Re: Another lintian release for squeeze?
Russ Allbery wrote:
> Raphael Geissert writes:
>> Russ Allbery wrote:
>
>>> Is there any way that we can fix the output handling so that at least
>>> it won't intersperse output from multiple threads? Making failures
>>> basically unreadable is unappealing, and I assume that's the possible
>>> result. Can we use some sort of locking method so that only one thread
>>> is printing stuff to the terminal at a time and finishes dumping its
>>> stuff, including its possible diff, before letting someone else go?
>
>> I don't think it's possible to lock the file descriptors.
>
> Yeah, but you don't need to. You can use a separate variable as mutex
> lock.
Sure. The problem is that the output of subcommands is not under the control
of the thread and as such it can't lock in case of failure or unexpected
writes.
>
>> Since doing this is going to take some time, is there any objection for
>> merging the initial -j option support to at least make prove run
>> multiple jobs? (i.e. not merging the 'use threads' part.)
>
> Oh, sure, I have no objections to that. I don't really have any
> objections to merging the support for parallel tests in general, just
> don't want to make it the default until we figure out how to handle the
> output.
Since by default it defaults to using two jobs, I'm going to hold the other
changes for now.
Cheers,
--
Raphael Geissert - Debian Developer
www.debian.org - get.debian.net
Reply to: