On 8/2/20 9:13 PM, Ken Moffat via blfs-dev wrote:
Moving to the new-style LFS has greatly improved test results. I
remember the development of 'pure lfs' where the tests were added,
and at that time if the tests passed we got much better builds. So
I mostly run all the LFS tests when building a new system. I'm keen
to see working tests in LFS (although for much of what is in BLFS
I'm ambivalent about the usefulness of the testsuites).
What I have now in LFS (not yet committed) is:
806-glibc-2.31:FAIL: misc/tst-ttyname
824-gcc-10.2.0:FAIL: 22_locale/time_get/get_time/char/2.cc execution test
824-gcc-10.2.0:FAIL: 22_locale/time_get/get_time/wchar_t/2.cc execution test
824-gcc-10.2.0:FAIL: 22_locale/time_get/get_time/char/wrapped_env.cc
execution test
824-gcc-10.2.0:FAIL: 22_locale/time_get/get_time/char/wrapped_locale.cc
execution test
824-gcc-10.2.0:FAIL: 22_locale/time_get/get_time/wchar_t/wrapped_env.cc
execution test
824-gcc-10.2.0:FAIL:
22_locale/time_get/get_time/wchar_t/wrapped_locale.cc execution test
833-libtool-2.4.6:123: compiling softlinked libltdl
FAILED (standalone.at:35)
833-libtool-2.4.6:124: compiling copied libltdl
FAILED (standalone.at:50)
833-libtool-2.4.6:125: installable libltdl
FAILED (standalone.at:67)
833-libtool-2.4.6:126: linking libltdl without autotools
FAILED (standalone.at:85)
833-libtool-2.4.6:130: linking libltdl without autotools
FAILED (subproject.at:115)
865-tar-1.32:223: capabilities: binary store/restore FAILED
(capabs_raw01.at:28)
867-vim-8.2.1209:1 FAILED:
=============
That's without running autoconf tests. I have not investigated the tar
and vim failures yet.
Still waiting for glibc-2.32. I'm a bit disappointed as I didn't see
anything in the mailing list and there are no commits since Friday morning.
-- Bruce
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
