On Thu, Aug 27, 2026 at 12:25:50PM +0000, Johannes Thyssen Tishman wrote: > 2026-08-27T13:35:56+0200 Stefan Sperling <[email protected]>: > > On Thu, Aug 27, 2026 at 11:16:33AM +0000, Johannes Thyssen Tishman wrote: > > > Thanks for pointing this out. Without the fs_test.c patch, kyua-testers > > > doesn't build on OpenBSD: > > > > > > ld: error: undefined symbol: lchmod > > > >>> referenced by fs_test.c > > > >>> fs_test-fs_test.o:(lchmod_fails) > > > > > > So my guess is that fs_test.c was patched such that the port would > > > compile, but lchmod wasn't patched out completely. The error bapt > > > mentions in the issue comes from fs.c:261 (try_unprotect_symlink()), > > > which is thrown because HAVE_WORKING_LCHMOD isn't defined. This can be > > > seen in the configure logs: > > > > > > checking for a working lchmod... no > > > > > > > Ah, indeed. Now it makes sense. > > > > > I suppose we could use a stub with fchmodat()? > > > > Yes. Something like this should work: > > Still getting 208/261 passed (53 failed), so maybe the problem is > somewhere else. I'll report this upstream. Should we go ahead with the > update regardless? >
Yes, I think we can go ahead. Should any problems show up at run-time we can still address them later. These test failures really look like a test suite problem to me.
