Re: Testsuite failure in (unprivileged) user namespace

Hi Collin, Collin Funk writes: > Ludovic Courtès writes: > >>> I am only a relatively new user of guix, so I can't speak for which >>> approach would be preferable from their perspective. I CC'ed Ludovic >>> since he implemented the unprivileged guix daemon approach. >> >> I’m not sure how ‘mod

Re: Testsuite failure in (unprivileged) user namespace

Collin Funk writes: > I think something like this would work: > > gl_CONDITIONAL([IS_OVERFLOW_GID], >[test `cat /proc/sys/kernel/overflowgid` = `id -G | sed > 's/ /\n/g' | awk '{ if (NR == 2) print }'`]) > > Let me see if I can figure out how to set up a guix vm. Unfortu

Re: Testsuite failure in (unprivileged) user namespace

Thanks for jumping in, Collin. > In the file 'modules/test-xfail' there is a few conditionals similar to > this: > > gl_CONDITIONAL([OS_IS_NETBSD], >[case "$host_os" in netbsd*) true ;; *) false ;; esac]) > > Then in 'cat modules/sigprocmask-tests', for example, we have:

Re: Testsuite failure in (unprivileged) user namespace

Hi Ludovic, Ludovic Courtès writes: >> I am only a relatively new user of guix, so I can't speak for which >> approach would be preferable from their perspective. I CC'ed Ludovic >> since he implemented the unprivileged guix daemon approach. > > I’m not sure how ‘modules/test-xfail’ is supposed

Re: Testsuite failure in (unprivileged) user namespace

Hi Bruno and all, keinflue writes: >> Instead, how about >> a) if you just ignore the test failures — since you know you are >> running them in a very special environment, or >> b) we can mark these 3 tests as expected test failures if you >> provide an identifier to mark them with

Re: Testsuite failure in (unprivileged) user namespace

keinflue wrote: > eecd8afd696055cf39ef934208724bfe850c5760 already made similar > platform-specific adjustments for macOS, hence my suggestion. That commit - cared about an ssh login on macOS, which is a quite common situation, - did not require understanding non-POSIX concepts about groups.

Re: Testsuite failure in (unprivileged) user namespace

On 03.05.2025 19:08, Bruno Haible wrote: Hi, I think the test cases should remove the overflow gid (ideally the actual value obtained from /proc/sys/fs/overflowgid) from the obtained list of gids before further processing. No, I don't think it makes sense to add complexities to this test that

Re: Testsuite failure in (unprivileged) user namespace

Hi, > I think the test cases should remove the overflow gid (ideally the > actual value obtained from /proc/sys/fs/overflowgid) from the obtained > list of gids before further processing. No, I don't think it makes sense to add complexities to this test that are 1. specific to Linux, and 2. har

Re: Testsuite failure in (unprivileged) user namespace

Correction: I meant /proc/sys/kernel/overflowgid instead of /proc/sys/fs/overflowgid. I think these two can be modified independently even if they have the same default value. On 03.05.2025 15:38, keinflue wrote: Hello, noticed this on guix (https://issues.guix.gnu.org/77862#5) when building

Testsuite failure in (unprivileged) user namespace

Hello, noticed this on guix (https://issues.guix.gnu.org/77862#5) when building coreutils 9.1. Some of the gnulib test cases may fail for this package in test-chown.h and test-lchown.h when building in an unprivileged user namespace on Linux: FAIL: test-chown test-chown.