bug-binutils
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Bug binutils/31327] New: libbacktrace test failures


From: sam at gentoo dot org
Subject: [Bug binutils/31327] New: libbacktrace test failures
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2024 07:21:26 +0000

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31327

            Bug ID: 31327
           Summary: libbacktrace test failures
           Product: binutils
           Version: unspecified
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: binutils
          Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org
          Reporter: sam at gentoo dot org
  Target Milestone: ---

Configured binutils-2.42 at 7e4f6dd4e6ef2d6c5d7929bb90364d7bff887c27 on
binutils-2_42-branch with:
```
$ ./configure --prefix=/tmp/bisect --disable-gdb --disable-libdecnumber
--disable-readline --disable-sim && make -j$(nproc) && make -j$(nproc) check
```

The libbacktrace testsuite fails its mtest_minidebug test for me: 
```
FAIL: mtest_minidebug
=====================

test1: [0]: syminfo did not find name
test1: [1]: syminfo did not find name
test1: [2]: syminfo did not find name
test1: [0]: missing function name
test1: [1]: missing function name
test1: [2]: missing function name
test3: [0]: NULL syminfo name
test3: [1]: NULL syminfo name
test3: [2]: NULL syminfo name
test5: NULL syminfo name
FAIL: backtrace_full noinline
FAIL: backtrace_simple noinline
FAIL: backtrace_syminfo variable
FAIL mtest_minidebug (exit status: 1)
```

I can hit the same on binutils-2.41_release so I guess something else changed
(either glibc-2.39 or gcc 14).

I notice our copy of libbacktrace looks a bit stale comapred to the one in gcc
- maybe needs a sync?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]