On October 28, 2019 10:52 AM, SZEDER Gábor wrote: > On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 10:15:31AM -0400, Randall S. Becker wrote: > > Here is the verbose output from subtest 2 that failed. Sorry it took > > so long, we had to arrange a different Jenkins job to test this in isolation. > > Format issue? > > > > Cheers, > > Randall > > > > expecting success of 0500.2 'progress display with total': > > cat >expect <<-\EOF && > > Working hard: 33% (1/3)<CR> > > Working hard: 66% (2/3)<CR> > > Working hard: 100% (3/3)<CR> > > Working hard: 100% (3/3), done. > > EOF > > > > cat >in <<-\EOF && > > progress 1 > > progress 2 > > progress 3 > > EOF > > test-tool progress --total=3 "Working hard" <in 2>stderr && > > > > show_cr <stderr >out && > > test_i18ncmp expect out > > > > + cat > > + 1> expect 0< /tmp/sh1811939370.4 > > Wow :) > > > + cat > > + 1> in 0< /tmp/sh1811939370.5 > > + test-tool progress --total=3 Working hard 0< in 2> stderr show_cr 0< > > + stderr 1> out > > Another wow. > > This is unrelated to the test failure, but makes me rather curious: > you run the test script with '-x', that's why we see the trace of commands > executed during the test. Interestingly, though, we don't see any trace of > commands executed within any shell function invoked in the test, i.e. from > show_cr above and test_i18ncmp below. > > What kind of shell is this? The test output requested by Johannes was to use -i -v -x. We use ksh and have for years to test git. The command used was done within a Jenkins environment and was: cd t && sh t0500-progress-display.sh -i -v -x > > > + test_i18ncmp expect out > > --- expect 2019-10-28 14:11:40 +0000 > > +++ out 2019-10-28 14:11:41 +0000 > > @@ -1,4 +1,2 @@ > > -Working hard: 33% (1/3)<CR> > > -Working hard: 66% (2/3)<CR> > > -Working hard: 100% (3/3)<CR> > > -Working hard: 100% (3/3), done. > > +Working hard: 0% (1/12884901888)<CR> > > +Working hard: 0% (3/12884901888), done. > > Weird, this looks exactly like the big-endian test failure that was fixed in > 2b6f6ea1bd (test-progress: fix test failures on big-endian systems, 2019-10- > 20), but that is already in 2.24.0-rc1 (but not yet in -rc0). > > https://public-inbox.org/git/f1ce445e-6954-8e7b-2dca- > 3a566ce689a5@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > Is NonStop big or little-endian? Does t0500 pass without 2b6f6ea1bd? NonStop is big-endian. When t0500 is run from an interactive terminal, it passes. This failure seems to be a result of being in a disconnected terminal situation typical of Jenkins, not that the test result makes any sense with that being the only difference. t0500 did not exist in 2.23.0, our last build, so I can't easily get that answer. Our Jenkins is based off the master branch, so it's a hard to revert in our pipeline without a serious amount of work - that and without 2b6f6ea1bd, other things break if I remember from August. Does the printf format use positional arguments (%digit$)? That has known issues on the platform. FYI: int/long are 32 bits, long long is 64 bits. 12884901888 is 0x300000000, surprisingly. > > error: last command exited with $?=1 > > not ok 2 - progress display with total > > # > > # cat >expect <<-\EOF && > > # Working hard: 33% (1/3)<CR> > > # Working hard: 66% (2/3)<CR> > > # Working hard: 100% (3/3)<CR> > > # Working hard: 100% (3/3), done. > > # EOF > > # > > # cat >in <<-\EOF && > > # progress 1 > > # progress 2 > > # progress 3 > > # EOF > > # test-tool progress --total=3 "Working hard" <in 2>stderr && > > # > > # show_cr <stderr >out && > > # test_i18ncmp expect out > > # > >
