[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#16231: [PATCH 0/9] Refactored loop fixes
From: |
Brian C. Lane |
Subject: |
bug#16231: [PATCH 0/9] Refactored loop fixes |
Date: |
Thu, 8 May 2014 08:22:22 -0700 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) |
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 09:32:45PM -0400, Phillip Susi wrote:
> On 05/07/2014 06:49 PM, Brian C. Lane wrote:
> > NAK. These make a pile of the tests fail:
> >
> > ========================================== GNU parted 3.1:
> > tests/test-suite.log ========================================== #
> > TOTAL: 77 # PASS: 27 # SKIP: 35 # XFAIL: 0 # FAIL: 15 # XPASS:
> > 0 # ERROR: 0 .. contents:: :depth: 2
> >
> > looks like at least one core dump in the mix.
>
> Something weird is going on.. as I mentioned before, I get that odd
> gnulib error after the first 3 sector size passes in a make check that
> seems to be a bug in the build scripts, but the first three all pass:
>
> ============================================================================
> Testsuite summary for GNU parted 3.1.98-c457
> ============================================================================
> # TOTAL: 77
> # PASS: 63
> # SKIP: 13
> # XFAIL: 1
> # FAIL: 0
> # XPASS: 0
> # ERROR: 0
>
> make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/psusi/parted'
> GEN public-submodule-commit
> Stopping at 'gnulib'; script returned non-zero status.
> maint.mk: found non-public submodule commit
> make: *** [public-submodule-commit] Error 1
>
> And then I manually run make check-recursive to get the 512 byte
> sector size:
>
> ============================================================================
> Testsuite summary for GNU parted 3.1.98-c457
> ============================================================================
> # TOTAL: 77
> # PASS: 75
> # SKIP: 1
> # XFAIL: 1
> # FAIL: 0
> # XPASS: 0
> # ERROR: 0
> ============================================================================
>
> Can you look into why/what fails on your system? I also notice yours
> says version 3.1 while mine is 3.1.98-c457. Did you check out 3.1
> instead of master and then not run bootstrap/configure after applying
> the patches?
That's weird (and troubling that the tests wouldn't fail the same). I
applied them to my fedora-21 branch and ran them via a mockbuild as a
first level test. My branch is only different from master by those few
test fixup patches that I sent a few weeks ago.
I'll take a deeper look at it when I get a chance, maybe not until
Monday.
--
Brian C. Lane | Anaconda Team | IRC: bcl #anaconda | Port Orchard, WA (PST8PDT)
- bug#16231: [PATCH 9/9] tests: test loop labels, (continued)
- bug#16231: [PATCH 9/9] tests: test loop labels, Phillip Susi, 2014/05/02
- bug#16231: [PATCH 3/9] libparted: remove all old partitions, even if new label allows less, Phillip Susi, 2014/05/02
- bug#16231: [PATCH 1/9] libparted: don't detect fat and ntfs boot sectors as dos MBR, Phillip Susi, 2014/05/02
- bug#16231: [PATCH 6/9] partprobe: do not skip loop labels, Phillip Susi, 2014/05/02
- bug#16231: [PATCH 7/9] libparted: give correct partition device name on loop labels, Phillip Susi, 2014/05/02
- bug#16231: [PATCH 5/9] libparted: don't create partition on loop label, Phillip Susi, 2014/05/02
- bug#16231: [PATCH 8/9] libparted: don't trash filesystem when writing loop label, Phillip Susi, 2014/05/02
- bug#16231: [PATCH 4/9] libparted: fix loop labels to not vanish, Phillip Susi, 2014/05/02
- bug#16231: [PATCH 0/9] Refactored loop fixes, Brian C. Lane, 2014/05/07
- bug#16231: [PATCH 0/9] Refactored loop fixes, Phillip Susi, 2014/05/07
- bug#16231: [PATCH 0/9] Refactored loop fixes,
Brian C. Lane <=
- bug#16231: [PATCH 0/9] Refactored loop fixes, Phillip Susi, 2014/05/19
- bug#16231: [PATCH 0/9] Refactored loop fixes, Brian C. Lane, 2014/05/21
- bug#16231: [PATCH 0/9] Refactored loop fixes, Phillip Susi, 2014/05/22
- bug#16231: [PATCH 0/9] Refactored loop fixes, Brian C. Lane, 2014/05/22
- bug#16231: [PATCH 0/9] Refactored loop fixes, Phillip Susi, 2014/05/22