From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from systemhalted (CPE00045aedab24-CM.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com [24.112.227.68]) by dsl2.external.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56AAC482A for ; Tue, 25 Mar 2003 08:41:58 -0700 (MST) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 10:41:44 -0500 From: Carlos O'Donell To: John David Anglin Cc: Matthew Wilcox , dave.anglin@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca, tausq@debian.org, parisc-linux@lists.parisc-linux.org Subject: Re: [parisc-linux] Glibc 2.3.2 failures and possible fixes? Message-ID: <20030325154144.GN8436@systemhalted> References: <20030324220130.GP31008@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> <200303251427.h2PERXxE029413@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <200303251427.h2PERXxE029413@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca> Sender: parisc-linux-admin@lists.parisc-linux.org Errors-To: parisc-linux-admin@lists.parisc-linux.org List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: parisc-linux developers list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: > I noticed that a couple of libstdc++ tests that used to fail because > of the long double mismatch are fixed with 2.3.1-14 :) Really? I didn't even put in patches for -14? :) This is all strictly from upstream glibc. > > > elf/vismain.out > > > elf/neededtest.out > > > elf/neededtest2.out > > > elf/neededtest3.out > > > elf/neededtest4.out > > > elf/circleload1.out > > > > > > - These have been around for a while, any idea about how to fix them? > > > > They've certainly been around since I was hacking on glibc ... > > Are you testing with 3.3? Some elf tests in the binutils suite > were failing because of the need to canonicalize function pointers. > There were also some tests that failed because we absolutely need > '-fPIC' for tests with shared libraries. I'd be interested to know > what's causing these. I can rebuild it using 3.3 and see if this goes away. Right now I'm building with 3.2.3. I sure hope getting rid of these is as easy as building with 3.3! On a second note, I've completely revamped the sysdep-cancel support since I must have been smoking crack when I wrote it... so I'm going to compile another round that should come out much better (hopefully removing all the linuxthread failures). Thanks for the feedback! c.