As the book correctly says: "Five tests are known to fail in the
LFS build envronment, but all tests pass if rechecked after Chapter
6 is complete."
I took a look at this, because it implies the build order might be
inadequate for the current version. After looking, I suspect it
shows two things:
1. These tests want automake (more specifically, they use aclocal).
2. The invocation of am_missing_run *might* be buggy - the autotools
are always hard to grok, but I sort-of expected that am_missing_run
might report that automake or aclocal is required. The tests now
use 'the autotest harness', perhaps the error gets ignored there.
Trying to debug the differences between good and bad runs is hard,
because the directory for any test which succeeds gets deleted
immediately after that test. Also, I thought I could edit the
Makefile afterwards to remove most of the earlier tests so that I
didn't have to wait around, but it continues to run all of them. I
interrupted during test 123 and got some information :
(i.) the initial failure in test 122 is repeated in all five tests:
/bin/sh: no: command not found
and that was from
CDPATH="${ZSH_VERSION+.} && cd . && no -I m4
(ii.) for test 123, the Makefile for the test included
ACLOCAL = no
but in the rerun at the end of chapter 6
ACLOCAL = aclocal
(iii.) The relevant line in the configure script for this test is
ACLOCAL=${ACLOCAL-"${am_missing_run}aclocal-${am__api_version}"}
(iv.) The tests which fail are from standalone.at and subproject.at.
Standalone Libltdl.
122: compiling softlinked libltdl FAILED
(standalone.at:35)
123: compiling copied libltdl FAILED
(standalone.at:50)
124: installable libltdl FAILED
(standalone.at:67)
125: linking libltdl without autotools FAILED
(standalone.at:85)
Subproject Libltdl.
126: compiling softlinked libltdl expected
failure (subproject.at:62)
127: compiling copied libltdl expected
failure (subproject.at:78)
128: installable libltdl expected
failure (subproject.at:97)
129: linking libltdl without autotools FAILED
(subproject.at:115)
Arguably, test 129 like the rest of the subproject.at tests should
be expected to fail, because the result is
./subproject.at:115: exit code was 2, expected 0
129. subproject.at:109: 129. linking libltdl without autotools
(subproject.at:109): FAILED (subproject.at:115)
and it fails BECAUSE the autotools are missing. Looks to me like a
duff test, but what do I know.
Summary:
Anybody feeling clever and want to disable these tests ?
Or could we say that these 5 tests need automake which cannot
be installed until later ?
Also, should we add automake to the dependencies for the test suite
of Libtool in Appendix C, in the same way that automake is a
dependency of the autoconf tests ?
ĸen
--
ĸen
Nanny Ogg usually went to bed early. After all, she was an old lady.
Sometimes she went to bed as early as 6 a.m.
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
