Mailing-List: contact dev-help@apr.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 17:40:45 +0100
From: Joe Orton <jorton@redhat.com>
To: APR Dev List <dev@apr.apache.org>
Cc: Justin Erenkrantz <justin@erenkrantz.com>, David Reid <david@jetnet.co.uk>
Subject: Re: 1.0.0.rc2 tarballs now ready...
Message-ID: <20040701164045.GG17290@redhat.com>
Mail-Followup-To: APR Dev List <dev@apr.apache.org>,
	Justin Erenkrantz <justin@erenkrantz.com>,
	David Reid <david@jetnet.co.uk>
References: <037301c45ebb$6b71ec60$7500a8c0@goliath>
 <20040701152418.GF1314@scotch.ics.uci.edu>
 <20040701153449.GD17290@redhat.com>
 <20040701162831.GG1314@scotch.ics.uci.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20040701162831.GG1314@scotch.ics.uci.edu>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i

On Thu, Jul 01, 2004 at 09:28:31AM -0700, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 01, 2004 at 04:34:49PM +0100, Joe Orton wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 01, 2004 at 08:24:18AM -0700, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> > > I'm getting a segfault in testsockets on Solaris 9/Intel.  No time to further
> > > debug.  Is anyone else seeing this?  Best I can tell is that an earlier
> > > test is failing and it's passing a NULL parameter on.
> > 
> > Does "./testall -v testsockets" give any useful information?
> 
> testsockets         : |Line 137: expected <0>, but saw <670008>
> \zsh: 13868 segmentation fault  ./testall -v testsockets

Oh for an apr_assert_success... the AF_UNSPEC lookup for "::1" gave
EAI_NONAME by my calculations which is not unexpected for a build on a
Solaris system without IPv6 configured; not a serious failure.

> I was curious why testall doesn't abort a sub-test after a failure, but oh
> well, I didn't write it...  -- justin

It did, and now it doesn't, and stuff like this happens a lot now.

joe