[lfs-dev] glibc-2.23

Bruce Dubbs bruce.dubbs at gmail.com
Fri Feb 19 16:01:25 PST 2016


Douglas R. Reno wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 3:18 PM, Bruce Dubbs <bruce.dubbs at gmail.com> 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




More information about the lfs-dev mailing list