Has anyone come across the following conform failures during a glibc-2.29 make check?
grep ^FAIL glibc-check-log || true FAIL: conform/POSIX2008/arpa/inet.h/conform FAIL: conform/POSIX2008/netdb.h/conform FAIL: conform/POSIX2008/netinet/in.h/conform FAIL: conform/POSIX2008/sys/socket.h/conform FAIL: conform/UNIX98/arpa/inet.h/conform FAIL: conform/UNIX98/netdb.h/conform FAIL: conform/UNIX98/netinet/in.h/conform FAIL: conform/UNIX98/sys/socket.h/conform FAIL: conform/XOPEN2K/arpa/inet.h/conform FAIL: conform/XOPEN2K/netdb.h/conform FAIL: conform/XOPEN2K/netinet/in.h/conform FAIL: conform/XOPEN2K/sys/socket.h/conform FAIL: conform/XOPEN2K8/arpa/inet.h/conform FAIL: conform/XOPEN2K8/netdb.h/conform FAIL: conform/XOPEN2K8/netinet/in.h/conform FAIL: conform/XOPEN2K8/sys/socket.h/conform FAIL: conform/XPG42/arpa/inet.h/conform FAIL: conform/XPG42/netdb.h/conform FAIL: conform/XPG42/netinet/in.h/conform FAIL: conform/XPG42/sys/socket.h/conform FAIL: inet/tst-idna_name_classify FAIL: misc/check-installed-headers-c The only significant difference between this build and my previous build which didn't have these failures was moving from linux 5.0.17 to 5.1.4. Thanks, Wayne. -- 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
