[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #60554] is_system_fcn_file fails with short fi
From: |
Markus Mützel |
Subject: |
[Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #60554] is_system_fcn_file fails with short file names |
Date: |
Sat, 8 May 2021 14:24:45 -0400 (EDT) |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/90.0.4430.93 Safari/537.36 Edg/90.0.818.51 |
Follow-up Comment #7, bug #60554 (project octave):
The Debian builders of the default branch seem to be failing the test for bug
#40117 since the change from comment #4:
>>>>> processing
/scratch/buildbot/workers/jwe-debian-x86_64-2/no-extras-debian/src/test/bug-40117.tst
***** test <*40117>
unwind_protect
tmp_dir = tempname ();
mkdir (tmp_dir);
a_dir = fullfile (tmp_dir, "a");
a_private_dir = fullfile (a_dir, "private");
mkdir (a_dir);
mkdir (a_private_dir);
__mktestfun_40117__ (fullfile (a_dir, "main_40117.m"),
"function r = main_40117 ()",
" r = p1_40117 ();",
"endfunction");
__mktestfun_40117__ (fullfile (a_private_dir, "p1_40117.m"),
"function r = p1_40117 ()",
" r = p2_40117 ();",
"endfunction");
__mktestfun_40117__ (fullfile (a_private_dir, "p2_40117.m"),
"function r = p2_40117 ()",
" r = 'a_p2_40117';",
"endfunction");
addpath (a_dir);
assert (main_40117 (), "a_p2_40117");
## Update the secondary private function, attempting to avoid
## filesystem timestamp resolution problems.
pause (1);
__mktestfun_40117__ (fullfile (a_private_dir, "p2_40117.m"),
"function r = p2_40117 ()",
" r = 'new function!';",
"endfunction");
## Force new functions to be found.
rehash ();
assert (main_40117 (), "new function!");
unwind_protect_cleanup
rmpath (a_dir);
confirm_recursive_rmdir (false, "local");
rmdir (tmp_dir, "s");
end_unwind_protect
!!!!! regression: https://octave.org/testfailure/?40117
ASSERT errors for: assert (main_40117 (),"new function!")
Location | Observed | Expected | Reason
[] a_p2_40117 new function! Strings don't match
Same for the Ubuntu GitHub runners.
The Fedora builders and the macOS runner seem to be ok though.
Also the builds from the stable branch seem to be not affected.
Did the `rehash` function break on the default branch?
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?60554>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/
- [Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #60554] Octave default paths stored as short names, anonymous, 2021/05/08
- [Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #60554] is_system_fcn_file doesn short names, Markus Mützel, 2021/05/08
- [Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #60554] is_system_fcn_file fails with short file names, Markus Mützel, 2021/05/08
- [Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #60554] is_system_fcn_file fails with short file names, anonymous, 2021/05/08
- [Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #60554] is_system_fcn_file fails with short file names, Markus Mützel, 2021/05/08
- [Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #60554] is_system_fcn_file fails with short file names, Markus Mützel, 2021/05/08
- [Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #60554] is_system_fcn_file fails with short file names, anonymous, 2021/05/08
- [Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #60554] is_system_fcn_file fails with short file names, Markus Mützel, 2021/05/08
- [Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #60554] is_system_fcn_file fails with short file names,
Markus Mützel <=
- [Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #60554] is_system_fcn_file fails with short file names, Markus Mützel, 2021/05/08
- [Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #60554] is_system_fcn_file fails with short file names, Markus Mützel, 2021/05/10
- [Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #60554] is_system_fcn_file fails with short file names, Markus Mützel, 2021/05/13