Hopefully Someone Will Check and Comment on My Logic [OT Maybe?]
What might make this OT is that it's not a question specifically about
building LFS, but rather a question of a script that I use to build LFS
not working the way I want it to. If this is really OT, maybe someone
will respond privately if the any have any ideas.
As many of you know, I use the More Control with Package Users
management system. I have modified the build scripts in the hint to
minimize the pedantic work at the keyboard that's involved with a
build. The script is designed to find the tarball, un-tar it and the
configure, make,make check and install. Additionally, I add other
necessary commands from the book in the appropriate places; e.g.
patches, creating symlinks and moving files around.
The script has evolved over six years and, much to my chagrin right now,
I've not been good at keeping the old versions or maintaining a changelog.
One thing I want it to do is recover from a failed 'make' or 'install'
without have to run the whole script again. This feature *used to*
work. It now doesn't. If everything is OK, the script runs from the
beginning to the successful end of a build. But if there is a glitch,
the recovery doesn't happen.
The most common interruption in a build, when using more control, is
write permissions to a directory. This causes the 'install' to abort.
The fix is simple. Change the write permissions and re-run the script.
I want it to pick up with the make install command, but right now it
goes to the make command on any abort. I thing the testing for
conditions is failing, and I cannot see the flaw in the logic or
construction. It is in this area that I'd like some help. A fresh set
of eyes, so to speak.
Following is the script from the variable definition through the logic
tests. I've eliminated all the extra stuff.
#! /bin/bash
# Begin Build for PACKAGE
# Run this script from the package user's home directory by invoking it
# with the package name--ex. vim-7.2. ./build vim-7.2 or ./build
$(whoami) It will find
# the tarball in $PACKAGES, untar it, change to the created directory
# and configure, make, make check and make install. Then it will
clean up
# by creating a list of the installed files and remove the source tree.
# It will create 6 log files in the $HOME directory:
# configure.log: All messages output during configure
# configure.err: Just the errors output during configure
# make.log: All messages output during make
# make.err: Just the errors output during make
# install.log: All messages output during make install
# install.err: Just the errors output during make install
# variables
package=$@
logdir=$package-logs
PACKAGES=/sources
CURRENT=$package
took out a lot of stuff
# Begin tests and function calls for fresh and failed builds.
# This one recovers from failed make.
if [ -e $logdir/make-`echo $package`.err ] \
[ ! -e $logdir/install-`echo $package`.err ]; then #Now build
removed make, make check and make install sections
fi
# This one recovers from a failed install
if [ -e $logdir/make-`echo $package`.log ] \
[ ! -e $HOME/$package-files.list ]; then
removed make install section
fi
# This one does everything through configure, make, make install
if [ ! -e $logdir ]; then
removed configure, make, make check and make install sections
removed extra commands and clean up sections.
fi
# End Build
This script creates six logs: configure.{log,err}, make.{log,err} and
install.{log,err}, which I put in a log directory, $logdir. The very
last thing is does is create a list of files installed,
$package-files.list. Therefore, and here comes the testing logic, at
the beginning there is no log directory, and the test becomes [ ! -e
$logdir ].
The necessary and sufficient conditions to define a failed make are a
make log or configure log that exists and an install log or package file
list that does not exist. If an install fails, there will be a make
log but no file list. An install log *may* exist so I don't consider it
in the logic.
The preceding two paragraphs are my logic. Would someone please, using
that, compare the logic to the test statements to see if they match, if
the tests are constructed properly or if I need different logic.
As I said, if all is well, the script runs like a charm. If there's a
hiccup, a failed install, the script starts from the make test.
Doesn't that mean the the logic failed?
I've removed a lot of stuff in the script trying to make things relevant
and specific to only the question. Please feel free to ask for
additional info.
I'm hoping that someone can point me to better constructs or better logic.
Thanks,
Dan
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Hopefully Someone Will Check and Comment on My Logic [OT Maybe?]
On Sat, 12 Mar 2011 18:00:56 -0600
Dan McGhee beesnee...@att.net wrote:
[snip]
Following is the script from the variable definition through the
logic tests. I've eliminated all the extra stuff.
