Bug#704769 Libarchive FTBFS on s390x sid buildds.
Package: libarchive
Version: 3.0.1b-1
Severity: serious
Note: this bug report is a continuation of discussions in the unblock
bug for libarchive (
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=704080 ).
my personal guess is that there's probably nothing s390x-specific to it,
it's probably broken with 64bit big endian. The d-ports build for
sparc64 fails as well.
Please also note that the current version (available in experimental for now)
seems to build ok on s390x (but fails on other platforms instead)......
Using git bisect should help identify the needed relevant changes.
I just noticed that the current s390x build was manually built on the
porterbox. There hasn't been a successfull s390x sid buildd build for even
longer. See bug 659294
I just tried to build it on the s390x porterbox and it built
successfully :/
So I diffed the logs (- is the log from the buildd + is my log
from the porterbox). Highlights are below.
65: test_read_disk_directory_traversals
-libarchive/test/test_read_disk_directory_traversals.c:1260: ARCHIVE_EOF != archive_read_next_header2(a, ae)
- Description: There must be no entry
-libarchive/test/test_read_disk_directory_traversals.c:1263: File at has atime 1364403708.000000000, expected 886622.000000000
- Description: Atime should be restored
-libarchive/test/test_read_disk_directory_traversals.c:1524: Assertion failed: strcmp(archive_entry_pathname(ae), "nd/f2") != 0
- Description: File 'nd/f2' should be exclueded
-libarchive/test/test_read_disk_directory_traversals.c:1551: ARCHIVE_EOF != archive_read_next_header2(a, ae)
- Description: There should be no entry
+libarchive/test/test_read_disk_directory_traversals.c:1221: SKIPPING: Can't test atime with nodump on this filesystem
+libarchive/test/test_read_disk_directory_traversals.c:1436: SKIPPING: Can't test nodump on this filesystem
66: test_read_disk_entry_from_file
Totals:
Tests run: 177
- Tests failed: 1
- Assertions checked:12819198
- Assertions failed: 4
- Skips reported: 73
-
-Failing tests:
- 65: test_read_disk_directory_traversals (4 failures)
-
-Details for failing tests: /tmp/libarchive_test.2013-03-27T17.01.30-000
-
-FAIL: libarchive_test
+ Tests failed: 0
+ Assertions checked:12819611
+ Assertions failed: 0
+ Skips reported: 34
+177 tests passed, no failures
+PASS: libarchive_test
13: test_option_b
-tar/test/test_option_b.c:41: File archive1.tar has size 3072, expected 2048
- Description: bsdtar does not pad archives written directly to regular files
-tar/test/test_option_b.c:63: File archive5.tar has size 3072, expected 2048
14: test_option_exclude
20: test_option_nodump
-tar/test/test_option_nodump.c:63: File should not exist: file2
+tar/test/test_option_nodump.c:32: SKIPPING: Can't test nodump on this filesystem
21: test_option_q
Totals:
Tests run: 32
- Tests failed: 2
- Assertions checked: 7490
- Assertions failed: 3
- Skips reported: 1
-
-Failing tests:
- 13: test_option_b (2 failures)
- 20: test_option_nodump (1 failures)
-
-Details for failing tests: /tmp/bsdtar_test.2013-03-27T17.02.00-000
-
-FAIL: bsdtar_test
+ Tests failed: 0
+ Assertions checked: 7468
+ Assertions failed: 0
+ Skips reported: 2
+32 tests passed, no failures
+PASS: bsdtar_test
.
If tests fail or crash, details will be in:
- /tmp/bsdcpio_test.2013-03-27T17.02.06-000
+ /tmp/bsdcpio_test.2013-04-05T16.24.48-000
In summary it seems to me like the testsuite failures are filesystem
dependent.
Now questions for various parties
Libarchive maintainers:
does the testsuite have a method for setting expected failures?
s390x porters and buildd admins:
what fileystem setup do the s390x buildds use for the build environments?
Release team:
should I upload the binary I built on the porterbox so that the security fix can migrate?
Reply to: