On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 03:33:58PM +0100, Pierre Labastie wrote: > On 06/03/2017 12:23, José Carlos Carrión Plaza wrote: > > Hello co-listers: > > > > In LFS-8.0 I’ve got 1143 unexpected failures in chapter 6 compilation of > > gcc-6.3.0. > > > > I have experience on LFS (my first versión was 5.1.1). > > > > I have never problems with Chapter 6 compilation of GCC (except the errors > > indicated on LFS book). [---] > > > > 11.- In chapter 6 gcc-6.3.0 phase “make -k check” generates five > > “unexpected failures” on libstdc++ and ¡1143 unexpected failures! on gcc > > Summary. > > > > 11.- “make -k check” log show 168 distinct tests failed: > > > > experimental/filesystem/iterators/directory_iterator.cc > > experimental/filesystem/iterators/recursive_directory_iterator.cc > > experimental/filesystem/operations/exists.cc > > experimental/filesystem/operations/is_empty.cc > > experimental/filesystem/operations/temp_directory_path.cc > > I have the same failures on a conventional HDD. > Me too, on SSD > > gcc.dg/cpp/trad/include.c > > And this one too Ditto > > > gcc.target/i386/pr65105-2.c > > (plus 161 on gcc.target/i386/mpx) > > But not those >
I had 1113 failures in gcc/target/i386/mpx last September (on 7.10). But I was building for x86_64. http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/pipermail/lfs-dev/2016-September/071267.html The good news is that the resulting system seemed to be fine. But I can't find the details for the "previous" failures I mentioned, and therefore I'm unsure which machine they were on. ĸen -- `I shall take my mountains', said Lu-Tze. `The climate will be good for them.' -- Small Gods -- 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
