Bug 147516

Summary:	expect problems with large amounts of output
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora	Reporter:	Guy Jennings <jennings>
Component:	expect	Assignee:	David Cantrell <dcantrell>
Status:	CLOSED RAWHIDE	QA Contact:
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	medium
Version:	3
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	i386
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2006-01-31 18:02:52 UTC	Type:	---
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Guy Jennings 2005-02-08 18:10:23 UTC

From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/125.5.6 (KHTML, like Gecko) Safari/125.12

Description of problem:
If you have an expect script that produces large amounts of output the output 'sticks' and repeats at some point.  This seems to be the same behavior described in bug
#147276 but I observe it in any terminal.  

[jennings@weimar ~]$ expect 
expect1.1> spawn perl
spawn perl
13403
expect1.2> interact
print $i++,"\n" while (1)
<ctrl-D>



Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
expect-5.42.1-1

How reproducible:
Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. see above
2.
3.
    

Actual Results:  The output gets to about 10000 and starts to repeat.

Expected Results:  The output should count upwards until you stop it

Additional info:

Comment 1 David Cantrell 2006-01-31 16:11:26 UTC

I see this is an old bug report.  I just recently took ownership of the expect
package, so I'm trying to get caught up.

Two things:

1)  I can't do anything for FC3 as that's now unsupported.

2)  On rawhide (what will become FC5), I ran your test above and the problem
doesn't appear for me.  I let it run to 509003 and killed it.  Rawhide has
expect-5.43.

If you're running FC5 Test 2 or rawhide, can you confirm the behavior is fixed?

Comment 2 Guy Jennings 2006-01-31 17:18:24 UTC

Yes, it was fixed in a later version

Comment 3 David Cantrell 2006-01-31 18:02:52 UTC

OK, thanks.