[snip]
# This one recovers from a failed install
if [ -e $logdir/make-`echo $package`.log ] \
[ ! -e $HOME/$package-files.list ]; then
[snip]
I've removed a lot of stuff in the script trying to make things
relevant and specific to only the question. Please feel free to ask
for additional info.
[snip]
Well... DOES the script add all the logfiles it is supposed to add?
Are you /sure/? Have you checked?
The tests look kosher, as far as that matters, but I would turn my
attention to the creation of logfiles.
Other than that, my money is on the `echo $package` substitutions.
If ${package} has a space in it, that could break it.
You can fix this by doing ''[ -e ${logdir}/make-${package}.log ]''.
Take a small package (gzip?), and build it in such a way that it breaks
at various points, then inspect the relevant directories to see what is
there and what is not.
--
-Aleksandar Kuktin
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Hopefully Someone Will Check and Comment on My Logic [OT Maybe?]
On 03/12/2011 06:47 PM, Aleksandar Kuktin wrote:
On Sat, 12 Mar 2011 18:00:56 -0600
Dan McGheebeesnee...@att.net wrote:
[snip]
Following is the script from the variable definition through the
logic tests. I've eliminated all the extra stuff.
[snip]
# This one recovers from a failed install
if [ -e $logdir/make-`echo $package`.log ] \
[ ! -e $HOME/$package-files.list ]; then
[snip]
I've removed a lot of stuff in the script trying to make things
relevant and specific to only the question. Please feel free to ask
for additional info.
[snip]
Thank you, Aleksandar.
Well... DOES the script add all the logfiles it is supposed to add?
Are you /sure/? Have you checked?
Yes, yes and yes.
The tests look kosher, as far as that matters, but I would turn my
attention to the creation of logfiles.
Other than that, my money is on the `echo $package` substitutions.
If ${package} has a space in it, that could break it.
You can fix this by doing ''[ -e ${logdir}/make-${package}.log ]''.
This is what I was hoping to hear--that the logic is sound,but that
there might be a problem in the construct. I've shied away from ( ) and
{} in $ xxx statements because I'm really shaky on what they mean. I've
also never seen the ' ' [ ] ' ' construct. I use the Advanced Bash
Scripting Guide as my reference. Thank you for your feedback. I'll play
with this.
Take a small package (gzip?), and build it in such a way that it breaks
at various points, then inspect the relevant directories to see what is
there and what is not.
I've done this with GDBM by adding `exit 1` at various points. The
results are as I have described in my first post.
I appreciate your input. We'll see what happens.
Dan
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Hopefully Someone Will Check and Comment on My Logic [OT Maybe?]
On Saturday 12 March 2011 19:00:56 Dan McGhee wrote:
# This one recovers from failed make.
if [ -e $logdir/make-`echo $package`.err ] \
[ ! -e $logdir/install-`echo $package`.err ]; then #Now build
removed make, make check and make install sections
fi
# This one recovers from a failed install
if [ -e $logdir/make-`echo $package`.log ] \
[ ! -e $HOME/$package-files.list ]; then
Technically, you may be mixing metaphors with this syntax. Perhaps the syntax
is valid, but it isn't doing what you expect. Try:
if [ -e file_1 -a ! -e file_2 ]; then
commands
fi
# equivalent: if test -e $file_1 -a ! -e file_2; then
OR use:
[ -e file_1 ] [ ! -e file_2 ] {
commands;
}
# equivalent: test -e $file_1 test ! -e file_2 {
OR even use:
[ -e file_1 -a ! -e file_2 ] {
commands;
}
# equivalent: test -e file_1 -a ! -e file_2 {
Also, the syntax '-e $logdir/make-${package}.log' will eliminate a smidgeon
of complexity even though what you did is correct. Any time you aren't sure if
a shell var like $var will be, or is being, parsed correctly in context, put
the name in braces, as in ${var}.
Nothing else on your script pokes me in the eye with a sharp stick.
