Re: SIGPIPE in TAP tests

2017-12-11 Thread Michael Paquier
On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 4:32 PM, Noah Misch wrote: > On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 04:19:52PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: >> On Sun, Dec 10, 2017 at 6:02 AM, Noah Misch wrote: > >> If SIGPIPE is ignored then test output just stops after generating the >> FATAL message. Oops. > > You mean "If SIGPIPE

Re: SIGPIPE in TAP tests

2017-12-10 Thread Noah Misch
On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 04:19:52PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Sun, Dec 10, 2017 at 6:02 AM, Noah Misch wrote: > If SIGPIPE is ignored then test output just stops after generating the > FATAL message. Oops. You mean "If SIGPIPE is not ignored ...", right? > > To fix the actual failures,

Re: SIGPIPE in TAP tests

2017-12-10 Thread Michael Paquier
On Sun, Dec 10, 2017 at 6:02 AM, Noah Misch wrote: > Two buildfarm runs[1][2] from the last 90 days have failed in > src/test/authentication, like this: > > t/001_password.pl .. > Failed 3/8 subtests > t/002_saslprep.pl .. ok 1815 ms ( 0.00 usr 0.00 sys + 0.89 cusr 0.26 > csys = 1.1

SIGPIPE in TAP tests

2017-12-09 Thread Noah Misch
Two buildfarm runs[1][2] from the last 90 days have failed in src/test/authentication, like this: t/001_password.pl .. Failed 3/8 subtests t/002_saslprep.pl .. ok 1815 ms ( 0.00 usr 0.00 sys + 0.89 cusr 0.26 csys = 1.15 CPU) Test Summary Report --- t/001_pas