bug-gnulib
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: test results on NetBSD 7.0


From: Paul Eggert
Subject: Re: test results on NetBSD 7.0
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2017 16:50:47 -0700
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.1

Bruno Haible wrote:
Test results of a Gnulib POSIX testdir on NetBSD 7.0:

Thanks for doing that. Although I don't know about the math problems, here are thoughts on the file-related issues.

FAIL: test-futimens
===================

../../gltests/test-futimens.h:154: assertion 'ctime_compare (&st3, &st2) < 0' 
failed
FAIL test-futimens (exit status: 134)>
> ...
FAIL: test-utimens
==================

../../gltests/test-utimens.h:130: assertion 'ctime_compare (&st3, &st2) < 0' 
failed
FAIL test-utimens (exit status: 134)

These two appear to because futimens and utimens are not properly marking the ctime for update after they change a file timestamp. If I'm right, it's a NetBSD bug that Gnulib cannot easily work around. It's just a guess, though.

FAIL: test-utimensat
====================

../../gltests/test-utimens.h:71: assertion 'func (BASE "file", ts) == -1' failed
FAIL test-utimensat (exit status: 134)

This appears to be because utimensat is not failing with errno==EINVAL for tv_nsec values less than 0 or greater than 999999999 (and not UTIME_OMIT or UTIME_NOW). If I'm right it's a NetBSD bug that Gnulib could work around though this is low priority. It's just a guess, though.


FAIL: test-renameat
===================

../../gltests/test-rename.h:525: assertion 'stat (BASE "file", &st) == 0' failed
FAIL test-renameat (exit status: 134)

FAIL: test-renameat2
====================

These appear to be because Gnulib tests are too strict about renameat. They should allow the NetBSD behavior, because it's better than the behavior that POSIX requires. I installed the first attached patch to try to fix this.

While looking into the utimensat problem I noticed a portability glitch that is unrelated to these NetBSD issues, and fixed that in the second attached patch. It's probably just theoretical.

Attachment: 0001-rename-document-test-NetBSD-rename.patch
Description: Text Data

Attachment: 0002-futimens-don-t-assume-struct-timespec-layout.patch
Description: Text Data


reply via email to

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