From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 127800 invoked by alias); 11 Jun 2019 20:54:58 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libc-help-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-help-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 127787 invoked by uid 89); 11 Jun 2019 20:54:58 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy=newest, 3.4, love X-HELO: mail-qt1-f194.google.com Received: from mail-qt1-f194.google.com (HELO mail-qt1-f194.google.com) (209.85.160.194) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 11 Jun 2019 20:54:57 +0000 Received: by mail-qt1-f194.google.com with SMTP id x47so16249118qtk.11 for ; Tue, 11 Jun 2019 13:54:57 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from [192.168.8.101] ([67.69.69.230]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id o71sm8319090qke.18.2019.06.11.13.54.54 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=AEAD-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 11 Jun 2019 13:54:55 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: GLIBC 2.25 and up test failures listed on wiki To: Lee Mracek , libc-help@sourceware.org Cc: carlos@systemhalted.org References: From: Carlos O'Donell Message-ID: <80f69151-eef7-a67d-611c-af968ac11e49@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2019 20:54:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2019-06/txt/msg00015.txt.bz2 On 6/11/19 4:47 PM, Lee Mracek wrote: > While building GLIBC I've been running into the issues with > test-cond-printers, etc as listed in the architecture-independent section > of https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/Release/2.25. Since I am sure that > Python is in my path, I'm assuming that this is due to the potential cause > added to the wiki regarding "gcc 7.8 or newer" but I'd like to confirm that. Look closely, it's "gdb 7.8 or newer", you need: - New enough python. * Python 3.4 or later Python is required to build the GNU C Library. As of release time, Python 3.7.1 is the newest verified to work for building and testing the GNU C Library. - New enough PExpect. * PExpect 4.0 The pretty printer tests drive GDB through test programs and compare its output to the printers'. PExpect is used to capture the output of GDB, and should be compatible with the Python version in your system. As of release time PExpect 4.3 is the newest verified to work to test the pretty printers. - New enough GNU Debugger (gdb). * GDB 7.8 or later with support for Python 2.7/3.4 or later GDB itself needs to be configured with Python support in order to use the pretty printers. Notice that your system having Python available doesn't imply that GDB supports it, nor that your system's Python and GDB's have the same version. As of release time GNU 'debugger' 8.2 is the newest verified to work to test the pretty printers. Unless Python, PExpect and GDB with Python support are present, the printer tests will report themselves as 'UNSUPPORTED'. Notice that some of the printer tests require the GNU C Library to be compiled with debugging symbols. All three of these things come togethe to test the pretty printers. Notes taken from glibc/INSTALL. > Currently my error presents as an unexpected output, and running the binary > itself doesn't provide any information. I can provide a full log if > necessary to compare. > > Furthermore, I'm wondering what changed in gcc 7.8 to make this test pass. > I'd love to deeply understand what is going on before I deploy a glibc that > is failing unit tests. It is documented as the minimum for the test to work in glibc/INSTALL. We don't explicitly explain why, but I expect it's a combination of what was the oldest tested gdb which works. Feel free to report back with an older gdb if it works :-) -- Cheers, Carlos.