Catching up. (I let stuff pile up preparing for the release and then took a couple days off, and now I'm at texas linuxfest doing sleep deprived talk prep for tomorrow...)
On 4/8/24 15:28, enh via Toybox wrote: > A (presumably overloaded) CI server saw the `exit 0` test time out. > Given that several of these tests should just fail immediately, > having a huge timeout isn't even a bad thing --- if we had a bug > that caused us to report the correct status, but not until the > timeout had _also_ expired, this would make that failure glaringly > obvious. > > Aren't the other tests with 0.1s timeouts potentially flaky? Yes, > obviously, but I'll worry about those if/when we see them in real > life? (Because increasing those timeouts _would_ increase overall > test time.) Yes it should never happen, but 11 minutes seems like a footgun. I bumped it up to 1 second (10 times as long as before). If you see it again I can bump it to 5 seconds, but much beyond 1 second and the "timeout -v .1 sleep 3" test later on gets flaky, as does: toyonly testcmd "-i" \ "-i 1 sh -c 'for i in .25 .50 2; do sleep \$i; echo hello; done'" \ "hello\nhello\n" "" "" Rob _______________________________________________ Toybox mailing list Toybox@lists.landley.net http://lists.landley.net/listinfo.cgi/toybox-landley.net