On Wed, 8 Apr 2015 18:42:35 +0100 Ken Moffat <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 08, 2015 at 06:01:02PM +0100, Hazel Russman wrote: > > According to the book, a failure of Test 501 (libtool test) is expected. I > > also have a failure of Test 209 (parallel autotest and signal handling) > > which is not in the book or in the specimen log. > > > > This failure remains when retesting after installing automake, and also > > when autoconf is built and checked with -j1. I've installed the package > > anyway but I wonder if anyone else has seen this error. > > I've not seen it, but I'll comment on "built and checked with -j1". > For the build, I would use -jN (for the largest value of N which is > useful on that particular machine), and only use -j1 for the check. Chapter 4.5 suggests using -j1 if any problems arise with a normal build. I wanted to see if that would make any difference in this case. > Testsuites and -jN can be nasty (see my comments on gcc in the past > few months on -dev). > > Do you still get that failure if you use fresh source ? Many > testsuites do not give complete reruns, they save existing results - > no idea if this is one of them. I always use freshly untarred source in my LFS builds. Again I think this is specifically recommended in the book. -- Hazel Russman <[email protected]> -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page Do not top post on this list. A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style
