On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 02:48:30PM +0100, Ken Moffat wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 11:42:26AM +0300, Markku Pesonen wrote:
> >
> > I think the problem may lie in the way LFS installs the tzdata package.
> > Glibc 2.15 (and earlier) installed timezone data without leap second
> > information in
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Lewis Pike wrote:
>> Digging a bit deeper into the test suits logs does indeed reveal a
>> difference of 18 seconds on the time stamps. I checked and 18 leap
>> seconds did occur between the aforementioned dates.
>>
>> I tried duplicating the test errors by building and testin
Ken Moffat wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 10:51:06AM -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>>
>> On a fresh LFS svn system, I can do
>>
>> $ TZ=EST date;date;date -u
>> Thu Aug 16 23:56:26 EST 2012
>> Fri Aug 17 04:56:26 GMT 2012
>> Fri Aug 17 04:56:51 UTC 2012
>>
>> My understanding is that POSIX ignores le
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 10:51:06AM -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
> On a fresh LFS svn system, I can do
>
> $ TZ=EST date;date;date -u
> Thu Aug 16 23:56:26 EST 2012
> Fri Aug 17 04:56:26 GMT 2012
> Fri Aug 17 04:56:51 UTC 2012
>
> My understanding is that POSIX ignores leap seconds, and TZ setting
Ken Moffat wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 11:42:26AM +0300, Markku Pesonen wrote:
>>
>> I think the problem may lie in the way LFS installs the tzdata package.
>> Glibc 2.15 (and earlier) installed timezone data without leap second
>> information in /usr/share/zoneinfo and /usr/share/zoneinfo/pos
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 11:42:26AM +0300, Markku Pesonen wrote:
>
> I think the problem may lie in the way LFS installs the tzdata package.
> Glibc 2.15 (and earlier) installed timezone data without leap second
> information in /usr/share/zoneinfo and /usr/share/zoneinfo/posix (why
> two copies of
Lewis Pike wrote:
> Digging a bit deeper into the test suits logs does indeed reveal a
> difference of 18 seconds on the time stamps. I checked and 18 leap
> seconds did occur between the aforementioned dates.
>
> I tried duplicating the test errors by building and testing
> e2fsprogs-1.42.5 on a
Lewis Pike wrote:
> Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> Yes. That's due to a change in timezone data and adding leap
>> seconds in glibc. The tests have not caught up with the changes.
>> Look at the output of the tests:
>>
>> -File /lost+found (inode #11, mod time Mon Sep 20 03:26:36 1993)
>> +File /lost+foun
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Yes. That's due to a change in timezone data and adding leap
> seconds in glibc. The tests have not caught up with the changes.
> Look at the output of the tests:
>
> -File /lost+found (inode #11, mod time Mon Sep 20 03:26:36 1993)
> +File /lost+found (inode #11, mod time Mon
Lewis Pike wrote:
> I'm getting some failures during the e2fsprogs test suite in part 3 of
> LFS Version SVN-20120806; revision 9930, to be exact.
>
> This seems related to ticket #3146 [1] in the bug reports. The report
> indicates that the issue has been fixed in svn r9926 with the upgrade
> to
I'm getting some failures during the e2fsprogs test suite in part 3 of
LFS Version SVN-20120806; revision 9930, to be exact.
This seems related to ticket #3146 [1] in the bug reports. The report
indicates that the issue has been fixed in svn r9926 with the upgrade
to e2fsprogs-1.42.5.
I am at r9
11 matches
Mail list logo
