[lfs-dev] Test failures in current svn

Ken Moffat zarniwhoop at ntlworld.com
Sat May 17 16:53:00 PDT 2014


 Since my build has stalled, I took the time to look at my test
results.  The following had failures (on x86_64) -

automake :

FAIL: t/lex-clean-cxx.sh
FAIL: t/lex-depend-cxx.sh

bc had the usual

binutils :

 ld-plugin failures (do we really want to enable this ?)
FAIL: PR ld/12758
FAIL: PR ld/12760
FAIL: LTO 3 symbol
FAIL: PR ld/13183
FAIL: LTO 3a
FAIL: LTO 11

coreutils :

FAIL: tests/misc/nohup.sh

 I see this was ok in LFS-7.5, but failed on my 20140331 build,
which was before gcc-4.9.

eudev :

1 errors occurred, in udev-test.pl but I can't work out which test
it was.
I've seen the same thing in 1.5.4 : I append udev-test.pl.log to my
own log,
but it is full of lines like
 open /dev/null failed: No such file or directory
which don't really help and I cannot spot any _real_ error.

gcc :

FAIL: c-c++-common/tsan/thread_leak1.c
(several times, for different optimizations)

FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/limits-exprparen.c
(several times, for different optimizations, all of them ICEd)

FAIL: g++.dg/ipa/devirt-11.C
(several times, for different values of -std=)

 Oddly, I cannot see any totals for unexpected failures

glibc :

make[2]: ***
[/building/glibc-build/libio/tst-ftell-partial-wide.out] Error 1
make[1]: *** [libio/tests] Error 2
make[2]: *** [/building/glibc-build/posix/tst-getaddrinfo4.out]
Error 1
make[2]: [/building/glibc-build/posix/annexc.out] Error 1 (ignored)
make[1]: *** [posix/tests] Error 2
make[2]: [/building/glibc-build/conform/run-conformtest.out] Error 1
(ignored)
make: *** [check] Error 2

 That tst-ftell-partial-wide failure is new since LFS-7.5, and was
also seen with gcc-4.8.2 in March.

perl :

t/op/numconvert ............................................... #
'-9223372036854775808' ne '-9.22337203685478e+18',
-1.84467440737096e+19   => I - N P vs I - P
# '-9223372036854775808' ne '-9.22337203685478e+18',
# -1.84467440737096e+19   => I - N P vs I - P
# '-9223372036854775808' ne '-9.22337203685478e+18',
# -9.22337203685478e+18   => I - N P vs I - P
# '-9223372036854775808' ne '-9.22337203685478e+18',
# -9223372036854775808    => I - N P vs I - P
# '-9223372036854775808' ne '-9.22337203685478e+18',
# 9223372036854775808     => I - N P vs I - P
# Failed test 104 - at op/numconvert.t line 247
# '-9223372036854775808' ne '-9.22337203685478e+18',
# -9223372036854775808    => N - N P vs N - P
# Failed test 108 - at op/numconvert.t line 247
# '-9223372036854775808' ne '-9.22337203685478e+18',
# -9223372036854775808    => P - N P vs P - P
# Failed test 112 - at op/numconvert.t line 247
# '-9223372036854775808' ne '-9.22337203685478e+18',
# -1.84467440737096e+19   => I - u P vs I - P
# '-9223372036854775808' ne '-9.22337203685478e+18',
# -1.84467440737096e+19   => I - u P vs I - P
# '-9223372036854775808' ne '-9.22337203685478e+18',
# -9.22337203685478e+18   => I - u P vs I - P
# '-9223372036854775808' ne '-9.22337203685478e+18',
# -9223372036854775808    => I - u P vs I - P
# '-9223372036854775808' ne '-9.22337203685478e+18',
# 9223372036854775808     => I - u P vs I - P
# Failed test 136 - at op/numconvert.t line 247
# '-9223372036854775808' ne '-9.22337203685478e+18',
# -9223372036854775808    => N - u P vs N - P
# Failed test 140 - at op/numconvert.t line 247
# '-9223372036854775808' ne '-9.22337203685478e+18',
# -9223372036854775808    => P - u P vs P - P
# Failed test 144 - at op/numconvert.t line 247
# '-9223372036854775808' ne '-9.22337203685478e+18',
# -1.84467440737096e+19   => I - i P vs I - P
# '-9223372036854775808' ne '-9.22337203685478e+18',
# -1.84467440737096e+19   => I - i P vs I - P
# '-9223372036854775808' ne '-9.22337203685478e+18',
# -9.22337203685478e+18   => I - i P vs I - P
# '-9223372036854775808' ne '-9.22337203685478e+18',
# -9223372036854775808    => I - i P vs I - P
# '-9223372036854775808' ne '-9.22337203685478e+18',
# 9223372036854775808     => I - i P vs I - P
# Failed test 152 - at op/numconvert.t line 247
# '-9223372036854775808' ne '-9.22337203685478e+18',
# -9223372036854775808    => N - i P vs N - P
# Failed test 156 - at op/numconvert.t line 247
# '-9223372036854775808' ne '-9.22337203685478e+18',
# -9223372036854775808    => P - i P vs P - P
# Failed test 160 - at op/numconvert.t line 247
# '-9223372036854775808' ne '-9.22337203685478e+18',
# -1.84467440737096e+19   => I - n P vs I - P
# '-9223372036854775808' ne '-9.22337203685478e+18',
# -1.84467440737096e+19   => I - n P vs I - P
# '-9223372036854775808' ne '-9.22337203685478e+18',
# -9.22337203685478e+18   => I - n P vs I - P
# '-9223372036854775808' ne '-9.22337203685478e+18',
# -9223372036854775808    => I - n P vs I - P
# '-9223372036854775808' ne '-9.22337203685478e+18',
# 9223372036854775808     => I - n P vs I - P
# Failed test 168 - at op/numconvert.t line 247
FAILED at test 104

and

t/op/range .................................................... #
Failed test 84 - Lower bound accepted: -9223372036854775807 at
op/range.t line 289
# Failed test 85 - Lower bound okay at op/range.t line 290
#      got undef
# expected "-9223372036854775807"
# Failed test 86 - Upper bound okay at op/range.t line 291
#      got undef
# expected "-9223372036854775797"
# Failed test 87 - Lower bound accepted: -9223372036854775806 at
# op/range.t line 289
# Failed test 88 - Lower bound okay at op/range.t line 290
#      got undef
# expected "-9223372036854775806"
# Failed test 89 - Upper bound okay at op/range.t line 291
#      got undef
# expected "-9223372036854775797"
# Failed test 90 - Lower bound accepted: -9223372036854775805 at
# op/range.t line 289
# Failed test 91 - Lower bound okay at op/range.t line 290
#      got undef
# expected "-9223372036854775805"
# Failed test 92 - Upper bound okay at op/range.t line 291
#      got undef
# expected "-9223372036854775797"
# Failed test 93 - Lower bound accepted: -9223372036854775804 at
# op/range.t line 289
# Failed test 94 - Lower bound okay at op/range.t line 290
#      got undef
# expected "-9223372036854775804"
# Failed test 95 - Upper bound okay at op/range.t line 291
#      got undef
# expected "-9223372036854775797"
# Failed test 99 - Upper bound accepted: -9223372036854775807 at
# op/range.t line 310
# Failed test 100 - Lower bound okay at op/range.t line 311
#      got undef
# expected "-9223372036854775807"
# Failed test 101 - Upper bound okay at op/range.t line 312
#      got undef
# expected "-9223372036854775807"
# Failed test 102 - Upper bound accepted: -9223372036854775806 at
# op/range.t line 310
# Failed test 103 - Lower bound okay at op/range.t line 311
#      got undef
# expected "-9223372036854775807"
# Failed test 104 - Upper bound okay at op/range.t line 312
#      got undef
# expected "-9223372036854775806"
# Failed test 105 - Upper bound accepted: -9223372036854775805 at
# op/range.t line 310
# Failed test 106 - Lower bound okay at op/range.t line 311
#      got undef
# expected "-9223372036854775807"
# Failed test 107 - Upper bound okay at op/range.t line 312
#      got undef
# expected "-9223372036854775805"
# Failed test 108 - Upper bound accepted: -9223372036854775804 at
# op/range.t line 310
# Failed test 109 - Lower bound okay at op/range.t line 311
#      got undef
# expected "-9223372036854775807"
# Failed test 110 - Upper bound okay at op/range.t line 312
#      got undef
# expected "-9223372036854775804"
# Failed test 111 - Range accepted at op/range.t line 330
FAILED at test 84

 Those two are both new after 20140422, so I suspect the gcc patch.

util-linux :

last: last ipv6                      ... FAILED (last/ipv6)
last: last                           ... FAILED (last/last)

 I think I've seen these before, but I believed the first was caused
by not setting CONFIG_IPV6=y in my host kernel's .config, but on
this occasion I do have that set.

 Note that I managed not to test acl, I need to work out why my
script failed to do that.

 You all should know by now that I think the test results are only
useful for showing new failures, and that what really matters is
whether the completed system works.  In this case, the new failures
for automake, coreutils and glibc are probably no big deal.

 The gcc tsan tests are probably new in 4.9, so not too worrying.

 But binutils gives me a worrying feeling in the context of enabling
lto, and perl looks as if it doesn't like something, presumably the
gcc patch.

ĸen
-- 
das eine Mal als Tragödie, dieses Mal als Farce


More information about the lfs-dev mailing list