Re: bash: how to interpret the test-results

"Rainer Fiebig" ([email protected] via lfs-support Mailing List) <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.linux.lfs.support
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Am 15.02.25 um 01:42 schrieb Bruce Dubbs ([email protected] via
lfs-support Mailing List):
> On 2/14/25 2:48 PM, Rainer Fiebig ([email protected] via lfs-support
> Mailing List) wrote:
>> I must admit that I've never paid attention to the test-results for
>> bash.  Bash has always worked, no problems.
>>
>> After updating glibc to -2.41, I rebuilt bash-5.1.16 and ran the tests
>> with  "make tests"  (as described in "Install" in the sources).
>>
>> The book says: "Any output from diff (prefixed with < and >) indicates a
>> test failure, unless there is a message saying the difference can be
>> ignored."
>>
>> A line in the log says: "Any output from any test, unless otherwise
>> noted, indicates a possible anomaly"
>>
>> According to that almost all of the 82 tests ("run-soandso") must have
>> failed because all have "anomalies".  For example:
>>
>> run-alias
>> 3c3
>> < ./alias.tests: Zeile 38: qfoo: Kommando nicht gefunden.
>> ---
>>> ./alias.tests: line 38: qfoo: command not found
>> run-appendop
>> 18c18
>> < ./appendop.tests: Zeile 97: x: Schreibgeschützte Variable.
>> ---
>>> ./appendop.tests: line 97: x: readonly variable
>> run-arith
>> 63c63
>> < ./arith.tests: Zeile 127: 1 ? 20 : x+=2: Versuchte Zuweisung zu etwas,
>> das keine Variable ist. (Fehlerverursachendes Zeichen ist "+=2").
>> ---
>>> ./arith.tests: line 127: 1 ? 20 : x+=2: attempted assignment to
>> non-variable (error token is "+=2")
>> 83,92c83,92
>>
>> And so on and so on.  "<" in German, ">" in English.  The test-results
>> are the same with glibc-2.35 and -2.41.  I mean I had _zero_ FAILS of
>> over 6000 tests for glibc-2.41 but almost every test for bash indicates
>> failure?
>>
>> I don't know what to make of it.  Any insights, please?  Thanks.
> 
> It sounds like a language issue to me.  Did you try setting LANG=C for
> the tests?
Thanks, "LANG=C" cured most of it.  With that only "run-func",
"run-herestr" and "run-intl" generated diff-output which was however
explained by the info given in "warning".  Exported functions like
pathappend () showed up in both "run-func" and "run-herestr".

Rainer

-- 
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/sympa/info/lfs-support
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.