On Tue, 2006-08-01 at 10:50 -0400, Jeff Licquia wrote: > Anyone willing to run the tests themselves can contact me for > assistance. Or, if you're willing to give me root access on your > machine to run the tests for you, please contact me.
And I have been contacted; thanks to all of you. One person, Frans Pop, has kindly pointed me to hercules, the s390 emulator, and has run the tests under it. These results can tell us a lot about the platform, but can also be misleading in other areas; to what extent is the test finding bugs in the runtime vs. finding bugs in the emulator? So, they should be looked at in that light. I here post the results that are different from the i386 results I posted earlier. First of all, there are no results yet for vsw4 (the X11 test) or desktop. This is due to the xvfb package being missing from etch for s390. Strictly speaking, the LSB does not require that runtimes provide xvfb, but it does make running the tests easier. I have not yet looked into finding an appropriate xvfb (perhaps the sarge package, if one exists; the xvfb from the LSB sample implementation might also work). Here are the results we do have: >From "lsb-runtime-test": /tset/ANSI.os/genuts/abort/T.abort 11 UNREPORTED /tset/ANSI.os/genuts/exit/T.exit 5 UNREPORTED /tset/LSB.os/ipc/shmctl/T.shmctl 15 UNREPORTED Frans did report that there were occasions where the test appeared to hang; in at least one of these cases, the test had been running for 20 hours, which is excessive. All of these results are marked in the journal as coming from a SIGTERM applied to the test. /tset/ANSI.os/maths/exp/T.exp 1 FAIL /tset/ANSI.os/maths/pow/T.pow 1 FAIL These appear to be floating point precision errors. Here, for example, are the journal results for the T.pow test: 400|128 1 1 12:52:36|IC Start 200|128 1 12:52:36|TP Start 520|128 1 00002597 1 1|Random arguments were tested from the interval [0.0941638, 10.6691] 520|128 1 00002597 1 2|The result was too large 368 times 520|128 1 00002597 1 3| equal 1281 times 520|128 1 00002597 1 4| too small 359 times 520|128 1 00002597 1 5| an ERANGE error 42 times 520|128 1 00002597 1 6|The maximum relative error of inf occured for values 1, 6.05487e+10 520|128 1 00002597 1 7|This gave a maximum loss of inf significant digits of base 2 520|128 1 00002597 1 8|The maximum acceptable loss is 80 significant digits 520|128 1 00002597 1 9|The root-mean-square relative error is 7.62839e+152 520|128 1 00002597 1 10|This gave an average loss of 5.6e+02 significant digits of base 2 520|128 1 00002597 1 11|The maximum acceptable loss is 40 significant digits 520|128 1 00002597 1 12|The percentage of ERANGE errors is 2 520|128 1 00002597 1 13|The maximum acceptable percentage is 20 220|128 1 1 12:52:37|FAIL 410|128 1 1 12:52:37|IC End I don't know to what extent these are bugs in the emulator. >From "libchk": libGL.so.1 1 FAIL This was caused by a missing OpenGL library. >From the C++ tests: /24_iterators/istreambuf_iterator/2.cc 1 FAIL /demangle/abi_examples/01.cc 1 FAIL /demangle/abi_examples/02.cc 1 FAIL This is actually a correction to the C++ tests on i386. I neglected to report these results due to an oversight. All of these are problems in the test suite and are already waived. /22_locale/locale/cons/12658_thread.cc 1 FAIL /thread/pthread4.cc 1 FAIL The thread tests are always sensitive to running under an emulator, so I'm hesitant to say for sure whether these are real failures. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
