Good news: Everything works ok in Salsa CI when adding -j1.
Tried in private fork:
https://salsa.debian.org/sanvila/node-fstream-ignore/-/pipelines
Thanks.
Le sam. 5 avr. 2025 à 23:40, Santiago Vila a écrit :
> El 5/4/25 a las 23:00, Jérémy Lal escribió:
> > The problem with the dh_auto_test_override is that it effectively stops
> > pkg-js-autopkgtest from running at all.
>
> Hmm, why is that the case?
>
I was surprised but it's to be expected - si
BTW: I see that the build and the autopkgtests are failing in Salsa CI,
and also the official autopkgtests. I believe Salsa CI uses
containers with 2 CPUs, which is consistent with the fact that it
fails for me on machines with 2 CPUs.
I guess the root cause for all those failures is probably the
El 5/4/25 a las 23:00, Jérémy Lal escribió:
The problem with the dh_auto_test_override is that it effectively stops
pkg-js-autopkgtest from running at all.
Hmm, why is that the case?
To check the concurrency hypothesis, could you try version 1.0.5-4 with -j1 added after
the command "tap" li
Le sam. 5 avr. 2025 à 18:09, Santiago Vila a écrit :
> reopen 1078886
> thanks
>
> Hello. I'm really sorry to reopen this, but the recent change
> did not fix the reported problem.
>
> I'm attaching my build history, where 1.0.5-5 is the version
> in unstable and 1.0.5-4.1 was my internal version
Le sam. 5 avr. 2025 à 18:06, Santiago Vila a écrit :
> reopen 1078886
> thanks
>
> Hello. I'm really sorry to reopen this, but the recent change
> did not fix the reported problem.
>
> I'm attaching my build history, where 1.0.5-5 is the version
> in unstable and 1.0.5-4.1 was my internal version
reopen 1078886
thanks
Hello. I'm really sorry to reopen this, but the recent change
did not fix the reported problem.
I'm attaching my build history, where 1.0.5-5 is the version
in unstable and 1.0.5-4.1 was my internal version where I
tested the proposed patch (which I assume it would still wo
Le sam. 5 avr. 2025 à 03:43, Santiago Vila a écrit :
> tags 1078886 patch
> thanks
>
> Hello.
>
> This failure happened 35% of the time on AWS machines with 2 CPUs,
> and never on machines with 1 CPU, so I tried running the
> tests sequentially, and discovered that the package does
> not seem to
tags 1078886 patch
thanks
Hello.
This failure happened 35% of the time on AWS machines with 2 CPUs,
and never on machines with 1 CPU, so I tried running the
tests sequentially, and discovered that the package does
not seem to fail that way.
Patch attached.
Note: I know this package has been re
Package: src:node-fstream-ignore
Version: 1.0.5-4
Severity: serious
Tags: ftbfs
Dear maintainer:
During a rebuild of all packages in bookworm, your package failed to build:
(Note: The package also FTBFS in trixie with a failure rate of 50% in my tests).
10 matches
Mail list logo
