I should probably send this on to the coreutils folks, but I'll start
here.  I'm working on CLFS Version SVN-20061027-x86_64-Multilib.  I'm
currently at section 10.16. Coreutils-6.4 and it doesn't like me.  The
append-only test fails.  Here's the verbose results:

make  check-TESTS
make[1]: Entering directory `/usr/src/coreutils/coreutils-6.4/tests/tail-2'
+ tail --version
tail (GNU coreutils) 6.4
Copyright (C) 2006 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software.  You may redistribute copies of it under the terms of
the GNU General Public License <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html>.
There is NO WARRANTY, to the extent permitted by law.

Written by Paul Rubin, David MacKenzie, Ian Lance Taylor, and Jim Meyering.
+ PRIV_CHECK_ARG=require-root
+ . ./../priv-check
++ case "$PRIV_CHECK_ARG" in
++ who='as root'
+++ id -u
++ my_uid=0
++ test 0 = 0
++ case $my_uid in
++ test 0 = 0
++ : nobody
+++ id -u nobody
++ coreutils_non_root_uid=65534
++ test 0 = 0
++ test 65534 = 0
++ give_msg=no
++ case $PRIV_CHECK_ARG:$my_uid in
++ test no = yes
++ pwd
+ pwd=/usr/src/coreutils/coreutils-6.4/tests/tail-2
++ echo ./append-only
++ sed 's,.*/,,'
+ t0=append-only.tmp
+ tmp=append-only.tmp/30252
+ trap 'status=$?; cd "$pwd" && chmod -R u+rwx $t0 && rm -rf $t0 &&
exit $status' 0
+ trap '(exit $?); exit $?' 1 2 13 15
+ framework_failure=0
+ mkdir -p append-only.tmp/30252
+ cd append-only.tmp/30252
+ touch f
+ chattr +a f
+ framework_failure=1
+ echo x
+ test 1 = 1
+ echo './append-only: failure in testing framework'
./append-only: failure in testing framework
+ exit 1
+ exit 1
+ status=1
+ cd /usr/src/coreutils/coreutils-6.4/tests/tail-2
+ chmod -R u+rwx append-only.tmp
+ rm -rf append-only.tmp
+ exit 1
FAIL: append-only
======================================
1 of 1 tests failed
Please report to [email protected]
======================================
make[1]: *** [check-TESTS] Error 1
make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/coreutils/coreutils-6.4/tests/tail-2'
make: *** [check-am] Error 2

So, if any one here is aware of this issue or what fixing it entails,
it'd be nice to know.  Otherwise I guess I'll be heading upstream to
bug the coreutils folks.  From some of the stuff I read over there, it
seems that coreutils 6.4 isn't exactly considered stable at the moment
anyway.  Thanks.

- Jonathan Davis
_______________________________________________
Clfs-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cross-lfs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/clfs-dev

Reply via email to