On 06/19/2014 11:32 PM, Justin Clift wrote:
On 19/06/2014, at 6:55 PM, Benjamin Turner wrote:
snip
I went through these a while back and removed anything that wasn't valid for
GlusterFS. This test was passing on 3.4.59 when it was released, i am thinking
it may have something to do with a
On 06/20/2014 06:26 PM, Matteo Checcucci wrote:
Control: forwarded -1 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454
On 06/20/2014 07:44 AM, Ravishankar N wrote:
Hi Matteo,
Thanks for the reproducer. I've filed a bug report here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454
Feel
Hi Rajesh,
Looking at the regression testing boxes this morning, they all have
several thousand /tmp/xfsmount* dirs on them.
Seems like they're coming from this:
f1705e2d (Rajesh Joseph 2014-06-05 10:00:33 +0530 3988) char
template [] = /tmp/xfsmountXX;
Thanks Justin for letting me know. Its clearly a bug in the implementation. I
will send a patch to fix this. Meanwhile if it is causing any test failures or
other issues then you can have a temporary fix to delete them in the script.
Thanks Regards,
Rajesh
- Original Message -
From:
KP,
One way to view relevant information from the core would be as follow,
1) before loading the core you need to tell gdb to look for shared objects in a
different path,
- using 'set solib-search-path'
- For us this translates to 'set solib-search-path
Control: forwarded -1 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454
On 06/20/2014 07:44 AM, Ravishankar N wrote:
Hi Matteo,
Thanks for the reproducer. I've filed a bug report here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454
Feel free to add yourself to the CC List to get
On 06/20/2014 03:05 PM, Ravishankar N wrote:
On 06/20/2014 06:26 PM, Matteo Checcucci wrote:
Control: forwarded -1 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454
On 06/20/2014 07:44 AM, Ravishankar N wrote:
[...]
Yes, just sent a patch for review on master
On 06/20/2014 08:13 PM, Raghavendra Bhat wrote:
Hi,
I am seeing glupy.t test being failed in some testcases. It is failing
in my local machine as well (with latest master). Is it a genuine
failure or a spurious one?
/tests/features/glupy.t(Wstat: 0 Tests: 6
Failed: 2)
On 20/06/2014, at 3:43 PM, Raghavendra Bhat wrote:
snip
I am seeing glupy.t test being failed in some testcases. It is failing in my
local machine as well (with latest master). Is it a genuine failure or a
spurious one?
/tests/features/glupy.t(Wstat: 0 Tests: 6
Hi,
I am seeing glupy.t test being failed in some testcases. It is failing
in my local machine as well (with latest master). Is it a genuine
failure or a spurious one?
/tests/features/glupy.t(Wstat: 0 Tests: 6
Failed: 2)
Failed tests: 2, 6
As per the logfile of
On 20/06/2014, at 3:49 PM, Vijay Bellur wrote:
snip
Side-effect of merging this patch [1]. Have reverted the change to let
regression tests pass.
That seems to have fixed it.
+ Justin
--
GlusterFS - http://www.gluster.org
An open source, distributed file system scaling to several
11 matches
Mail list logo
