Did we decide that "most NetBSD/i386 users have fpus" in which case Marko's
patch should be applied?
Cheers,
Patrick
(just checked, it isn't in today's cvs)
On Thu, Mar 22, 2001 at 10:27:44PM +0200, Marko Kreen wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 22, 2001 at 07:58:04PM +, Patrick Welche wrote:
> > On Fri
Giles Lean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm not sure how interesting these differences are anymore -- is there
> anyone familiar enough with floating point to determine if the results
> are acceptable (although currently unexpected :-) or not?
Differences in the last couple of decimal places in
> Okay, here are my results:
>
> Box 1: C180 (2.0 PA8000), HPUX 10.20
>
> Compile with gcc: all tests pass
> Compile with cc: two lines of diffs in geometry (attached)
>
> Box 2: 715/75 (1.1 PA7100LC), HPUX 10.20
>
> Compile with gcc: all tests pass
> Compile with cc: all tests pass
I haven'
Two more for the list (not a single regression test failing, which is a
first on Alpha!)
Tru64 4.0G Alpha cc-v6.3-129 7.1 2001-03-28
Tru64 4.0G Alpha gcc-2.95.1 7.1 2001-03-28
I updated the regression test database as well.
Adriaan
---(end of broadcast)-
On Wed, 21 Mar 2001, Thomas Lockhart wrote:
> OK, here is my current platform list taken from the -hackers list and
> from Vince's web page. I'm sure I've missed at least a few reports, but
> please confirm that platforms are actually running and passing
> regression tests with recent betas or th
Hi all,
Vince asked me to forward this here.
Regards and best wishes,
Justin Clift
Original Message
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Call for platforms
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2001 19:45:37 -0500 (EST)
From: Vince Vielhaber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Justin Clift <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Marko Kreen writes:
> OK: Linux 2.4.2 i686 / gcc 2.95.2 / Debian testing/unstable
>
> no problems.
>
> OK?: NetBSD 1.5 i586 / egcs 2.91.66 / (netbsd-1-5 from Jan)
>
> netbsd FAILED the geometry test, diff attached, dunno if its
> critical or not.
Can you check whether it matches any of the othe
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane writes:
>> The bit test diffs seem to indicate that bit_cmp is messed up. That
>> depends on memcmp. I seem to recall something about memcmp not being
>> 8-bit-clean on SunOS ... does that ring a bell with anyone?
> Sure enough:
> - Macro
Tom Lane writes:
> The bit test diffs seem to indicate that bit_cmp is messed up. That
> depends on memcmp. I seem to recall something about memcmp not being
> 8-bit-clean on SunOS ... does that ring a bell with anyone?
Sure enough:
- Macro: AC_FUNC_MEMCMP
If the `memcmp' function is no
Giles Lean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 2. I saw two different sets of output for geometry.out. These seem to
>relate to the processor level:
Okay, here are my results:
Box 1: C180 (2.0 PA8000), HPUX 10.20
Compile with gcc: all tests pass
Compile with cc: two lines of diffs in geometry (a
> Hm, I thought I had updated that before beta6. What it has now is
> The parallel regression test script (gmake check) is known to lock up
> when run under HP's default Bourne shell, at least in HPUX 10.20. This
> appears to be a shell bug, not the fault of the script. If you see that
> th
> >I'll look at this next week. If someone can confirm that
> >/usr/bin/sh works for make check on HP-UX 10.20 that would be
> >useful.
>
> It does not work. See FAQ_HPUX.
I'm confused: I don't see anything about shells or make check hanging
in doc/FAQ_HPUX. There is clear instru
Giles Lean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> It does not work. See FAQ_HPUX.
> I'm confused: I don't see anything about shells or make check hanging
> in doc/FAQ_HPUX. There is clear instruction to use GNU make, which I
> am doing.
Hm, I thought I had updated that before beta6. What it has now i
Giles Lean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>I'll look at this next week. If someone can confirm that
>/usr/bin/sh works for make check on HP-UX 10.20 that would be
>useful.
It does not work. See FAQ_HPUX.
> 2. I saw two different sets of output for geometry.out. These seem to
>rel
On 23 Mar 2001, Trond Eivind [iso-8859-1] Glomsrød wrote:
> Vince Vielhaber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On 22 Mar 2001, Trond Eivind [iso-8859-1] Glomsrød wrote:
> >
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Trond Eivind Glomsrød) writes:
> > >
> > > > Thomas Lockhart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > >
> >
Vince Vielhaber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 22 Mar 2001, Trond Eivind [iso-8859-1] Glomsrød wrote:
>
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Trond Eivind Glomsrød) writes:
> >
> > > Thomas Lockhart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >
> > > > If a platform you are running on is not listed, make sure it gets
>
On Thu, Mar 22, 2001 at 07:58:04PM +, Patrick Welche wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2001 at 06:25:50AM +1100, Giles Lean wrote:
> >
> > > PS: AFAIK geometry-positive-zeros-bsd works for all NetBSD platforms - the
> > > above difference is only for i386 + fpu.
