Thanks to visit codestin.com
Credit goes to github.com

Skip to content

Conversation

@fnordahl
Copy link

@fnordahl fnordahl commented May 9, 2025

Please review/merge commit by commit.

@github-actions
Copy link

GNU testsuite comparison:

Skip an intermittent issue tests/timeout/timeout (fails in this run but passes in the 'main' branch)

Scripts exist that may call one of the multi-binary entry points
with argument 0 set to some other value than the name of the entry
point.

One example is the Open vSwitch testsuite which makes use of
/bin/true as an argument to the bash builtin `exec` to check
whether it supports the '-a' argument [0].

In this situation coreutils will print usage on standard output,
which makes unnecessary noise.

Printing usage on standard error, which is customary for other
tools, allows the script to succeed.

0: https://github.com/openvswitch/ovs/blob/28064e9fa50d/tests/ovs-macros.at#L199
Signed-off-by: Frode Nordahl <[email protected]>
@github-actions
Copy link

GNU testsuite comparison:

Skipping an intermittent issue tests/misc/tee (passes in this run but fails in the 'main' branch)
Skipping an intermittent issue tests/timeout/timeout (passes in this run but fails in the 'main' branch)

At present, the `cat` command unexpectedly prints an error message
when it receives a broken pipe error.

As an example, there are many workflows that make use of `cat` and
`head` together to process only part of the data.  The `head`
command will stop reading after a configured number of bytes or
lines, subsequently exposing `cat` to a broken pipe condition.

Said workflows may fail when they unexpectedly get error messages
in their output.

Suppress broken pipe errors.

Signed-off-by: Frode Nordahl <[email protected]>
@fnordahl fnordahl marked this pull request as ready for review May 11, 2025 20:03
@sylvestre
Copy link
Contributor

Please split the two commits in 2 different pr

@github-actions
Copy link

GNU testsuite comparison:

Skipping an intermittent issue tests/timeout/timeout (passes in this run but fails in the 'main' branch)

@fnordahl
Copy link
Author

Split into #7920 and #7921 as requested by @sylvestre.

@fnordahl fnordahl closed this May 12, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants