Le 2024-04-25 09:13, Miroslav Lichvar a écrit :
> On Wed, Apr 24, 2024 at 04:46:07PM +0200, Vincent Blut wrote:
> > The failing tests that initiated this thread are now fixed, however
> > 002-largenetwork
> > still fails though.
>
> I think that's the arm emulation being too slow and causing
On Wed, Apr 24, 2024 at 04:46:07PM +0200, Vincent Blut wrote:
> The failing tests that initiated this thread are now fixed, however
> 002-largenetwork
> still fails though.
I think that's the arm emulation being too slow and causing timeouts.
Try setting the CLKNETSIM_CONNECT_TIMEOUT environment
Le 2024-04-24 12:17, Miroslav Lichvar a écrit :
> On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 07:07:33PM +0200, Vincent Blut wrote:
> > Le 2024-04-18 17:19, Miroslav Lichvar a écrit :
> > > On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 04:06:54PM +0200, Vincent Blut wrote:
> > > > So after building clknetsim with these flags, the same
On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 07:07:33PM +0200, Vincent Blut wrote:
> Le 2024-04-18 17:19, Miroslav Lichvar a écrit :
> > On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 04:06:54PM +0200, Vincent Blut wrote:
> > > So after building clknetsim with these flags, the same tests are still
> > > failing (well I guess so because I
Le 2024-04-18 17:19, Miroslav Lichvar a écrit :
> On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 04:06:54PM +0200, Vincent Blut wrote:
> > > The log shows that clknetsim is not built with the -D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE
> > > -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -D_TIME_BITS=64 flags. It needs to use the same
> > > time_t as the chronyd
On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 04:06:54PM +0200, Vincent Blut wrote:
> > The log shows that clknetsim is not built with the -D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE
> > -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -D_TIME_BITS=64 flags. It needs to use the same
> > time_t as the chronyd binaries.
>
> So after building clknetsim with these flags,
Hi,
Le 2024-04-16 08:08, Miroslav Lichvar a écrit :
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 12:25:53AM +0200, Vincent Blut wrote:
> > I have yet to set up an armhf based environment to properly debug those
> > failures,
> > but the most likely cause seems to be the ongoing migration of our
> > 32-bits
On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 12:25:53AM +0200, Vincent Blut wrote:
> I have yet to set up an armhf based environment to properly debug those
> failures,
> but the most likely cause seems to be the ongoing migration of our
> 32-bits architectures to 64-bits time_t. If so, do you have an idea
> about
Hi Miroslav,
I'm experiencing some issues with 4 simulation tests¹ on the armel and armhf
architectures:
SUMMARY:
TOTAL 63
PASSED 59
FAILED 4(008-ntpera 115-cmdmontime 139-nts 145-rtc) (24508 24508 24508
24508)
SKIPPED 0 ()
I have yet to set up an armhf based environment to
