source builder issue (unstable: expat-2.1.0-1 missing)

[Gedare Bloom]

On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 4:38 AM, Karel Gardas <karel.gardas at centrum.cz> wrote:
> On 03/23/14 11:28 PM, Chris Johns wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Interesting and thanks for using the rtems-test command. There is a
>>>> patch about for the SPARC simulator to fix the output. I am not sure if
>>>> this is included in the gdb build. What is the error ? The log should
>>>> list the details of the tests that are in error. I should mention the
>>>> number of concurrent tests running can effect the results. It is
>>>> typically safe to have a test per core and you can go higher but there
>>>> may be failures.
>>>
>>>
>>> I think I just run tests with simple make not using any -jX option.
>>> Shall I?
>>
>>
>> The rtems-test command has a --jobs option that controls the number of
>> parallel tests. I am not sure I follow where make is involved when using
>> the rtems-test command.
>
>
> Indeed! My mistake, and no, I've not used --jobs so it was run in
> single-threaded mode.
>
I think the default is to run with the number of cores on your host machine.

>
>>>
>>> The error is this:
>>>
>>> [karel at centos sis-bsp]$ sparc-rtems4.11-sis
>>>
>>> SIS - SPARC instruction simulator 2.7.5, copyright Jiri Gaisler 1995
>>> Bug-reports to jgais at wd.estec.esa.nl
>>>
>>> sis> load ./sparc-rtems4.11/c/sis/testsuites/samples/hello/hello.exe
>>> sis> go
>>> resuming at 0x02000000
>>>
>>>
>>> *** HELLO WORLD TEST ***
>>> Hello World
>>> *** END OF HELLO WORLD TEST ***
>>> IU in error mode (257)
>>> 128835 02001f38 91d02000 Address 0x0000000002001f38 is out of
>>> bounds.
>>>
>>> sis>
>>>
>>> I mean this "IU in error mode (257)
>>> 128835 02001f38 91d02000 Address 0x0000000002001f38 is out of
>>> bounds." message...
>>>
>>
>> I do not think there is any support for the sis command. There is
>> support for gdb and the run command.
>
>
> Err, again my mistake. I used what's supported by tester so sis and sis-run.
> Hmm, I've rerun tests now and it looks like I did another mistake in the
> past. Now I see I run with:
>
> Passed:   466
>
> Failed:     3
> Timeouts:   5
> Invalid:    1
> -------------
> Total:    475
>
> Failures:
>  mrfs_fstime.exe
>  spintrcritical20.exe
>  sp2038.exe
> Timeouts:
>  monitor.exe
>  fileio.exe
>  termios.exe
>  pppd.exe
>  capture.exe
> Invalid:
>  tmcontext01.exe
>
>
> while using sis
>
> and with
>
> Passed:   470
>
> Failed:     3
> Timeouts:   1
> Invalid:    1
> -------------
> Total:    475
>
> Failures:
>  mrfs_fstime.exe
>  spintrcritical20.exe
>  sp2038.exe
> Timeouts:
>  pppd.exe
> Invalid:
>  tmcontext01.exe
>
>
> while using sis-run.
>
> Failures/invalids are the same, the difference is only in timeouts and
> probably caused by much slower run of sis in comparison with sis-run.
>
> So, Chris, I'm really sorry for all this chaos done on my side!
>
> Thanks,
> Karel
>
>