John Mitchell wrote:
> FYI: The compiler segfault below created one of my test errors that I
> reported earlier. -- This is one I guess I can legitimately ignore?
>
> Not sure about the remaining errors:
>
> make[2]: [/sources/glibc-build/posix/annexc.out] Error 1 (ignored)
> make[2]: *** [/sour
FYI: The compiler segfault below created one of my test errors that I
reported earlier. -- This is one I guess I can legitimately ignore?
Not sure about the remaining errors:
make[2]: [/sources/glibc-build/posix/annexc.out] Error 1 (ignored)
make[2]: *** [/sources/glibc-build/nptl/tst-rwlock6.ou
Hi,
This is my first crack at LFS. I'm wandering if the error associated with
the link below was ever resolved?
*Previous and related errors:*
http://www.mail-archive.com/lfs-support@linuxfromscratch.org/msg14143.html
*My setup:*
- Book 6.7
- 64 bit -- athlon x2
- host kernel = 2.6.31
On 07/14/2010 04:35 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Dan McGhee wrote:
>
>> I did the rebuild of Chapter 5 make twice. Once using only the patch
>> from Ch. 6 and then with both the patch and the sed command from Ch. 6.
>> There was no change in the glibc tests. However, after applying the
>> patch and
Dan McGhee wrote:
> On 07/14/2010 12:31 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> Dan McGhee wrote:
>>
>>> I got some interesting results when I ran the glibc-2.11.2 test suite.
>>> I'm conducting a 64-bit SVN build.
>>>
>>> These are the last three lines of the test log:
>>>
>>>
make[1]: Target `c
On 07/14/2010 12:31 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Dan McGhee wrote:
>
>> I got some interesting results when I ran the glibc-2.11.2 test suite.
>> I'm conducting a 64-bit SVN build.
>>
>> These are the last three lines of the test log:
>>
>>
>>> make[1]: Target `check' not remade because of e
Dan McGhee wrote:
> Reading this I forgot to mention my host system. It's Ubuntu 10.04 and
> I'm running Ubuntu's latest version of 2.6.32-23-generic (wish I hadn't
> wiped out my CLFS build). I'm supplying this info now because in my
> research I found some references in the LFS archives about
On 07/14/2010 12:31 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
> If you do rebuild the Chapter 5 make and try the Chapter 6 glibc tests
> again, I'd appreciate knowing the results. However, I don't think this
> is what is causing the glibc test errors. I was able to duplicate at
> least some of the errors on the c
Dan McGhee wrote:
> I got some interesting results when I ran the glibc-2.11.2 test suite.
> I'm conducting a 64-bit SVN build.
>
> These are the last three lines of the test log:
>
>> make[1]: Target `check' not remade because of errors.
>> make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/glibc-2.11.2/gl
I got some interesting results when I ran the glibc-2.11.2 test suite.
I'm conducting a 64-bit SVN build.
These are the last three lines of the test log:
make[1]: Target `check' not remade because of errors.
make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/glibc-2.11.2/glibc-2.11.2'
make: *** [check] Er
10 matches
Mail list logo