public inbox for gdb-testresults@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michael Elizabeth Chastain <mec@shout.net> To: gcc-testresults@gcc.gnu.org, gdb-testresults@sources.redhat.com Subject: gdb tests with gcc 3.0.3 versus gcc 3.0.4-200202-15 Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2002 08:04:00 -0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <200202181604.g1IG4Cc01118@duracef.shout.net> (raw) I did some test runs with several versions of gdb versus gcc 3.0.3, gcc 3.0.4-20020215, and gcc gcc-3_0-branch. The tables are here: http://www.shout.net/~mec/sunday_project/by-gcc-2002-02-16/index.html The test matrix has 18 configurations: target=native host=i686-pc-linux-gnulibc2.2:rh-7.2) gdb={5.1.1, gdb_5_1-2001-07-29-branch:20020216, HEAD} gcc={3.0.3, 3.0.4-20020215, gcc-3_0-branch:20020216} goption={-gdwarf2, -gstabs+} gdb test regressions from gcc 3.0.3 to gcc 3.0.4-20020215: *none* gdb test improvements from gcc 3.0.3 to gcc 3.0.4-20020215: gdb.base/break.exp: breakpoint at start of multi line if conditional gdb.base/break.exp: breakpoint at start of multi line while conditional gdb.base/break.exp: breakpoint info FAIL -> PASS with gdb-HEAD-g-dwarf-2 FAIL -> PASS with gdb-HEAD-g-stabs+ gdb.base/step-line.exp: next over dummy 1 gdb.base/step-line.exp: next over dummy 10 gdb.base/step-line.exp: next over dummy 2 gdb.base/step-line.exp: next over dummy 4 gdb.base/step-line.exp: next over dummy 6 gdb.base/step-line.exp: next over dummy 8 FAIL -> PASS with gdb-5.1.1-g-dwarf-2 FAIL -> PASS with gdb-5.1.1-g-stabs+ FAIL -> PASS with gdb-gdb_5_1-2001-07-29-branch-g-dwarf-2 FAIL -> PASS with gdb-gdb_5_1-2001-07-29-branch-g-stabs+ FAIL -> PASS with gdb-HEAD-g-dwarf-2 FAIL -> PASS with gdb-HEAD-g-stabs+ gdb test regressions from gcc 3.0.3 to gcc gcc-3_0-branch: gdb.base/condbreak.exp, gdb.base/funcargs.exp, gdb.c++/ovldbreak.exp: regressions in dwarf-2 configurations. I don't have time to drill down. gdb test improvements from gcc 3.0.3 to gcc gcc-3_0-branch: same as gcc 3.0.3 to gcc 3.0.4-20020215 Notes: I am cross-posting these results to lists: gcc-testresults and gdb-testresults. Someone kindly correct me if I should do something different. gdb 5.1.1 is the latest released version of gdb. gdb gdb_5_1-2001-07-29-branch is a nearly dead branch. I am not investigating the regressions on gcc-3_0-branch because it's not a release candidate at this time and I have limited time. If another tarball gets made then I will test the tarballs. Michael Elizabeth Chastain <mailto:mec@shout.net> "love without fear"
reply other threads:[~2002-02-18 16:04 UTC|newest] Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
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=200202181604.g1IG4Cc01118@duracef.shout.net \ --to=mec@shout.net \ --cc=gcc-testresults@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gdb-testresults@sources.redhat.com \ /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: linkBe 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).