-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 24
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Test failures #4
Comments
I've observed this before as well. When we run it in the shell, we get exit code 139 (tried bash and zsh). When running under But when running under Relevant code is perhaps: (newState, event) <- case status of
-- `Exited` means that the process chose to exit by itself,
-- as in calling `exit()` (as opposed to e.g. getting killed
-- by a signal).
Exited i -> do
case i of
0 -> pure (state, Death $ ExitSuccess)
_ -> pure (state, Death $ ExitFailure i)
Continued -> error $ "waitForTraceEvent: BUG: Continued status appeared even though WCONTINUE was not passed to waitpid"
-- Note that `Signaled` means that the process was *terminated*
-- by a signal.
-- Signals that come in without killing the process appear in
-- the `Stopped` case.
Signaled _sig -> pure (state, Death $ ExitFailure (fromIntegral fullStatus)) Should check which of the two |
For the third one, absence of On Ubuntu 16.04, in
While @qrilka gets: On Gentoo,
|
When trying with Bash 4.4.23 via nix on my Ubuntu, I also don't have the
So that really looks like an optimisation, and the |
OK, we found the solution to this one: |
For the second one, regarding the extraneous From
This indicates that due to glibc differences between us, @qrilka's glibc does more (an extra My glibc version:
@qrilka's glibc version:
|
Reverting the commit is the correct solution, as the extra handling for multi-threaded programs isn't necessary: We are just after |
This reverts commit 874b29c. Also some commentary added.
Ending with b968ad1 all of this seem to get resolved |
I run tests on
and I get the following reproducible failures
I'll try to dig what could be wrong here but maybe @nh2 you could give some hints what I should check first?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: