Question About Unstable "Host system requirements"

Randy McMurchy LFS-User at
Tue Jun 15 08:37:10 PDT 2004

On Tue, June 15, 2004 at 6:25 -0500, Ken Moffat wrote:

> On Tue, 15 Jun 2004, Randy McMurchy wrote:
> >
> > Perhaps a mention on the glibc page in Chapter 5 where there's
> > known issues on test failures (As an aside, I don't understand
> > explaining the test failures in Chapter 5, they really belong
> > in Chapter 6. The book is fairly adamant about skipping the
> > tests in Chapter 5, why explain the tests here?).
> >
> The 'pure lfs' method started out by running all of the tests.
> Eventually the non-toolchain tests in chapter 5 were discouraged because
> of unexplained problems on certain hosts / distros (tests failed in
> chapter 5, but chapter 6 was ok).  Anybody who cares about the book
> should prolly be running the chapter 5 tests, at least to look for new
> failures.  But, if the book suggests you should skip the toolchain tests
> in chapter 5 (I say 'if' because I'm not following CVS at the moment)
> then the book is _wrong_.

I'm not in a position to say what is "right" and what is "wrong".
I just know what the book says:

Chapter 4: "About the test suites" - There's a "Note" box saying
this: "For the average reader of this book we recommend not to
run the test suites in Chapter 5."

Chapter 5: "Binutils - Pass 1" - Normally we would now run the
test suite, but at this early stage the test suite framework
(Tcl, Expect and DejaGNU) is not yet in place. And there would
be little point in running the tests anyhow, since the programs
from this first pass will soon be replaced by those from the

Chapter 5: "GCC - Pass 1" - Same thing as Binutils above.

Chapter 5: "Glibc" - "As mentioned earlier, we don't recommend
running the test suites for the temporary system here in this

Chapter 5: "GCC - Pass 2" - Verbatim exactly as Glibc.

Chapter 5: "Binutils - Pass 2" - Same as GCC Pass 2.

Now, all this said, I should have known better and run the
tests. I always have in the past. I fully realize this is an
"unstable" branch of the book and therefore I should expect
some difficulty, or at least, some unknowns.

But this isn't an unknown issue. It's something that's been
known for months. Why not just put something in the book about
it? Hey, I'm not crying because I had trouble building Glibc,
or that the tests failed. So what. I learned along the way.

I'm simply trying to bring this issue to light, *so that
something will be done about it*, and others won't have to
go through this. The problem is not going to go away.

My thanks to those who responded to this issue. I'm simply
going to make an entry in Bugzilla and hope it's taken as a
valid concern. If it's deemed to be an invalid entry, so be
it. At least I tried.


More information about the lfs-dev mailing list