[PATCH] Fix 30808 gprofng tests failed

[H.J. Lu]

On Wed, Jan 17, 2024 at 7:53 PM Xi Ruoyao <xry111@xry111.site> wrote:
>
> 在 2024-01-17星期三的 16:49 -0800，Vladimir Mezentsev写道：
> > On 1/17/24 03:24, Xi Ruoyao wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2023-09-01 at 13:04 -0700, Vladimir Mezentsev via Binutils wrote:
> > >
> > > > diff --git a/gprofng/testsuite/config/default.exp b/gprofng/testsuite/config/default.exp
> > > > index 1c862d54592..c4a6588bb64 100644
> > > > --- a/gprofng/testsuite/config/default.exp
> > > > +++ b/gprofng/testsuite/config/default.exp
> > > > @@ -32,17 +32,25 @@ if {![info exists CFLAGS]} {
> > > >       set CFLAGS "-g -O2"
> > > >   }
> > > >
> > > > +remote_exec host "sh -c \"rm -rf tmpdir; mkdir -p tmpdir\""
> > > >   if { "$CHECK_TARGET" == "check-install" } {
> > > >       set ::env(GPROFNG) "$PREFIX/bin/gprofng"
> > > >   } else {
> > > > -    set ::env(GPROFNG) "$BUILDDIR/src/gprofng"
> > > > +    # Make a temporary install dir to run gprofng from, and point at it
> > > > +    remote_exec host "sh -c \"$MAKE -C .. install-gprofng MAKEFLAGS=program_transform_name= DESTDIR=$BUILDDIR/tmpdir/root\""
> > > Unfortunately this has bring back PR29107.  I've created PR31252.
> > >
> >
> > I cannot reproduce the problem on the master branch ( OL8 / x86_64 ).
> > I did:
> >
> > mkdir bld_x86_64
> > cd bld_x86_64
> > ../configure --prefix=/usr --with-system-zlib --enable-shared
> > --disable-{gdb,gdbserver,libbacktrace,libdecnumber,readline,sim}
> > make -j16 -O tooldir=/usr V=1 2>&1 | tee make.log
> > make -k -j16 -O check 2>&1 | tee make_check.log
> >
> > I see errors but they are not related to 30808.
>
> But they are likely caused by the change.
>
> I think I (and Nick) have explained the issue well in
> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29107: if you run "make
> install" in the test suite, libtool will relink some shared libraries
> and the other test suite using these shared libraries will error out
> with messages like "file too short" or "undefined symbol" while the
> shared libraries are being overwritten.
>
> So you shouldn't run "make install" in the test suite, period, no some
> sort of "but I need it" things.
>

I agree.  Does LD_LIBRARY_PATH work for gprofng tests?

-- 
H.J.