This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH roland/test-unsupported] Let tests result in UNSUPPORTED; use that for unbuildable C++ cases
- From: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Carlos O'Donell <carlos at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Roland McGrath <roland at hack dot frob dot com>, "GNU C. Library" <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 16:03:20 +0000
- Subject: Re: [PATCH roland/test-unsupported] Let tests result in UNSUPPORTED; use that for unbuildable C++ cases
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20150307010200 dot B51122C3B39 at topped-with-meat dot com> <54FCA197 dot 9030007 at redhat dot com>
On Sun, 8 Mar 2015, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> I'm less fine with XPASS failing the entire make check run. There are cases
> that I want to XFAIL for Fedora that include intermittent test failures related
> to kernel or glibc issues. If those tests pass and become XPASS, then `make check`
I'd like to see such XFAILs go in the main glibc repository, not just in
distribution versions, if the cause of the failure isn't distribution
glibc changes. (It would be desirable to comment them e.g. "this fails
intermittently with kernels before commit abcdef, which was in kernel g.h
and later", so we can tell when such XFAILs are no longer needed - or if
the failure is well-enough understood to know there's a glibc bug
involved, the comment should point to that bug in Bugzilla. We could do
with a policy on how conditional to try to make such XFAILs.)
Generically, I think listing known failures on the per-release wiki pages
is worse than XFAILing them, at least after some analysis has been done to
understand the cause of the failure and how to tell when it's been fixed.
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com