Pierre Labastie wrote:
> Le 31/12/2012 04:09, Bruce Dubbs a écrit :
>> Pierre Labastie wrote:
>>> Le 24/12/2012 17:23, Bruce Dubbs a écrit :
[...]
075-binutils
Running /sources/binutils-2.23.1/ld/testsuite/ld-ifunc/ifunc.exp ...
FAIL: Common symbol override ifun
Le 31/12/2012 04:09, Bruce Dubbs a écrit :
> Pierre Labastie wrote:
>> Le 24/12/2012 17:23, Bruce Dubbs a écrit :
>>> [...]
>>>
>>> 075-binutils
>>> Running /sources/binutils-2.23.1/ld/testsuite/ld-ifunc/ifunc.exp ...
>>> FAIL: Common symbol override ifunc test 1b
>>>
>>> This is new
Pierre Labastie wrote:
> Le 24/12/2012 17:23, Bruce Dubbs a écrit :
>> [...]
>>
>> 075-binutils
>> Running /sources/binutils-2.23.1/ld/testsuite/ld-ifunc/ifunc.exp ...
>> FAIL: Common symbol override ifunc test 1b
>>
>> This is new to me, but there are some mentions at
>> http://sou
Le 24/12/2012 17:23, Bruce Dubbs a écrit :
[...]
075-binutils
Running /sources/binutils-2.23.1/ld/testsuite/ld-ifunc/ifunc.exp ...
FAIL: Common symbol override ifunc test 1b
This is new to me, but there are some mentions at
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14778
- Mail original -
> De: "Bruce Dubbs"
> À: "LFS Developers Mailinglist"
> Envoyé: Vendredi 28 Décembre 2012 01:03:32
> Objet: Re: [lfs-dev] LFS SVN urrent build results
>
> Pierre Labastie wrote:
> > Le 25/12/2012 00:41, Bruce Dubbs a écri
Pierre Labastie wrote:
> Le 25/12/2012 00:41, Bruce Dubbs a écrit :
>>
>> I'm not quite ready to give up on E2fsprogs-1.42.6 because I think it
>> only is a problem in jhalfs. AFAICT right now, the test actually
>> passes, but leaves an unwanted background process running.I'm not
>> sure we w
Le 25/12/2012 00:41, Bruce Dubbs a écrit :
>
> I'm not quite ready to give up on E2fsprogs-1.42.6 because I think it
> only is a problem in jhalfs. AFAICT right now, the test actually
> passes, but leaves an unwanted background process running.I'm not
> sure we want the -k in the make check.
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 11:03 PM, Matt Burgess
wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-12-24 at 23:24 +0100, g@free.fr wrote:
>
>> the remaining process are
>> 23812 pts/0SN 0:00 /bin/sh ./test_one ../../tests/f_mmp
>> 23813 pts/0SN52:27 ../debugfs/debugfs -w f_mmp.tmp
>> 23814 pts/0SN13
On Mon, 2012-12-24 at 23:24 +0100, g@free.fr wrote:
> the remaining process are
> 23812 pts/0SN 0:00 /bin/sh ./test_one ../../tests/f_mmp
> 23813 pts/0SN52:27 ../debugfs/debugfs -w f_mmp.tmp
> 23814 pts/0SN13:49 cat /dev/zero
>
> So the issue is in tests/f_mmp.tmp
>
>
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 10:24 PM, wrote:
>> After my build, I see using 'ps ax' a process doing
>> cat /dev/zero
>> and the other process should be '/bin/sh ./test_one' which is an
>> e2fsprogs test
>>
> the remaining process are
> 23812 pts/0SN 0:00 /bin/sh ./test_one ../../tests/f_mmp
- Mail original -
> De: "g esp"
> À: "LFS Developers Mailinglist"
> Envoyé: Lundi 24 Décembre 2012 18:12:00
> Objet: Re: [lfs-dev] LFS SVN urrent build results
...
> > The umount process at the end did not work properly.
> > There may al
- Mail original -
> De: "Bruce Dubbs"
> À: "LFS Developers Mailinglist"
> Envoyé: Lundi 24 Décembre 2012 17:23:13
> Objet: [lfs-dev] LFS SVN urrent build results
>
> I ran a new build test last night and had some issues. Just
> reporting
>
I ran a new build test last night and had some issues. Just reporting
right now.
Numbers refer to jhalfs order.
071-glibc
annexc (ignored) error
cputimer1 error
run-conformtest (ignored)
These have been around for a while and are documented in the book.
075-binutils
Running /sources/
13 matches
Mail list logo
