Re: glibc 2.1.92 tst-getdate failure on linuxppc

[Franz Sirl <Franz dot Sirl-kernel at lauterbach dot com>]

On Sun, 20 Aug 2000, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
> >>>>> Jack Howarth writes:
>  >
>  > Hello,
>  >      I am wondering if we are the only platform seeing the following
>  > failure in
>  > make check on glibc 2.1.92? In build-ppc-linux/time/tst-getdate.out we
>  > see
>  >
>  > Failure for getdate ("16:30:46 2000-2-29"):
>  > struct tm is:  2000-1-29 16:30:46
>  > but should be: 2000-1-29 16:31:46
>  > No errors found.
>  >
>  > ...such that the struct tm is always 1 minute behind the actual time
>  > according to
>  > the test. Geoff sees this as well on linuxppc. I am curious if the same
>  > thing happens
>  > on any other platforms like i386. Thanks in advance for any hints or
>  > information.
>
> The test case was wrong.  I've committed the appended patch to fix
> this.
>
> Thanks,
> Andreas
>
> 2000-08-20  Andreas Jaeger  <aj@suse.de>
>
> 	* time/tst-getdate.c (main): Increase error in case of wrong
> 	conversion.
> 	Fix typo in test case.

Thanks. Since you also did the new match tests in CVS, what can I do about:

Test: not testing FE_NOMASK_ENV, it isn't implemented.
Test: after fesetenv (FE_DFL_ENV) processes will not abort
      when feraiseexcept (FE_DIVBYZERO) is called.
  Pass: Process exited normally.
Tests for feenableexcepts etc. with flag FE_DIVBYZERO
Test: fedisableexcept (FE_ALL_EXCEPT) failed
Test: not testing FE_NOMASK_ENV, it isn't implemented.
Test: after fesetenv (FE_DFL_ENV) processes will not abort
      when feraiseexcept (FE_INVALID) is called.
  Pass: Process exited normally.
Tests for feenableexcepts etc. with flag FE_INVALID
Test: fedisableexcept (FE_ALL_EXCEPT) failed
Test: not testing FE_NOMASK_ENV, it isn't implemented.
Test: after fesetenv (FE_DFL_ENV) processes will not abort
      when feraiseexcept (FE_INEXACT) is called.
  Pass: Process exited normally.
Tests for feenableexcepts etc. with flag FE_INEXACT
Test: fedisableexcept (FE_ALL_EXCEPT) failed
Test: not testing FE_NOMASK_ENV, it isn't implemented.
Test: after fesetenv (FE_DFL_ENV) processes will not abort
      when feraiseexcept (FE_UNDERFLOW) is called.

in test-fenv.out? Can I just copy the implementations from another platform? 
Which files do I need to look at as examples?

And the last one, the following FAIL undetected by make check, are they 
expected? Do they happen on other platforms too?

posix/runptests.out:regexp: "[A-[.].]c]", string: "ab]!" -> no match, FAIL
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "[[.ch.]]", string: "abc" -> compiling failed, OK
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "[[.ab.][.CD.][.EF.]]", string: "yZabCDEFQ9" -> 
compiling failed, OK
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "[[:alnum:]]*", string: " aB28gH" -> wrong match 
(0 to 0): FAIL
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "[^[:alnum:]]*", string: "2         ,a" -> wrong 
match (0 to 0): FAIL
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "[[:alpha:]]*", string: " aBgH2" -> wrong match 
(0 to 0): FAIL
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "[[:digit:]]*", string: "a28" -> wrong match (0 
to 0): FAIL
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "[[:punct:]]*", string: "a,2" -> wrong match (0 
to 0): FAIL
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "[^[:space:]]*", string: " aB28gH,  " -> wrong 
match (0 to 0): FAIL
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "[[:upper:]]*", string: "aBH2" -> wrong match (0 
to 0): FAIL
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "[[:xdigit:]]*", string: "gaB28h" -> wrong match 
(0 to 0): FAIL
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "[^[:xdigit:]]*", string: "a        gH,2" -> 
wrong match (0 to 0): FAIL
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "[b-a]", string: "abc" -> compiling failed, OK
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "[A-[.].]c]", string: "ab]!" -> no match, FAIL
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "a\(b\)*c\1", string: "acb" -> no match, FAIL
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "a\(b\)*c\1", string: "acb" -> no match, FAIL
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "a\(b\(c\(d\(f\)*\)\)\)\4", string: 
"xYzabcdePQRST" -> no match, FAIL
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "\(a\(b\)\)\3", string: "foo" -> compiling 
failed, OK
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "\(a\(b\)\)\(a\(b\)\)\5", string: "foo" -> 
compiling failed, OK
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "\([a-c]*\)\{0,\}", string: "aabcaab" -> no 
match, FAIL
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "\(a\)010\{1,2\}", string: "aaaabc" -> no match, 
FAIL
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "\(\(a\)\1\)\{1,2\}", string: "aaaabc" -> no 
match, FAIL
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "\([a-c]*\)\{0,\}", string: "aabcaab" -> no 
match, FAIL
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "\([a-c]*\)\{1,\}", string: "abcdefg" -> no 
match, FAIL
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "\^\[[[.].]]\\(\\1\\)\\*\\{1,2\\}\$", string: 
"a^[]\(1\)\*\{1,2\}$b" -> no match, FAIL
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "[$\(*\)1]*", string: "$\()*^" -> wrong match (0 
to 5): FAIL
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "\(*\)*\1*", string: "a*b*11" -> wrong match (0 
to 0): FAIL
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "\(a\(b\{1,2\}\)\{1,2\}\)", string: "abbab" -> 
wrong match (0 to 3): FAIL
posix/runptests.out:regexp: "[a-z]*$", string: "99ZZxyz99" -> wrong match (9 
to 9): FAIL

Franz.