C de-Avillez wrote:
On Wed, 2009-08-12 at 23:06 +0200, Jim Meyering wrote:
C de-Avillez wrote:
Yet another one, on check-root. I am starting to wonder if this may be a
problem with my setup, since nobody has reported errors on tail.
FAIL: tail-2/append-only (exit: 1)
Jim Meyering wrote:
C de-Avillez wrote:
FAIL: tail-2/append-only (exit: 1)
==
...
+ chattr +a f
+ echo x
+ test 1 = 0
+ fail=0
+ sleep 1
+ pid=29813
+ tail --pid=29813 -f f
+ fail=1
What type of file system is that? (i.e., run this: df -hT .)
I
Pádraig Brady wrote:
Jim Meyering wrote:
C de-Avillez wrote:
FAIL: tail-2/append-only (exit: 1)
==
...
+ chattr +a f
+ echo x
+ test 1 = 0
+ fail=0
+ sleep 1
+ pid=29813
+ tail --pid=29813 -f f
+ fail=1
What type of file system is that? (i.e., run
On Sun, 2009-08-16 at 13:22 +0100, Pádraig Brady wrote:
Jim Meyering wrote:
C de-Avillez wrote:
FAIL: tail-2/append-only (exit: 1)
==
...
+ chattr +a f
+ echo x
+ test 1 = 0
+ fail=0
+ sleep 1
+ pid=29813
+ tail --pid=29813 -f f
+ fail=1
Pádraig Brady wrote:
I was wondering about printing the warning,
and was wary about now silently not preserving symlink times.
I.E. being silently inconsistent. I guess it's better
to be quiet in this case? That also means I can
reinstate the mv/part-symlink test on systems without
Jim Meyering jim at meyering.net writes:
AFAIK, I am the only one who has built the latest snapshot:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.coreutils.bugs/17604
Though it's been only two days.
Unless I hear of new bug reports or portability problems soon,
expect coreutils-7.5 to
Eric Blake wrote:
Jim Meyering jim at meyering.net writes:
AFAIK, I am the only one who has built the latest snapshot:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.coreutils.bugs/17604
Though it's been only two days.
Unless I hear of new bug reports or portability problems soon,
expect
Jim Meyering jim at meyering.net writes:
In that case, the configure-time check for is-an-ELF-system
must be failing on cygwin:
No:
configure:43745: checking whether this is an ELF system
configure:43761: result: no
But there might be some missing holes where 'make check' tries to build
Eric Blake wrote:
Jim Meyering jim at meyering.net writes:
In that case, the configure-time check for is-an-ELF-system
must be failing on cygwin:
No:
configure:43745: checking whether this is an ELF system
configure:43761: result: no
But there might be some missing holes where 'make
Eric Blake ebb9 at byu.net writes:
The test is still running.
misc/stdbuf hangs (cygwin still has some fifo issues that might be at play, but
more importantly, dd appears to be stuck trying to write to a fifo that never
gets filled because stdbuf isn't working). I had to kill two different
Eric Blake wrote:
Eric Blake ebb9 at byu.net writes:
The test is still running.
misc/stdbuf hangs (cygwin still has some fifo issues that might be at play,
but
That should not run if stdbuf is not built.
Here's a patch:
From 6c077c1633e31c36d17253ee7c946b47791dfd8e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
Eric Blake ebb9 at byu.net writes:
The test is still running.
The final list of failures on cygwin 1.7 (I'll need to investigate further, and
still want to rerun this under pristine conditions. I'm not even going to
bother running this under cygwin 1.5.x):
FAIL: misc/invalid-opt
FAIL:
Pádraig Brady wrote:
Jim Meyering wrote:
AFAIK, I am the only one who has built the latest snapshot:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.coreutils.bugs/17604
Though it's been only two days.
Unless I hear of new bug reports or portability problems soon,
expect coreutils-7.5 to be
Pádraig Brady wrote:
Pádraig Brady wrote:
C de-Avillez wrote:
Sorry for the delay, got busy. I just built make check, and got two
errors.
First one is here, I will re-run the second error by itself in a few.
Running on Ubuntu 9.10 (kernel 2.6.31.5 with Ubuntu mods, libc6
Pádraig Brady wrote:
While I'm at it here's a patch to
improve that test.
cheers,
Pádraig.
From c720e160a96b813a7c24c5ac8a9a9a37590f4190 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: =?utf-8?q?P=C3=A1draig=20Brady?= p...@draigbrady.com
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 19:46:27 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] tests: improve
Jim Meyering wrote:
Pádraig Brady wrote:
Subject: [PATCH] tail: fix tail -f failure when inotify used
* src/tail.c (tail_inotify_forever): Use the correct bounds
in the error check of the return from inotify_add_watch().
Reported by C de-Avillez.
---
src/tail.c |2 +-
1 files
Pádraig Brady wrote:
Jim Meyering wrote:
Pádraig Brady wrote:
Subject: [PATCH] tail: fix tail -f failure when inotify used
* src/tail.c (tail_inotify_forever): Use the correct bounds
in the error check of the return from inotify_add_watch().
