From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/10258 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Szabolcs Nagy Newsgroups: gmane.comp.hardware.lowrisc.devel,gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: [musl] Weekly Report of Porting musl to RISC-V Project #5 Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2016 16:24:46 +0200 Message-ID: <20160703142445.GF19691@port70.net> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1467555902 24139 80.91.229.3 (3 Jul 2016 14:25:02 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2016 14:25:02 +0000 (UTC) Cc: lowrisc-dev@lists.lowrisc.org To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: lowrisc-dev-bounces@lists.lowrisc.org Sun Jul 03 16:25:01 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: gchld-lowrisc-dev@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from bagpuss.pepperfish.net ([148.251.8.16]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1bJiKS-00079l-BW for gchld-lowrisc-dev@m.gmane.org; Sun, 03 Jul 2016 16:25:00 +0200 Original-Received: from platypus.pepperfish.net (unknown [10.112.100.20]) by bagpuss.pepperfish.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32CC4B5C; Sun, 3 Jul 2016 15:24:58 +0100 (BST) Original-Received: from ip6-localhost ([::1] helo=platypus.pepperfish.net) by platypus.pepperfish.net with esmtp (Exim 4.80 #2 (Debian)) id 1bJiKQ-0003HG-33; Sun, 03 Jul 2016 15:24:58 +0100 Original-Received: from inmail0 ([10.112.100.10] helo=mx0.pepperfish.net) by platypus.pepperfish.net with esmtp (Exim 4.80 #2 (Debian)) id 1bJiKO-0003H6-6m for ; Sun, 03 Jul 2016 15:24:56 +0100 Original-Received: from port70.net ([81.7.13.123] ident=postfix) by mx0.pepperfish.net with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1bJiKM-0008SY-HI for lowrisc-dev@lists.lowrisc.org; Sun, 03 Jul 2016 15:24:56 +0100 Original-Received: by port70.net (Postfix, from userid 1002) id 4CEBCABEC082; Sun, 3 Jul 2016 16:24:46 +0200 (CEST) Mail-Followup-To: musl@lists.openwall.com, lowrisc-dev@lists.lowrisc.org Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-Spam-Score: -4.7 X-Spam-Score-int: -46 X-Spam-Bar: ---- X-Scanned-By: pepperfish.net, Sun, 03 Jul 2016 15:24:56 +0100 X-Spam-Report: Content analysis details: (-4.7 points) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -1.0 PPF_USER_AGENT_MUTT User-Agent: contains Mutt (Mutt isn't a spam tool) -0.5 PPF_USER_AGENT User-Agent: exists -0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -1.3 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] X-ACL-Warn: message may be spam X-Scan-Signature: 31220cad705bfbd317f78b62475c9ba5 X-BeenThere: lowrisc-dev@lists.lowrisc.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Hardware or software development discussion for lowRISC List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: lowrisc-dev-bounces@lists.lowrisc.org Errors-To: lowrisc-dev-bounces@lists.lowrisc.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.hardware.lowrisc.devel:427 gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:10258 Archived-At: * Masanori Ogino [2016-07-03 09:42:00 +0900]: > Some failures are expected since musl on x86_64 also does the same > ones (e.g. errors in src/api/fcntl.c), but there are some unexpected > errors too. I guess that the "warning: is > shorter than expected" warning indicates bugs in arch-dependent part > of I/O functions or system calls (or kernel?) and it causes syntax > errors in the same compilation unit. try to figure out this error: cc1: warning: src/regression/printf-fmt-g-zeros.c is shorter than expected In file included from src/regression/printf-fmt-g-zeros.c:3:0: /usr/include/stdio.h:8:22: warning: /usr/include/features.h is shorter than expected #include ^ In file included from /usr/include/stdio.h:22:0, from src/regression/printf-fmt-g-zeros.c:3: /usr/include/bits/alltypes.h:46:19: error: missing ')' after "defined" #if defined(__NEED_suseconds_t) && !defined(__DEFINED_suseconds_t) ^ is this a native toolchain? i thought you would cross compile things first (although libc-test is not set up to easily run the tests in a simulator after cross compiling) it might be some filesystem issue if there are truncated files.