Source: uid-wrapper Followup-For: Bug #1069425 Control: tags -1 ftbfs Debugging a little on porterbox, the problem is that tv2 is set by the system call SYS_gettimeofday, rc = syscall(SYS_gettimeofday, &tv2, NULL); which gets tv2.tv_sec=0 on arm-32. So the test fails since tv1 has a non-zero value, tv2 gets 0.
SYS_gettimeofday is an alias to __NR_gettimeofday, if defined, set in /usr/include/*/bits/syscall.h (l.687) On amd64 (x86_64-linux-gnu), 32-bit __NR_gettimeofday is defined in /usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu/asm/unistd_32.h as syscall 78. The 64-bit bit syscall is 96 (in unistd_64.h). on armel (arm-linux-gnueabi), /usr/include/arm-linux-gnueabi/asm/unistd_32.h does not contain a definition for __NR_gettimeofday. I presume this is the problem. There no such syscall on 32-bit arm, to SYS_gettimeofday returns a null (0) results. If that's the case, if arm-32 simply does not have this syscall, then of course the test can't pass and therefore should be skipped. The complicating point is that there is an alternative definition in /usr/include/arm-linux-gnueabi/asm/unistd-oabi.h l.67 #define __NR_gettimeofday (__NR_SYSCALL_BASE + 78) likewise unistd-eabi.h l.61 I guess this is the definition that arm-32 is supposed to be using. The equivalent alternative definition on amd64 is in unistd_x32.h l.89: #define __NR_gettimeofday (__X32_SYSCALL_BIT + 96) bits/syscall.h should not be used directly, rather sys/syscall.h should be used. On amd64 sys/syscall.h includes asm/unistd.h which includes asm/unistd_32.h for __i386__, asm/unistd_x32.h for __ILP32__, else asm/unistd_64.h On armel, asm/unistd.h uses unistd-eabi.h for __ARM_EABI__, otherwise unistd-oabi.h So arm-32 should have __NR_gettimeofday defined either way. Does it mean the syscall is defined but not implemented on arm-32 (just returns 0 time)?
