[lfs-support] gcc-4.9.0 changes
Ok, followed the advises from ticket #3552, now binutils chapter 6 reports failures: Running /sources-bss/binutils-2.24/ld/testsuite/ld-plugin/lto.exp ... FAIL: PR ld/12758 FAIL: PR ld/12760 FAIL: LTO 3 symbol FAIL: PR ld/13183 FAIL: LTO 3a FAIL: LTO 11 Running /sources-bss/binutils-2.24/ld/testsuite/ld-plugin/plugin.exp ... Concerning LTO, thus induced by gcc-4.9.0. Chapter 5 is completed without any errors, added --disable-werror to the binutils configure...Seems that others having no problem, so what could be wrong? Frans. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [lfs-support] gcc-4.9.0 changes
Le 24/04/2014 17:28, Frans de Boer a écrit : Ok, followed the advises from ticket #3552, now binutils chapter 6 reports failures: Running /sources-bss/binutils-2.24/ld/testsuite/ld-plugin/lto.exp ... FAIL: PR ld/12758 FAIL: PR ld/12760 FAIL: LTO 3 symbol FAIL: PR ld/13183 FAIL: LTO 3a FAIL: LTO 11 Running /sources-bss/binutils-2.24/ld/testsuite/ld-plugin/plugin.exp ... Concerning LTO, thus induced by gcc-4.9.0. Chapter 5 is completed without any errors, added --disable-werror to the binutils configure...Seems that others having no problem, so what could be wrong? Frans. I have exactly the same failures. Pierre -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [lfs-support] gcc-4.9.0 changes
Pierre Labastie wrote: Le 24/04/2014 17:28, Frans de Boer a écrit : Ok, followed the advises from ticket #3552, now binutils chapter 6 reports failures: Running /sources-bss/binutils-2.24/ld/testsuite/ld-plugin/lto.exp ... FAIL: PR ld/12758 FAIL: PR ld/12760 FAIL: LTO 3 symbol FAIL: PR ld/13183 FAIL: LTO 3a FAIL: LTO 11 Running /sources-bss/binutils-2.24/ld/testsuite/ld-plugin/plugin.exp ... Concerning LTO, thus induced by gcc-4.9.0. Chapter 5 is completed without any errors, added --disable-werror to the binutils configure...Seems that others having no problem, so what could be wrong? Frans. I have exactly the same failures. Looking at a full build, I have: 077-binutils-2.24:FAIL: PR ld/12758 077-binutils-2.24:FAIL: PR ld/12760 077-binutils-2.24:FAIL: LTO 3 symbol 077-binutils-2.24:FAIL: PR ld/13183 077-binutils-2.24:FAIL: LTO 3a 077-binutils-2.24:FAIL: LTO 11 093-coreutils-8.22:FAIL: tests/misc/nohup.sh 093-coreutils-8.22:# FAIL: 1 093-coreutils-8.22:FAIL: tests/misc/nohup 093-coreutils-8.22:# FAIL: 1 106-perl-5.18.2:FAILED at test 104 106-perl-5.18.2:FAILED at test 84 131-systemd-212:FAIL: test-strv 131-systemd-212:FAIL: test-bus-creds 131-systemd-212:FAIL: test-journal-flush 131-systemd-212:# FAIL: 3 133-util-linux-2.24.1:last: last ipv6... FAILED (last/ipv6) 133-util-linux-2.24.1:last: last ... FAILED (last/last) 133-util-linux-2.24.1: 2 tests of 127 FAILED -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [lfs-support] gcc-4.9.0 changes
On 04/24/2014 09:38 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote: Pierre Labastie wrote: Le 24/04/2014 17:28, Frans de Boer a écrit : Ok, followed the advises from ticket #3552, now binutils chapter 6 reports failures: Running /sources-bss/binutils-2.24/ld/testsuite/ld-plugin/lto.exp ... FAIL: PR ld/12758 FAIL: PR ld/12760 FAIL: LTO 3 symbol FAIL: PR ld/13183 FAIL: LTO 3a FAIL: LTO 11 Running /sources-bss/binutils-2.24/ld/testsuite/ld-plugin/plugin.exp ... Concerning LTO, thus induced by gcc-4.9.0. Chapter 5 is completed without any errors, added --disable-werror to the binutils configure...Seems that others having no problem, so what could be wrong? Frans. I have exactly the same failures. Looking at a full build, I have: 077-binutils-2.24:FAIL: PR ld/12758 077-binutils-2.24:FAIL: PR ld/12760 077-binutils-2.24:FAIL: LTO 3 symbol 077-binutils-2.24:FAIL: PR ld/13183 077-binutils-2.24:FAIL: LTO 3a 077-binutils-2.24:FAIL: LTO 11 These are new to me. Using gcc-4.8.2 did not yield these results. 093-coreutils-8.22:FAIL: tests/misc/nohup.sh 093-coreutils-8.22:# FAIL: 1 093-coreutils-8.22:FAIL: tests/misc/nohup 093-coreutils-8.22:# FAIL: 1 These are older and can be avoided by echo exit 0 tests/misc/nohub.sh 106-perl-5.18.2:FAILED at test 104 106-perl-5.18.2:FAILED at test 84 These are also new to me. 131-systemd-212:FAIL: test-strv 131-systemd-212:FAIL: test-bus-creds 131-systemd-212:FAIL: test-journal-flush 131-systemd-212:# FAIL: 3 I am not sure of the above. 133-util-linux-2.24.1:last: last ipv6... FAILED (last/ipv6) 133-util-linux-2.24.1:last: last ... FAILED (last/last) 133-util-linux-2.24.1: 2 tests of 127 FAILED Errors are known as well as the reason too. -- Bruce I use bash scripts with set +h and set -e, so any error is terminating execution. Some scripts have set +e; make check/tests ; set -e to catch known errors with no known (grave) severity. So new errors or lack of errors are not being seen, unless I run the scripts manually and check every output. It's clear that gcc-4.9.0 does introduce some new failures in tests. Maybe because the maintainers of those other packages are behind? It seems that new software - or software depended on new software - should be tested manually, and if all is working out, enable the set +e to generate the whole TC and/or BSS part in one go. Frans. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
