[lldb-dev] [cfe-dev] [3.8 Release] RC1 has been tagged

[Nikola Smiljanic via lldb-dev]

Phase1 fails to build on openSUSE 13.2, can anyone see what's wrong from
this log file?

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 5:45 AM, Hans Wennborg via cfe-dev <
cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:

> On Sun, Jan 24, 2016 at 2:48 PM, Brian Cain <brian.cain at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 9:52 PM, Brian Cain <brian.cain at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 8:31 PM, Eric Fiselier <eric at efcs.ca> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 7:04 PM, Brian Cain via cfe-dev
> >>> <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> SuSE Linux Enterprise Server 11SP3 x86_64
> >>>>
> >>>> Looks like I see several failures that weren't in 3.7.1.  Is there any
> >>>> way to tell whether these are regressions vs
> new-to-3.8.0-but-failing?  The
> >>>> MSan ones were in 3.7.1 but the ThreadPoolTest and the libc++ errors
> were
> >>>> not in 3.7.1.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> All of the libc++ failures seem like non-issues and should be in 3.7.1.
> >>> Did you change or upgrade your platform or libc version?  I'm not sure
> about
> >>> the libc++abi error though.
> >>
> >>
> >> I don't recall any changes to libc.  Attached is the testing log from
> >> 3.7.1 rc2 (I don't have logs from -final handy).
> >>
> >> I can repeat a 3.7.1 release build on this system now.  I don't think
> the
> >> results will change, though.
> >>
> >
> > I discussed this more with Eric off-list and I think we've come to the
> > conclusion that this was not a regression, it was my error.
> >
> > It's a bit tricky -- what should I expect for a new platform?  All
> failing
> > tests are likely failing because they can't be/aren't yet supported?
> It's
> > tough to distinguish -- are they real bugs to be fixed, errors in the
> > build/release process?
>
> Ideally, all tests should pass on the platforms we build for. In your
> case, it's not even very exotic, just x86_64 Linux. The LLVM and Clang
> tests are pretty good in this regard, but various sanitizer and libc++
> tests seem less stable. In practice, we've been releasing as long as
> the failures don't look like regressions from previous releases.
> _______________________________________________
> cfe-dev mailing list
> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/lldb-dev/attachments/20160126/7af1d20d/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: log.zip
Type: application/zip
Size: 165152 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/lldb-dev/attachments/20160126/7af1d20d/attachment-0001.zip>