Return-Path: X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7976A431FB6 for ; Fri, 3 Oct 2014 10:00:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.3 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=disabled Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Xcd-bTBP4w+A for ; Fri, 3 Oct 2014 10:00:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from outgoing.csail.mit.edu (outgoing.csail.mit.edu [128.30.2.149]) by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A92F431FBC for ; Fri, 3 Oct 2014 10:00:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [104.131.20.129] (helo=awakeningjr) by outgoing.csail.mit.edu with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Xa6Dd-0000IH-4H; Fri, 03 Oct 2014 13:00:37 -0400 Received: from amthrax by awakeningjr with local (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1Xa6Dc-0004Br-JG; Fri, 03 Oct 2014 13:00:36 -0400 From: Austin Clements To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] test: Port atomicity test to Python In-Reply-To: <1412355483-7670-1-git-send-email-aclements@csail.mit.edu> References: <1412355483-7670-1-git-send-email-aclements@csail.mit.edu> User-Agent: Notmuch/0.18.1+86~gef5e66a (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.3.1 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Date: Fri, 03 Oct 2014 13:00:36 -0400 Message-ID: <874mvldr63.fsf@csail.mit.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Oct 2014 17:00:45 -0000 On Fri, 03 Oct 2014, Austin Clements wrote: > Previously, this was implemented using a horrible GDB script (because > there is no such thing as a non-horrible GDB script). This GDB script > often broke with newer versions of GDB for mysterious reasons. Port > the test script to GDB's Python API, which makes the code much cleaner > and, hopefully, more stable. > --- > > Hi Amadeusz. Does this patch fix the problem for you? I don't have > GDB 7.8, so I can't test against it, but the Python interface is less > fragile than the GDB scripting language. (Even if this doesn't fix > your problem, I think we should switch to the Python interface.) Oops. I meant this to be a reply to id:87sijovhuf.fsf@freja.aidecoe.name. Sorry for any confusion.