Closed
Bug 388971
Opened 17 years ago
Closed 14 years ago
add unit test to check for R_386_PC32 relocations
Categories
(Testing :: General, defect)
Testing
General
Tracking
(Not tracked)
RESOLVED
FIXED
People
(Reporter: ted, Assigned: benjamin)
Details
Attachments
(2 files)
934 bytes,
patch
|
benjamin
:
review-
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
1.15 KB,
patch
|
benjamin
:
review+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
These R_386_PC32 relocations creep into the build when using system headers without adding them to the list in config/system-headers. This breaks x86_64 builds (with a newer GCC), and it breaks running these builds on an SELinux system. As a stopgap until we can get an x86_64 tinderbox (bug 359336), bsmedberg suggested a unit test that would check for these sections in our shared libs. I believe it doesn't have to be any more complicated than: objdump -R *.so | grep R_386_PC32
Reporter | ||
Comment 1•17 years ago
|
||
Pretty simple, except for the ugly shell logic.
Assignee: nobody → ted.mielczarek
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Attachment #274377 -
Flags: superreview?(dbaron)
Attachment #274377 -
Flags: review?(benjamin)
Assignee | ||
Comment 2•17 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 274377 [details] [diff] [review] add a simple unit test 1) Do you want to test TARGET_CPU as well? 2) you probably want to quote $$relcount in case objdump exits without any output 3) dist/bin/*.so won't check component DLLs
Attachment #274377 -
Flags: review?(benjamin) → review-
Attachment #274377 -
Flags: superreview?(dbaron)
Reporter | ||
Comment 3•16 years ago
|
||
Given taht bug 359336 is fixed, I'm WONTFIXING.
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 16 years ago
Resolution: --- → WONTFIX
Reporter | ||
Updated•16 years ago
|
Component: Testing → General
Product: Core → Testing
QA Contact: testing → general
Assignee | ||
Comment 4•14 years ago
|
||
Reopening, bug 595112 apparently added a 32-bit only case of this, so we should just check it.
Assignee: ted.mielczarek → benjamin
Status: RESOLVED → REOPENED
Resolution: WONTFIX → ---
Assignee | ||
Comment 5•14 years ago
|
||
http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/b4811d1b1fea
Status: REOPENED → RESOLVED
Closed: 16 years ago → 14 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Was it intentional that the target was 'scheck' rather than 'check'?
Also, do 'make check' tests run anywhere on tinderbox? (And would this even pass until bug 604307 is fixed?)
Reporter | ||
Comment 8•14 years ago
|
||
They run after the build on both the opt and debug build machines. (Technically after the build has been uploaded for the test machines to do their thing.)
Now that bug 604307 is fixed, should this be changed from 'scheck' to 'check'?
Flags: needinfo?(benjamin)
https://tbpl.mozilla.org/?tree=Try&rev=48e240000c54 with try: --build do --platform linux,android-x86,linux_gecko --unittests none --talos none --no-emails
Attachment #8334281 -
Flags: review?(benjamin)
Assignee | ||
Updated•10 years ago
|
Attachment #8334281 -
Flags: review?(benjamin) → review+
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•