From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp1 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id ELEKOSTqyl/BGAAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Sat, 05 Dec 2020 02:02:12 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp1 with LMTPS id YOLnNCTqyl93bwAAbx9fmQ (envelope-from ) for ; Sat, 05 Dec 2020 02:02:12 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DC1B794038E for ; Sat, 5 Dec 2020 02:02:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:35860 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1klMtl-0004Pj-5Y for larch@yhetil.org; Fri, 04 Dec 2020 21:02:09 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:55582) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1klMte-0004Pd-7F for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 04 Dec 2020 21:02:02 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:34696) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1klMtd-0001NO-Vn for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 04 Dec 2020 21:02:01 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1klMtd-0003Zw-Sj for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 04 Dec 2020 21:02:01 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#44953: lsof: LTlock test consistently fails (possibly due to btrfs) Resent-From: raingloom Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 05 Dec 2020 02:02:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 44953 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Mark H Weaver Received: via spool by 44953-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B44953.160713367313696 (code B ref 44953); Sat, 05 Dec 2020 02:02:01 +0000 Received: (at 44953) by debbugs.gnu.org; 5 Dec 2020 02:01:13 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:46242 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1klMsr-0003Yq-CI for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 04 Dec 2020 21:01:13 -0500 Received: from mx1.riseup.net ([198.252.153.129]:41038) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1klMsl-0003Ye-6T for 44953@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 04 Dec 2020 21:01:11 -0500 Received: from bell.riseup.net (bell-pn.riseup.net [10.0.1.178]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.riseup.net", Issuer "Sectigo RSA Domain Validation Secure Server CA" (not verified)) by mx1.riseup.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4Cnt8c42dRzFd7h; Fri, 4 Dec 2020 18:01:04 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=riseup.net; s=squak; t=1607133664; bh=HncSRmfF2IFxQsz5uqYIOLUOqSZEjIuidOhb7x8gNZ0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=lTKzBLmnq6xKdwJrWtuI/NeG5/kHEhVW4Cgw2aoyeQAVRYA3FRGlRS4jvw5G56Ovj fBPhmA1z+2J2anIvNn0YYnpHPpljhsPz7W3zl7bH3ogCiLXlQY5yMs3KL2+JXUmfig xnQwOxn4/J+46VkLhFwBTknXlakPNAaxRQF1gDLI= X-Riseup-User-ID: 400ED16BBD707AD9FED00AF9D574A500520AE4C69580575C79C834FA275788A6 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bell.riseup.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4Cnt8Y2sv0zJn9m; Fri, 4 Dec 2020 18:00:57 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 5 Dec 2020 02:57:36 +0100 From: raingloom Message-ID: <20201205025736.50b83726@riseup.net> In-Reply-To: <87r1obd41k.fsf@netris.org> References: <87zh2zdgfh.fsf@netris.org> <874kl7zw4u.fsf@nckx> <87r1obd41k.fsf@netris.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-guix@gnu.org List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: 44953@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -1.19 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail (headers rsa verify failed) header.d=riseup.net header.s=squak header.b=lTKzBLmn; dmarc=fail reason="SPF not aligned (relaxed)" header.from=riseup.net (policy=none); spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of bug-guix-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=bug-guix-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Queue-Id: DC1B794038E X-Spam-Score: -1.19 X-Migadu-Scanner: ns3122888.ip-94-23-21.eu X-TUID: xXs8hY073wCy On Sun, 29 Nov 2020 20:30:20 -0500 Mark H Weaver wrote: > Hi Tobias, >=20 > Thanks for the super quick response and for reproducing the bug. >=20 > > This looks like an upstream bug to me. =20 >=20 > Agreed. >=20 > > Do you have time to file=20 > > one? We're using the upstream=20 > > since Victor Abell retired. =20 >=20 > I have time, but there's another problem: it appears that I cannot > file a bug report on Github without first creating an account, which > in turn requires me to formally agree to their legal agreement. > Among other things, it includes an indemnification clause, meaning > that I would have to promise to pay their legal fees if some dispute > arises involving me and they decide to retain laywers to deal with > it. They also claim the right to change the terms of the agreement > at any time without notifying me, and by continuing to use the > service I would implicitly agree to those new terms. >=20 > I refuse to sign that agreement, which means that I cannot file bug > reports on Github. Oh well. >=20 > I don't actually care about 'lsof', except for the fact that our > 'gnome' package depends on it. For now, I'll just disable the 'lsof' > test suite on my private branch. >=20 > > Alternatively we could disable this test in Guix =E2=80=98for now=E2=80= =99 with a > > comment--but we both know how long it will remain unfixed. =20 >=20 > Sounds fine to me, unless someone who has already has a Github account > wants to use it to file a bug. >=20 > Thanks again, > Mark >=20 >=20 >=20 My usual workaround to this is to do a shallow clone (git clone --depth 1) and look for frequently occuring email addresses in git log. Then I just send the bug/patch to them. It hasn't failed so far.