From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12755 invoked by alias); 12 Jan 2018 11:46:00 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 12732 invoked by uid 89); 12 Jan 2018 11:46:00 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy= X-HELO: rock.gnat.com Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 12 Jan 2018 11:45:59 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B64621172AE; Fri, 12 Jan 2018 06:45:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id LXTCZQ+ebclL; Fri, 12 Jan 2018 06:45:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5309911703A; Fri, 12 Jan 2018 06:45:57 -0500 (EST) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 19C9A83301; Fri, 12 Jan 2018 15:45:53 +0400 (+04) Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2018 11:46:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Andrew Burgess Cc: Simon Marchi , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] gdb/testsuite: Don't attempt tests if they fail to compile Message-ID: <20180112114553.auftjbcjfr7z56p4@adacore.com> References: <20180111190055.4875-1-andrew.burgess@embecosm.com> <20180112102308.GN3026@embecosm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180112102308.GN3026@embecosm.com> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) X-SW-Source: 2018-01/txt/msg00242.txt.bz2 > > That would make the test similar to other test, in that if we fail to > > build the test program it's not a failure (it shows as UNTESTED, doesn't > > make the test run fail). I find it's a strange behavior though. If a > > test program starts not building for some reason, I'd certainly like to > > know (e.g. it could be UNRESOLVED), instead of it silently failing. > > > > Any other opinion? FWIW, no strong opinion on my side. -- Joel