On October 28, 2019 10:52 AM, SZEDER Gábor wrote:

On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 10:15:31AM -0400, Randall S. Becker wrote:

quoted

Here is the verbose output from subtest 2 that failed. Sorry it took
so long, we had to arrange a different Jenkins job to test this in isolation.
Format issue?

Cheers,
Randall

expecting success of 0500.2 'progress display with total':
	cat >expect <<-\EOF &&
	Working hard:  33% (1/3)<CR>
	Working hard:  66% (2/3)<CR>
	Working hard: 100% (3/3)<CR>
	Working hard: 100% (3/3), done.
	EOF

	cat >in <<-\EOF &&
	progress 1
	progress 2
	progress 3
	EOF
	test-tool progress --total=3 "Working hard" <in 2>stderr &&

	show_cr <stderr >out &&
	test_i18ncmp expect out

+ cat
+ 1> expect 0< /tmp/sh1811939370.4

Wow :)

quoted

+ cat
+ 1> in 0< /tmp/sh1811939370.5
+ test-tool progress --total=3 Working hard 0< in 2> stderr show_cr 0<
+ stderr 1> out

Another wow.

This is unrelated to the test failure, but makes me rather curious:
you run the test script with '-x', that's why we see the trace of commands
executed during the test.  Interestingly, though, we don't see any trace of
commands executed within any shell function invoked in the test, i.e. from
show_cr above and test_i18ncmp below.

What kind of shell is this?

The test output requested by Johannes was to use -i -v -x. We use ksh and have for years to test git. The command used was done within a Jenkins environment and was:

cd t && sh t0500-progress-display.sh -i -v -x

quoted

+ test_i18ncmp expect out

--- expect	2019-10-28 14:11:40 +0000
+++ out	2019-10-28 14:11:41 +0000

@@ -1,4 +1,2 @@
-Working hard:  33% (1/3)<CR>
-Working hard:  66% (2/3)<CR>
-Working hard: 100% (3/3)<CR>
-Working hard: 100% (3/3), done.
+Working hard:   0% (1/12884901888)<CR>
+Working hard:   0% (3/12884901888), done.

Weird, this looks exactly like the big-endian test failure that was fixed in
2b6f6ea1bd (test-progress: fix test failures on big-endian systems, 2019-10-
20), but that is already in 2.24.0-rc1 (but not yet in -rc0).

https://public-inbox.org/git/f1ce445e-6954-8e7b-2dca-
3a566ce689a5@physik.fu-berlin.de/

Is NonStop big or little-endian?  Does t0500 pass without 2b6f6ea1bd?

NonStop is big-endian. When t0500 is run from an interactive terminal, it passes. This failure seems to be a result of being in a disconnected terminal situation typical of Jenkins, not that the test result makes any sense with that being the only difference. t0500 did not exist in 2.23.0, our last build, so I can't easily get that answer. Our Jenkins is based off the master branch, so it's a hard to revert in our pipeline without a serious amount of work - that and without 2b6f6ea1bd, other things break if I remember from August.

Does the printf format use positional arguments (%digit$)? That has known issues on the platform.

FYI: int/long are 32 bits, long long is 64 bits. 12884901888 is 0x300000000, surprisingly.

quoted

error: last command exited with $?=1
not ok 2 - progress display with total
#
#		cat >expect <<-\EOF &&
#		Working hard:  33% (1/3)<CR>
#		Working hard:  66% (2/3)<CR>
#		Working hard: 100% (3/3)<CR>
#		Working hard: 100% (3/3), done.
#		EOF
#
#		cat >in <<-\EOF &&
#		progress 1
#		progress 2
#		progress 3
#		EOF
#		test-tool progress --total=3 "Working hard" <in 2>stderr &&
#
#		show_cr <stderr >out &&
#		test_i18ncmp expect out
#