libexplain-users Mailing List for libexplain
Status: Alpha
Brought to you by:
pmiller
Menu
▾
▴
libexplain-users — Discussion on the use of libexplain by coders
You can subscribe to this list here.
| 2009 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
(1) |
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
(2) |
Aug
(3) |
Sep
|
Oct
(2) |
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2012 |
Jan
(3) |
Feb
|
Mar
(1) |
Apr
(1) |
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2013 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
(1) |
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2014 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
(1) |
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2016 |
Jan
(1) |
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
|
From: Fernando T. <fer...@gl...> - 2016-01-13 19:17:17
|
Hello, Is there a way to disable a set of libraries when compiling? For example, I would like to disable *libacl* support because I rather not install the whole package and its dependencies in the destination machine. Thank you! |
|
From: Jakub C. <jc...@re...> - 2014-06-23 07:53:53
|
Hello,
I have encountered build/test failures during build on up mentioned
architectures in
Fedora(https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1111453).
I have looked in to it and found a cause and I fixed it. In
attachment is patch fixing problems I have encountered. It should apply
cleanly. Patch changes the preprocesor macros. Adding missing
constants(fnctl.h), fix to #ifndef(ustat.h) and disabling sysctl related
stuff on aarch64(enfile.c and listen.c). If you are interested in these
changes fell free to pick them up.
I hope this is the right place to post this.
Best Regards
Jakub Čajka
|
|
From: Eric S. <bro...@fe...> - 2013-06-04 17:02:02
|
I'm updating the Fedora libexplain package to 1.2, and get a test failure for test t0555a: ATH=`pwd`/bin:$PATH /bin/sh test/05/t0555a.sh 1,2c1,2 < getpgid(pid = 666) failed, No such process (ESRCH) because the pid process < does not exist --- > getpgid(pid = 666 "accounts-daemon") failed, No such process (ESRCH) > because the pid process does not exist FAILED test of getpgid ESRCH In case it's relevant, when the test was run, the PID of accounts-daemon was 647. For now I've disabled this test in the Fedora package. Best regards, Eric |
|
From: Dagobert M. <da...@op...> - 2012-04-26 12:52:15
|
Hi, I have some problems compiling the latest version on Solaris 9 Sparc with Sun Studio. This patch makes it compile: http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gar/browser/csw/mgar/pkg/libexplain/trunk/files/0001-Solaris-fixes.patch?rev=17880 However, some things should better be checked during configure time instead of just disabling it. In detail the following problems occurred: - SHM_REMAP is not known on Solaris 9 - In the datastructure ipc_perm the members are named "key" and "seq" instead of "__key" and "__seq" - Although Solaris does have /usr/include/sys/shm.h there is no structure shm_info defined (but shminfo) - The shminfo structure does not contain members named "shmmin", "shmseg" and "shmall" - SHM_INFO is not defined on Solaris It would be nice if you could detect this in the next release. Best regards -- Dago -- "You don't become great by trying to be great, you become great by wanting to do something, and then doing it so hard that you become great in the process." - xkcd #896 |
|
From: Eric S. <er...@br...> - 2012-03-11 06:19:25
|
Building libexplain locally passes all of the tests, but when I build the Fedora package on a koji build server, test t0524a fails, possibly due to running in a chroot environment: PATH=`pwd`/bin:$PATH /bin/sh test/05/t0524a.sh 2,3c2,3 < because there is no "abc" directory in the current directory; the tempnam < system call is dangerous, a more secure alternative should be used --- > because there is no "abc" directory in the pathname "/tmp" directory; the > tempnam system call is dangerous, a more secure alternative should be used FAILED test of tempnam ENOTDIR make: *** [t0524a] Error 1 Currently I have the Fedora spec set up to exclude that test. Is this something that could be fixed in libexplain, or should I just continue excluding that test? Thanks! Eric |
|
From: Eric S. <er...@br...> - 2012-01-22 23:25:08
