--- Begin Message ---
|
Subject: |
Coreutils 8.26 test failure on arm-linux-gnueabihf |
|
Date: |
Sat, 25 Mar 2017 16:45:33 +0100 |
|
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1 (gnu/linux) |
In current ‘core-updates’ (7fdca77e007f0838ecd32b044827678f2b345ff0),
tests/misc/cut-huge-range.sh in Coreutils 8.26 fails reproducibly in the
chroot build environment; it succeeds outside of it.
When it fails, cut-huge-range.log shows this:
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
+ CUT_MAX=4294967294
+ ulimit -v 3004
+ cut -b4294967294- /dev/null
+ ulimit -v 3004
+ cut -b1-4294967294 /dev/null
+ ulimit -v 3004
+ returns_ 1 cut -b4294967295 /dev/null
+ fail=1
+ ulimit -v 3004
+ returns_ 1 cut -b4294967296 /dev/null
+ fail=1
+ compare /dev/null err
+ compare_dev_null_ /dev/null err
+ test 2 = 2
+ test x/dev/null = x/dev/null
+ test -s err
+ return 0
+ return 0
+ Exit 1
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
So the two lines that fail are these:
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
# Explicitly disallow values above CUT_MAX
(ulimit -v $vm && returns_ 1 cut -b$SIZE_MAX /dev/null 2>/dev/null) || fail=1
(ulimit -v $vm && returns_ 1 cut -b$SIZE_OFLOW /dev/null 2>/dev/null) || fail=1
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
I don’t understand why at this point, but I found that removing
“2>/dev/null” from these two lines lets the test pass (and AIUI, this
redirection is not necessary for the test; it just hides the
cut: byte/character offset '4294967296' is too large
error message.)
I’ve tried to reduce the test case to facilitate debugging, to no
avail.
To be continued!
Ludo’.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
|
Subject: |
Re: bug#26253: tests/misc/cut-huge-range.sh fails on arm-linux-gnueabihf |
|
Date: |
Mon, 27 Mar 2017 21:30:09 -0700 |
|
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 |
On 27/03/17 02:18, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Hi Pádraig,
>
> Pádraig Brady <address@hidden> skribis:
>
>> On 26/03/17 06:41, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>>> Part of the reason, I think, is that ‘vm’ is computed by simply running
>>> ‘cut -b1’:
>>>
>>> vm=$(get_min_ulimit_v_ cut -b1 /dev/null) \
>>> || skip_ "this shell lacks ulimit support"
>>>
>>> … but the last couple of tests also run sh within that limit:
>>
>> Are you saying the returns_ call induces a subshell?
>> I suppose it might on some shells, though it doesn't seem to on bash 4.3
>> here.
>
> I don’t think ‘return_’ spawns a subshell, but the ulimit should account
> for memory needed by the shell in addition to what ‘cut’ needs.
>
>>> # Explicitly disallow values above CUT_MAX
>>> (ulimit -v $vm && returns_ 1 cut -b$SIZE_MAX /dev/null 2>/dev/null) ||
>>> fail=1
>>> (ulimit -v $vm && returns_ 1 cut -b$SIZE_OFLOW /dev/null 2>/dev/null) ||
>>> fail=1
>>>
>>> It might be more accurate to do something like:
>>>
>>> vm=$(get_min_ulimit_v_ sh -c 'cut -b1 /dev/null')
>>
>> That give 10004 rather than 5004 on my x86_64 system here.
>> Another option might be to use:
>> vm=$(get_min_ulimit_v_ returns_ 0 cut -b1 /dev/null)
>>
>> Does that give better results for you?
>
> Yes the patch below on top of 8.26 (that is, without vm += 1000) works
> for me.
>
> Thanks,
> Ludo’.
Pushed in your name at:
http://git.sv.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=coreutils.git;a=commitdiff;h=f542200
Marking this as done.
cheers,
Pádraig
--- End Message ---