util-linux test failed

r.stiltskin · 02-15-2014, 06:55 PM

I'm posting this here just as a matter of information that may eventually turn out to be useful to somebody. I'm assuming that this failed test is non-critical.

So after building util-linux-2.23.2 I ran

Code:

chown -Rv nobody .
su nobody -s /bin/bash -c "PATH=$PATH make check"

The output was similar to what is posted at http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/...086-util-linux
except for:

Code:

---------------------------------------------------------------------
  1 tests of 113 FAILED
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Specifically, near the beginning:

Code:

-------------------- util-linux regression tests --------------------

                    For development purpose only.                    
                 Don't execute on production system!                 

       bitops: swap bytes                     ... OK
        blkid: low-level superblocks probing  ...
                : adaptec-raid                ... OK
                : befs                        ... OK
                : bfs                         ... OK
                : cramfs                      ... OK
                : ddf-raid                    ... OK
                : exfat                       ... OK
                : ext2                        ... FAILED (blkid/low-probe-ext2)
                : ext3                        ... OK
and so on...

Searching through the util-2.23.2/tests directory didn't tell me very much. The only clue I found is a difference between one "expected" file and the corresponding "output" file:

tests/expected/blkid/low-probe-ext2 contains:

Code:

ID_FS_LABEL=test-ext2
ID_FS_LABEL_ENC=test-ext2
ID_FS_TYPE=ext2
ID_FS_USAGE=filesystem
ID_FS_UUID=22f0eac3-5c89-4ec1-9076-60799119aaea
ID_FS_UUID_ENC=22f0eac3-5c89-4ec1-9076-60799119aaea
ID_FS_VERSION=1.0

vs tests/output/blkid/low-probe-ext2:

Code:

ID_FS_LABEL=test-ext2
ID_FS_LABEL_ENC=test-ext2
ID_FS_SEC_TYPE=ext2
ID_FS_TYPE=ext4
ID_FS_USAGE=filesystem
ID_FS_UUID=22f0eac3-5c89-4ec1-9076-60799119aaea
ID_FS_UUID_ENC=22f0eac3-5c89-4ec1-9076-60799119aaea
ID_FS_VERSION=1.0

as opposed to the other tests for which the corresponding "expected" and "output" files are identical.

The only other info that I think may be relevant is that the host system is Xubuntu 13.10, the / and /home partitions are both formatted ext4, and the hard disk is a Seagate Hybrid drive ST2000DX001.

Maybe there will be some correlation between this and someone else's results ...

stoat · 02-17-2014, 04:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by r.stiltskin

I'm assuming that this failed test is non-critical.

Quote:

Originally Posted by r.stiltskin

Maybe there will be some correlation between this and someone else's results ...

Hi. I don't have anything for this. Sorry. Since nobody has answered yet, I only wanted to mention (FWIW, maybe nothing) that I don't test anything in chapter 6 except for the big stuff at the beginning with tests considered critical. I did all those tests once. It was interesting and all that, but doing that terrifically extended the build time. And I never really found anything important anyway. And as for testing packages for BLFS, that never entered my head since it already takes me two or three weeks to build one of those. Everybody should do what they think is best though. At least I bumped the thread.

r.stiltskin · 02-17-2014, 05:59 PM

Yeah, I'm really not worried about this either. I just threw it up here in case it might be useful to anyone trying to figure out what causes that error.

And yes, I agree that testing everything takes a huge amount of time. Hereafter I'll just test where the developers say it's critical.