GNU bug report logs - #27431
Acl test investigation

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 27431 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 27431 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Kei Kebreau <kei <at> openmailbox.org>
To: guix-patches <at> gnu.org
Subject: Acl test investigation
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2017 12:37:55 -0400

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

I discovered that the Acl tests are failing partly because the coreutils
seemingly aren't compiled with Acl support before the tests are run
(even though acl is an input to coreutils). The tests are written with
the assumption that the coreutils are built with Acl support. An example
is in the sbits-restore.test file, where a sed command is expecting to
remove an Acl bit from ls output, but instead removes normal directory
permission information.

Any ideas on how to resolve this without disabling the Acl tests?

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #8 received at 27431 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)
To: Kei Kebreau <kei <at> openmailbox.org>
Cc: 27431 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#27431] Acl test investigation
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2017 22:19:09 +0200

Hello Kei,

Kei Kebreau <kei <at> openmailbox.org> skribis:

> I discovered that the Acl tests are failing partly because the coreutils
> seemingly aren't compiled with Acl support before the tests are run
> (even though acl is an input to coreutils). The tests are written with
> the assumption that the coreutils are built with Acl support. An example
> is in the sbits-restore.test file, where a sed command is expecting to
> remove an Acl bit from ls output, but instead removes normal directory
> permission information.
>
> Any ideas on how to resolve this without disabling the Acl tests?

Could you give a bit more context?  On which branch does this failure
happen?

If the unit tests of the ‘acl’ package check the output of ‘ls’, then
there’s a circular dependency issue between Coreutils and ACL.  I would
argue that it’s up to Coreutils to test its ‘ls’ command, but in the
meantime, we could patch ACL to skip its ‘ls’ test.

Is this what you were asking?  :-)

Ludo’.

Message #13 received at 27431-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Kei Kebreau <kei <at> openmailbox.org>
To: 27431-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#27431] Acl test investigation
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2017 15:45:09 -0400

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Kei Kebreau <kei <at> openmailbox.org> writes:

> I discovered that the Acl tests are failing partly because the coreutils
> seemingly aren't compiled with Acl support before the tests are run
> (even though acl is an input to coreutils). The tests are written with
> the assumption that the coreutils are built with Acl support. An example
> is in the sbits-restore.test file, where a sed command is expecting to
> remove an Acl bit from ls output, but instead removes normal directory
> permission information.
>
> Any ideas on how to resolve this without disabling the Acl tests?

Wrong mailing list...

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Previous Next

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