Re: elf/tst-protected1[ab] failures

["H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>]

On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 2:43 PM, Roland McGrath <roland@hack.frob.com> wrote:
> These tests fail (at least on i686, x86_64, and powerpc64, that I know of;
> probably on all machines) when using all released versions of binutils.
>
> The state in the libc tree should never be to expect that unreleased tools
> are the norm.  These tests ought to be either marked for XFAIL or disabled
> entirely when not using a linker that makes them succeed.  We should never
> have allowed this state to exist in a libc release (release managers take
> note!).
>
> Can you figure out if it's possible to improve the existing configure check
> controlling have-protected-data so that it will accept only linkers that
> actually support these tests correctly?  If that's not feasible in the
> configure check, then we'll just need to mark the tests for XFAIL.  It
> would be nice if that could be conditional, but conditionalizing it on the
> ld version string seems nasty, so perhaps it's better to just have it as
> always XFAIL unless an empirical configure check can rule it out.
>

Since this requires both updated GCC and binutils, we can just make
it XFAIL.

-- 
H.J.