bogus FAILs from mmix ld testsuite

[Michael Matz]

Hello,

On Mon, 17 Nov 2025, Jan Beulich wrote:

> very reliably with an unchanged configuration, but also very dependent upon
> the configuration I'm observing
> 
> FAIL: ld-mmix/bpo-15
> FAIL: ld-mmix/bpo-15m
> FAIL: ld-mmix/bpo-21
> FAIL: ld-mmix/bpo-21m

...

> ./ld-new   -L.../ld/testsuite/ld-mmix  -m elf64mmix -o tmpdir/dump tmpdir/start.o tmpdir/bpo-7.o 
> Executing on host: sh -c {./ld-new   -L.../ld/testsuite/ld-mmix  -m elf64mmix -o tmpdir/dump tmpdir/start.o tmpdir/bpo-7.o  2>&1}  /dev/null dump.tmp (timeout = 300)
> spawn [open ...]
> .../ld/.libs/ld-new: tmpdir/bpo-7.o:(.text+0x2): undefined reference to `areg'
> failed with: <.../ld/.libs/ld-new: tmpdir/bpo-7.o:(.text+0x2): undefined reference to `areg'>, expected: <^[^c][^h][^i][^l][^d].* undefined reference to `areg'$>
> FAIL: ld-mmix/bpo-15
> 
> (paths shortened for readability). I can't help the impression that the actual
> output matches the expectation expression, so I'm at a loss to explain why FAIL
> is reported in the first place. Am I overlooking something very obvious? Has
> anyone else ever observed anything similar?

The above four .d files are some of only ones to use '$' in their 
'#error:' expectations (for mmix its also getaa14{b,f}.d and 
jumpa14{b,f}.d).  Maybe you also change hosts and use different tcl?  Or 
some environment setting ala LANG makes a difference?


Ciao,
Michael.