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
gcc test failures
Here's the synopsis: Been trying to compile LFS (from the latest svn version) on my laptop, I have tried four times so far (please note I'm making use of JHLAFS). During all the four builds, gcc tests don't seem to be satisfactory as the number of unexpected failures is too high and the number of expected passes is too low. I have tried changing the CFLAGS and tried to be conservative but, the result seems to be the same. The fourth time I chose to run tests both for the tools and the final system. As I can see tests for all other packages are successful (All # tests were successful) except for gcc ! The CFLAGS I used for the fourth build are -O3 -pipe -msse -msse2 -mmmx -march=native -mtune=native. The processor is an Intel Penitum4 Mobile. The only deviations from the SVN book are m4 (using 1.4.16), mpc (using 0.9), less (using 446). Here's the grep -A7 Summ output: === libstdc++ Summary === FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/ieee/20010226-1.c compilation, -Os FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/ieee/20011123-1.c compilation, -O0 FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/ieee/20011123-1.c compilation, -O1 FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/ieee/20011123-1.c compilation, -O2 FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/ieee/20011123-1.c compilation, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/ieee/20011123-1.c compilation, -O3 -g -- === libstdc++ Summary === AR=ar; export AR; \ RANLIB=ranlib; export RANLIB; \ if [ -z normal1 ] \ [ -j = -j ]; then \ make check-DEJAGNUnormal0 check-DEJAGNUnormal1 \ check-DEJAGNUnormal2 check-DEJAGNUnormal3; \ -- === libstdc++ Summary === AR=ar; export AR; \ RANLIB=ranlib; export RANLIB; \ if [ -z normal2 ] \ [ -j = -j ]; then \ make check-DEJAGNUnormal0 check-DEJAGNUnormal1 \ check-DEJAGNUnormal2 check-DEJAGNUnormal3; \ -- === libstdc++ Summary === AR=ar; export AR; \ RANLIB=ranlib; export RANLIB; \ if [ -z normal3 ] \ [ -j = -j ]; then \ make check-DEJAGNUnormal0 check-DEJAGNUnormal1 \ check-DEJAGNUnormal2 check-DEJAGNUnormal3; \ -- === libstdc++ Summary === make[6]: Leaving directory `/sources/gcc-build/i686-pc-linux-gnu/libstdc++-v3/testsuite' FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/ieee/pr28634.c compilation, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/ieee/pr28634.c compilation, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-all-loops -finline-functions FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/ieee/pr28634.c compilation, -O3 -g FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/ieee/pr28634.c compilation, -Os FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/ieee/pr29302-1.c compilation, -O0 -- === gcc Summary === # of expected passes414 # of unexpected failures11965 # of expected failures 33 # of unresolved testcases 866 # of unsupported tests 401 Couldn't determine version of /sources/gcc-build/gcc/xgcc: spawn failed -- === gcc Summary === # of unexpected failures2692 # of unresolved testcases 2692 Couldn't determine version of /sources/gcc-build/gcc/xgcc: spawn failed make[4]: [check-parallel-gcc_1] Error 1 (ignored) test -d testsuite || mkdir testsuite -- === gcc Summary === # of unexpected failures4628 # of unresolved testcases 4628 Couldn't determine version of /sources/gcc-build/gcc/xgcc: spawn failed make[4]: [check-parallel-gcc_2] Error 1 (ignored) test -d testsuite || mkdir testsuite -- === gcc Summary === # of expected passes12 # of unexpected failures7232 # of unresolved testcases 42 # of unsupported tests 118 Couldn't determine version of /sources/gcc-build/gcc/xgcc: spawn failed -- === gcc Summary === # of expected passes564 # of unexpected failures10695 # of unexpected successes 12 # of expected failures 29 # of unresolved testcases 93 # of unsupported tests 246 -- === gcc Summary === # of unexpected failures2409 # of unresolved testcases 380 # of unsupported tests 273 Couldn't determine version of /sources/gcc-build/gcc/xgcc: spawn failed make[4]: [check-parallel-gcc_5] Error 1 (ignored) -- === gcc Summary === # of unexpected failures2425 # of unresolved testcases 80 # of unsupported tests 1277 Couldn't determine version of /sources/gcc-build/gcc/xgcc: spawn failed make[4]: [check-parallel-gcc_6] Error 1 (ignored) -- === g++ Summary === # of expected passes6 # of unexpected failures3543 # of unexpected successes 6 # of unresolved testcases 255 # of unsupported tests 188 Couldn't determine version of
