On the dev (x104) system, running as root - testbuckets succeeds; rerunning on x054, as root, testbuckets also succeeds.
So, only testxlate is (still) standing in the way. On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 5:42 PM, Michael Felt <[email protected]> wrote: > cut/paste killed the "command" > > $ ./testall -x testxlate testbuckets > > > On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 5:41 PM, Michael Felt <[email protected]> wrote: > >> michael@x054:[/data/prj/apr/apr-util-1.4.1/test]stxlate >> testbuckets < >> teststrmatch : SUCCESS >> testuri : SUCCESS >> testuuid : SUCCESS >> testpass : SUCCESS >> testmd4 : SUCCESS >> testmd5 : SUCCESS >> testcrypto : SUCCESS >> testdbd : SUCCESS >> >> testdate : SUCCESS >> testmemcache : SUCCESS >> testxml : SUCCESS >> testrmm : SUCCESS >> testdbm : SUCCESS >> testqueue : SUCCESS >> testreslist : SUCCESS >> All tests passed. >> >> michael@x054:[/data/prj/apr/apr-util-1.4.1/test]stxlate >> testbuckets < >> teststrmatch : SUCCESS >> testuri : SUCCESS >> testuuid : SUCCESS >> testpass : SUCCESS >> testmd4 : SUCCESS >> testmd5 : SUCCESS >> testcrypto : SUCCESS >> testdbd : SUCCESS >> >> testdate : SUCCESS >> testmemcache : SUCCESS >> testxml : SUCCESS >> testrmm : SUCCESS >> testdbm : SUCCESS >> testqueue : SUCCESS >> testreslist : SUCCESS >> All tests passed. >> >> So testxlate and testbuckets fail on a "user" system, no dev stuff >> installed. >> >> If I get different results on the dev server I'll update. >> >> >> >> On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 5:34 PM, Michael Felt <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> if testdbd is first, seems to have passed, but I shall try the -x option >>> as soon as I get the development server turned on again. >>> >>> If it is happening elsewhere, then maybe it is not just IBM's way of >>> doing iconv. >>> >>> It looks like a segmentation error after a pipe call to /bin/sh. I was >>> thinking, once I know where to look, to do the iconv command manually >>> and/or as a regular script and see if that tells me/i.e., you, anything >>> useful to determine the cause. >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Guenter Knauf <[email protected]>wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Michael, >>>> Am 20.09.2012 10:34, schrieb Guenter Knauf: >>>> >>>> Am 20.09.2012 08:53, schrieb Michael Felt: >>>>> >>>>>> Yes, unfortunately? or fortunately! >>>>>> >>>>> hehe, I would say fortunately since that makes it no regression and >>>>> therefore your issue might not be something to hold back 1.5.1 ;-) >>>>> >>>> of course this doesnt mean that we shouldnt look into it; BTW. this >>>> test fails on NetWare too, so seems its a bit picky, whatever ... >>>> best is that you exclude this test for now so that you can proceed with >>>> testing in order to see what else fails; testdbd did also fail, or? >>>> then try: >>>> aputest -x testdbd -x testxlate >>>> >>>> Gün. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >
