Hi Ken, Fotis, yesterday I googled the failed tests and found two related bug-reports:
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=22760 https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=22810 It looks like starting from the v3.5 release Clang requires Glibc v2.13 or newer.. Anyway, I was able to succesfully install Clang-3.4.2-GCC-4.8.2.eb building block. Now I am happy except only one thing. Actually, I need to install some other LLVM modules such as SAFEcode, DragonEgg. The problem is that after succesfull installation of a building block the building directory is automatically cleaned up. Could you please advise me how to force EB to prevent cleaning source as well as building directories? Thanks you very much for your help and assistance! With best regards, Victor 14.01.2016, 02:09, "Fotis Georgatos" <[email protected]>: > Hi Ken, Victor, > > On Jan 13, 2016, at 3:25 PM, Kenneth Hoste <[email protected]> wrote: >> According to our findings, "ulimit -v" must be set to 'unlimited', while >> "ulimit -s" must be set to something else than 'unlimited' for the tests to >> work. >> There may be more going on though, since that's exactly what you have >> according to your debug log. >> Maybe the stack size limit should be higher? Not sure… > > I’ve seen this issue before. I hadn’t debugged it fully, but it appeared to > relate to glibc-2.12 of RHEL6 and friends (hello Centos6, hello SL6); > > AFAIK, the issue goes away with glibc 2.13 and anything greater. If I recall > the story right, clang v3.4 and above will fail the sanitiser test, > because they are picky for a situation that can indeed imply a race > condition (if true, well done! :) - can someone else confirm this? > btw. try to install either of clang/3.3 and clang/3.4 to verify the above > statement, across glibc cases. > >> Ward has issued a PR to add a new option to hard disable only the >> sanitizer checks, see >> https://github.com/hpcugent/easybuild-easyblocks/pull/806. >> That should go in very soon, and so will be part of the next release >> (EasyBuild v2.6.0). > > Nice to have that as a tuneable. > >> With that in place, adding "skip_sanitizer_tests = True" will be >> sufficient to dance around this issue, as opposed to having to skip *all* >> tests and disable bootstrapping, as I mentioned earlier. >> We should consider having that enabled by default to skip these >> troublesome tests... Ward? > > I’m inclined to agree, however it’s good to have a better understanding if > that introduces an “unsafe" situation. > Basically, if behaviour is the same like it used to be with clang/3.3, it > may be OK to disable as default even if imperfect; > but if the v3.4 sanitiser checks are more strict for a strong reason (race > conditions looming ahead), I’d be more skeptical... > more input needed. > > Fotis > > -- > echo "sysadmin know better bash than english" | sed s/min/mins/ \ > | sed 's/better bash/bash better/' # signal detected in a CERN forum
