Re: Bug#917143: t-coffee autopkgtest regression
On Mon, Feb 04, 2019 at 07:35:12PM +0100, Liubov Chuprikova wrote: > > > > Excellent! I think we need some goblet for the most active Outreachy / > > GSoC remainer (=beeing most active after the internship endet) and you > > are my favourite candidate for this praise! ;-) > > Ahah, thank you, Andreas! You are welcome. > > In any case you deserve a $DRINK at dinner on our sprint for your > > activity. > > Yehey! It happened that I had missed the opportunity to get a $drink in > September [1], so I am happy to get it now! :-) That's not missed. You get two (at least) ;-) See you Andreas. > [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-med/2018/09/msg0.html -- http://fam-tille.de
Re: Bug#917143: t-coffee autopkgtest regression
On Mon, 4 Feb 2019 at 11:32, Andreas Tille wrote: > On Mon, Feb 04, 2019 at 11:05:36AM +0100, Liubov Chuprikova wrote: > > > > I have just pushed a fix of this! The problem was with two processes > > competing for the same temporary file, as the tempfile names were defined > > static. > > Excellent! I think we need some goblet for the most active Outreachy / > GSoC remainer (=beeing most active after the internship endet) and you > are my favourite candidate for this praise! ;-) > Ahah, thank you, Andreas! > In any case you deserve a $DRINK at dinner on our sprint for your > activity. > Yehey! It happened that I had missed the opportunity to get a $drink in September [1], so I am happy to get it now! :-) __ Liubov [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-med/2018/09/msg0.html
Re: Bug#917143: t-coffee autopkgtest regression
On Mon, Feb 04, 2019 at 11:05:36AM +0100, Liubov Chuprikova wrote: > > I have just pushed a fix of this! The problem was with two processes > competing for the same temporary file, as the tempfile names were defined > static. Excellent! I think we need some goblet for the most active Outreachy / GSoC remainer (=beeing most active after the internship endet) and you are my favourite candidate for this praise! ;-) In any case you deserve a $DRINK at dinner on our sprint for your activity. Thanks a lot Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de
Re: Bug#917143: t-coffee autopkgtest regression
Hi Andreas, On Sun, 27 Jan 2019 at 16:23, Andreas Tille wrote: > Control: tags -1 help upstream > Control: forwarded -1 https://github.com/cbcrg/tcoffee/issues/13 > > Hi Liubov, > > On Sun, Jan 27, 2019 at 04:06:51PM +0100, Liubov Chuprikova wrote: > > I was trying to figure out the reason for the failure but without any > > success. It appeared that the error is reproducible with the upstream's > > source version, so I have just opened an issue [1] to inform the upstream > > about this bug. > > > > [1] https://github.com/cbcrg/tcoffee/issues/13 > > Thanks a lot, > > Andreas. > I have just pushed a fix of this! The problem was with two processes competing for the same temporary file, as the tempfile names were defined static. With regards, Liubov
Re: Bug#917143: t-coffee autopkgtest regression
Control: tags -1 help upstream Control: forwarded -1 https://github.com/cbcrg/tcoffee/issues/13 Hi Liubov, On Sun, Jan 27, 2019 at 04:06:51PM +0100, Liubov Chuprikova wrote: > I was trying to figure out the reason for the failure but without any > success. It appeared that the error is reproducible with the upstream's > source version, so I have just opened an issue [1] to inform the upstream > about this bug. > > [1] https://github.com/cbcrg/tcoffee/issues/13 Thanks a lot, Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de
Bug#917143: t-coffee autopkgtest regression
Hi, I was trying to figure out the reason for the failure but without any success. It appeared that the error is reproducible with the upstream's source version, so I have just opened an issue [1] to inform the upstream about this bug. [1] https://github.com/cbcrg/tcoffee/issues/13 With regards, Liubov