> >
> > It doesn't on NetBSD-1.5/alpha
> Tatsuo Ishii <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > For the regression test, I got 7 failures, most of them seem harmless,
> > the only concern I have is bit test though.
>
> Most of the diffs derive from what I recall to be a known SunOS problem,
> that strtol fails to notice overflow. A value that
> Tatsuo Ishii <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> Tatsuo Ishii <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > ! FATAL 2: ZeroFill(logfile 0 seg 1) failed: No such file or directory
> > ! pqReadData() -- backend closed the channel unexpectedly.
> >>
> >> Is it possible you ran out of disk space?
>
> > Probably n
Tatsuo Ishii <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> The bit test diffs seem to indicate that bit_cmp is messed up. That
>> depends on memcmp. I seem to recall something about memcmp not being
>> 8-bit-clean on SunOS ... does that ring a bell with anyone?
> Good point. From the man page of memcmp(3) on
Tatsuo Ishii <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> For the regression test, I got 7 failures, most of them seem harmless,
> the only concern I have is bit test though.
Most of the diffs derive from what I recall to be a known SunOS problem,
that strtol fails to notice overflow. A value that should be re
I have tested today's snap shot on SunOS4.
% uname -a
SunOS srashd 4.1.4-JL 1 sun4m
There's a minor portability problem in
src/bin/pg_encoding/Makefile.
*** MakefileFri Mar 23 11:53:49 2001
--- Makefile.orig Wed Feb 21 18:05:21 2001
***
*** 16,28
all: submake pg_
On 22 Mar 2001, Trond Eivind [iso-8859-1] Glomsrød wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Trond Eivind Glomsrød) writes:
>
> > Thomas Lockhart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > If a platform you are running on is not listed, make sure it gets
> > > included!
> >
> > Red Hat Linux, Wolverine Beta (and so
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Trond Eivind Glomsrød) writes:
> Thomas Lockhart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > If a platform you are running on is not listed, make sure it gets
> > included!
>
> Red Hat Linux, Wolverine Beta (and some updates) - glibc 2.2.2,
> 2.4.2ish kernel (read: lots of fixes), gcc
> Seems that following patch is needed. Now It Works For Me (tm).
> Giles, does the regress test now succed for you?
Yes, but I don't like that it is 1.5 specific. I expect that later
NetBSD/i386 releases will also have the "new" floating point behaviour
by default, subject to /etc/ld.so.conf
Thomas Lockhart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If a platform you are running on is not listed, make sure it gets
> included!
Red Hat Linux, Wolverine Beta (and some updates) - glibc 2.2.2,
2.4.2ish kernel (read: lots of fixes), gcc 2.96RH: All 76 tests passed
with 7.1beta6 (parallel_schedule).
On Fri, Mar 23, 2001 at 06:25:50AM +1100, Giles Lean wrote:
>
> > PS: AFAIK geometry-positive-zeros-bsd works for all NetBSD platforms - the
> > above difference is only for i386 + fpu.
>
> It doesn't on NetBSD-1.5/alpha -- there geometry-positive-zeros is
> correct.
Sorry, that should have rea
On Thu, Mar 22, 2001 at 10:27:44PM +0200, Marko Kreen wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 22, 2001 at 07:58:04PM +, Patrick Welche wrote:
> >
> > AFAIK geometry-positive-zeros works for all NetBSD platforms - the
> > above difference is only for i386 + fpu.
>
> Seems that following patch is needed. Now It
> PS: AFAIK geometry-positive-zeros-bsd works for all NetBSD platforms - the
> above difference is only for i386 + fpu.
It doesn't on NetBSD-1.5/alpha -- there geometry-positive-zeros is
correct.
Regards,
Giles
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: Ha
Just a data point on the geometry test under NetBSD/i386 issue:
/etc/ld.so.conf by default now contains:
libm.so.0 machdep.fpu_present 1:libm387.so.0,libm.so.0
which means that if the sysctl machdep.fpu_present returns 1, load the
shared library libm387 to make use of the fpu.
