bug-gdb
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

make check problems in gdb-5.2


From: David Ronis
Subject: make check problems in gdb-5.2
Date: Thu, 2 May 2002 16:35:32 -0400

Hi,

I've just tried building gdb-5.2 on a i686-linux-gnu box, using
gcc-2.95.3 or gcc version 3.1 20020422.  In both cases I configured with 
fairly optimized CFLAGS:

-O3 -march=i686 -funroll-loops -fomit-frame-pointer -falign-jumps=3
 -falign-loops=3 -falign-functions=3 -mpreferred-stack-boundary=3

The build completed without problems; however, make check generated
several testsuite failures:

FAIL: gdb.base/completion.exp: (timeout) complete 'file ./Make'
ERROR: Got interactive prompt.
FAIL: gdb.base/completion.exp: (timeout) complete 'file ./gdb.base/compl'
FAIL: gdb.base/completion.exp: (timeout) complete 'info func mar'
FAIL: gdb.base/completion.exp: (timeout) complete 'set follow-fork-mode'
FAIL: gdb.base/corefile.exp: print func2::coremaker_local
FAIL: gdb.base/corefile.exp: backtrace in corefile.exp
ERROR: Got interactive prompt.
FAIL: gdb.base/gcore.exp: re-load generated corefile (incomplete note section)
FAIL: gdb.base/gcore.exp: where in corefile, pattern 1
FAIL: gdb.base/gcore.exp: corefile restored general registers
FAIL: gdb.base/gcore.exp: corefile restored all registers
FAIL: gdb.base/gcore.exp: capture_command_output failed on print 
array_func::local_array.
FAIL: gdb.base/gcore.exp: corefile restored stack array
FAIL: gdb.base/gcore.exp: corefile restored backtrace
FAIL: gdb.base/reread.exp: second pass: breakpoint foo in first file
FAIL: gdb.base/selftest.exp: breakpoint in captured_main
FAIL: gdb.base/selftest.exp: run until breakpoint at captured_main
FAIL: gdb.c++/annota2.exp: watch triggered on a.x
FAIL: gdb.c++/classes.exp: ptype class Static
FAIL: gdb.c++/classes.exp: calling method for small class
FAIL: gdb.mi/mi-break.exp: insert temp breakpoint at "<fullfilename>":6 
(callee4)
FAIL: gdb.mi/mi-console.exp: Hello message (known bug)
FAIL: gdb.mi/mi-simplerun.exp: insert breakpoint at "<fullfilename>":6 (callee4)
FAIL: gdb.mi/mi-stack.exp: stack args listing 0
FAIL: gdb.mi/mi-stack.exp: stack args listing 1
FAIL: gdb.mi/mi-stack.exp: stack info-depth
FAIL: gdb.mi/mi-stack.exp: stack info-depth 99
FAIL: gdb.mi/mi0-break.exp: insert temp breakpoint at "<fullfilename>":6 
(callee4)
FAIL: gdb.mi/mi0-console.exp: Hello message (known bug)
FAIL: gdb.mi/mi0-simplerun.exp: insert breakpoint at "<fullfilename>":6 
(callee4)
FAIL: gdb.mi/mi0-stack.exp: stack args listing 0
FAIL: gdb.mi/mi0-stack.exp: stack args listing 1
FAIL: gdb.mi/mi0-stack.exp: stack info-depth
FAIL: gdb.mi/mi0-stack.exp: stack info-depth 99
FAIL: gdb.threads/gcore-thread.exp: corefile contains at least two threads
FAIL: gdb.threads/gcore-thread.exp: thread2 is current thread in corefile
FAIL: gdb.threads/linux-dp.exp: philosopher is distinct: 3
FAIL: gdb.threads/linux-dp.exp: philosopher is distinct: 4
FAIL: gdb.threads/linux-dp.exp: philosopher is distinct: 7
FAIL: gdb.threads/pthreads.exp: apply backtrace command to all three threads

