On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 06:01:49PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote: > Ken Moffat wrote: > > My result is identical. I think it's internal to the math co-processor > hw. I've seen this for years. Noted in the book. > OK, I was on a series of ttys while I looked at the logs and I didn't bother to look at the book.
> > > Interestingly, the last screen of the check log just shows a lot > > of lines reporting Total tests: 300, Total failures: 0 among a few > > other things, so it is easy to overlook these failures (and anyway > > they almost certainly don't matter). > > That's just the last set of tests not a sum of all tests. > Yes, but it explains why _I_ probably didn't notice it before. I tend to lack something in the "review _everything_" part of "thoroughness" when a check log appears to have ended ok. > > 2. gcc > > Running /building/gcc-4.8.1/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/asan.exp ... > > FAIL: g++.dg/asan/asan_test.C -O2 AddressSanitizer_HugeMallocTest > > Ident((char*)malloc(size))[-1] = 0 output pattern test, should match > > is located 1 bytes to the left of 2726297600-byte > > Seems to pass for me on x86_64. > My x86_64 7.4 is powered down at the moment, might take a look later if I remember. > > and > > Running > > /building/gcc-4.8.1/libmudflap/testsuite/libmudflap.c++/c++frags.exp > > ... > > FAIL: libmudflap.c++/pass41-frag.cxx ( -O) execution test > > FAIL: libmudflap.c++/pass41-frag.cxx (-O2) execution test > > FAIL: libmudflap.c++/pass41-frag.cxx (-O3) execution test > > This has been around for *years*. > Yes. Just noting what I saw on this run (apart from in bash and vim which are fairly impenetrable). > > 3. glibc > > make: *** [check] Error 2 > > - pretty much as expected, I think > > Yes. > > > 4. inetutils - > > Failed at pinging ::1. > > Do you have IPv6 enabled in the running kernel? > Not sure. I'll need to check and compare what is on the x86_64 kernel where the tests always passed. > > 5. texinfo. > > FAIL: test_scripts/formatting_unknown_nodes_renamed.sh > > > > Not sure if Matt's patch fixes this. > > Don't know, but I had: > > FAIL: prove.sh > > formatting_unknown_nodes_renamed.sh passed for me. > I think I had a patch in my builds (on the other machine) last week, but if I did then I lost it in moving to 7.4-rc. Will check when I can go back to the git branch I used for building that, and when I've checked all the logs. ĸen -- das eine Mal als Tragödie, dieses Mal als Farce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
