I have the "sleep 1" in my tree, will commit after my next validate round.
Cheers, Simon On 27/09/2013 10:14, Nicolas Frisby wrote:
The test as in the repo also fails on my Mac (18 out of 20 times in a row). Adding a 'sleep 1' before the second set of echo commands makes it succeed (20 out of 20 times in a row). On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 7:43 AM, Simon Peyton-Jones <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: No, it fails on Linux. Mostly but not invariably. Running it by hand (ie with TEST=recomp013) fails 9 times out of 10 and succeeds once. Weird. Simon | -----Original Message----- | From: Simon Marlow [mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>] | Sent: 23 September 2013 12:08 | To: Gabor Greif; Simon Peyton-Jones | Cc: Joachim Breitner; [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> | Subject: Re: recomp013 | | Is it failing on Windows only? It could be an issue with the | granularity of timestamps. I think we use more accurate timestamps on | Linux nowadays, whereas Windows is still using 1 second granularity. If | that's the case, it probably needs a "sleep 1" somewhere. If the "sleep | 1" didn't help, perhaps it wasn't in the right place - it needs to be | before the second set of echo commands. | | On the subject of naming the test, we want two pieces of information in | the name: | - what it tests | - the ticket number, if it's a regression test | So rather than just renaming it to the ticket number (which would lose | the information that it's a recomp test), I suggest moving all the | recomp tests into their own directory first. It's really useful to have | all the tests for a component together, so you can run them quickly when | you're working on that component. | | Cheers, | Simon | | On 19/09/2013 08:57, Gabor Greif wrote: | > On 9/19/13, Simon Peyton-Jones <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: | >> I lied. Whether or not the 'sleep' is there, the test usually fails, | but | >> occasionally (one time in ten or so) succeeds. | > | > I am the originator of the bug report, and could consistently | > reproduce it in a bigger project. Unfortunately I have no time | > currently to dive into the issue, but I have it earmarked for later. | > | > Cheers, | > | > Gabor | > | > | >> | >> SImon | >> | >> | -----Original Message----- | >> | From: ghc-devs [mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>] On Behalf Of | Simon | >> | Peyton-Jones | >> | Sent: 19 September 2013 12:50 | >> | To: Joachim Breitner; [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> | >> | Subject: RE: recomp013 | >> | | >> | that makes it work.! | >> | | >> | | -----Original Message----- | >> | | From: Joachim Breitner [mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>] | >> | | Sent: 19 September 2013 12:41 | >> | | To: Simon Peyton-Jones; [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> | >> | | Subject: Re: recomp013 | >> | | | >> | | Dear Simon, | >> | | | >> | | Am Donnerstag, den 19.09.2013, 11:33 +0000 schrieb Simon Peyton- | Jones: | >> | | > =====> recomp013(normal) 89 of 114 [0, 0, 0] | >> | | > cd ./recomp013 && $MAKE -s --no-print-directory recomp013 | >> | | </dev/null >recomp013.run.stdout 2>recomp013.run.stderr | >> | | > Actual stdout output differs from expected: | >> | | > --- ./recomp013/recomp013.stdout 2013-09-18 12:38:22.000000000 | >> | +0100 | >> | | > +++ ./recomp013/recomp013.run.stdout 2013-09-19 | 12:15:22.611120935 | >> | | +0100 | >> | | > @@ -3,5 +3,3 @@ | >> | | > [2 of 3] Compiling B ( B.hs, B.o ) | >> | | > [3 of 3] Compiling C ( C.hs, C.o ) | >> | | > second run | >> | | > -[2 of 3] Compiling B ( B.hs, B.o ) | >> | | > -[3 of 3] Compiling C ( C.hs, C.o ) [B changed] | >> | | > *** unexpected failure for recomp013(normal) | >> | | | >> | | It works here. So that means either two things: | >> | | * that the bug described in #8247 is actually present in HEAD, | but | >> | | only under certain circumstances, or | >> | | * that there is a timing issue with the update of B.hs. | >> | | | >> | | The latter seems to be more likely. I notice that other recomp- | tests | >> | | have a "sleep 1" before updating the file: If you insert that in | >> | | recomp013/Makefile, does it go through for you? | >> | | | >> | | Greetings, | >> | | Joachim | >> | | | >> | | -- | >> | | Joachim "nomeata" Breitner | >> | | [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> * http://www.joachim-breitner.de/ | >> | | Jabber: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> * GPG-Key: 0x4743206C | >> | | Debian Developer: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> | >> | _______________________________________________ | >> | ghc-devs mailing list | >> | [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> | >> | http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs | >> _______________________________________________ | >> ghc-devs mailing list | >> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> | >> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs | >> | > _______________________________________________ | > ghc-devs mailing list | > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> | > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs | > _______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