|
Thanks for the update; libexplain 0.50 builds successfully on F16 and F17. I did have to disable test t0524a, which fails when build in the koji build system, possibly due to being in a somewhat minimal chroot environment. The log shows: PATH=`pwd`/bin:$PATH /bin/sh test/05/t0524a.sh 2,3c2,3 < because there is no "abc" directory in the current directory; the tempnam < system call is dangerous, a more secure alternative should be used --- > because there is no "abc" directory in the pathname "/tmp" directory; the > tempnam system call is dangerous, a more secure alternative should be used FAILED test of tempnam ENOTDIR |
|
From: Peter M. <pet...@gm...> - 2012-01-16 08:18:55
|
On Sun, 2012-01-15 at 03:44 -0800, Eric Smith wrote: > libexplain/buffer/errno/lseek.c:60:32: error: '_PC_MIN_HOLE_SIZE' > libexplain/buffer/blk_user_trace_setup.c:39:29: error: 'BLK_TC_BARRIER' There is a new release of the website, with fixes for these two problems. -- Peter Miller <pet...@gm...> |
|
From: Eric S. <er...@br...> - 2012-01-15 12:04:24
|
Once again, stable APIs aren't. On Fedora 16, I get the error: libexplain/buffer/errno/lseek.c: In function 'holes_are_not_supported': libexplain/buffer/errno/lseek.c:60:32: error: '_PC_MIN_HOLE_SIZE' undeclared (first use in this function) Sure enough, on my F16 system _PC_MIN_HOLE_SIZE doesn't seem to be defined in any header under /usr/include. Apparently BLK_TC_BARRIER went away in a recent kernel change. On Fedora 17 (in development), I get the error: libexplain/buffer/blk_user_trace_setup.c: In function 'explain_buffer_blktrace_mask': libexplain/buffer/blk_user_trace_setup.c:39:29: error: 'BLK_TC_BARRIER' undeclared (first use in this function) Best regards, Eric |
|
From: Peter M. <pm...@op...> - 2011-10-09 08:28:08
|
> > From: Eric Smith <er...@br...> > > I'm updating the Fedora package for libexplain to 0.47.D001. There were > > a bunch of tests that failed for me previously that now work. However, > > there are three new failures reported: > > > > PATH=`pwd`/bin:$PATH /bin/sh test/04/t0461a.sh > > 1,2c1,3 > > < kill(pid = 42, sig = 3200) failed, Invalid argument (EINVAL) because the > > < sig argument was incorrectly specified > > --- > > > kill(pid = 42 "exe (readlink: Permission denied)", sig = 3200) failed, > > > Invalid argument (EINVAL) because the sig argument was incorrectly > > > specified > > FAILED test of kill EINVAL > > > > > > PATH=`pwd`/bin:$PATH /bin/sh test/04/t0462a.sh > > 1,3c1,4 > > < kill(pid = 42, sig = SIGTERM) failed, Operation not permitted (EPERM) > > < because the process does not have permission to send the signal to any of > > < the target processes, and the process is not privileged > > --- > > > kill(pid = 42 "exe (readlink: Permission denied)", sig = SIGTERM) failed, > > > Operation not permitted (EPERM) because the process does not have > > > permission to send the signal to any of the target processes, and the > > > process is not privileged > > FAILED test of kill EPERM > > > > > > PATH=`pwd`/bin:$PATH /bin/sh test/04/t0463a.sh > > 1,2c1,2 > > < kill(pid = 42, sig = SIGKILL) failed, No such process (ESRCH) because the > > < pid process does not exist > > --- > > > kill(pid = 42 "exe (readlink: Permission denied)", sig = SIGKILL) failed, > > > No such process (ESRCH) because the pid process does not exist > > FAILED test of kill ESRCH This is caused by process 42 existing. I'll improve the test scripts to cope with this. > > What does the extra "exe (readlink: Permission denied)" signify? It means that when lsof(1) attempted to read the name of the executable, it couldn't. The process ID is supplemented with the name of the executable, when available. I wish lsof(1) had said nothing, rather than said this. I'll add code to detected and discard this useless result. > > Could > > that have something to do with the tests being run in a chroot > > environment? With earlier versions of libexplain and Fedora I had 23 > > other tests fail seemingly due to the lack of /etc/mtab in the chroot, > > but those tests are all passing now. |
|
From: Peter M. <pm...@op...> - 2011-10-09 08:10:43
|
|
From: Dagobert M. <da...@op...> - 2011-08-13 17:18:15
|
