From owner-freebsd-testing@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Dec 18 20:59:45 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-testing@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4F29715F for ; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 20:59:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qc0-f172.google.com (mail-qc0-f172.google.com [209.85.216.172]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 188A4225F for ; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 20:59:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qc0-f172.google.com with SMTP id m20so1528891qcx.17 for ; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 12:59:44 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=uu37QRaZV9Zx9ghxG4fL/Xd+RewebzC9dzQp3FtGsHs=; b=EBAP8VFyC5gpFOQ9s9wGyQV1VABW0KWv8BM9WAJNzJBlbZVtA8HoXZcjApeXUIVfMa GK4/SsUAtX8P4Rgq9S5JrfHH/uRbx88vE47yUiNEQVnEBvwpYtIMN+BMvOEsWB1jFmGb 3C1n6SExSvWSvXUkrALRzpn3WbN7SaWhJysKmUq3XSGYO1VvYG8UKL+5bHLCI5fucpFE crFUS3DlFygjyYy1faBpl4zkbIuZXI1uR3QxH+kZSj6094khL08cys84uppeW95mSwvw SHU7sdfF4Wwzf5imS2NmGR2kRJAIHdxK4aOJm4bbvE4i1WWP7fGCwDjqxXPhWwB8BWF1 dMNQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQn3vjSKw4h0ADVS4MCTzpwyRIMhrKsNjtt4ToQT5jwQuCB/Gn6YRth23nnx1Y7Zn++tsogo X-Received: by 10.140.40.51 with SMTP id w48mr7336666qgw.34.1418936384053; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 12:59:44 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: jmmv@meroh.net Received: by 10.96.154.4 with HTTP; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 12:59:23 -0800 (PST) X-Originating-IP: [2620:0:1003:1007:51a6:ae44:98bd:55f] In-Reply-To: References: From: Julio Merino Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2014 15:59:23 -0500 X-Google-Sender-Auth: LjJLKfPReilKTt7rUTQstfvIzYw Message-ID: Subject: Re: One kyua test failure in FreeBSD10.1 running on Hyper-V 2012R2 To: Craig Rodrigues Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: "freebsd-testing@freebsd.org" , "Andy Zhang \(AZURE\)" X-BeenThere: freebsd-testing@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Testing on FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2014 20:59:45 -0000 On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 4:29 PM, Craig Rodrigues wrote: > On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 4:10 AM, Andy Zhang (AZURE) > wrote: > >> >> - usr.bin/yacc/legacy_test:main >> >> >> >> > Andy, > > Thank you for taking the time to run the FreeBSD tests, and report > the results after running them in Hyper-V. Your input is valuable. > > I believe that the yacc test failures are known and have been reported in > our > bug system: > > https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193499 > > Unfortunately, the fix for this test did not make it into 10.1-RELEASE, > but should be available in newer FreeBSD versions. We should mark this test as an "expected failure". Unfortunately, this is currently not possible with the plain interface so the easiest way would be to wrap the test into an ATF test program. From owner-freebsd-testing@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Dec 18 21:13:39 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-testing@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4D1417D2 for ; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 21:13:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qc0-f174.google.com (mail-qc0-f174.google.com [209.85.216.174]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1340C264C for ; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 21:13:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qc0-f174.google.com with SMTP id c9so1536781qcz.33 for ; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 13:13:38 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=86biJhAbCQHsnLTrneyLYPcHOzzlmKW3wj9mMJY3r0E=; b=fF1CX+bjhyAjFoAbIgKNP2Ms8NXAnICMwRWrHllGgeVPxEeNBCU/iATjUZ75WT1rMH CphUZZQNcEIolgaKyq1BxM9LWhV8m0eN2lGSt/5gAFuAFZtwk9hJQx1vuymbORcJpSU2 za+2wiWjBjQYj+iPj5tbmfsOIp05ha3jcSLLibNwVMkQDezn5fou3l//6W/CO/MWZcq4 QUDkh7V+X10zYwKrqTeqw6kLEgWXDuB15gxfg5j2TSd67gEatqhu7QdTACTVW/Zn3j4m LhlgPJi3RhcW/Pkx2WK+4tRPOxM2bmTrCGKDoLf/T5i83MvjV5XvSoEKb1L3LeBySvJk 1y0Q== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnkHGV+B1o/YyK3WibCoQnbKjHojuWCr3Ne2+lYUJHDqDXrQSaNsFfZpRL7bVCbJgaLD8ev X-Received: by 10.224.95.67 with SMTP id c3mr7688550qan.3.1418937218183; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 13:13:38 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: jmmv@meroh.net Received: by 10.96.154.4 with HTTP; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 13:13:17 -0800 (PST) X-Originating-IP: [2620:0:1003:1007:51a6:ae44:98bd:55f] In-Reply-To: References: <20141016001543.GD1852@funkthat.com> <69C71414-AE05-4AC2-B07D-23F5569C9FCA@gmail.com> <20141016003822.GE1852@funkthat.com> From: Julio Merino Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2014 16:13:17 -0500 X-Google-Sender-Auth: lyEFBhPTYvoGZP3hE6LFjnaY5Dg Message-ID: Subject: Re: help on testing for FreeBSD... To: NGie Cooper Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: "freebsd-testing@freebsd.org" , John-Mark Gurney X-BeenThere: freebsd-testing@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Testing on FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2014 21:13:39 -0000 On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 8:46 PM, NGie Cooper wrote: > On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 5:38 PM, John-Mark Gurney wrote: >> Garrett Cooper wrote this message on Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 17:25 -0700: >>> - Why are they written in python? >> >> Because I'm too lazy to write code in C... I had already written >> framework code in Python, and C doesn't have a standard function to >> decode hex.. :) And error handling it much easier in python... > > I ask because we don't have a means for doing unittest level execution > right now and not being written in something that's in base or > installed automatically (perl for instance) would mean that your test > code wouldn't be run by default on jenkins runs. There are ways around this. pyUnit test programs are simple executables that return 0 on success and 1 on failure, so they can work with the "plain" interface of Kyua. We can then mark the test program as requiring python in the Kyuafile, just as we already do for some in-tree perl-based test programs. And then, we can tell whichever driver we are using to set up the test VMs to "pkg install python" right before running the test suite. We do this already, at least from autotest, to install perl and other required utilities. I'm sure we'd do the same for the Jenkins case. From owner-freebsd-testing@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Dec 18 21:26:47 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-testing@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 38AE1CE3 for ; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 21:26:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1FB4927EA for ; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 21:26:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bugs.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id sBILQktn092246 for ; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 21:26:46 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-testing@freebsd.org Subject: [Bug 194828] [test] lib.libc.sys.getcontext_test.setcontext_link fails on amd64, not i386 Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2014 21:26:47 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: bin X-Bugzilla-Version: 11.0-CURRENT X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Some People X-Bugzilla-Who: jmmv@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Status: Closed X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: ngie@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-testing@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Testing on FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2014 21:26:47 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=194828 --- Comment #19 from Julio Merino,+1 347 694 0576,New York City --- Just to clarify regarding: --- Older versions of ATF had gdb integration, but this might not be in kyua. Let me dig around a bit more and determine whether or not that's possible still... --- Kyua does have the same "GDB integration" that ATF had, namely that Kyua will automatically extract a stacktrace of any crashed test program and attach such stacktrace to the test report. Now... stacktrace gathering in FreeBSD was broken because the version of GDB in base is super-old and did not accept the command-line syntax that Kyua was expecting. This has been fixed in https://github.com/jmmv/kyua/commit/179b573ae639886c22809df77019e59e28055bca and will be part of Kyua 0.12. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. From owner-freebsd-testing@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Dec 18 22:22:58 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-testing@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8E747C52 for ; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 22:22:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ob0-x22d.google.com (mail-ob0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::22d]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 50515108C for ; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 22:22:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ob0-f173.google.com with SMTP id uy5so6480201obc.4 for ; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 14:22:57 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=X5igzBmmOkt7LL2ngXZhWLcGQ2y4lkDu6C2Akkkj4Fs=; b=JiuC0rKQnL06Jq03b5ToWpPrM9KPQCymJBWRg/pQbxxHR0juaHqWjOB8hZa42IT0H8 xP4CkGO4jCpGrEViQe46RXaSHooyiCGlUW9eqUvfKS0RMhzdr3cTT4k5VcQhsJQ2ERfY yrl19s+0Xydue8k0y4HPhHFZ1bZpXrYc9GwnoAYBGaXqBSOjTL4jC/U4d48h/PLqYx3T /scIu6h1MXtFv0g5USrSkMqo7AQxHuylcqwSc9iyv0jQiwVC3ukT37YKh8FNN4QiGMrQ GJYwE9wEexlGeN0S62K66tZLb7k0H7XvvaGRfYWGpRCr8A5yBNkHGIgHoqMsMoZXdr2W 4OBA== X-Received: by 10.42.78.208 with SMTP id o16mr4068738ick.41.1418941377690; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 14:22:57 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: carpeddiem@gmail.com Received: by 10.107.0.85 with HTTP; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 14:22:37 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: From: Ed Maste Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2014 17:22:37 -0500 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 4doJKYbEvRejBeEcAK0GVZt7bvQ Message-ID: Subject: Re: One kyua test failure in FreeBSD10.1 running on Hyper-V 2012R2 To: "Andy Zhang (AZURE)" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: "freebsd-testing@freebsd.org" X-BeenThere: freebsd-testing@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Testing on FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2014 22:22:58 -0000 Hi Andy, On 5 December 2014 at 07:10, Andy Zhang (AZURE) wrote: > Hello guys, > Our team are doing some development work on FreeBSD running on Hyper-V. Per Craig's suggestion, recently I tried "kyua test" in FreeBSD10.1 on Hyper-V 2012R2, only 1 case failed out of 2430 cases. Glad to hear you're running the regression tests on FreeBSD in Hyper-V. You might like to have a look at Peter Holm's "stress2" test suite as well. As the name implies it's a set of kernel stress tests. The README for the test suite can be found here: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/base/user/pho/stress2/README?view=markup A quick-start guide to giving it a try: % svnlite co svn://svn.freebsd.org/base/user/pho/stress2 % cd stress2 % make % sh run.sh Note that you may well run into bugs in stock FreeBSD. Either way the result should be useful in improving FreeBSD on Hyper-V. -Ed From owner-freebsd-testing@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Dec 19 15:30:27 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-testing@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4061E9E for ; Fri, 19 Dec 2014 15:30:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qg0-f48.google.com (mail-qg0-f48.google.com [209.85.192.48]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F037C2C7F for ; Fri, 19 Dec 2014 15:30:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qg0-f48.google.com with SMTP id f51so774379qge.21 for ; Fri, 19 Dec 2014 07:30:20 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=RpNjHEewIVv1sIXyUuLC+H4AsfwKf1ARDjOQvnGoSWI=; b=UWbgzWXza228Y8bhhGou6xbOlrdJ1Ao5pxqiEodHOSrnAR7Wh2U+q47c0/HFbxwMAl 7Lld6otXtYUYmstBW+Nh40gVRTDonwQ9c5PWZysDB/PyKD6EUKMgjwRZ4WW14Uyqzlw7 raicYacP6q5J4e1JdDW327S5u+464u7WZH3xeRSa41oqF67P2Qx9S9C5yhhUz/fti7Lm DK8D/OMCMGQExN+JSF63gr7cXSUe53LzNliLOlJy1/lvvzZOYczLnyOgZqTOjZa0cw2N vYgHIiLBdUvnMIznjanCbtwfkiHUtiYgDR7UjUwAEsdmggd2BV5dlFGVXPiMDQBkatNm Y4mg== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlIdBgkrP+7Vdee5CR4/1z6abpIf75gN86TVrHX2nttmGB7uEesbf3aWjaAaBrJKST7mrP8 X-Received: by 10.140.31.36 with SMTP id e33mr13861084qge.36.1419003019774; Fri, 19 Dec 2014 07:30:19 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: jmmv@meroh.net Received: by 10.96.154.4 with HTTP; Fri, 19 Dec 2014 07:29:59 -0800 (PST) X-Originating-IP: [2620:0:1003:1007:51a6:ae44:98bd:55f] In-Reply-To: References: From: Julio Merino Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 10:29:59 -0500 X-Google-Sender-Auth: X1JYSG2IdTF2fWyAOyne7N4oKkY Message-ID: Subject: Re: Deltas between FreeBSD and NetBSD and POSIX conformance (was "[Bug 194828] [test] lib.libc.sys.getcontext_test.setcontext_link fails on amd64, not i386") To: Garrett Cooper Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: "freebsd-testing@freebsd.org" X-BeenThere: freebsd-testing@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Testing on FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 15:30:27 -0000 On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 12:34 PM, Garrett Cooper wrote: > > On Nov 14, 2014, at 2:28, Justin Cormack wrote: > >> On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 7:35 AM, wrote: >>> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=194828 >>> >>> --- Comment #12 from Garrett Cooper,425-314-3911 --- >>> In a perfect world I would like for everything to be consistent between FreeBSD >>> and NetBSD, but that's not the way it should be, and that's a silly ideal to >>> hope for :). >> >> NetBSD dev here... I would rather that tests actually test behaviour >> as defined in standards, especially for eg libc tests, and indeed I >> have bunch of stuff to add more tests on standards compliance. So if >> stuff is testing implementation internals it should go away, and if >> NetBSDs behaviour is incorrect please file an issue, or if the test >> setup is not eg standards compliant please file an issue >> http://www.netbsd.org/cgi-bin/sendpr.cgi?gndb=netbsd That's a nice ideal... but in practice, the standard does sometimes leave details up to the implementation and/or the implementation provides custom extensions. Both need tests, and such tests will be implementation-dependent. So how could we deal with this? Tests for the standard should really be unified across both codebases, but there should be a way to supplement them with implementation-specific tests. Not sure what the best organization scheme for this would be, nor how we'd maintain the "common code". From owner-freebsd-testing@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Dec 19 15:30:41 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-testing@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1B25FBE for ; Fri, 19 Dec 2014 15:30:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 027A22C87 for ; Fri, 19 Dec 2014 15:30:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bugs.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id sBJFUeMD066905 for ; Fri, 19 Dec 2014 15:30:40 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-testing@freebsd.org Subject: [Bug 194828] [test] lib.libc.sys.getcontext_test.setcontext_link fails on amd64, not i386 Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 15:30:40 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: bin X-Bugzilla-Version: 11.0-CURRENT X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Some People X-Bugzilla-Who: jhb@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Status: Closed X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: ngie@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-testing@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Testing on FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 15:30:41 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=194828 --- Comment #20 from John Baldwin --- In this particular case the test case did not crash, so a stack trace would not have helped. What did help was to use gdb interactively to step through the test as it ran. I'm not sure if you really want a wrapper that basically does 'gdb --args ' (and that disabled the timeout checking), but that's effectively what I would want. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. From owner-freebsd-testing@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Dec 19 15:54:56 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-testing@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2C8F751B; Fri, 19 Dec 2014 15:54:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-yh0-x22d.google.com (mail-yh0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c01::22d]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D5DC31291; Fri, 19 Dec 2014 15:54:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-yh0-f45.google.com with SMTP id f10so506736yha.32; Fri, 19 Dec 2014 07:54:55 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=c8Oyjym55pf21vfCPyOgNEXWro+qoOPrO/Prdmpj8TY=; b=ZCGL13F424hvJ8V5Q0IcWM9238qxq4n+TPTMJ0j8xSStGhmONxab50j9ZNRbXiLAUN XwB8W7uu5sN/h01wH5+/xXNzDSzCaDNs4etbYPMnDG2geUkvToyD4LEYrkLFZCxoGMdT x1jEUQDqjpLoXa24MNN0Gzibv0YNOvPTufp5HiS015kPapO9Uhbis3J/cp/8wpIuEL93 fhuBuU/tNfI4xXVS/F+/qEPKW+PVPbkDQ+wYxYcW9LvugEQkzw6atlXh+j37IyI0dQQL X2TI3U2y1ymM5yqNDzSoz1AmhhXmTMKO/mUDfh4oYd1qYmXD7rrXyfLLL3oVD/vb8lbf fqKg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.170.214.4 with SMTP id g4mr7768755ykf.41.1419004494985; Fri, 19 Dec 2014 07:54:54 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.170.90.131 with HTTP; Fri, 19 Dec 2014 07:54:54 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 07:54:54 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Deltas between FreeBSD and NetBSD and POSIX conformance (was "[Bug 194828] [test] lib.libc.sys.getcontext_test.setcontext_link fails on amd64, not i386") From: Mehmet Erol Sanliturk To: Julio Merino Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.18-1 Cc: "freebsd-testing@freebsd.org" X-BeenThere: freebsd-testing@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Testing on FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 15:54:56 -0000 On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 7:29 AM, Julio Merino wrote: > On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 12:34 PM, Garrett Cooper > wrote: > > > > On Nov 14, 2014, at 2:28, Justin Cormack > wrote: > > > >> On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 7:35 AM, wrote: > >>> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=194828 > >>> > >>> --- Comment #12 from Garrett Cooper,425-314-3911 > --- > >>> In a perfect world I would like for everything to be consistent > between FreeBSD > >>> and NetBSD, but that's not the way it should be, and that's a silly > ideal to > >>> hope for :). > >> > >> NetBSD dev here... I would rather that tests actually test behaviour > >> as defined in standards, especially for eg libc tests, and indeed I > >> have bunch of stuff to add more tests on standards compliance. So if > >> stuff is testing implementation internals it should go away, and if > >> NetBSDs behaviour is incorrect please file an issue, or if the test > >> setup is not eg standards compliant please file an issue > >> http://www.netbsd.org/cgi-bin/sendpr.cgi?gndb=netbsd > > That's a nice ideal... but in practice, the standard does sometimes > leave details up to the implementation and/or the implementation > provides custom extensions. Both need tests, and such tests will be > implementation-dependent. > > So how could we deal with this? Tests for the standard should really > be unified across both codebases, but there should be a way to > supplement them with implementation-specific tests. Not sure what the > best organization scheme for this would be, nor how we'd maintain the > "common code". > > > Establish a "BSD Operating Systems Foundation" and generate a Version Control System to be shared among participating establishments such as DragonFly BSD , FreeBSD , NetBSD , OpenBSD , and if there are others . Each participating establishment will maintain its own special parts and will pull common parts from the common Version Control System. The common Version Control System will be maintained by groups with committers from participating establishments . In that way , common parts will not be maintained separately . This will reduce costs , waste on human power by unnecessary repeated works , and therefore will improve common quality . Decisions will be made by voting and accepting the result . Since , participating establishments will continue to work on their operating systems , if any one wants to apply any different ideas , they may apply them onto their branches . My opinion is that , the persons in all of the BSD operating systems groups are very good human beings and only they need a common cooperation decision between themselves and work toward realization of it . It is not necessary to see specialization as a negative effect but a realization of alternative approaches . Over time , if any such specialization proves to be a more advantageous approach , it may be adopted by other groups . Thank you very much . Mehmet Erol Sanliturk