zarniwhoop at ntlworld.com
Mon Feb 22 16:38:04 PST 2016
On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 09:35:05PM +0100, ALZ (phyglos.org) wrote:
> On 02/20/2016 09:49 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> >Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> >>Douglas R. Reno wrote:
> >>>On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 3:18 PM, Bruce Dubbs <bruce.dubbs at gmail.com>
> >I also had a bunch of gcc test failures not in x86-64. There were 8
> >failures using different options with c-c++-common/asan/null-deref-1.c,
> >1 failure for gcc.dg/pr45352-1.c, and 1 for gcc.dg/pr63914.c. The test
> >failures that are in the x86_64 build, directory_iterator.cc and
> >recursive_directory_iterator.cc fail here too.
> >The only other failure I see that differs from x86-64 is:
> >105-inetutils-1.9.4:FAIL: ping-localhost.sh
I've seen that in the past - a year ago, in 32-bit builds for a VM
and for a real machine when testing 7.7. It has also been reported,
along with another failure, in 1.9.1 and LFS-7.3 :
No idea what triggers it.
But I've got a further inetutils test failure which I don't recall
seeing before, although we apparently mentioned it in 7.7 :
checkls.sh - google found ticket #3852 saying it was reported to be
> On the physical x86_64, clean results:
> === libstdc++ Summary ===
> # of expected passes 9871
> # of unexpected failures 2
> # of expected failures 65
> # of unsupported tests 530
> The 2 unexpected failures are the same that appear on virtual x86_64:
> FAIL: experimental/filesystem/iterators/recursive_directory_iterator.cc
> execution test
> FAIL: experimental/filesystem/iterators/directory_iterator.cc execution test
I also get those two, on real x86_64 hardware.
Are there any LFS gcc results to look at ? The link in my local
copy of the book points to
which all appear to be old.
This email was written using 100% recycled letters.
More information about the lfs-dev