This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: glibc 2.1.92 tst-getdate failure on linuxppc
- To: Andreas Jaeger <aj at suse dot de>,Jack Howarth <howarth at fuse dot net>
- Subject: Re: glibc 2.1.92 tst-getdate failure on linuxppc
- From: Franz Sirl <Franz dot Sirl-kernel at lauterbach dot com>
- Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 13:24:04 +0200
- Cc: libc-alpha at sources dot redhat dot com
- References: <399F675F.922CE11C@fuse.net> <u8pun4cjm1.fsf@gromit.rhein-neckar.de>
On Sun, 20 Aug 2000, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
> >>>>> Jack Howarth writes:
> >
> > Hello,
> > I am wondering if we are the only platform seeing the following
> > failure in
> > make check on glibc 2.1.92? In build-ppc-linux/time/tst-getdate.out we
> > see
> >
> > Failure for getdate ("16:30:46 2000-2-29"):
> > struct tm is: 2000-1-29 16:30:46
> > but should be: 2000-1-29 16:31:46
> > No errors found.
> >
> > ...such that the struct tm is always 1 minute behind the actual time
> > according to
> > the test. Geoff sees this as well on linuxppc. I am curious if the same
> > thing happens
> > on any other platforms like i386. Thanks in advance for any hints or
> > information.
>
> The test case was wrong. I've committed the appended patch to fix
> this.
>
> Thanks,
> Andreas
>
> 2000-08-20 Andreas Jaeger <aj@suse.de>
>
> * time/tst-getdate.c (main): Increase error in case of wrong
> conversion.
> Fix typo in test case.
Thanks. Since you also did the new match tests in CVS, what can I do about:
Test: not testing FE_NOMASK_ENV, it isn't implemented.
Test: after fesetenv (FE_DFL_ENV) processes will not abort
when feraiseexcept (FE_DIVBYZERO) is called.
Pass: Process exited normally.
Tests for feenableexcepts etc. with flag FE_DIVBYZERO
Test: fedisableexcept (FE_ALL_EXCEPT) failed
Test: not testing FE_NOMASK_ENV, it isn't implemented.
Test: after fesetenv (FE_DFL_ENV) processes will not abort
when feraiseexcept (FE_INVALID) is called.
Pass: Process exited normally.
Tests for feenableexcepts etc. with flag FE_INVALID
Test: fedisableexcept (FE_ALL_EXCEPT) failed
Test: not testing FE_NOMASK_ENV, it isn't implemented.
Test: after fesetenv (FE_DFL_ENV) processes will not abort
when feraiseexcept (FE_INEXACT) is called.
Pass: Process exited normally.
Tests for feenableexcepts etc. with flag FE_INEXACT
Test: fedisableexcept (FE_ALL_EXCEPT) failed
Test: not testing FE_NOMASK_ENV, it isn't implemented.
Test: after fesetenv (FE_DFL_ENV) processes will not abort
when feraiseexcept (FE_UNDERFLOW) is called.
in test-fenv.out? Can I just copy the implementations from another platform?
Which files do I need to look at as examples?
And the last one, the following FAIL undetected by make check, are they
expected? Do they happen on other platforms too?
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "[A-[.].]c]", string: "ab]!" -> no match, FAIL
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "[[.ch.]]", string: "abc" -> compiling failed, OK
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "[[.ab.][.CD.][.EF.]]", string: "yZabCDEFQ9" ->
compiling failed, OK
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "[[:alnum:]]*", string: " aB28gH" -> wrong match
(0 to 0): FAIL
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "[^[:alnum:]]*", string: "2 ,a" -> wrong
match (0 to 0): FAIL
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "[[:alpha:]]*", string: " aBgH2" -> wrong match
(0 to 0): FAIL
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "[[:digit:]]*", string: "a28" -> wrong match (0
to 0): FAIL
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "[[:punct:]]*", string: "a,2" -> wrong match (0
to 0): FAIL
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "[^[:space:]]*", string: " aB28gH, " -> wrong
match (0 to 0): FAIL
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "[[:upper:]]*", string: "aBH2" -> wrong match (0
to 0): FAIL
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "[[:xdigit:]]*", string: "gaB28h" -> wrong match
(0 to 0): FAIL
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "[^[:xdigit:]]*", string: "a gH,2" ->
wrong match (0 to 0): FAIL
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "[b-a]", string: "abc" -> compiling failed, OK
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "[A-[.].]c]", string: "ab]!" -> no match, FAIL
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "a\(b\)*c\1", string: "acb" -> no match, FAIL
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "a\(b\)*c\1", string: "acb" -> no match, FAIL
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "a\(b\(c\(d\(f\)*\)\)\)\4", string:
"xYzabcdePQRST" -> no match, FAIL
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "\(a\(b\)\)\3", string: "foo" -> compiling
failed, OK
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "\(a\(b\)\)\(a\(b\)\)\5", string: "foo" ->
compiling failed, OK
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "\([a-c]*\)\{0,\}", string: "aabcaab" -> no
match, FAIL
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "\(a\)010\{1,2\}", string: "aaaabc" -> no match,
FAIL
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "\(\(a\)\1\)\{1,2\}", string: "aaaabc" -> no
match, FAIL
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "\([a-c]*\)\{0,\}", string: "aabcaab" -> no
match, FAIL
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "\([a-c]*\)\{1,\}", string: "abcdefg" -> no
match, FAIL
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "\^\[[[.].]]\\(\\1\\)\\*\\{1,2\\}\$", string:
"a^[]\(1\)\*\{1,2\}$b" -> no match, FAIL
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "[$\(*\)1]*", string: "$\()*^" -> wrong match (0
to 5): FAIL
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "\(*\)*\1*", string: "a*b*11" -> wrong match (0
to 0): FAIL
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "\(a\(b\{1,2\}\)\{1,2\}\)", string: "abbab" ->
wrong match (0 to 3): FAIL
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "[a-z]*$", string: "99ZZxyz99" -> wrong match (9
to 9): FAIL
Franz.