On 08/10/2018 08:17 PM, Ken Moffat wrote:

Full results follow -

cat <<'EOF' |
LAST_UPDATED: Obtained from SVN: tags/gcc_8_2_0_release revision 262993

Native configuration is x86_64-pc-linux-gnu

                === g++ tests ===


Running target unix
FAIL: g++.dg/pr83239.C  -std=gnu++11  scan-tree-dump-not optimized 
"_ZNSt6vectorIiSaIiEE17_M_default_appendEm"
FAIL: g++.dg/pr83239.C  -std=gnu++14  scan-tree-dump-not optimized 
"_ZNSt6vectorIiSaIiEE17_M_default_appendEm"
        1
                === libstdc++ tests ===


Running target unix
FAIL: 27_io/filesystem/iterators/directory_iterator.cc execution test
FAIL: 27_io/filesystem/iterators/recursive_directory_iterator.cc execution test
FAIL: 27_io/filesystem/operations/exists.cc execution test
FAIL: 27_io/filesystem/operations/is_empty.cc execution test
FAIL: 27_io/filesystem/operations/remove.cc execution test
FAIL: 27_io/filesystem/operations/status.cc execution test
FAIL: 27_io/filesystem/operations/symlink_status.cc execution test
FAIL: 27_io/filesystem/operations/temp_directory_path.cc execution test
FAIL: experimental/filesystem/iterators/directory_iterator.cc execution test
FAIL: experimental/filesystem/iterators/recursive_directory_iterator.cc 
execution test
FAIL: experimental/filesystem/operations/exists.cc execution test
FAIL: experimental/filesystem/operations/is_empty.cc execution test
FAIL: experimental/filesystem/operations/remove.cc execution test
FAIL: experimental/filesystem/operations/temp_directory_path.cc execution test

                === libstdc++ Summary ===

# of expected passes            12250
# of unexpected failures        14
# of expected failures          71
# of unsupported tests          274

As a sanity check, I reran the gcc tests as a regular user (kernel 4,17,10; glibc-2.27). I still got the two g++ test failures above, but none of the libstdc++ tests failed:

      === libstdc++ Summary ===

# of expected passes    12199
# of expected failures     71
# of unsupported tests     306

I found a short fix for the g++ test and we can use that. I'm going to try running the tests as user nobody in a full build. We might be able to get a clean set of tests,

  -- Bruce
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Reply via email to