On Sun, 2009-12-20 at 15:46 -0800, Ryan Niebur wrote:
> Package: linux-image-2.6-parisc64
Yes but which version?
> Severity: important
> Blocks: 558981
>
> The attatched minimal test case shows these results:
>
> on my i386 machine, it correctly gives two different numbers:
> $ gcc test.c; ./a.out
> First: 1
> Second: 2
>
> however on paer.debian.org (hppa):
> $ gcc test.c; ./a.out
> First: 1
> Second: 1
>
> Based on the manpage of inotify_add_watch, it sounds like the correct
> behavior is to have different numbers. It seems that the author of
> inotify-tools also interpreted it that way.
>
> This bug is causing my package's tests to fail, which causes it to FTBFS:
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=558981
I think the test case is broken; why should two watches that don't exist
at the same time have unique ids? You might as well test:
fd1 = open("foo", O_RDONLY);
close(fd1);
fd2 = open("bar", O_RDONLY);
assert(fd2 != fd1);
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings
Once a job is fouled up, anything done to improve it makes it worse.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part