couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christopher Lenz <cml...@gmx.de>
Subject Re: Call for testing: couchjs branch
Date Tue, 04 Mar 2008 21:12:06 GMT
Hi Benoit,

thanks for checking out the branch!

On 04.03.2008, at 13:35, Benoit Chesneau wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 11:20 AM, Christopher Lenz <cmlenz@gmx.de>  
> wrote:
>> we've been working on a branch that would remove the SpiderMonkey
>> sources from the CouchDB repository, so that we could instead treat
>> SpiderMonkey as a normal external library dependency.
>>
[snip]
>> The branch has now come so far along that it "worksforme", so I'd  
>> like
>> to ask anyone who's interested to check out the branch, do the build
>> and run some tests, and report back problems (or, hopefully at least
>> in some cases, the absence of problems ;).
>>
> tested on openbsd 4.3-current on amd64. The bootstrap don't work,
> mostly because spidermonkey is compiled with threads support and it
> don't find -ljs. Find patchs enclosed.
>
> After having installed I tested it and have following errors :
> - conflicts : Run with debuggerAssertion failed: e.error == "conflict"

This one is expected and also happens on trunk. I deliberately made  
the test case fail back in January as it was previously masking a 500  
internal server error. This requires a fix somewhere in the CouchDB  
Erlang code (haven't tracked it down yet, and probably won't until  
we've moved the repos and Damien can finally check in his refactorings).

> - replication : # Exception raised:
> {"error":"EXIT","reason":"{{badmatch,{error,eaddrinuse}},\n
> [{couch_rep,do_http_request,3},\n {couch_rep,get_missing_revs,2},\n
> {couch_rep,maybe_save_docs,4},\n {couch_rep,'-pull_rep/4-fun-0-',5},\n
> {couch_rep,enum_docs0,3},\n {couch_rep,enum_docs_since,4},\n
> {couch_rep,pull_rep,4},\n {couch_rep,replicate,3}]}"}

Now that's a weird error. You aren't getting that one with trunk? Is  
this consistently reproducible?

Replication shouldn't be starting a new server process, but rather  
simply to connecting to the already running process IIUC. So it  
shouldn't be trying to listen to some point, and thus shouldn't get an  
eaddrinuse error. But maybe I'm overlooking something.

Cheers,
Chris
--
Christopher Lenz
   cmlenz at gmx.de
   http://www.cmlenz.net/


Mime
View raw message