After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 629164 - assert-msg-test fails because gdb doesn't support --ex parameter
assert-msg-test fails because gdb doesn't support --ex parameter
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 684723
Product: glib
Classification: Platform
Component: general
2.24.x
Other Linux
: Normal minor
: ---
Assigned To: gtkdev
gtkdev
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2010-09-09 13:18 UTC by Jesús Martínez Novo
Modified: 2017-05-16 08:18 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---



Description Jesús Martínez Novo 2010-09-09 13:18:15 UTC
I'm on SuSE 9 and the test `assert-msg-test´ fails.

 jesus@linux:/tmp/glib-2.24.1/tests> ./run-assert-msg-test.sh -v
 Running assert-msg-test
 Running gdb on assert-msg-test
 Checking if assert message is in __glib_assert_msg
 Test failed: __glib_assert_msg does not have assertion message

The command that is running is:
  gdb --batch --ex run --ex "print (char*) __glib_assert_msg" .libs/$msg_test

where $msg_test is lt-assert-msg-test

The problem is that my gdb version doesn't support --ex parameter. My GDB version is GNU gdb 5.3.92. But it supports the -x parameter, to pass the file that contains the commands to run.

I've created a file containing those lines:
 run
 print (char*) __glib_assert_msg

And ran the gdb with the -x parameter and it worked.

Maybe my gdb is too old, probably it's not worth to spend time on fixing this, but just to let you know that a more "compatible" way of doing this test exists.

Thanks.
Comment 1 Jesús Martínez Novo 2017-05-14 20:52:23 UTC
I guess this is too old to be fixed
Comment 2 Philip Withnall 2017-05-16 08:18:45 UTC
(In reply to Jesús Martínez Novo from comment #1)
> I guess this is too old to be fixed

It was actually fixed in bug #684723. Thanks for following up.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 684723 ***