On Tuesday 09 October 2007 17:03, Carsten Menke wrote:
> Carsten Menke wrote:
> > Dan Langille wrote:
> >> On 4 Oct 2007 at 11:37, Kern Sibbald wrote:
> >>> Could each of the regression testers please test the code for version
> >>> 2.2.5?
>
> I've uploaded the results, the output is 4,2 MB so I uploaded it as a
> textfile and as a compressed version which has 160 K
>
> http://prozesse-im-unternehmen.de/opensource/debug/bacula-debug.txt
> http://prozesse-im-unternehmen.de/opensource/debug/bacula-debug.txt.bz2

It looks to me like the weird files tests are failing because of some sorting 
or time differences.  Only a careful inspection of the output files that are 
being compared can determine what is happening -- on a quick look, it appears 
to be a false alert.

However, the hard-link test is really failing, which is not a good sign.  One 
would have to take a more careful look at why the restore failed to 
understand the problem.  This looks like a real problem.

Regards,

Kern

>
> I've done the tests with ./do_all
>
> Regards
>
> Carsten

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/
_______________________________________________
Bacula-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-devel

Reply via email to