bug-coreutils archive search

21. Re: new coreutils snapshot; are they useful? (score: 1)

Author: HIDDEN

Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 18:25:30 +0100

Thanks for the feedback. I'll remove the colons.

/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2007-02/msg00098.html (5,737 bytes)

22. Re: new coreutils snapshot; are they useful? (score: 1)

Author: HIDDEN

Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 19:41:06 +0100

Jim Meyering wrote on 14-02-07 14:48: Last night I made another coreutils snapshot: http://meyering.net/cu/coreutils-6.7-dirty.tar.gz http://meyering.net/cu/coreutils-6.7-dirty.tar.gz.sig aka http://

/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2007-02/msg00100.html (10,246 bytes)

23. Re: new coreutils snapshot; are they useful? (score: 1)

Author: HIDDEN

Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 20:20:06 +0100

Le Wed, 14 Feb 2007 14:48:08 +0100, Jim Meyering disait : On my debian system, the automake package is only at version 1.9.6 and not 1.10 as requested. Anyway I modified the incriminated line in the

/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2007-02/msg00103.html (6,461 bytes)

24. Re: new coreutils snapshot; are they useful? (score: 1)

Author: HIDDEN

Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 20:27:31 +0100

Thanks! Ah ha! That might be a test bug. I'll investigate. Personally (on principle), I never build or even run "make check" as root. Rather, I use the special target that runs only the root-only tes

/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2007-02/msg00104.html (7,760 bytes)

25. Re: new coreutils snapshot; are they useful? (score: 1)

Author: HIDDEN

Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 21:51:29 +0100

One problem is that pre-1.10 can end up using a race-prone MKDIR_P. I'm sure there are other specific reasons, but can't name others off the top of my head. There may be subtle portability problems.

/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2007-02/msg00105.html (6,395 bytes)

26. Re: new coreutils snapshot; are they useful? (score: 1)

Author: HIDDEN

Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 16:34:37 -0600

http://meyering.net/cu/coreutils-6.7-dirty.tar.gz http://meyering.net/cu/coreutils-6.7-dirty.tar.gz.sig aka http://meyering.net/cu/coreutils-6.7-ss-2007-02-14.00:04:10+0.tar.gz http://meyering.net/cu

/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2007-02/msg00120.html (7,719 bytes)

27. Re: new coreutils snapshot; are they useful? (score: 1)

Author: HIDDEN

Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 13:38:01 -0600

Matthew Woehlke wrote: [blah blah] it built clean, which is an improvement over last time when as you'll recall I had problems with the strstr declaration. I'll be pleasantly surprised if it passes '

/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2007-02/msg00122.html (7,458 bytes)

28. Re: new coreutils snapshot; are they useful? (score: 1)

Author: HIDDEN

Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 18:03:21 +0100

To build and run "make check" using various writable directories on file systems of different types, do this: for d in $dir_list; do ( cd $d && $cu_srcdir/configure && make && make check ) done

/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2007-02/msg00126.html (6,047 bytes)

29. Re: new coreutils snapshot; are they useful? (score: 1)

Author: HIDDEN

Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 10:20:52 -0600

Jim Meyering wrote: Matthew Woehlke wrote: might be useful to have some way to run the test suite in a different directory, so that it is easy to run once on NFS and once on local. In particular I re

/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2007-02/msg00144.html (7,025 bytes)

30. one last snapshot before test release (score: 1)

Author: HIDDEN

Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 00:14:59 +0100

I've made another snapshot: http://meyering.net/cu/coreutils-6.7-dirty.tar.gz http://meyering.net/cu/coreutils-6.7-dirty.tar.gz.sig Please give it a try and report anything strange. I expect to make

/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2007-02/msg00148.html (5,550 bytes)

31. Re: one last snapshot before test release (score: 1)

Author: HIDDEN

Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 19:15:16 -0600

http://meyering.net/cu/coreutils-6.7-dirty.tar.gz http://meyering.net/cu/coreutils-6.7-dirty.tar.gz.sig Please give it a try and report anything strange. I expect to make a test release tomorrow. 'ma

/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2007-02/msg00151.html (6,892 bytes)

32. Re: one last snapshot before test release (score: 1)

Author: HIDDEN

Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 08:58:45 +0100

Thanks for the quick feedback. That's fall-out from some of the recent gnulib changes in that area. Here's the fix I've just committed: * lib/gettimeofday.c (rpl_gettimeofday): Remove declaration of

/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2007-02/msg00154.html (7,772 bytes)

33. Re: one last snapshot before test release (score: 1)

Author: HIDDEN

Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 09:31:28 +0100

I'm still expecting to make the coreutils test release today, but have made one more snapshot due to some last-minute porting changes. Same URLs (but different i-nodes): http://meyering.net/cu/coreut

/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2007-02/msg00156.html (7,698 bytes)

34. Re: one last snapshot before test release (score: 1)

Author: HIDDEN

Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 10:09:44 -0600

Jim Meyering wrote: Matthew Woehlke <address@hidden> wrote: Jim Meyering wrote: I've made another snapshot: http://meyering.net/cu/coreutils-6.7-dirty.tar.gz http://meyering.net/cu/coreutils-6.7-dirt

/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2007-02/msg00161.html (8,226 bytes)

35. Re: one last snapshot before test release (score: 1)

Author: HIDDEN

Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 10:19:27 -0600

Ok, this was my only failure on IRIX: Can't locate Data/Dumper.pm in @INC (@INC contains: ./.. /usr/share/lib/perl5/irix-n32/5.00405 /usr/share/lib/perl5 /usr/share/lib/perl5/site_perl/irix-n32 /usr/

/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2007-02/msg00162.html (7,465 bytes)

36. Re: one last snapshot before test release (score: 1)

Author: HIDDEN

Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 17:26:22 +0100

I don't remember if 5.004 is supposed to have that. In any case, that script doesn't even use Data::Dumper, so I've removed it. Thanks.

/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2007-02/msg00163.html (7,465 bytes)

37. Re: one last snapshot before test release (score: 1)

Author: HIDDEN

Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 16:03:41 -0600

http://meyering.net/cu/coreutils-6.7-dirty.tar.gz http://meyering.net/cu/coreutils-6.7-dirty.tar.gz.sig Please give it a try and report anything strange. I expect to make a test release tomorrow. Hoo

/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2007-02/msg00167.html (8,576 bytes)

38. Re: one last snapshot before test release (score: 1)

Author: HIDDEN

Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 00:52:25 -0800

Does the test actually fail, or does it succeed while something is spewing out those messages?

/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2007-02/msg00174.html (7,352 bytes)

39. Re: one last snapshot before test release (score: 1)

Author: HIDDEN

Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 10:02:50 -0600

Paul Eggert wrote: Matthew Woehlke <address@hidden> writes: Hooboy. sort-compress failed spectacularly on OSF. From the errors (lots of "task_create() failed for pid 12044: maxuprc (=64) exceeded for

/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2007-02/msg00178.html (8,387 bytes)

40. Re: one last snapshot before test release (score: 1)

Author: HIDDEN

Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 20:11:47 +0100

Yes, please. Also, what version of OSF? I see failures on OSF V4.0 1229, but none involving sort. These are the ones that fail for me: chown/preserve-root readlink/can-e readlink/can-f readlink/can-m

/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2007-02/msg00200.html (8,444 bytes)