bug-autoconf
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [GNU Autoconf 2.69] testsuite: 203 264 271 286 311 312 313 314 315 3


From: Dennis Clarke
Subject: Re: [GNU Autoconf 2.69] testsuite: 203 264 271 286 311 312 313 314 315 316 323 328 339 503 failed
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 20:42:25 +0000
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:77.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/77.0

On 7/17/20 10:17 PM, Paul Eggert wrote:
> On 7/14/20 9:22 AM, Dennis Clarke wrote:
>>
>> I was surprised to see many failures :
> 
> I suggest trying Autoconf 2.69b (which happened to be announced about
> the same time you sent your bug report). See:
> 
> https://lists.gnu.org/r/autoconf/2020-07/msg00006.html
> 
> Better yet, try 2.69b with the attached further patches applied, as many
> of them are relevant to Solaris 10. These patches have all been applied
> to the master branch on Savannah, which you can find here:
> 
> https://savannah.gnu.org/git/?group=autoconf

I gave this is run through last night and the results were not thrilling
 but here they are :


## ------------- ##
## Test results. ##
## ------------- ##

ERROR: 508 tests were run,
17 failed (4 expected failures).
15 tests were skipped.
## -------------------------- ##
## testsuite.log was created. ##
## -------------------------- ##

Please send `tests/testsuite.log' and all information you think might help:

   To: <bug-autoconf@gnu.org>
   Subject: [GNU Autoconf 2.69b] testsuite: 221 222 273 280 295 318 319
320 321 322 323 335 346 failed

You may investigate any problem if you feel able to do so, in which
case the test suite provides a good starting point.  Its output may
be found below `tests/testsuite.dir'.

gmake[2]: *** [Makefile:2150: check-local] Error 1
gmake[2]: Leaving directory
'/opt/bw/build/autoconf-2.69b_sunos5.10_sparcv9.002'
gmake[1]: *** [Makefile:1687: check-am] Error 2
gmake[1]: Leaving directory
'/opt/bw/build/autoconf-2.69b_sunos5.10_sparcv9.002'
gmake: *** [Makefile:1689: check] Error 2

So I guess I can look into the test area for some logs files and what
ever was left behind.  I attached a tarball that has everything about
the procedure and the results.  I have yet to go digging in there but
figured I would post this first and then climb down into the test
results and look around.


-- 
Dennis Clarke
RISC-V/SPARC/PPC/ARM/CISC
UNIX and Linux spoken
GreyBeard and suspenders optional



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]