On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Branko Čibej <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 21.01.2014 02:18, Branko Čibej wrote: > > On 21.01.2014 01:55, Branko Čibej wrote: > >> I've added a test case to testdir.c to exercise this code in parallel. > > r1559873, original patch (with slightly tweaked comments) and test case. > > Bert, can you please double-check that this works on Windows? > > Also r1559878 (1.5.x) and r1559879 (1.4.x). > > -- Brane > > I see intermittent failures testing the 1.5.x branch on Linux (4 cores, 8 threads) after picking up your new testcase. The two variations seen the most are testdir : |Line 84: expected <0>, but saw <2> testdir : \Line 87: expected <0>, but saw <2> I've also seen a single failure at line 85 as well as this one that needs to be recovered from manually: testdir : -Line 199: expected <0>, but saw <39> (39 is "Directory not empty") Current state as of the unrecoverable failure: $ find data/prll/ data/prll/ data/prll/11 data/prll/11/12 data/prll/11/12/13 data/prll/11/12/13/14 data/prll/11/12/13/14/15data data/prll/11/12/13/14/15data/prll data/prll/11/12/13/14/15data/prll/11 data/prll/11/12/13/14/15data/prll/11/12 I didn't see a failure on Windows (2 virtualized processors). --- Also, can you add a CHANGES entry in the 1.4.x and 1.5.x branches? -- Born in Roswell... married an alien... http://emptyhammock.com/
