[lfs-dev] Test failures in something close to current LFS
krejzi at email.com
Wed Jan 28 16:36:58 PST 2015
On 01/29/2015 01:23 AM, Ken Moffat wrote:
> I've started on a build, with current LFS plus a few variations
> (bison-3.0.4, libtool-2.4.5, patch-2.7.3, linux-3.19-rc6 headers)
> and I've also changed my build to untar and compile in a tmpfs -
> does not seem to make any significant difference to the build times I
> can compare, but perhaps the untarring and rm -rf is faster.
> Anyway, I mention the tmpfs because attr's testsuite failed - you
> can't have extended attributes in tmpfs - and it is possible that
> the new gcc failures are related to this, or, of course, to the
> newer kernel headers.
You can have both Extended Attributes and Access Control Labels on a tmpfs.
See CONFIG_TMPFS_XATTR and CONFIG_TMPFS_POSIX_ACL
> I'm seeing errors, beyond those I expected to see, in the testsuites
> gcc: 125 unexpected failures in g++, 658 in gcc, 22 in libstdc++
> instead of the usual handful of failures. The last time I saw those
> sorts of numbers was a little while before my AmigaOne expired.
> perl: unexpected error number in getnameinfo.t, invalid argument in
> io_multihomed.t and io_sock.t : I think I've seen something like
> that in the last few months, but I thought it had gone away (didn't
> run any tests on real hardware for my previous build, and the logs
> from the i686 VM tests are in qemu images).
> This is _intended_ to be a full build of the desktop packages I
> care about, to be followed by some server and other things in a VM.
> So, maybe nothing to worry about :)
Note: My last name is not Krejzi.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the lfs-dev