Hi Peter, Am 13.08.2011 um 12:54 schrieb Peter Miller: > On Fri, 2011-08-12 at 23:50 +0200, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: >> I have now a build of libexplain 0.45.D002 but several tests are failing: >> http://buildfarm.opencsw.org/~dam/libexplain-testsuite.log >> >> Is there some more porting required? > > Is lsof available for Solaris 9? Some errors relate to information > unavailable without lsof, lsof is installed, but does not work as the Solaris 9 sparc instance is a branded local zone and lsof needs access to /dev/kmem not granted to local zones. > when a test expects "the current directory" > but sees "pathname /tmp/blahblah directory" instead (and similar). The > messages are still accurate, just not what the tests expect. Some tests > make provision for two answers, maybe more could. Is this really the same? Shouldn't two platforms give the same answers or is the determination of the current directory different on Solaris? > Alternatively, they could test for lsof, and auto-pass without it. This wouldn't help as I want to build with lsof support. If the libexplain package is installed on a native Solaris 9 machine it should use lsof, just the tests on a Solaris 9 branded zone within Solaris 10 or a local Solaris 10 zone can not use lsof. So, better would be to cleanly handle a dysfunctional lsof. > The "fmt: bad width: 0" error messages are a mystery, tho. Something like this is called: > + fmt -w700 test.out.4 > fmt: bad width: 0 You could either try the Solaris fmt as fmt -w 700 test.out.4 or try to detect a GNU fmt which we also have on OpenCSW: gfmt -w700 test.out.4 Did you get my email about the Solaris 9 images? Best regards -- Dago |
|
From: Peter M. <pet...@gm...> - 2011-08-13 10:54:45
|
On Fri, 2011-08-12 at 23:50 +0200, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > I have now a build of libexplain 0.45.D002 but several tests are failing: > http://buildfarm.opencsw.org/~dam/libexplain-testsuite.log > > Is there some more porting required? Is lsof available for Solaris 9? Some errors relate to information unavailable without lsof, when a test expects "the current directory" but sees "pathname /tmp/blahblah directory" instead (and similar). The messages are still accurate, just not what the tests expect. Some tests make provision for two answers, maybe more could. Alternatively, they could test for lsof, and auto-pass without it. The "fmt: bad width: 0" error messages are a mystery, tho. -- Peter Miller <pet...@gm...> |
|
From: Dagobert M. <da...@op...> - 2011-08-12 21:51:02
|
Hi, I have now a build of libexplain 0.45.D002 but several tests are failing: http://buildfarm.opencsw.org/~dam/libexplain-testsuite.log Is there some more porting required? Best regards -- Dago -- "You don't become great by trying to be great, you become great by wanting to do something, and then doing it so hard that you become great in the process." - xkcd #896 |
|
From: Peter M. <pet...@gm...> - 2011-07-13 07:21:35
|
On Tue, 2011-07-12 at 16:38 +0200, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > I noticed on > http://libexplain.sourceforge.net/ > the link to the PDF is broken as this is not found: > http://libexplain.sourceforge.net/lca2010/lca2010.pdf OK. Bug in web site update script, will be fixed when next release (soon). > BTW, are the sources available somewhere in GIT or something? If yes, a link > on the webpage would be useful. Yes, using Aegis. Links at bottom of web page. Will be more obvious after website updates for next release. -- Peter Miller <pet...@gm...> |
|
From: Dagobert M. <da...@op...> - 2011-07-12 14:57:23
|
Hi, I noticed on http://libexplain.sourceforge.net/ the link to the PDF is broken as this is not found: http://libexplain.sourceforge.net/lca2010/lca2010.pdf BTW, are the sources available somewhere in GIT or something? If yes, a link on the webpage would be useful. Best regards -- Dago -- "You don't become great by trying to be great, you become great by wanting to do something, and then doing it so hard that you become great in the process." - xkcd #896 |
|
From: Peter M. <pm...@op...> - 2009-05-17 14:14:01
|
Making sure the list is up. -- Regards Peter Miller <pm...@op...> /\/\* http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~millerp/ PGP public key ID: 1024D/D0EDB64D fingerprint = AD0A C5DF C426 4F03 5D53 2BDB 18D8 A4E2 D0ED B64D See http://www.keyserver.net or any PGP keyserver for public key. |
