>On Mon, 20 Dec 2010 23:38:32 +0000 >bendeguz <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I'll see the test sources tonight to get more detail, but I think > > that is one of those test whose failure you can safely ignore. > Well, actually, I already did that. > Now I'm using the pached glibc build. I haven't built anything with > the "new" glibc, but I'm hoping the best:)
Well, I've taken a peek at the sources, and I wouldn't know what to say. Perhaps it's something to do with the kernel version mismatch? Impossible to tell without a hard-grinding investigation. So go forth and watch out for anomalies, I guess. :) IF threading a potentially dangerous terrain is not a problem for you. You should know that glibc's tests are not always consistent. For example: when I rebuild my system, if I do tests for the temporary toolchain, those usually have no failures (apart from a few well-known ones). When I do them for the end system, they have them. ?? -- -Aleksandar Kuktin -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
