(going back to this earlier part of the thread after my excursions
last night and earlier today, Cc'ing Thomas in case he hasn't been
following this.
On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 09:23:45AM +0200, Thomas Trepl wrote:
> Am Sonntag, den 12.08.2018, 22:05 -0500 schrieb DJ Lucas:
> >
> > On 08/12/2018 02:28 AM, Thomas Trepl wrote:
> > > Am Sonntag, den 12.08.2018, 03:36 +0100 schrieb Ken Moffat:
> > > > 6.0.1 builds.
> > >
> > > Did you also run the tests? This is where i struggle atm. Tests
> > > seem
> > > to fail in a good amount and finally hang.
> >
> > Which tests fail? Are you building with make or ninja? I'm of the
> > mind
> You are kidding ;-) "limiting to 12 threads", "only 16GB of RAM"
> Sounds like you're on a very tiny and slow machine...
>
> I used "make" - will redo checks with ninja and keep you updated. Btw,
> new multilib-patch to come, building m32, mx32 and m64 ...
>
I've now run the tests using the instructions in the book (i.e.
'make'). This was using 4 cores (not two pairs of hyperthreads as I
had intended - I've now made a note of which CPUs are on the same
cores ;).
The initial build was "odd" - I specified make -j4, but it only ever
seemed to use 100% CPU (i.e. 1 core). My "real" build (first build,
plus separate build for html using sphinx) took just over 25 minutes
using -j8. After 50 minutes I stopped and tried again.
This time I paid more attention: brief initial 400%, then a long
100%, later 200%. I left it, completed in 57m22.
Tried the tests using 'make' - about 20 minutes to build all the
test progs, then using the 4 cores - tests completed in 28m50 (19.5
SBU).
Neither this test nor last night's ninja test got the clean results
DJ had, but they seem to accord with what the book said for 6.0.0.
1 warning(s) in tests.
Testing Time: 486.50s
********************
Failing Tests (11):
AddressSanitizer-x86_64-linux :: TestCases/throw_invoke_test.cc
AddressSanitizer-x86_64-linux-dynamic :: TestCases/throw_invoke_test.cc
LeakSanitizer-AddressSanitizer-x86_64 :: TestCases/Linux/use_tls_dynamic.cc
LeakSanitizer-Standalone-x86_64 :: TestCases/Linux/use_tls_dynamic.cc
MemorySanitizer-X86_64 :: Linux/sunrpc.cc
MemorySanitizer-X86_64 :: Linux/sunrpc_bytes.cc
MemorySanitizer-X86_64 :: Linux/sunrpc_string.cc
MemorySanitizer-X86_64 :: dtls_test.c
SanitizerCommon-lsan-x86_64-Linux ::
Posix/sanitizer_set_death_callback_test.cc
ThreadSanitizer-x86_64 :: static_init6.cc
ThreadSanitizer-x86_64 :: sunrpc.cc
Expected Passes : 29115
Expected Failures : 103
Unsupported Tests : 8915
Unexpected Failures: 11
make[3]: *** [CMakeFiles/check-all.dir/build.make:58: CMakeFiles/check-all]
Error 1
make[2]: *** [CMakeFiles/Makefile2:439: CMakeFiles/check-all.dir/all] Error 2
make[1]: *** [CMakeFiles/Makefile2:446: CMakeFiles/check-all.dir/rule] Error 2
make: *** [Makefile:251: check-all] Error 2
I haven't been measuring space (expected this to hang), but after
the tests (without sphinx or clang docs) the build tree is using
14GB according to 'du -sch'.
Sorry I've no idea why the tests hung for Thomas.
I think I might play around with using ninja to see if it really is
faster (that seemed to be the impression last night), but with two
real CPUs and their matching hyperthreaded CPUs. But taking a break
for the moment.
ĸen
--
Entropy not found, thump keyboard to continue
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