If you
On Thu, Mar 22, 2001 at 05:25:01PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Marko Kreen writes:
> >
> > OK?: NetBSD 1.5 i586 / egcs 2.91.66 / (netbsd-1-5 from Jan)
> >
> > netbsd FAILED the geometry test, diff attached, dunno if its
> > critical or not.
>
> Can you check whether it matches any of the oth
OK: Linux 2.4.2 i686 / gcc 2.95.2 / Debian testing/unstable
no problems.
OK?: NetBSD 1.5 i586 / egcs 2.91.66 / (netbsd-1-5 from Jan)
netbsd FAILED the geometry test, diff attached, dunno if its
critical or not.
--
marko
*** ./expected/geometry-positive-zeros.out Wed Mar 21 15:07:12
On Thu, Mar 22, 2001 at 12:31:03PM +1200, Franck Martin wrote:
> I see nobody did a test of 7.1 on Linux 2.4.x ?
>
> Would be nice to certify it is running on kernel 2.4.x as they claim this
> is entreprise strength kernel...
I've been running the 7.1 betas on 2.4 for weeks without any p
Tatsuo Ishii <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Tatsuo Ishii <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> ! FATAL 2: ZeroFill(logfile 0 seg 1) failed: No such file or directory
> ! pqReadData() -- backend closed the channel unexpectedly.
>>
>> Is it possible you ran out of disk space?
> Probably not.
The reason
* Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010321 21:29]:
> Tatsuo Ishii <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> Tatsuo Ishii <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > ! FATAL 2: ZeroFill(logfile 0 seg 1) failed: No such file or directory
> > ! pqReadData() -- backend closed the channel unexpectedly.
> >>
> >> Is it possib
Franck Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Would be nice to certify it is running on kernel 2.4.x as they claim this
> is entreprise strength kernel...
Lamar, if you send me your SRPM I can do that...
--
Trond Eivind Glomsrød
Red Hat, Inc.
---(end of broadcast)---
I see nobody did a test of 7.1 on Linux 2.4.x ?
Would be nice to certify it is running on kernel 2.4.x as they claim this
is entreprise strength kernel...
Cheers.
Thomas Lockhart wrote:
>
>
> AIX 4.3.2 RS6000 7.0 2000-04-05, Andreas Zeugswetter
> Compaq Tru64 5.0 Alpha 7.0 2000-04-11, Andrew
Hi,
I am currently testing beta6 on AIX 4.3.3 on a RS6000 H80 with 4 cpu and 4
Go RAM
I use :
./configure
--with-CC=/usr/local/bin/gcc
--with-includes=/usr/local/include
--with-libraries=/usr/local/lib
All seem to be ok, There just the geometry failure in regression tes
Hi,
I reported Linux RedHat 6.2 - 2.2.14-5.0smp #1 SMP Tue Mar 7 21:01:40 EST
2000 i686
2 cpu - 1Go RAM
Gilles DAROLD
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
http://www.postgresql.org/search.mpl
> Tatsuo Ishii <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > ! FATAL 2: ZeroFill(logfile 0 seg 1) failed: No such file or directory
> > ! pqReadData() -- backend closed the channel unexpectedly.
>
> Is it possible you ran out of disk space?
Probably not.
--
Tatsuo Ishii
---(end of br
Tatsuo Ishii <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> ! FATAL 2: ZeroFill(logfile 0 seg 1) failed: No such file or directory
> ! pqReadData() -- backend closed the channel unexpectedly.
Is it possible you ran out of disk space?
regards, tom lane
---(end of
> > mklinux PPC750 7.0 2000-04-13, Tatsuo Ishii
>
> I got core dump while running the parallel regression test of beta6.
> Will look at...
> --
> Tatsuo Ishii
VACUUM;
! FATAL 2: ZeroFill(logfile 0 seg 1) failed: No such file or directory
! pqReadData() -- backend closed the channel unexpe
> Compaq Tru64 5.0 Alpha 7.0 2000-04-11, Andrew McMurry
We've got 7.0.3 and 7.1b4 running on
Compaq Tru64 4.0G Alpha
Will do the regression test once RC1 is out.
Adriaan
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [
> mklinux PPC750 7.0 2000-04-13, Tatsuo Ishii
I got core dump while running the parallel regression test of beta6.
Will look at...
--
Tatsuo Ishii
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
sub
* Thomas Lockhart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010320 20:04]:
> OK, here is my current platform list taken from the -hackers list and
> from Vince's web page. I'm sure I've missed at least a few reports, but
> please confirm that platforms are actually running and passing
> regression tests with recent be
45 matches
Mail list logo
