Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-harmony-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 19054 invoked from network); 20 Mar 2007 13:30:00 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 20 Mar 2007 13:30:00 -0000 Received: (qmail 96829 invoked by uid 500); 20 Mar 2007 13:29:45 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-harmony-dev-archive@harmony.apache.org Received: (qmail 96797 invoked by uid 500); 20 Mar 2007 13:29:45 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@harmony.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@harmony.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@harmony.apache.org Received: (qmail 96752 invoked by uid 99); 20 Mar 2007 13:29:45 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (140.211.11.133) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 20 Mar 2007 06:29:45 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.0 required=10.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of tatyanadoubtsova@gmail.com designates 66.249.82.234 as permitted sender) Received: from [66.249.82.234] (HELO wx-out-0506.google.com) (66.249.82.234) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 20 Mar 2007 06:29:35 -0700 Received: by wx-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id i26so1685970wxd for ; Tue, 20 Mar 2007 06:29:14 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=bVtlZHKMyfFLYChfysmmYwccriq/Hw/e0YOSt0SLUL2CMQnW+tsWzoY7BBMl/OvUVAiSNEcW2qVOyWow5Yzk4n3CSFOqiyJo1J0+Vz5tQIMu4y4T5SxK8mzB7o8pP6TDzdz/l4mL1rHKf5p+KZtRks0vJfiRyQYccNxGzJeTyb4= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=RrnvvYoalp6X5gtG23KOlTKr7UMdXTnhbUf4LbFETr/zjGqwKIRv1RI1dbJn2BWZjrFGIfDfdiVNGBcWerAaRyJJaaF61GA8UQbBhsiUjb8Znt0onXCd5si/COTH9H1q34ywT7s+KEgKdm7+GauHQGek3B7ZWnjRx5h0+f0anoE= Received: by 10.90.116.6 with SMTP id o6mr570269agc.1174397354150; Tue, 20 Mar 2007 06:29:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.90.80.6 with HTTP; Tue, 20 Mar 2007 06:29:14 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <678b3f320703200629m2455f311ma95bc1b5fcee52b4@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2007 19:29:14 +0600 From: "tatyana doubtsova" To: dev@harmony.apache.org Subject: Re: [classlib][awt] exclude lists cleanup In-Reply-To: <2c9597b90703160639u23dd0a6cjfe0ed8245737a2@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_94379_1664763.1174397354101" References: <2c9597b90703160329l47969b16n15bd3a5b82099b00@mail.gmail.com> <7273946b0703160559k1b868f26ged2eafc26b2dc4a2@mail.gmail.com> <2c9597b90703160639u23dd0a6cjfe0ed8245737a2@mail.gmail.com> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org ------=_Part_94379_1664763.1174397354101 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Alexei, I've observed some failures after clean-up and updated 1979: java.awt.AccessibleAWTWindowTest java.awt.TextComponentTest hangs or crashes VM On lnx ia64 java.awt.AccessibleAWTButtonTest crashes VM. Everything OK on win XP. Could you, please update x-lists? Thanks, Tanya On 3/16/07, Alexei Zakharov wrote: > > Done. Thanks Vladimir. > > 2007/3/16, Vladimir Ivanov : > > The test java.awt.font.LineBreakMeasurerTest failed on x86-64 Linux. > > Could you exclude it again? > > > > thanks, Vladimir > > > > On 3/16/07, Alexei Zakharov wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > > > Recently I've discovered that a lot of tests from our AWT exclude > > > lists are passing tests indeed. We have an old JIRA describing this > > > problem =96 HARMONY-1979. So two days ago I've started a big exclude > > > list cleanup process and just have finished it =96 see the revision > > > 518922. According to JUnit report now we have +292 enabled tests on > > > Windows and +166 on Linux. However, regardless of the fact that I've > > > tested everything many times on DLRVM & IBM VME on Linux 32/ Windows > > > 32 it may happen that some of enabled tests will fail / crash on the > > > configurations that differ from mine. Hope CC will alert us if this i= s > > > the case. Please note that I didn't check 64bit builds due the lack o= f > > > time. Just assumed the all tests that fail on Linux 32 will fail on > > > Linux 64 as well. > > > > > > In other words, new AWT unit tests failures are possible. It is > > > normal. Please feel free to send your complaints to this thread. :) > > > > > > Thanks, > > > -- > > > Alexei Zakharov, > > > Intel ESSD > > > -- > Alexei Zakharov, > Intel ESSD > ------=_Part_94379_1664763.1174397354101--