Yes. I see from the journal that there were actually several tests. 10|631 /tset/LSB.os/procprim/execle/T.execle 21:38:34|TC Start, scenario ref 636-0 15|631 3.3-lite 5|TCM Start 400|631 1 1 21:38:34|IC Start 200|631 1 21:38:34|TP Start 220|631 1 4 21:38:34|UNSUPPORTED 410|631 1 1 21:38:34|IC End 400|631 2 1 21:38:34|IC Start 200|631 2 21:38:34|TP Start 220|631 2 0 21:38:34|PASS 410|631 2 1 21:38:34|IC End 400|631 3 1 21:38:34|IC Start 200|631 3 21:38:34|TP Start 220|631 3 0 21:38:35|PASS 410|631 3 1 21:38:35|IC End 400|631 4 1 21:38:35|IC Start 200|631 4 21:38:35|TP Start 520|631 4 00019923 2 1|unexpected signal 2 (SIGINT) received 220|631 4 2 08:11:34|UNRESOLVED 410|631 4 1 08:11:34|IC End 400|631 5 1 08:11:34|IC Start 200|631 5 08:11:34|TP Start 520|631 5 00019923 1 1|_POSIX_MESSAGE_PASSING not supported 220|631 5 4 08:11:34|UNSUPPORTED 410|631 5 1 08:11:34|IC End 520|631 4 00020129 1 1|unexpected signal 11 (SIGSEGV) received 90|08:11:34|User Abort 80|631 0 08:11:34|TC End, scenario ref 636-0
In this case, the probem may be an unexpected SIGINT. John On Thu, 2002-06-13 at 23:05, Andrew Josey wrote: > On Jun 13, 10:03am in "more on hanging test", John Cherry wrote: > > With a stock RH 7.2 (2.4.7-10 kernel), I reran the runtime tests using > > 1.1.10-1. The following tests hung: > > > > /tset/LSB.os/procprim/execle/T.execle > > /tset/LSB.os/procprim/execvp/T.execvp > > > > The report (see below) indicated that both of these tests were > > "Unsupported". Should an "Unsupported" test hang? > > > Remember that each test contains multiple testcases, ie. test > assertions, some of which might be unsupported. So what you > are seeing is normal. That version of the kernel has known > problems wrt to LSB conformance. > regards > Andrew > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
