On Sat, Dec 10, 2005 at 12:06:58PM +0000, Stephen Gran wrote: > > I have a copy of fork.t, hacked to run outside the perl source tree, > > which I've tried running a whole load of times on mips and anything > > else to hand... it hasn't failed yet. My best guess is that > > /dev/urandom on the buildd isn't working right, but it's sheer > > guesswork since I can't actually look at the thing. > > The point that I was originally trying to make was that, really, if you > are testing fork, maybe using rand isn't the best test for it. rand > does always have a non zero chance of collision, while fixed numbers > don't.
Yes, it's completely insane... but I can't think of any way we could have this many failures without something being fundamentally broken somewhere. -- .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield : :' : http://www.debian.org/ | `. `' | `- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
