[commit: ghc] ghc-7.10: More trivial test fixes (be0eb64)

[git at git.haskell.org]

Repository : ssh://git@git.haskell.org/ghc

On branch  : ghc-7.10
Link       : http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/changeset/be0eb64308cb15bf2b18789f1644561d684edd61/ghc

>---------------------------------------------------------------

commit be0eb64308cb15bf2b18789f1644561d684edd61
Author: Ben Gamari <ben at smart-cactus.org>
Date:   Fri Oct 2 23:17:50 2015 +0200

    More trivial test fixes


>---------------------------------------------------------------

be0eb64308cb15bf2b18789f1644561d684edd61
 testsuite/tests/typecheck/should_fail/T10285.stderr | 7 +++++--
 testsuite/tests/typecheck/should_fail/T7525.stderr  | 4 ++--
 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/testsuite/tests/typecheck/should_fail/T10285.stderr b/testsuite/tests/typecheck/should_fail/T10285.stderr
index 47cfbec..e9bb56e 100644
--- a/testsuite/tests/typecheck/should_fail/T10285.stderr
+++ b/testsuite/tests/typecheck/should_fail/T10285.stderr
@@ -1,7 +1,10 @@
 
 T10285.hs:8:17:
-    Could not deduce (a ~ b)
-    from the context (Coercible (N a) (N b))
+    Could not deduce: (Coercible a b)
+      arising from trying to show that the representations of
+        ‘a’ and
+        ‘b’ are the same
+    from the context: (Coercible (N a) (N b))
       bound by a pattern with constructor
                  Coercion :: forall (k :: BOX) (a :: k) (b :: k).
                              Coercible a b =>
diff --git a/testsuite/tests/typecheck/should_fail/T7525.stderr b/testsuite/tests/typecheck/should_fail/T7525.stderr
index ecf3eb1..e80e3dc 100644
--- a/testsuite/tests/typecheck/should_fail/T7525.stderr
+++ b/testsuite/tests/typecheck/should_fail/T7525.stderr
@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 
 T7525.hs:5:30:
-    Could not deduce (?b::Bool)
+    Could not deduce: (?b::Bool)
       arising from a use of implicit parameter ‘?b’
-    from the context (?a::Bool)
+    from the context: (?a::Bool)
       bound by the implicit-parameter binding for ?a at T7525.hs:5:7-31
     In the second argument of ‘(&&)’, namely ‘?b’
     In the expression: ?a && ?b