Douglas R. Reno wrote:
On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 3:18 PM, Bruce Dubbs <[email protected]> wrote:I've built the new glibc in my sandbox and will start doing a -rc2 when my full build completes in the next hour or so. I did look at the test failures: XPASS: elf/tst-protected1a XPASS: elf/tst-protected1b FAIL: posix/tst-getaddrinfo4 FAIL: posix/tst-getaddrinfo5 Summary of test results: 2 FAIL 2401 PASS 84 XFAIL 2 XPASS I've updated the text to add posix/tst-getaddrinfo5 to the list of known failures. When I look at the text we have now, I also see: * The rt/tst-cputimer1 and rt/tst-cpuclock2 tests have been known to fail. The reason is not completely understood, but indications are that minor timing issues can trigger these failures. * The math tests sometimes fail when running on systems where the CPU is not a relatively new Intel or AMD processor. * Other tests known to fail on some architectures are malloc/tst-malloc-usable and nptl/tst-cleanupx4. I have already removed the text about tst-protected1{a,b}. I have not seen any of these in a long time. Should I remove them?
Are these i686 specific?
I don't think so, but I'm not sure. I can do a build on my 686 and check, but that wouldn't hold off proceeding with BLFS testing. I'll try to set it up tonight and let it run to check. A full build with all tests takes about 17 hours on that system.
-- Bruce -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
