On Mon, Jun 08, 2020 at 06:11:53PM +0300, Αγαθοκλής wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 07, at 10:51 Bruce wrote:
> > On 6/7/20 10:35 AM, Ken Moffat wrote:
> > > On Sun, Jun 07, 2020 at 03:43:30PM +0100, Ken Moffat wrote:
> > > > Finally replying to this:
>
> Hi Ken,
>
> I was meant to ask you about this, to
On Sun, Jun 07, at 10:51 Bruce wrote:
> On 6/7/20 10:35 AM, Ken Moffat wrote:
> > On Sun, Jun 07, 2020 at 03:43:30PM +0100, Ken Moffat wrote:
> > > Finally replying to this:
Hi Ken,
I was meant to ask you about this, to verify that the issue was really
-march=native,
because in that case it
On Sun, Jun 07, 2020 at 10:51:22AM -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> On 6/7/20 10:35 AM, Ken Moffat wrote:
> > On Sun, Jun 07, 2020 at 03:43:30PM +0100, Ken Moffat wrote:
> >
> > So, I've been looking in the wrong place, it's embedded perl in
> > rxvt-unicode: google found
> >
On Sun, Jun 07, 2020 at 03:43:30PM +0100, Ken Moffat wrote:
> Finally replying to this:
>
> I did use that system for a fresh build, but the sigfpe problem was
> present in the tests for both bash and check (building from xorg).
>
> Then I booted the latest system (last night) and the check
On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 12:43:46AM +0100, Ken Moffat wrote:
> On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 03:28:17AM +0100, Ken Moffat wrote:
> > On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 02:08:08AM +0100, Ken Moffat wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 10:13:12PM +0100, Ken Moffat wrote:
[...]
> > >
> > > Result! In chroot bash
On 6/7/20 10:35 AM, Ken Moffat wrote:
On Sun, Jun 07, 2020 at 03:43:30PM +0100, Ken Moffat wrote:
Finally replying to this:
I did use that system for a fresh build, but the sigfpe problem was
present in the tests for both bash and check (building from xorg).
Then I booted the latest system
On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 03:28:17AM +0100, Ken Moffat wrote:
> On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 02:08:08AM +0100, Ken Moffat wrote:
> > On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 10:13:12PM +0100, Ken Moffat wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 12:43:26PM +0800, Xi Ruoyao wrote:
> > > >
> > >
> > > When the -O0 override in
On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 02:08:08AM +0100, Ken Moffat wrote:
> On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 10:13:12PM +0100, Ken Moffat wrote:
> > On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 12:43:26PM +0800, Xi Ruoyao wrote:
> > >
> >
> > When the -O0 override in glibc errored, I changed that to -O1 (still
> > with -march=native).
On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 10:13:12PM +0100, Ken Moffat wrote:
> On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 12:43:26PM +0800, Xi Ruoyao wrote:
> >
>
> When the -O0 override in glibc errored, I changed that to -O1 (still
> with -march=native). Tests on bash still showed the SIGFPE falure,
> but I suspect I need to
On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 12:43:26PM +0800, Xi Ruoyao wrote:
>
> If SIGFPE is somehow masked by sigprocmask, this phenomenon would happen. The
> SIGFPE raised by raise() will be masked, but the SIGFPE produced by 1/0 is
> still
> undefined behavior (on x86_64 Linux normally "as if" a SIGFPE is
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 10:07:50PM +0100, Ken Moffat wrote:
>
> I've now had a reply on the check list suggesting that I try
> rebuilding with -O0.
error: #error "glibc cannot be compiled without optimization"
Fun, isn't it.
ĸen
--
Do you not know that, what you belittle by the name tree is
On Wed, 2020-05-27 at 00:27 -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> On 5/26/20 11:43 PM, Xi Ruoyao wrote:
> > On 2020-05-26 18:17 +0100, Ken Moffat wrote:
> > > I'm trying to discover why two tests in the testsuite for 'check'
> > > always fail for me. I've now got a response that the tests raise
> > >
On 2020-05-27 00:27 -0500, Bruce Dubbs write:
> On 5/26/20 11:43 PM, Xi Ruoyao wrote:
> > On 2020-05-26 18:17 +0100, Ken Moffat wrote:
> > > I'm trying to discover why two tests in the testsuite for 'check'
> > > always fail for me. I've now got a response that the tests raise
> > > SIGFPE but do
On 5/26/20 11:43 PM, Xi Ruoyao wrote:
On 2020-05-26 18:17 +0100, Ken Moffat wrote:
I'm trying to discover why two tests in the testsuite for 'check'
always fail for me. I've now got a response that the tests raise
SIGFPE but do not receive it. The example is
ken@plexi ~/check-debug $cat
On 2020-05-26 18:17 +0100, Ken Moffat wrote:
> I'm trying to discover why two tests in the testsuite for 'check'
> always fail for me. I've now got a response that the tests raise
> SIGFPE but do not receive it. The example is
>
> ken@plexi ~/check-debug $cat test.c
> #include
>
> #include
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 07:38:34PM +0100, Ken Moffat wrote:
> On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 01:32:55PM -0400, Don Cross wrote:
> > On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 1:17 PM Ken Moffat wrote:
> >
> > > I'm trying to discover why two tests in the testsuite for 'check'
> > > always fail for me. I've now got a
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 01:32:55PM -0400, Don Cross wrote:
> On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 1:17 PM Ken Moffat wrote:
>
> > I'm trying to discover why two tests in the testsuite for 'check'
> > always fail for me. I've now got a response that the tests raise
> > SIGFPE but do not receive it. The
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 12:28:15PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> On 5/26/20 12:17 PM, Ken Moffat wrote:
> > I'm trying to discover why two tests in the testsuite for 'check'
> > always fail for me. I've now got a response that the tests raise
> > SIGFPE but do not receive it. The example is
[...]
I'm trying to discover why two tests in the testsuite for 'check'
always fail for me. I've now got a response that the tests raise
SIGFPE but do not receive it. The example is
ken@plexi ~/check-debug $cat test.c
#include
#include
int main() {
printf("Before\n");
raise(SIGFPE);
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 1:17 PM Ken Moffat wrote:
> I'm trying to discover why two tests in the testsuite for 'check'
> always fail for me. I've now got a response that the tests raise
> SIGFPE but do not receive it. The example is
>
> ken@plexi ~/check-debug $cat test.c
> #include
>
>
On 5/26/20 12:17 PM, Ken Moffat wrote:
I'm trying to discover why two tests in the testsuite for 'check'
always fail for me. I've now got a response that the tests raise
SIGFPE but do not receive it. The example is
ken@plexi ~/check-debug $cat test.c
#include
#include
int main() {
21 matches
Mail list logo
