On 8/21/20 4:40 PM, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote:
I've now run the full set of tests on three different builds of 10.1-rc1, and I'm almost in agreement about the expected results.Two builds were on ryzen. Those used -O3 throughout, even in gcc where I had stopped doing that because of failures I described as in the torture tests. Reinstated because on a semi-decent development machine I want to build more quickly. The other build was one my i3 skylake using -O2 - it's not a main development machine. The following packages still cause me to query what the book says: tcl: I still think that the line Files with failing tests: http.test httpold.test should be mentioned in addition to the clock test (which exits with errors). gcc: I get two additional failures in libstdc++ on all three machines, FAIL: 20_util/unsynchronized_pool_resource/allocate.cc execution test FAIL: 22_locale/numpunct/members/char/3.cc execution test Totals for unexpected failures in my builds: -O2 -O3 g++ 17 17 and 18 gcc 7 21 libstdc++ 8 8 So, using -O3 still breaks some more gcc torture tests (but the build seems to work well). But I think those two extra libstdc++ failures ought to be mentoned. Python: for me, test_normalization passed on each build. Not sure if it still fails for you guys ? coreutils: We say test-getlogin is known to fail, but in each of my builds I have: SKIP: test-getlogin util-linux: we pass -k to make check without specifying any details. For me, column/invalid multibyte failed on each of my builds. Apart from these minor details of what to expect, this is now all looking really good. I'll also mention that for inetutils, where libls _may_ fail, it failed on the O2 build and one of the O3 builds, but not on the other O3 build.
We are still working on tags fo rBLFS, so I opened a ticket on LFS so we don't forget.
http://wiki.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/ticket/4720 -- Bruce -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
