On 20 Feb 2014, at 13:57, Sven Van Caekenberghe <[email protected]> wrote:

> 
> On 20 Feb 2014, at 13:32, Camillo Bruni <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> This test is really fragile... If you look at the code you'll see that
>> it has already been patched to cope with some defects under linux.
>> 
>> - Maybe one try is to increase the wait time?
>> - make sure the fork happens at higher priority than the surrounding thread
>> - skip it :P
> 
> Someone should make a choice…

I vote for skipping it for now


Reply via email to