building GHC for "antique" OSX
Hello all, I'm one of those curmudgeons still working on OSX 10.5.8. Recently I finally got around to building the latest GHC and, FWIW, everything seems to have worked out fine. I did get a few failed tests in the testsuite though, and I'm curious what they mean or if they're actually cause for concern? OVERALL SUMMARY for test run started at Fri Dec 7 10:49:39 EST 2012 3402 total tests, which gave rise to 14436 test cases, of which 0 caused framework failures 11364 were skipped 2985 expected passes 47 had missing libraries 34 expected failures 0 unexpected passes 6 unexpected failures Unexpected failures: ../../libraries/directory/tests T4113 [bad stdout] (normal) concurrent/should_run conc070 [bad stdout or stderr] (ghci) ghci/should_run 3171 [bad stdout] (normal) perf/haddock haddock.Cabal [stat too good] (normal) perf/haddock haddock.base [stat too good] (normal) perf/haddock haddock.compiler [stat too good] (normal) -- Live well, ~wren
On Sun, Dec 09, 2012 at 05:45:17PM -0500, wren ng thornton wrote:
I'm one of those curmudgeons still working on OSX 10.5.8. Recently I finally got around to building the latest GHC and, FWIW, everything seems to have worked out fine. I did get a few failed tests in the testsuite though, and I'm curious what they mean or if they're actually cause for concern?
Unexpected failures: ../../libraries/directory/tests T4113 [bad stdout] (normal) concurrent/should_run conc070 [bad stdout or stderr] (ghci) ghci/should_run 3171 [bad stdout] (normal) perf/haddock haddock.Cabal [stat too good] (normal) perf/haddock haddock.base [stat too good] (normal) perf/haddock haddock.compiler [stat too good] (normal)
"stat too good" is definitely not a cause for concern. It just means that haddock's performance was better than expected. For the others, you'd have to look at why they failed (add TEST="T4113 conc070 3171" to the testsuite "make" command you ran if you want to rerun only those tests). Thanks Ian
participants (2)
-
Ian Lynagh -
wren ng thornton