From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 67844 invoked by alias); 22 Dec 2016 22:50:17 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 67827 invoked by uid 89); 22 Dec 2016 22:50:16 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-5.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=$path, $PATH, Hx-languages-length:1419, absent X-Spam-User: qpsmtpd, 2 recipients X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Message-ID: <1482447010.14990.815.camel@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v11] Add pretty printers for the NPTL lock types From: Torvald Riegel To: Martin Galvan Cc: siddhesh@sourceware.org, Joseph Myers , libc-alpha@sourceware.org Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2016 22:50:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: References: <1481576088-15304-1-git-send-email-omgalvan.86@gmail.com> <1482424494.14990.810.camel@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2016-12/txt/msg00895.txt.bz2 On Thu, 2016-12-22 at 13:43 -0300, Martin Galvan wrote: > 2016-12-22 13:34 GMT-03:00 Torvald Riegel : > > Testing the pretty printers if the build host gdb isn't ready out of the > > box is quite annoying. > > How so? IIRC the tests should return UNSUPPORTED when gdb is absent. > Are you seeing something different? Yeah, they print UNSUPPORTED, but it's not straightforward to get to a point where your test setup is sufficient to do more than UNSUPPORTED. > > It would be good if README.pretty-printers could > > be improved to cover this. > > The README says: > > "The tests run on the glibc host, which is assumed to have both gdb > and PExpect; if any of those is absent the tests will fail with code > 77 (UNSUPPORTED)." > > What do you suggest? Should it mention that the gdb binary should > actually be called "gdb" and be somewhere within PATH? I first thought it would pick the system gdb and not the one from $PATH. This was because I had built a new gdb with --with-python, and I can do a 'python print "hello"' successfully from the new prompt of the new gdb I've built. It seems that the new gdb is used, but the test script still complaints that the gdb doesn't support python ('gdb must have python support to test the pretty printers.'). pexpect should be installed for the python that's used. What am I doing wrong?