[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Print KFAIL's in dejagnu summary?

From: Rob Savoye
Subject: Re: Print KFAIL's in dejagnu summary?
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2003 09:47:42 -0600
User-agent: Mutt/

On Thu, Sep 25, 2003 at 05:44:27PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:

> PS: Some [non] history.  Neither Fernando nor I can figure out how/why 
> the current behavior came to be.  Our best guess is that there was some 
> flip-flopping (the lists suggest this) and the current behavior was 
> chosen because it happened to be that way in the last version of the 
> patch.  Enjoy!

  I think you're right. It's the way it is, cause that's the way it is...
I think KFAILs should go in the summary. I've never really liked the idea of
either XFAIL or KFAIL, but understand others find these useful. I worry that
once setup as a expected failure, they'll get lost, and never fixed. So KFAIL
should be in the summary to beat developers over the head with them so they
eventually get fixed and removed.

  btw - I'm still waiting for KFAIL documentation... :-)

        - rob -

reply via email to

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