On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 10:27 PM, Nicholas Nethercote <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, 26 Feb 2008, Bart Van Assche wrote: > > > By the way, does the patch below make sense or is the comment in > > tests/vg_regtest.in correct as it is now ? > > > > Index: tests/vg_regtest.in > > =================================================================== > > --- tests/vg_regtest.in (revision 7477) > > +++ tests/vg_regtest.in (working copy) > > @@ -61,7 +61,7 @@ > > # Note that filters are necessary for stderr results to filter out things > that > > # always change, eg. process id numbers. > > # > > -# Expected stdout (filtered) is kept in <test>.stdout.exp[0-9]* (can be > more > > +# Expected stdout (filtered) is kept in <test>.stdout.exp* (can be more > > # than one expected output). It can be missing if it would be empty. > Expected > > # stderr (filtered) is kept in <test>.stderr.exp*. There must be at least > > # one stderr.exp* file. > > The comment is correct. For example, in memcheck/tests/ we have both: > > sh-mem-random.stdout.exp > sh-mem-random.stdout.exp64 > > For 32- and 64-bit machines
Maybe I should have made myself more clear. The comment in tests/vg_regtest.pl.in explains that stdout.exp files only can have a numeric suffix ([0-9]*), while stderr.exp files can have any suffix (*). If I understood the tests/vg_regtest.pl.in sourcecode correctly, both stdout.exp and stderr.exp files can now have any suffix. Is this correct ? Bart. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Valgrind-developers mailing list Valgrind-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/valgrind-developers
