GNU bug report logs - #26253
Coreutils 8.26 test failure on arm-linux-gnueabihf

Previous Next

Full log

Message #24 received at 26253 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)
To: Pádraig Brady <P <at> draigBrady.com>
Cc: 26253 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: tests/misc/cut-huge-range.sh fails on arm-linux-gnueabihf
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2017 15:41:23 +0200

Hi Pádraig,

We found that ‘tests/misc/cut-huge-range.sh’ would fail on our ARMv7
GNU/Linux machines:

  https://bugs.gnu.org/26253

(I noticed there’s a thinko in the patch I used for Guix: ‘getconf
PAGESIZE’ returns bytes whereas ‘ulimit -v’ expects kibibytes).

The reason for this failure is that the limit passed to ‘ulimit -v’
would be slightly too low, even after Coreutils commit
28803c8a3144d5d4363cdbd148bbe067af1a67c2 (2004 KiB before and 3004KiB
after this commit.)

Part of the reason, I think, is that ‘vm’ is computed by simply running
‘cut -b1’:

  vm=$(get_min_ulimit_v_ cut -b1 /dev/null) \
    || skip_ "this shell lacks ulimit support"

… but the last couple of tests also run sh within that limit:

  # Explicitly disallow values above CUT_MAX
  (ulimit -v $vm && returns_ 1 cut -b$SIZE_MAX /dev/null 2>/dev/null) || fail=1
  (ulimit -v $vm && returns_ 1 cut -b$SIZE_OFLOW /dev/null 2>/dev/null) || fail=1

It might be more accurate to do something like:

  vm=$(get_min_ulimit_v_ sh -c 'cut -b1 /dev/null')

However it still seems easy to slightly underestimate the limit and get
those spurious failures.

Thoughts?

Ludo’.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.