On 13/09/14 23:04, Armin K. wrote: > On 09/13/2014 01:18 PM, Wayne Blaszczyk wrote: >> On 09/09/14 11:14, Bruce Dubbs wrote: >>> Ken Moffat wrote: >>>> >>>> FAIL: posix/tst-getaddrinfo4 >>>> Summary of test results: >>>> 1 FAIL >>>> 1721 PASS >>>> 121 XFAIL >>>> 3 XPASS >>>> Makefile:321: recipe for target 'tests' failed >>>> make[1]: *** [tests] Error 1 >>>> make[1]: Target 'check' not remade because of errors. >>>> make[1]: Leaving directory '/building/glibc-2.20' >>>> Makefile:9: recipe for target 'check' failed >>>> make: *** [check] Error 2 >>>> ~ >>>> >>>> And that is a lot easier to understand than how things used to be. >>>> But for me, it means that the follwing instructions, which used to >>>> be very helpful, now actually make things harder to understand: >>>> >>>> make check 2>&1 | tee glibc-check-log >>>> grep Error glibc-check-log >>>> >>>> I save glibc-check-log separately, and it contains only the >>>> following: >>>> >>>> make[1]: *** [tests] Error 1 >>>> make: *** [check] Error 2 >>>> >>>> Logging the tests is probably good, but I think we should drop the >>>> grep because it no longer useful (it doesn't say which test(s) >>>> failed). >>> >>> Good point. We can do that. >>> >>> -- Bruce >>> >>> >>> >> >> I was writing a separate email when I noticed this thread. >> >> I'm not doing a full build, just picking out a few things. >> Should the line 'grep Error glibc-check-log' be 'grep FAIL >> glibc-check-log' or even 'grep ^FAIL glibc-check-log' >> >> This will display the individual tests that have failed. >> >> >> Regards, >> Wayne. >> > > Summary is given at the end of "make check", so why bother redirecting > and greping? You only have to read few extra lines after that :-). > > >
You are right, I didn't even noticed that. -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
