FAIL: gdb.base/nextoverexit.exp: next over exit (the program exited) (was: [PATCH 1/2] Port gdbserver to GNU/Hurd)

[Thomas Schwinge]

Hi!

On Thu, 19 Sep 2013 15:40:40 +0800, Yue Lu <hacklu.newborn@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 8:37 PM, Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com> wrote:
> > On 09/12/2013 04:05 AM, Yue Lu wrote:
> >
> >> On Sat, Sep 7, 2013 at 2:53 AM, Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com> wrote:
> >>> https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2013-09/msg00253.html

> First thank you to tell me how to apply patch from email. I used
> webmail of gmail and directly copy patch from the email which often
> apply failed, then I had to patch line by line. Now I used mutt to
> save email to mbox file then apply it, life changed! Before you told
> me this, I never imaged this, so thanks!

Well, never assume that we'd use any convoluted procedures, such as
manually copying a patch's text.  ;-) Never hesitate to ask if you think
some process is too complicated to be done manually -- there will always
be someone who is happy to tell you about his creative solution.

> I have test your patch, seems need a tiny fix. This is just a spelling
> mistaken I think.

Right; I had come to the same conclusion, see my message in the other
thread.


> After add this change, the gdb can work. But I have found a little
> strange from the origin gdb.
> When I set a breakpoint, then I run the inferior, after hit the
> breakpoint, I just input next next until the inferior exit, then the
> gdb will complain this:
> [Inferior 1 (bogus thread id 0) exited normally]
> Thread-specific breakpoint -37 deleted - thread 4 is gone.
> Thread-specific breakpoint -38 deleted - thread 4 is gone.
> Thread-specific breakpoint -39 deleted - thread 4 is gone.
> Thread-specific breakpoint 0 deleted - thread 4 is gone.
> 
> I am not sure why this will output or is reasonable.
> 
> I got this output like this:
> $./gdb gdb
> $b main
> $r
> $n
> $n
> ...
> $q  (quit the debugged gdb)

"As of recently", I notice the same behavior for GDB on both x86
GNU/Linux and GNU/Hurd, also resulting in the gdb.base/nextoverexit.exp
test failing.  So, I don't think this is related to any Hurd
patches/behavior, but instead a general issue.

Quoting from the x86 GNU/Linux' gdb/testsuite/gdb.base2/gdb.log:

    Breakpoint 1, main () at 
../../../Ferry_Tagscherer/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/nextoverexit.c:21
    21        exit (0);
    (gdb) next
    [Inferior 1 (process 25208) exited normally]
    Thread-specific breakpoint -5 deleted - thread 1 is gone.
    Thread-specific breakpoint -6 deleted - thread 1 is gone.
    Thread-specific breakpoint -7 deleted - thread 1 is gone.
    Thread-specific breakpoint 0 deleted - thread 1 is gone.
    (gdb) FAIL: gdb.base/nextoverexit.exp: next over exit (the program exited)

Can others confirm this/is this a known issue?


Grüße,
 Thomas

pgp6JuU5KO2fY.pgp
Description: PGP signature