[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: coreutils-6.6 check failures on Itanium Linux
From: |
Bob Proulx |
Subject: |
Re: coreutils-6.6 check failures on Itanium Linux |
Date: |
Tue, 28 Nov 2006 00:44:34 -0700 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.9i |
Matthew Woehlke wrote:
> I get two 'make check' test failures on Itanium Linux.
All tests pass for me on Debian Sarge on ia64. I am using
linux-2.6.12, glibc-2.3.2, and an ext3 filesystem. I just varified
that the tests also passed on xfs too.
> The tests are mv/dir2dir and mv/no-target-dir. The dir2dir failure
> seems to be a disagreement on error message, although given that the
> error I see is the same as on no-target-dir, I'm still suspicious.
> < mv: cannot move `b/t' to `a/t': Device or resource busy
> > mv: cannot move `b/t' to `a/t': Directory not empty
Yes, both an error but different errors. Can you reproduce the error
from the command line? It would probably make further debugging
easier.
mkdir -p a/t b/t
touch a/t/f
$builddir/src/mv b/t a
And then at that point run strace to see what system calls and results
occurred.
strace -e file $builddir/src/mv b/t a
This is a feature that has changed in recent history. Other versions
of mv gave different messages. I don't think it unreasonable to
believe that linux-2.4 gave different error messages than linux-2.6.
I think this problem will simply be one of kernel error message
differences in the different kernel versions.
+ mkdir -p d/sub empty src d2/sub e2
+ touch f
+ test 0 = 1
+ fail=0
+ mv -fT d empty
mv: cannot move `d' to `empty': Device or resource busy
+ fail=1
That seems really strange. If I read that right it collapses to a
very simple thing that should not be failing.
mkdir -p d/sub empty
$builddir/src/mv -fT d empty
strace -e file $builddir/src/mv -fT d empty
The above works for me on my ia64 system. That one looks to be the
more interesting of the two failures.
> $ uname -a
> Linux <hostname> 2.4.18-e.27smp #1 SMP Mon Mar 31 20:45:49 EST 2003 ia64
> GNU/Linux
I am using a 2.6 kernel. I think that will be the big difference.
But ia64 support really did not get stable in the linux kernel until
2.6 and so for ia64 I highly recommend upgrading. This is very likely
an ia64 specific kernel problem.
Bob
- coreutils-6.6 check failures on Itanium Linux, Matthew Woehlke, 2006/11/22
- Re: coreutils-6.6 check failures on Itanium Linux, Paul Eggert, 2006/11/24
- Re: coreutils-6.6 check failures on Itanium Linux,
Bob Proulx <=
- Re: coreutils-6.6 check failures on Itanium Linux, Bob Proulx, 2006/11/28
- Re: coreutils-6.6 check failures on Itanium Linux, Jim Meyering, 2006/11/28
- Re: coreutils-6.6 check failures on Itanium Linux, Bob Proulx, 2006/11/28
- Re: coreutils-6.6 check failures on Itanium Linux, Jim Meyering, 2006/11/28
- Re: coreutils-6.6 check failures on Itanium Linux, Bob Proulx, 2006/11/28
- looking for ia64 linux newer than 2.4.19 [Re: coreutils-6.6 check failures on Itanium Linux, Jim Meyering, 2006/11/28
- Re: looking for ia64 linux newer than 2.4.19 [Re: coreutils-6.6 check failures on Itanium Linux, Andreas Schwab, 2006/11/28
- Re: looking for ia64 linux newer than 2.4.19 [Re: coreutils-6.6 check failures on Itanium Linux, Jim Meyering, 2006/11/28
- Re: looking for ia64 linux newer than 2.4.19 [Re: coreutils-6.6 check failures on Itanium Linux, Matthew Woehlke, 2006/11/28
- Re: looking for ia64 linux newer than 2.4.19 [Re: coreutils-6.6 check failures on Itanium Linux, Matthew Woehlke, 2006/11/28