[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: new snapshot available: coreutils-8.20.113-1f1f4

From: Pádraig Brady
Subject: Re: new snapshot available: coreutils-8.20.113-1f1f4
Date: Sat, 09 Feb 2013 04:52:52 +0000
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120615 Thunderbird/13.0.1

On 02/08/2013 05:09 PM, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
On February 8, 2013 at 5:30 PM "Pádraig Brady" <address@hidden> wrote:
On 02/08/2013 02:53 PM, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
On February 7, 2013 at 8:57 PM "Pádraig Brady" <address@hidden> wrote:
* SLES-10.3 (i586):
    gcc (GCC) 4.1.2 20070115 (SUSE Linux)

    FAIL: tests/tail-2/
          NFS issue during cleanup_
          reproduced: 2x out of 2 tries.

If you put a "wait" before the "Exit" at the end of that test, does it help.
As a less desirable solution we could put require_local_dir_ at the top
of this test.

Unfortunately not:

I think I see what's happening.  With /bin/sh -> bash,
bash will create a redundant subshell for the : && timeout ... construct.
I.E. this prints bash rather than timeout:

  : && timeout 5 sleep 1 & readlink /proc/$!/exe

So if you had dash installed, this would probably work:

make check SHELL=dash TESTS="tests/tail-2/" \

The reason the subshell causes an issue is that it won't
auto send the SIGHUP to timeout when it gets a SIGTERM
as it's a non interactive script, and so the timeout
processes and thus the tail processes accessing the files
hang around until the 40s timeout.

In any case the attached should avoid the subshell
and hopefully fix the issue.

BTW I found a related signal race in bash when looking at this,
where it will ignore the SIGTERM before it execs the background
command, but I'm fairly sure we're not hitting this here
and so will only send details of that to the bash list.

Why do we need this in remove_tmp_ ()?

   # If removal fails and exit status was to be 0, then change it to 1.
   rm -rf "$test_dir_" || { test $__st = 0 && __st=1; }

I think that's fine. It's indicating the error which
we would have missed otherwise.
Maybe it should call framework_failure_ or something,
rather than set __st=1, but that's a minor detail.


Attachment: inotify-rotate-nfs.patch
Description: Text Data

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]