                === gdb Summary ===

# of expected passes            8035
# of unexpected failures        39
# of unexpected successes       12
# of expected failures          165
# of unresolved testcases       10
# of untested testcases         1
/home/ronis/gdb-5.2/gdb/testsuite/../../gdb/gdb version  5.2 -nx


If I rebuild with the default CFLAGS (and gcc-2.95.3) make check gives:


FAIL: gdb.base/completion.exp: (timeout) complete 'file ./Make'
ERROR: Got interactive prompt.
FAIL: gdb.base/completion.exp: (timeout) complete 'file ./gdb.base/compl'
FAIL: gdb.base/completion.exp: (timeout) complete 'info func mar'
FAIL: gdb.base/completion.exp: (timeout) complete 'set follow-fork-mode'
FAIL: gdb.base/corefile.exp: print func2::coremaker_local
FAIL: gdb.base/corefile.exp: backtrace in corefile.exp
ERROR: Got interactive prompt.
FAIL: gdb.base/gcore.exp: re-load generated corefile (incomplete note section)
FAIL: gdb.base/gcore.exp: where in corefile, pattern 1
FAIL: gdb.base/gcore.exp: corefile restored general registers
FAIL: gdb.base/gcore.exp: corefile restored all registers
FAIL: gdb.base/gcore.exp: capture_command_output failed on print 
array_func::local_array.
FAIL: gdb.base/gcore.exp: corefile restored stack array
FAIL: gdb.base/gcore.exp: corefile restored backtrace
FAIL: gdb.base/reread.exp: second pass: breakpoint foo in first file
FAIL: gdb.base/selftest.exp: backtrace through signal handler
FAIL: gdb.c++/annota2.exp: watch triggered on a.x
FAIL: gdb.c++/classes.exp: ptype class Static
FAIL: gdb.c++/classes.exp: calling method for small class
FAIL: gdb.mi/mi-break.exp: insert temp breakpoint at "<fullfilename>":6 
(callee4)
FAIL: gdb.mi/mi-console.exp: Hello message (known bug)
FAIL: gdb.mi/mi-simplerun.exp: insert breakpoint at "<fullfilename>":6 (callee4)
FAIL: gdb.mi/mi-stack.exp: stack args listing 0
FAIL: gdb.mi/mi-stack.exp: stack args listing 1
FAIL: gdb.mi/mi-stack.exp: stack info-depth
FAIL: gdb.mi/mi-stack.exp: stack info-depth 99
FAIL: gdb.mi/mi0-break.exp: insert temp breakpoint at "<fullfilename>":6 
(callee4)
FAIL: gdb.mi/mi0-console.exp: Hello message (known bug)
FAIL: gdb.mi/mi0-simplerun.exp: insert breakpoint at "<fullfilename>":6 
(callee4)
FAIL: gdb.mi/mi0-stack.exp: stack args listing 0
FAIL: gdb.mi/mi0-stack.exp: stack args listing 1
FAIL: gdb.mi/mi0-stack.exp: stack info-depth
FAIL: gdb.mi/mi0-stack.exp: stack info-depth 99
FAIL: gdb.threads/linux-dp.exp: philosopher is distinct: 3
FAIL: gdb.threads/linux-dp.exp: philosopher is distinct: 4
FAIL: gdb.threads/pthreads.exp: check backtrace from main thread
FAIL: gdb.threads/pthreads.exp: apply backtrace command to all three threads

                === gdb Summary ===

# of expected passes            8058
# of unexpected failures        36
# of unexpected successes       12
# of expected failures          165
# of unresolved testcases       10
# of untested testcases         1
/home/ronis/gdb-5.2/gdb/testsuite/../../gdb/gdb version  5.2 -nx


Slightly better, but still problems.

On the off chance that none of these are serious enough to keep from
installing, please let me know.


David




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]