Does anybody know what the right solution to this problem is? I'm happy to
implement/test either one, but I don't want to spend my time working on a
solution that won't be accepted upstream.
Tim
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 3:16 PM, Tim Newsome wrote:
> TEST #9 in targets/SECONDA
TEST #9 in targets/SECONDARY sometimes fails when two commands execute in a
different order than expected. As far as I can tell make is doing the right
thing.
# TEST #9 -- Savannah bug #15919
# The original fix for this bug caused a new bug, shown here.
touch(qw(1.a 2.a));
run_make_test('
%.c :
On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 4:19 PM, Paul Smith wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-10-25 at 13:34 -0700, Tim Newsome wrote:
> > We do a lot of builds (as in double-digit servers building non-stop).
> > Sometimes, when a part of the build fails, make -j8 would die with:
> > make: INT
y-one error in cleanup code that is almost never run. Attached is a
patch that fixes it. We've been running with it for over 5 days now and
haven't noticed any problems.
Tim
From 2fc5429506b6c1221992f91f5d608598067e3f21 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Tim Newsome
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011
