On Thu, Jul 26, 2007 at 07:01:27PM +0200, M.Canales.es wrote: > > On the Pentium-IV machin I have no current testsuites logs right now. On the > AMD64 machine I have the logs for a normal build, a 3-iterations build and a > build using MAKEFLAGS=-j3. On all of them the results are identical: > > LAST_UPDATED: Obtained from SVN: tags/gcc_4_1_2_release revision 121944 > > Native configuration is i686-pc-linux-gnu > [...] > === g++ tests === > > > Running target unix > XPASS: g++.dg/tree-ssa/pr14814.C scan-tree-dump-times &this 0 > XPASS: g++.old-deja/g++.other/init5.C execution test > [...] > === libstdc++ tests === > > > Running target unix > XPASS: 26_numerics/cmath/c99_classification_macros_c.cc (test for excess > errors) [...] > The unique diference with Bruce's result are the 2 unexpected successes in > gcc.
I'm seeing exactly the same on an AMD64 running 32-bit and built from LFS-svn-2006-12-09 (gcc-4.1.1, ld-2.17, glibc-2.5), currently running kernel 2.6.22-rc1. Looking back at my packages from December, I can see that these were the standard versions of binutils and glibc, without any branch update patches. Running /lib/libc.so.6 in chroot shows '2.5' even though we have a branch update patch applied. As a matter of form, should we in future change how we produce branch_update patches so that there is some sort of date identifier produced when asking for the version, the way that most distros do ? ĸen -- das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
