From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 0C8BC38618E5; Thu, 5 Aug 2021 13:17:01 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 0C8BC38618E5 From: "vries at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gdb-prs@sourceware.org Subject: [Bug ada/28180] FAIL: gdb.ada/interface.exp: print s (timeout) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2021 13:17:00 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gdb X-Bugzilla-Component: ada X-Bugzilla-Version: HEAD X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: vries at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: tromey at sourceware dot org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: gdb-prs@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-prs mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2021 13:17:01 -0000 https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D28180 --- Comment #6 from Tom de Vries --- (In reply to Tom Tromey from comment #2) > (In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #0) >=20 > > [1] s at > > /home/vries/gdb_versions/devel/binutils-gdb.git/gdb/testsuite/gdb.ada/ > > interface/foo.adb:20^M > > [2] s at > > /home/vries/gdb_versions/devel/binutils-gdb.git/gdb/testsuite/gdb.ada/ > > interface/foo.adb:?^M >=20 > The second location is pretty weird. AFAICT, due to the corresponding artificial variable in dwarf having no location info. > I suspect this is just some kind of debuginfo problem > with the older compiler. >=20 I cannot tell whether the change in debug info is incorrect -> correct, or = just different. Either way, the patch from comment 4 seems to be able to handle this. > > Same for: > > ... > > > FAIL: gdb.ada/tagged.exp: ptype obj (timeout) >=20 > Is it the same compiler versions that fail here? Yes. > I can't test it readily but I can send a patch to disable > these tests with an older gcc. Any thoughts on the patch ? --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.=