[glibc] 01/01: debian/testsuite-xfail-debian.mk: Also allow tst-malloc-thread-fail to fail where we've already done so for test-xfail-tst-malloc-thread-exit.
This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script.
adconrad pushed a commit to branch glibc-2.23
in repository glibc.
commit e28fbf4b2b3fcce40ff1e5a0af9a6d8b4a23602a
Author: Adam Conrad <adconrad@0c3.net>
Date: Wed Mar 23 21:54:44 2016 -0600
debian/testsuite-xfail-debian.mk: Also allow tst-malloc-thread-fail to fail where we've already done so for test-xfail-tst-malloc-thread-exit.
---
debian/changelog | 5 +++++
debian/testsuite-xfail-debian.mk | 2 ++
2 files changed, 7 insertions(+)
diff --git a/debian/changelog b/debian/changelog
index 0e49fc9..d77c179 100644
--- a/debian/changelog
+++ b/debian/changelog
@@ -1,7 +1,12 @@
glibc (2.23-0experimental2) UNRELEASED; urgency=medium
+ [ Aurelien Jarno ]
*
+ [ Adam Conrad ]
+ * debian/testsuite-xfail-debian.mk: Also allow tst-malloc-thread-fail to
+ fail where we've already done so for test-xfail-tst-malloc-thread-exit.
+
-- Aurelien Jarno <aurel32@debian.org> Thu, 24 Mar 2016 00:23:13 +0100
glibc (2.23-0experimental1) experimental; urgency=medium
diff --git a/debian/testsuite-xfail-debian.mk b/debian/testsuite-xfail-debian.mk
index 7020f73..2a127d4 100644
--- a/debian/testsuite-xfail-debian.mk
+++ b/debian/testsuite-xfail-debian.mk
@@ -1302,6 +1302,7 @@ test-xfail-tst-waitid = yes
# Known failure not a regression, see https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6527
test-xfail-tst-malloc-thread-exit = yes
+test-xfail-tst-malloc-thread-fail = yes
endif
@@ -1316,6 +1317,7 @@ test-xfail-tst-waitid = yes
# Known failure not a regression, see https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6527
test-xfail-tst-malloc-thread-exit = yes
+test-xfail-tst-malloc-thread-fail = yes
# Failures due to a GCC bug, see http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59412
# and http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64811
--
Alioth's /usr/local/bin/git-commit-notice on /srv/git.debian.org/git/pkg-glibc/glibc.git
Reply to: