bug#10427: bug#10437: parallel-tests: `recheck' recipe can cause sed to be invoked with too long input lines

On 01/05/2012 07:24 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > On 01/05/2012 07:06 PM, Paul Eggert wrote: >> On 01/05/12 06:07, Stefano Lattarini wrote: >>> Which "sort of thing" exactly? I could find only one place which suffers >>> of the problem you've pointed out, i.e., the `recheck recheck-html' rules >>

bug#10427: bug#10437: parallel-tests: `recheck' recipe can cause sed to be invoked with too long input lines

On 01/05/2012 07:06 PM, Paul Eggert wrote: > On 01/05/12 06:07, Stefano Lattarini wrote: >> Which "sort of thing" exactly? I could find only one place which suffers >> of the problem you've pointed out, i.e., the `recheck recheck-html' rules >> in lib/am/check.am. Am I missing something? > > Sor

bug#10427: parallel-tests: `recheck' recipe can cause sed to be invoked with too long input lines

On 01/05/12 06:07, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > Which "sort of thing" exactly? I could find only one place which suffers > of the problem you've pointed out, i.e., the `recheck recheck-html' rules > in lib/am/check.am. Am I missing something? Sorry, that appears to have been a miscount on my part:

bug#10427: bug#10437: parallel-tests: `recheck' recipe can cause sed to be invoked with too long input lines

f9c6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 Message-Id: From: Stefano Lattarini Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2012 15:13:30 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] parallel-tests: avoid issue with overly long lines in sed input See automake bug#10437: <http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=10437> and coreutils bug#10427:

bug#10427: parallel-tests: `recheck' recipe can cause sed to be invoked with too long input lines (was: Re: bug#10427: coreutils-8.14.116-1e18d: testsuite failures on NetBSD 5.1)

[adding bug-automake in CC:] Reference: Hi Paul, thanks for the report and diagnosis. On 01/05/2012 10:00 AM, Paul Eggert wrote: > The latest coreutils snapshot fail to build > >> On 01/03/2012 06:10 PM, Jim Meyering wrote: >>> FYI, here's

bug#8887: Automake patches for custom test drivers' support break coreutils testsuite (was: Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] parallel-tests: add auxiliary script 'pt-driver', refactor)

[Adding bug-coreutils] Reference: On Friday 17 June 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > I generally like the direction this is taking. The point of best > separation between which code goes into Makefile.in and which into > t

build: use Automake's new parallel-tests feature

FYI, here are 3 patches (just pushed) to - enable parallel tests via automake, now that it can (thanks again Ralf!) (rather than by enabling the parallelization via build-aux/check.mk) - likewise for colored "make check" FAIL/PASS (red/green) test results - change how automake&#x

Re: parallel-tests

Hi Jim, * Jim Meyering wrote on Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 02:40:59PM CET: > Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > this patch enables the use of Automake's parallel-tests instead of using > > check.mk (use the 'next' branch of git Automake). With it, coreutils > > make

Re: parallel-tests

Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > Hi Jim, > > this patch enables the use of Automake's parallel-tests instead of using > check.mk (use the 'next' branch of git Automake). With it, coreutils > make -jN check > > still passes, but distcheck fails, for reasons not yet ap

parallel-tests

Hi Jim, this patch enables the use of Automake's parallel-tests instead of using check.mk (use the 'next' branch of git Automake). With it, coreutils make -jN check still passes, but distcheck fails, for reasons not yet apparent to me. FAIL: mv/i-1 (exit: 255)