On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 8:40 PM, Paul Eggert <egg...@cs.ucla.edu> wrote: > Jim Meyering wrote: >> >> what about configure's --without-included-regex option? >> With it, the test may well pass (counted as a failure, here) on >> systems without glibc. > > > Grep uses the glibc interface for regular expressions, and I expect that > every current implementation of that interface has the bug, so this > shouldn't be an issue now (though it would be an issue if the bug is ever > fixed). > > Or were you thinking of glibc 2.2.6 and earlier? That might not have the > bug, as it predates the circa-2002 regex rewrite that introduced the bug. I > suspect, though, that 2.2.6 regex would fail several other tests. Are glibc > versions this old still being used? > > (Do users really complain when XFAIL tests succeed instead of failing as > predicted? Dumb question, I know; they'll complain about anything....)
That's it. When an XFAIL test passes, the framework counts it as a failure and requests that a report including test-suite.log be sent to the bug-reporting address. I have found that it is almost always worthwhile to invest in avoiding those :-)
