>> Hm, I am suspecting that nobody has actually tested whether
>> backtrace() really works on NetBSD/powerpc... I'll write a
>> simple test of that in C tomorrow.
>
> Yes, this looks more like dysfunctional backtrace(3).
>
> We have got an ATF test for this:
>
> tests/lib/libexecinfo/t_backtrace
>> I don't see an ATF machine for powerpc, there shall be one available.
>>
>> http://releng.netbsd.org/test-results.html
>
> Mm, OK, doing the tests on netbsd-8 on this MacMini G4 should be
> fairly straight-forward.
Not so. The machine wedged partway through the tests, it's in
the office and I'
>>> I don't see an ATF machine for powerpc, there shall be one available.
>>>
>>> http://releng.netbsd.org/test-results.html
>>
>> Mm, OK, doing the tests on netbsd-8 on this MacMini G4 should be
>> fairly straight-forward.
>
> Not so. The machine wedged partway through the tests, it's in
> the of
>> And ... as follow-up I thought I'd check whether "make test" in
>> lang/llvm (5.0.1nb1) works on NetBSD/amd64 8.0_BETA. And while the
>> selftest setup seems to work fine on this platform, there are quite a
>> bit of unexpected failures:
>>
>> Expected Passes: 20309
>> Expected Failures
On 03.04.2018 23:36, Havard Eidnes wrote:
>>> And ... as follow-up I thought I'd check whether "make test" in
>>> lang/llvm (5.0.1nb1) works on NetBSD/amd64 8.0_BETA. And while the
>>> selftest setup seems to work fine on this platform, there are quite a
>>> bit of unexpected failures:
>>>
>>> E
> On 01.04.2018 16:53, Havard Eidnes wrote:
>> And some of the internal functions in libexecinfo are apparently
>> static, so not present in the symbol table for display in the
>> debugger, making debugging all that much harder.
>>
>> Sigh!
>>
>> Hints, anyone?
>
> There is an internal LLVM suppo
On 05.04.2018 00:55, Havard Eidnes wrote:
> Hm, I am suspecting that nobody has actually tested whether
> backtrace() really works on NetBSD/powerpc... I'll write a
> simple test of that in C tomorrow.
>
Yes, this looks more like dysfunctional backtrace(3).
We have got an ATF test for this:
Hi,
I decided it might be a good idea to run the self-tests in llvm
5.0.1 on powerpc. However, after the test and utilities are
built, it appears to spin while doing the first test. The run
log shows:
[100%] Built target LLVMHello_exports
[100%] Built target LLVMHello
Scanning dependencies of t
On 01.04.2018 16:53, Havard Eidnes wrote:
> And some of the internal functions in libexecinfo are apparently
> static, so not present in the symbol table for display in the
> debugger, making debugging all that much harder.
>
> Sigh!
>
> Hints, anyone?
>
There is an internal LLVM support for un
And ... as follow-up I thought I'd check whether "make test" in
lang/llvm (5.0.1nb1) works on NetBSD/amd64 8.0_BETA. And while the
selftest setup seems to work fine on this platform, there are quite a
bit of unexpected failures:
Expected Passes: 20309
Expected Failures : 130
Unsupporte
On 02.04.2018 11:47, Havard Eidnes wrote:
> And ... as follow-up I thought I'd check whether "make test" in
> lang/llvm (5.0.1nb1) works on NetBSD/amd64 8.0_BETA. And while the
> selftest setup seems to work fine on this platform, there are quite a
> bit of unexpected failures:
>
> Expected Pas
11 matches
Mail list logo
