-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 17.7k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
net: TestLookupDotsWithLocalSource fails #29712
Labels
FrozenDueToAge
NeedsInvestigation
Someone must examine and confirm this is a valid issue and not a duplicate of an existing one.
WaitingForInfo
Issue is not actionable because of missing required information, which needs to be provided.
Milestone
Comments
CC @mikioh @bradfitz @ianlancetaylor for |
This test passes under all recent releases for me on recent Debian; I'm guessing it's something distro-specific. What distribution and version are you running? (Please attach the output of
|
bcmills
added
the
WaitingForInfo
Issue is not actionable because of missing required information, which needs to be provided.
label
Jan 30, 2019
bcmills
added
the
NeedsInvestigation
Someone must examine and confirm this is a valid issue and not a duplicate of an existing one.
label
Jan 30, 2019
This is on Arch Linux.
(no lsb-release provided by default) |
I fixed this by adding |
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Labels
FrozenDueToAge
NeedsInvestigation
Someone must examine and confirm this is a valid issue and not a duplicate of an existing one.
WaitingForInfo
Issue is not actionable because of missing required information, which needs to be provided.
What version of Go are you using (
go version
)?Does this issue reproduce with the latest release?
Yes, 1.11.4 is the latest (not counting betas?).
What operating system and processor architecture are you using (
go env
)?go env
OutputWhat did you do?
What did you expect to see?
All tests pass
What did you see instead?
Test failures:
This appears to be a regression of or related to #15881
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: