Re: [bug-inetutils] Re: [PATCH] Inetd and test scripts

[Alfred M. Szmidt]

   >> > On the contrary, GNU/Linux was so quick to proceed that the test failed.
   >> > Again, robustness and predictable behaviour.
   >> 
   >> Then we have a problem.  Under load, on a slower (virtual) CPU, etc., 1s
   >> may not be enough.
   >
   > I had the race condition on Debian GNU/Linux testing/Squeeze with a
   > processor Pentium III 800 MHz. Newer hardware is less likely. There
   > was so far no race condition with OpenBSD on Pentium M, 1.73 MHz!

   What I meant is that we need actual synchronization.

The proper fix is to make inetd work, as a stop gap measure using
sleep to work around a race condition is I think a good enough fix.
Would you like to fix inetd to pop into background properly?

   > NixOS is unknown territory for me, but I aim at all POSIX systems,

   NixOS is just another GNU/Linux distribution; the difference, which
   makes it a demanding test environment, is that tools are installed in
   “unusual” locations.  So any tool that’s not explicitly listed as a
   dependency is effectively unavailable, as is the case with ‘netstat’.

NixOS is a very good canditate to filter out weirdo problems, so we
should fix thouse if they pop up.

   For the record Inetutils also gets built on FreeBSD and Darwin here:

     http://hydra.nixos.org/jobset/gnu/inetutils-master

   Currently it fails to build on both, but apparently progress has been
   made lately.  :-)

That is good to hear!