public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "manu at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug testsuite/25241] DejaGNU does not distinguish between errors and warnings
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 21:10:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070130211044.18648.qmail@sourceware.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-25241-1000@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
------- Comment #6 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-30 21:10 -------
(In reply to comment #5)
> Subject: Re: DejaGNU does not distinguish between errors
> and warnings
>
> On Tue, 30 Jan 2007, manu at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
>
> > I have the following patch. Framework tests work. However, this patch will make
> > a lot of tests to fail because:
> >
> > * Many tests are using the wrong dg-warning or dg-error directive.
> > * Many tests add an explicit "warning:" or "error:" to workaround this bug.
> > * Many tests match several warning/error messages with a single
> > dg-warning/dg-error directive.
> >
> > So what we want to do? Fix the testcases or do nothing?
>
> Fix the testcases.
>
> (a) Fix tests using the wrong one of dg-warning or dg-error, and tests
> matching multiple diagnostics with a single directive, bit by bit. Such
> fixes should not depend on this patch.
>
> (b) Apply this patch and remove the "warning:" and "error:" workarounds.
>
There are around 6914 tests failing. And I am not even sure if the above patch
is correct. Perhaps there is something wrong on it that is causing excessive
failures. :-(
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25241
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-01-30 21:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 68+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-12-03 10:12 [Bug testsuite/25241] New: " gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-12-03 16:39 ` [Bug testsuite/25241] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2006-11-27 22:12 ` janis at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-01-27 16:49 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-01-30 20:36 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-01-30 21:02 ` joseph at codesourcery dot com
2007-01-30 21:10 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org [this message]
2007-01-30 22:14 ` joseph at codesourcery dot com
2007-01-31 2:04 ` janis at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-01-31 2:28 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-01-31 6:44 ` gdr at cs dot tamu dot edu
2007-01-31 17:34 ` janis at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-01-31 18:11 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-01-31 18:34 ` janis at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-01-31 19:11 ` joseph at codesourcery dot com
2007-01-31 21:15 ` gdr at cs dot tamu dot edu
2007-01-31 22:24 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-02-02 12:17 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-02-02 13:14 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-02-03 1:29 ` janis at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-02-03 22:58 ` janis at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-02-28 0:31 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-02-28 9:57 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-03-01 21:36 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-03-01 22:54 ` janis at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-03-01 23:25 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-03-13 0:29 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-03-13 0:34 ` janis at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-03-13 0:44 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-03-13 0:49 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-03-22 22:37 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-03-23 20:51 ` janis at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-03-23 21:15 ` janis at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-03-23 21:52 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-03-23 22:00 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-03-23 22:06 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-03-23 22:13 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-03-23 22:49 ` janis at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-03-23 23:52 ` janis at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-03-24 0:28 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-03-24 11:10 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-03-24 17:55 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-03-26 19:49 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-03-29 0:12 ` janis at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-03-30 11:25 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-03-30 20:14 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-05-15 0:35 ` janis at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-05-15 15:16 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-05-15 18:30 ` janis at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-05-17 1:52 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-06-04 21:12 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-06-05 22:30 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-06-06 20:49 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-06-07 21:02 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-06-30 13:03 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-06-30 13:07 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-07-08 14:50 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-07-10 9:17 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-07-12 22:58 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-07-12 23:05 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-08-22 20:10 ` [Bug testsuite/25241] [C++] " janis at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-08-26 18:30 ` janis at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-09-17 0:09 ` janis at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-09-17 23:25 ` janis at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-09-18 22:32 ` janis at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-12-28 22:19 ` reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-01-06 17:51 ` janis at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-01-10 22:37 ` reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20070130211044.18648.qmail@sourceware.org \
--to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).