Re: [PATCH] gdb/testsuite/tui: start GDB with "set filename-display basename"

[Simon Marchi <simon.marchi@polymtl.ca>]

On 2022-09-23 09:50, Tom Tromey wrote:
>>>>>> "Simon" == Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.org> writes:
> 
> Simon> And that causes `wait_for` to think the "step" command is complete.
> Simon> This is wrong, as the prompt at line 17 isn't the prompt drawn after the
> Simon> completion of the "step" command.  The subsequent tests now run with a
> Simon> partially updated screen (what is shown above) and obviously fail.
> 
> Simon> The ideal way to fix this would be for `wait_for` to be smarter, to
> Simon> avoid it confusing the different prompts drawn.
> 
> This is actually ridiculously hard.  Not being able to solve this is why
> we added the refresh-counting hack for TUI testing.

Ok, I'm not aware of that.  But yeah I thought about this problem for a
day and didn't find any magic solution.  The only semi-relevant idea I
had was to track at which line the last prompt was printed.  And when
matching a prompt, it must be at a line >= where the last prompt was
printed.  If it's above, it means it's a redraw of an old prompt.

> Simon> Doing this happens to fix my failures and makes my CI happy (which in
> Simon> turns makes me happy).  To be clear, I understand that this does not fix
> Simon> the root issue of `proc wait_for` being confused.  However, it makes TUI
> Simon> test runs be more similar for everyone, such that there's less chance of
> Simon> TUI tests randomly failing for somebody.
> 
> It seems like an improvement to me.
> 
> Simon> Note that there are other reasons why TUI tests could vary, like
> Simon> different curses library versions taking different re-drawing decisions.
> Simon> However, I think my change is a good step towards more stable test
> Simon> results.
> 
> Indeed, I think this has happened already.
> 
> Anyway the patch looks good to me.

Thanks, I'll push it.

Simon