From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 33979383FBB9 for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2022 15:31:18 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 33979383FBB9 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=simark.ca Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=simark.ca Received: from [10.0.0.85] (modemcable162.249-56-74.mc.videotron.ca [74.56.249.162]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A40111E0CB; Wed, 26 Oct 2022 11:31:16 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=simark.ca; s=mail; t=1666798276; bh=cOZV/eMjBZ4pf3PMaX/kuY3+aK5m0LR04jB9FegL1Vg=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=h7U8CzH+OxHtrxd8d8nNBqZCIvSuKsOTZHw4R8hVP1OUGE2G2u80nOtyhR7bCloqn 3if0uuTkzjv9saL1Yn8NMkCObOb6Bh+6qI1RvXoiQ8fUldnhXnvMcETW4bAMCuVTxg KZcu1CkabmAOjluLlfljT2SL7CxreZEwfSX0p9Cc= Message-ID: Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2022 11:31:16 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.4.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] gdb/testsuite: fix gdb.guile/scm-parameter.exp "wrong type argument" test pattern To: Tom de Vries , "Maciej W. Rozycki" , Simon Marchi Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20221024164338.1762303-1-simon.marchi@efficios.com> <8ef2b43b-9ac4-3a50-3c93-753c8dcfe001@simark.ca> Content-Language: fr From: Simon Marchi In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,GIT_PATCH_0,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On 10/26/22 03:15, Tom de Vries wrote: > On 10/25/22 03:08, Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches wrote: >> >> >> On 2022-10-24 19:22, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: >>> On Mon, 24 Oct 2022, Simon Marchi wrote: >>> >>>> I believe that the first two lines are output by Guile itself, in the >>>> SCM_ASSERT_TYPE macro.  I tried on different systems, different Guile >>>> versions (2.0, 2.2 and 3.0) and I always get the former output, never >>>> the output the test expects.  I presume the patch below isn't right, as >>>> there is surely some systems that do print the latter output, otherwise >>>> Maciej (the original author) would have noticed it.  I presume we'll >>>> need to accept both outputs.  But I'd like we if could clarify when we >>>> get which. >>> >>>   FTR I'm still looking into it and like you I have hesitated to just paper >>> the issue over by allowing both outputs without first understanding what >>> is really going on here.  I cannot rule out a distribution-specific patch >>> causing a discrepancy here, but I feel like tracking it down. >>> >>>   NB guile 2.0.13 here, reporting as: >>> >>> guile (GNU Guile) 2.0.13 >>> Packaged by Debian (2.0.13-deb+1-5.4) >> >> According to that version number, it looks like Ubuntu 20.04? >> >>    https://packages.ubuntu.com/focal/guile-2.0 >> >> I tried building on Ubuntu 20.04 against guile-2.0, and I see the same >> result as you.  And when I try guile2.0 on Arch Linux (this package >> [1]), I also see the same result as you.  So I must have tested it wrong >> previously. >> >> You can dig further if you want, but I'd be fine just accepting both >> outputs and saying that guile-2.0 outputs the additional ERROR: while >> subsequent versions do not. >> > > FWIW, I did the same here in commit 6bbe1a929c6 ("[gdb/testsuite] Fix gdb.guile/scm-breakpoint.exp with guile 3.0"). Thanks, then I just went ahead and pushed this: >From ee7f721ea2f51cd6cda301ce6a68e84f61c31e0c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Simon Marchi Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2022 12:43:38 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] gdb/testsuite: fix gdb.guile/scm-parameter.exp "wrong type argument" test pattern for Guile >= 2.2 Since commit 90319cefe3 ("GDB/Guile: Don't assert that an integer value is boolean"), I see: FAIL: gdb.guile/scm-parameter.exp: kind=PARAM_ZINTEGER: test-PARAM_ZINTEGER-param: guile (set-parameter-value! test-PARAM_ZINTEGER-param #:unlimited) FAIL: gdb.guile/scm-parameter.exp: kind=PARAM_ZUINTEGER: test-PARAM_ZUINTEGER-param: guile (set-parameter-value! test-PARAM_ZUINTEGER-param #:unlimited) This comes from the fact that GDB outputs this: ERROR: In procedure set-parameter-value!: In procedure gdbscm_set_parameter_value_x: Wrong type argument in position 2 (expecting integer): #:unlimited Error while executing Scheme code. while the test expects an additional "ERROR:" on the second line, something like this: ERROR: In procedure set-parameter-value!: ERROR: In procedure gdbscm_set_parameter_value_x: Wrong type argument in position 2 (expecting integer): #:unlimited Error while executing Scheme code. Guile 2.0 outputs the `ERROR:` on the second line, while later versions do not. Change the pattern to accept both outputs. This is similar to commit 6bbe1a929c6 ("[gdb/testsuite] Fix gdb.guile/scm-breakpoint.exp with guile 3.0"). Change-Id: I9dc45e7492a4f08340cad974610242ed689de959 --- gdb/testsuite/gdb.guile/scm-parameter.exp | 8 ++++---- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.guile/scm-parameter.exp b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.guile/scm-parameter.exp index b9f2d8252117..0b2076c40576 100644 --- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.guile/scm-parameter.exp +++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.guile/scm-parameter.exp @@ -183,10 +183,10 @@ foreach_with_prefix kind { "end" set param_integer_error \ - "ERROR: In procedure set-parameter-value!:\r\nERROR: In procedure\ - gdbscm_set_parameter_value_x: Wrong type argument in position 2\ - \\(expecting integer\\): #:unlimited\r\nError while executing Scheme\ - code\\." + [multi_line \ + "ERROR: In procedure set-parameter-value!:" \ + "(ERROR: )?In procedure gdbscm_set_parameter_value_x: Wrong type argument in position 2 \\(expecting integer\\): #:unlimited" \ + "Error while executing Scheme code\\."] set param_minus_one_error "integer -1 out of range" set param_minus_two_range "integer -2 out of range" set param_minus_two_unlimited "only -1 is allowed to set as unlimited" -- 2.38.1