Reported by C de-Avillez.
---
src/tail.c |
Pádraig Brady wrote:
Pádraig Brady wrote:
Jim Meyering wrote:
AFAIK, I am the only one who has built the latest snapshot:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.coreutils.bugs/17604
Though it's been only two days.
Unless I hear of new bug reports or portability problems soon,
expect
Jim Meyering wrote:
Pádraig Brady wrote:
These highlighted a couple of issues I think on systems without utimensat().
1. The symlink _target_ gets its time updated
2. If 1 fails then the process returns a failure
I've fixed both in the attached patch hopefully
by only doing the explicit
AFAIK, I am the only one who has built the latest snapshot:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.coreutils.bugs/17604
Though it's been only two days.
Unless I hear of new bug reports or portability problems soon,
expect coreutils-7.5 to be released in the next few days.
Hi Jim,
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 12:42:59PM +0200, Jim Meyering wrote:
AFAIK, I am the only one who has built the latest snapshot:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.coreutils.bugs/17604
Though it's been only two days.
Unless I hear of new bug reports or portability problems
Erik Auerswald wrote:
Hi Jim,
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 12:42:59PM +0200, Jim Meyering wrote:
AFAIK, I am the only one who has built the latest snapshot:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.coreutils.bugs/17604
Though it's been only two days.
Unless I hear of new bug reports or
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009, Jim Meyering wrote:
AFAIK, I am the only one who has built the latest snapshot:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.coreutils.bugs/17604
Though it's been only two days.
Unless I hear of new bug reports or portability problems soon,
expect coreutils-7.5 to be
Jim Meyering wrote:
AFAIK, I am the only one who has built the latest snapshot:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.coreutils.bugs/17604
Though it's been only two days.
Unless I hear of new bug reports or portability problems soon,
expect coreutils-7.5 to be released in the next
Pádraig Brady wrote:
Jim Meyering wrote:
AFAIK, I am the only one who has built the latest snapshot:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.coreutils.bugs/17604
Though it's been only two days.
Unless I hear of new bug reports or portability problems soon,
expect coreutils-7.5 to be
Jim Meyering wrote:
Thanks for the testing and report!
Are these new failures? If they are, it might be worth fixing.
Otherwise, FC5 is so old that I won't worry.
Reverting the symlink timestamp patch make the tests pass
$ wget -q -O- 'http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/'\
On Wed, 2009-08-12 at 14:54 +0200, Jim Meyering wrote:
Are these new failures? If they are, it might be worth fixing.
Otherwise, FC5 is so old that I won't worry.
Sorry for the delay, got busy. I just built make check, and got two
errors.
First one is here, I will re-run the second error
C de-Avillez wrote:
Sorry for the delay, got busy. I just built make check, and got two
errors.
First one is here, I will re-run the second error by itself in a few.
Running on Ubuntu 9.10 (kernel 2.6.31.5 with Ubuntu mods, libc6
2.10.1-0ubuntu6).
FAIL: tail-2/pid
+ tail
On Wed, 2009-08-12 at 17:15 +0100, Pádraig Brady wrote:
I'd better try and pay attention in this meeting ;)
Heh. Please let me help you get distracted ;-)
Second error, also on tail:
FAIL: tail-2/pid (exit: 1)
==
+ tail --version
tail (GNU coreutils) 7.4.115-c9c92
Yet another one, on check-root. I am starting to wonder if this may be a
problem with my setup, since nobody has reported errors on tail.
FAIL: tail-2/append-only (exit: 1)
==
+ tail --version
tail (GNU coreutils) 7.4.115-c9c92
Copyright (C) 2009 Free Software
Pádraig Brady wrote:
C de-Avillez wrote:
Sorry for the delay, got busy. I just built make check, and got two
errors.
First one is here, I will re-run the second error by itself in a few.
Running on Ubuntu 9.10 (kernel 2.6.31.5 with Ubuntu mods, libc6
2.10.1-0ubuntu6).
FAIL: tail-2/pid
On Wed, 2009-08-12 at 20:22 +0100, Pádraig Brady wrote:
While I'm at it here's a patch to
improve that test.
Thanks, Pádraig. Building testing right now both of them on the
snapshot; then on git.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On Wed, 2009-08-12 at 20:22 +0100, Pádraig Brady wrote:
While I'm at it here's a patch to
improve that test.
cheers,
Pádraig.
OK. Both tests now succeed on the snapshot. I will apply them to git now
(where I also had the same error).
Cheers,
..C..
signature.asc
Description: This is a
C de-Avillez wrote:
Yet another one, on check-root. I am starting to wonder if this may be a
problem with my setup, since nobody has reported errors on tail.
FAIL: tail-2/append-only (exit: 1)
==
Thanks for the reports.
How did you run those tests?
When I do
On Wed, 2009-08-12 at 23:06 +0200, Jim Meyering wrote:
C de-Avillez wrote:
Yet another one, on check-root. I am starting to wonder if this may be a
problem with my setup, since nobody has reported errors on tail.
FAIL: tail-2/append-only (exit: 1)
==
35 matches
Mail list logo
