Re: FIP test results
hi Joe,
The test is for chroot().
On systems with shared libraries, since the environment for
chroot() setup by the test does not include the shared libraries,
the exec() fails.
A FIP is put out so you can sign this off as a pass if your
system uses shared libraries.
Its possible we could change the test suite for a future release
to have Linux specifics setup so that the chroot() with shlibs
would pass -- but for now, you should sign it off as passing.
For now the test code is the same as per the standards test
suite that this was derived from.
regards
Andrew
On Aug 2, 10:43am in "Re: FIP test results", veach@caldera.com wrote:
> Ok, I have "ticked" all the FIP items. Only one issue is not yet
> clear to me:
>
> > /tset/LSB.os/procenv/chroot/T.chroot 4
> >
> > Test Description:
> >
> > Test Information:
> > execve() of ./chroot_t4 failed - errno 2 (ENOENT)
> >
> > Signature/Date ____________________________________
> >
> >
> > There ought to be more information put out by this test
> > case, and thats something that should be fed back into the source
> > for the next maintenance update. This relates to a chroot() call in a
> > shared library environment, and can be signed off if that is the
> > cause.
>
> The test tries to exec "./chroot_t4" but the exec fails because it
> does not see the file. I verified that there is an executable ./chroot_t4
> in /home/tet/test_sets/TESTROOT/tset/LSB.os/procenv/chroot/chroot_t4
> with owner vsx0, group vsxg0, and mode 0755. I couldn't easily figure out
> how to build the tests from the source in order to add debugging statements
> to determine in what directory the test runs.
>
> If someone tells me how to build the tests, I am willing to further debug
> this. Otherwise, I will assume this is a test problem and ignore it.
>
>
> Joe
>-- End of excerpt from veach@caldera.com
Reply to: