> El 6 mar 2017, a las 19:48, Ken Moffat <[email protected]> escribió: > >> 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
Ken message gives me peace of mind. I'll continue until LFS end and I'll build BLFS in chroot jail at least until LAMP and X+Motif. If something's wrong I suspect it will explode by the way. Thanks again J. C. > -- > `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 -- 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
