On 3/8/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I've been trying to upgrade to glibc-2.5.
> On tests ('make check') I get TWO failures.
> I'm wondering if I can ignore or fix them.
> I'd appreciate if anybody can help.<snip> > B. GORY DETAILS > Make Check: Two failures. > 1. > glibc-build/nptl/tst-cancel1 > "Didn't expect signal from child: got `Aborted'" > > 2. > glibc-build/rt/tst-cpuclock2 > Exits with Error 1 I've certainly seen these happen before on working systems. > C. POSSIBLE/ACCEPTABLE WORKAROUNDS? > 1. In 'tst-cancel1.c' > At the bottom, added > "#define EXPECTED_SIGNAL SIGABORT" > Question: It works now but > is it correct what I did? No clue, but probably not the right thing to do. Someone with much more experience with libc would have to take a look at that, but it seems like what you did was a workaround. Just a guess. > 2. A lot trickier here. > In 'tst-cpuclock2.c' > 2.1 I bumped up "if (my_diff > 100000000)" > to 600000000. > > 2.2 On "if (diff < sleeptime.tv_nsec || ...)" > I forced success (real cheating) > Question: Can I live with these _real_ failures? > It works now but > After all, my system is running pretty nicely with > presumably a most recent kernel - > with all its timing clock issues. I would certainly move on. I don't know much C and certainly not what to expect when running tests on C libraries. So, when I build, I just don't want to see a lot of failures. One or two is usually acceptable and can often disappear under the right host conditions. But I would encourage you to investigate those failures if you have the skills to do it. I'd like to know the real reason why those tests fail. -- Dan -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
