On Fri, Feb 26 2021, David Bremner wrote: > David Bremner <david@tethera.net> writes: > >> >> Thanks to both of you for your feedback / suggestions. I did read today >> that timeout exits with 124 when the time limit is reached. I haven't >> investigated further (nor do I know how the timelimit should be reached, >> since the whold build+test cycle takes about 10s on this machine. > > Maybe a timeout is not so crazy. I ran a couple of trials with > NOTMUCH_TEST_TIMEOUT=0, and it eventually hung (after 6, and 110 > repetitions) in T355-smime, as far as I can tell on the first test. > I'm currently running some trials to see if I can duplicate that without > parallel execution, but that of course takes longer. So, AFAIU, you got 124 since timeout(1) exited with that status (and killed all parallel(1) executions (after 2 minutes in that case?)... ... and when you set NOTMUCH_TEST_TIMEOUT=0 then timeout(1) was not executed and a test hung (probably T355-smime). In any way you get it again to hung state (w/o using timeout(1) to mess around) you probably can peek things with ps, /proc, strace, gdb, or with some other (potentially more sophisticated ;) tools. > > d Tomi _______________________________________________ notmuch mailing list -- notmuch@notmuchmail.org To unsubscribe send an email to notmuch-leave@notmuchmail.org