Description of problem: qt4 fails some of the optional LSB 3.1 tests. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): qt4-4.2.1-1 Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server release 5.1 (Tikanga) How reproducible: 100% Steps to Reproduce: 1. wget http://ftp.linux-foundation.org/pub/lsb/bundles/released-3.1.1/dist-testkit/lsb-dist-testkit-3.1.1-5.ia32.tar.gz 2. tar zxvf lsb-dist-testkit-3.1.1-5.ia32.tar.gz 3. lsb-dist-testkit/install.sh 4. /opt/lsb/test/manager/autotest-ext/lsb-tef.pl --lsb=3.1 libchk_qt4 Actual results: libQtGui.so.4 6305 Failed Messages from the test Did not find _ZTI11QBmpHandler () in libQtGui.so.4 Comment: Test Purpose Comment: _ZTI11QBmpHandler () libQtGui.so.4 6326 Failed Messages from the test Did not find _ZTI11QPngHandler () in libQtGui.so.4 Comment: Test Purpose Comment: _ZTI11QPngHandler () libQtGui.so.4 6327 Failed Messages from the test Did not find _ZTI11QPpmHandler () in libQtGui.so.4 Comment: Test Purpose Comment: _ZTI11QPpmHandler () libQtGui.so.4 6340 Failed Messages from the test Did not find _ZTI11QXbmHandler () in libQtGui.so.4 Comment: Test Purpose Comment: _ZTI11QXbmHandler () Expected results: No failures. Additional info: Output from the test (on RHEL 5.2 snapshot 2) is attached.
Created attachment 301916 [details] test output
The maintainter will be back on Monday. Querying exception flag for now.
This request was evaluated by Red Hat Product Management for inclusion, but this component is not scheduled to be updated in the current Red Hat Enterprise Linux release. If you would like this request to be reviewed for the next minor release, ask your support representative to set the next rhel-x.y flag to "?".
Event posted on 11-12-2009 05:56am EST by Glen Johnson ------- Comment From mbeeraka.com 2009-11-12 05:53 EDT------- Hi, Ran the libchk_qt4 tests on RHEL5.4GA i386 machine and noticed some minor failures as below: Tests executed Certification Tests Static Interface Tests Library Check v 3.1.1-3 Failures: 8 Passed: 14251 Also Attaching the results tar ball. Thanks Muni This event sent from IssueTracker by jkachuck issue 172305
Event posted on 11-12-2009 05:56am EST by Glen Johnson File uploaded: ia32-x445-2009-11-12-13h-12m-24s.bz2 This event sent from IssueTracker by jkachuck issue 172305 it_file 273155
Event posted on 11-12-2009 06:17am EST by Glen Johnson ------- Comment From iranna.ankad.com 2009-11-12 06:06 EDT------- (In reply to comment #39) > Hi, > > Ran the libchk_qt4 tests on RHEL5.4GA i386 machine and noticed some minor > failures as below: > > Tests executed > Certification Tests > Static Interface Tests > Library Check v 3.1.1-3 Failures: 8 Passed: 14251 > > Also Attaching the results tar ball. > > Thanks > Muni Good to see the no. of failures reduced to 8 (from original report of 22). @Muni: I guess, you used LSB3.1 test suite. Could you please try with LSB3.2 ? Thanks! This event sent from IssueTracker by jkachuck issue 172305
Event posted on 11-12-2009 06:34am EST by Glen Johnson ------- Comment From iranna.ankad.com 2009-11-12 06:28 EDT------- (In reply to comment #42) > Good to see the no. of failures reduced to 8 (from original report of 22). > @Muni: I guess, you used LSB3.1 test suite. Could you please try with LSB3.2 ? > > Thanks! Got to know from below LSB link that RHEL5.x supports only LSB 3.1 certification. https://www.linuxfoundation.org/lsb-cert/productdir.php?by_prod So, rerunning test with LSB3.2 suite is NOT required. However coming back to the 8 failures reported with LSB3.1 (on RHEL5.4GA), we observe all of them are actually warning failures not the real test case failures. @Red Hat: Please refer the results attachment (test_log.html) & let us know if you agree whether these are OK to ignore kind of failures. Thanks! This event sent from IssueTracker by jkachuck issue 172305
The engineer for qt here at Red Hat checked the test_log.html and verified that the warning are OK from our side. Additionally the 22 failures for QT-4 really boil down to a documented bug from the LSB-3.1 test suite which were fixed in the LSB-3.2 release. For more information see here: http://bugs.linuxbase.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1173 http://bugs.linuxbase.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1801 http://bugs.linuxbase.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1796 http://www.linuxfoundation.org/en/ReleaseNotes32 I'm therefore closing this as NOTABUG. Thanks & regards, Phil