* Conform failures in glibc?
@ 2019-05-21 16:45 Steve Ellcey
2019-05-21 17:10 ` Florian Weimer
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Steve Ellcey @ 2019-05-21 16:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: libc-alpha@sourceware.org
I just ran the glibc testsuite and am seeing a number of conform failures
with the following messages in the err file:
/tmp/tmprhwms3a9/test.c:1:10: fatal error: ndbm.h: No such file or directory
1 | #include <ndbm.h>
| ^~~~~~~~
compilation terminated.
In file included from /tmp/tmpyhffvdkg/test.c:1:
/home/sellcey/gcc_newbuild/install/lib/gcc/aarch64-linux-gnu/10.0.0/include/varargs.h:4:2: error: #error "GCC no longer implements <varargs.h>."
4 | #error "GCC no longer implements <varargs.h>."
| ^~~~~
/home/sellcey/gcc_newbuild/install/lib/gcc/aarch64-linux-gnu/10.0.0/include/varargs.h:5:2: error: #error "Revise your code to use <stdarg.h>."
5 | #error "Revise your code to use <stdarg.h>."
| ^~~~~
I am using the latest GCC and the latest GLIBC on an Aarch64 system. I do
have some local changes in glibc but nothing that should be affecting these
files. Has anyone else run into this?
Steve Ellcey
sellcey@marvell.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread* Re: Conform failures in glibc?
2019-05-21 16:45 Conform failures in glibc? Steve Ellcey
@ 2019-05-21 17:10 ` Florian Weimer
2019-05-21 17:22 ` [EXT] " Steve Ellcey
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Florian Weimer @ 2019-05-21 17:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Steve Ellcey; +Cc: libc-alpha@sourceware.org
* Steve Ellcey:
> I just ran the glibc testsuite and am seeing a number of conform failures
> with the following messages in the err file:
>
> /tmp/tmprhwms3a9/test.c:1:10: fatal error: ndbm.h: No such file or directory
> 1 | #include <ndbm.h>
> | ^~~~~~~~
> compilation terminated.
> In file included from /tmp/tmpyhffvdkg/test.c:1:
> /home/sellcey/gcc_newbuild/install/lib/gcc/aarch64-linux-gnu/10.0.0/include/varargs.h:4:2: error: #error "GCC no longer implements <varargs.h>."
> 4 | #error "GCC no longer implements <varargs.h>."
> | ^~~~~
> /home/sellcey/gcc_newbuild/install/lib/gcc/aarch64-linux-gnu/10.0.0/include/varargs.h:5:2: error: #error "Revise your code to use <stdarg.h>."
> 5 | #error "Revise your code to use <stdarg.h>."
> | ^~~~~
>
These should be XFAILed and not really count as failures.
I find these errors confusing as well. On the one hand, I think want
the conform test expectations to reflect POSIX as closely as possible,
but on the other hand, I do not see value in carrying around such fringe
XFAILs forever. The <varargs.h> one in particular will never get fixed
at this point. We know that, so reporting it over and over again is
just noise.
Thanks,
Florian
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [EXT] Re: Conform failures in glibc?
2019-05-21 17:10 ` Florian Weimer
@ 2019-05-21 17:22 ` Steve Ellcey
2019-05-21 19:16 ` Florian Weimer
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Steve Ellcey @ 2019-05-21 17:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: fweimer@redhat.com; +Cc: libc-alpha@sourceware.org
On Tue, 2019-05-21 at 19:10 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
>
> These should be XFAILed and not really count as failures.
>
> I find these errors confusing as well. On the one hand, I think want
> the conform test expectations to reflect POSIX as closely as possible,
> but on the other hand, I do not see value in carrying around such fringe
> XFAILs forever. The <varargs.h> one in particular will never get fixed
> at this point. We know that, so reporting it over and over again is
> just noise.
>
> Thanks,
> Florian
I actually hadn't run into these before. I have recently changed my
build setup so maybe that is what caused me to start seeing these.
I see glibc/conform/Makefile has some XFAILS:
# Pre-standard C feature no longer supported by GCC (obsoleted in
# newer POSIX standards).
test-xfail-XPG4/varargs.h/conform = yes
test-xfail-XPG42/varargs.h/conform = yes
test-xfail-UNIX98/varargs.h/conform = yes
# Header not provided by glibc.
test-xfail-XPG42/ndbm.h/conform = yes
test-xfail-UNIX98/ndbm.h/conform = yes
test-xfail-XOPEN2K/ndbm.h/conform = yes
test-xfail-XOPEN2K8/ndbm.h/conform = yes
The failures I am seeing are:
FAIL: conform/POSIX2008/arpa/inet.h/conform
FAIL: conform/POSIX2008/netdb.h/conform
FAIL: conform/POSIX2008/netinet/in.h/conform
FAIL: conform/POSIX2008/sys/socket.h/conform
FAIL: conform/UNIX98/arpa/inet.h/conform
FAIL: conform/UNIX98/netdb.h/conform
FAIL: conform/UNIX98/netinet/in.h/conform
FAIL: conform/UNIX98/sys/socket.h/conform
FAIL: conform/XOPEN2K8/arpa/inet.h/conform
FAIL: conform/XOPEN2K8/netdb.h/conform
FAIL: conform/XOPEN2K8/netinet/in.h/conform
FAIL: conform/XOPEN2K8/sys/socket.h/conform
FAIL: conform/XOPEN2K/arpa/inet.h/conform
FAIL: conform/XOPEN2K/netdb.h/conform
FAIL: conform/XOPEN2K/netinet/in.h/conform
FAIL: conform/XOPEN2K/sys/socket.h/conform
FAIL: conform/XPG42/arpa/inet.h/conform
FAIL: conform/XPG42/netdb.h/conform
FAIL: conform/XPG42/netinet/in.h/conform
FAIL: conform/XPG42/sys/socket.h/conform
Steve Ellcey
sellcey@marvell.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [EXT] Re: Conform failures in glibc?
2019-05-21 17:22 ` [EXT] " Steve Ellcey
@ 2019-05-21 19:16 ` Florian Weimer
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Florian Weimer @ 2019-05-21 19:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Steve Ellcey; +Cc: libc-alpha@sourceware.org
* Steve Ellcey:
> On Tue, 2019-05-21 at 19:10 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
>>
>> These should be XFAILed and not really count as failures.
>>
>> I find these errors confusing as well. On the one hand, I think want
>> the conform test expectations to reflect POSIX as closely as possible,
>> but on the other hand, I do not see value in carrying around such fringe
>> XFAILs forever. The <varargs.h> one in particular will never get fixed
>> at this point. We know that, so reporting it over and over again is
>> just noise.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Florian
>
> I actually hadn't run into these before. I have recently changed my
> build setup so maybe that is what caused me to start seeing these.
> FAIL: conform/POSIX2008/arpa/inet.h/conform
> FAIL: conform/POSIX2008/netdb.h/conform
> FAIL: conform/POSIX2008/netinet/in.h/conform
You need to check the .out files. It could be the Linux 5.1 UAPI
header issue.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2019-05-21 19:16 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2019-05-21 16:45 Conform failures in glibc? Steve Ellcey
2019-05-21 17:10 ` Florian Weimer
2019-05-21 17:22 ` [EXT] " Steve Ellcey
2019-05-21 19:16 ` Florian Weimer
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).