[Bug]: Spurious self-test failures on slow machines

[jas4711]

Steps to Reproduce

Build and run self-checks.

Your Environment

• OS - Debian
• Version - sid

Expected Behavior

Self checks pass

Actual Behavior

Self checks fail

Additional Context

Hi

I am helping maintaining this package in Debian, and we're seeing spurious self-test failures on armhf/armel, which I believe is mostly due to these platforms being slow.

https://ci.debian.net/packages/g/golang-github-smallstep-crypto/testing/armhf/56206910/
https://ci.debian.net/packages/g/golang-github-smallstep-crypto/testing/armel/56206817/

Here are what I believe are the relevant errors:

190s     certificate_test.go:647: 
190s         	Error Trace:	/tmp/autopkgtest-lxc.lgsuy2x8/downtmp/autopkgtest_tmp/_build/src/go.step.sm/crypto/x509util/certificate_test.go:647
190s         	Error:      	Not equal: 
...
190s         	            	Diff:
190s         	            	--- Expected
190s         	            	+++ Actual
190s         	            	@@ -59,3 +59,3 @@
190s         	            	   wall: (uint64) 0,
190s         	            	-  ext: (int64) 63872019401,
190s         	            	+  ext: (int64) 63872019402,
190s         	            	   loc: (*time.Location)(<nil>)

and

160s     funcmap_test.go:245: 
160s         	Error Trace:	/tmp/autopkgtest-lxc.1d0o0uzr/downtmp/autopkgtest_tmp/_build/src/go.step.sm/crypto/internal/templates/funcmap_test.go:245
160s         	Error:      	Not equal: 
160s         	            	expected: "2025-01-09T06:22:13Z"
160s         	            	actual  : "2025-01-09T06:22:14Z"
160s         	            	
160s         	            	Diff:
160s         	            	--- Expected
160s         	            	+++ Actual
160s         	            	@@ -1 +1 @@
160s         	            	-2025-01-09T06:22:13Z
160s         	            	+2025-01-09T06:22:14Z
160s         	Test:       	TestTemplates/formatTime_in_sprig

What do you think?

Thanks,
Simon

Contributing

Vote on this issue by adding a 👍 reaction.
To contribute a fix for this issue, leave a comment (and link to your pull request, if you've opened one already).