RFC: test-in-container vs ld.so
Florian Weimer
fw@deneb.enyo.de
Sat Nov 9 14:05:00 GMT 2019
* DJ Delorie:
> This patch seems to work, but we don't have a lot of containerized
> tests, and my setup is "normal" (esp compared to Joseph's ;)
>
> diff --git a/Rules b/Rules
> index 8dbac56ce6..9ca5e14092 100644
> --- a/Rules
> +++ b/Rules
> @@ -275,8 +275,8 @@ $(objpfx)%.out: /dev/null $(objpfx)% # Make it 2nd arg for canned sequence.
> # tests-container.
> $(tests-container:%=$(objpfx)%.out): $(objpfx)%.out : $(if $(wildcard $(objpfx)%.files),$(objpfx)%.files,/dev/null) $(objpfx)%
> $(test-wrapper-env) $(run-program-env) $(run-via-rtld-prefix) \
> - $(common-objpfx)support/test-container env $(run-program-env) $($*-ENV) \
> - $(host-test-program-cmd) $($*-ARGS) > $@; \
> + $(common-objpfx)support/test-container env $($*-ENV) \
> + $(built-program-file) $($*-ARGS) > $@; \
> $(evaluate-test)
I think it's a step in the right direction. The outer
$(run-program-env) is still inherited by the test, and that will need
fixing, too.
More information about the Libc-alpha
mailing list