Jim Meyering wrote: > Pádraig Brady wrote: >> I just noticed the test was skipped in this report also: >> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2009-12/msg00031.html >> >> So the approach I've taken is to mark this test as experimental for now. >> I.E. it won't be run unless we explicitly enable it. >> It's a nice test which hopefully we can use in future, >> but it's just too problematic at the moment. > > Thanks! > I don't object, but this would mean that I'd want to run with > RUN_EXPERIMENTAL_TESTS set in my environment to ensure that this test > doesn't bit rot -- or tail regress. It does pass for me on most of > the systems on which I test regularly.
Yes I had it as a "very expensive" test first. I'll change it back to that and push. cheers, Pádraig.
