harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Mikhail Fursov" <mike.fur...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [general] Discussion: how to keep up stability and fast progress all together?
Date Thu, 19 Apr 2007 14:27:44 GMT
I used Windows 32-bit and my Centrino-based laptop.

On 4/19/07, Alexei Zakharov <alexei.zakharov@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Mikhail,
>
> On which system have you tried to start it?
> I can't say I was so lucky. Today I've tried to start jEdit (I have
> the most recent stable version 4.2) several times on my Debian Linux
> (32bit) system.
>
> First time it hanged after pressing couple of buttons with:
> free(): invalid pointer 0x<some hex number>
> free(): invalid pointer 0x<another hex number>
>
> When I started it again it crashed with:
> SIGSEGV in VM code.
> Stack trace:
>
> I don't want to say that jEdit is the best possible reproducer. Just
> like to reminde that we still have problems with it.
>
> With Best Regards,
>
> 2007/4/15, Mikhail Fursov <mike.fursov@gmail.com>:
> > I also tried jEdit today: (version 4.3 pre9)  - it started fine in
> default
> > JIT mode. I opened and edited several documents and found no errors.
> I'll
> > try more with different verification levels enabled.
> >
> > On 4/13/07, Alexei Zakharov <alexei.zakharov@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > jEdit?
> > > > But I'm not sure that it works ok on current class library :)
> > >
> > > I've tried to run jEdit on Harmony recently. I was able to start it on
> > > IBM VME only - it fails to start on JITed version of DRLVM and startup
> > > takes tooo long in DRLVM's interpreter mode (however, it starts).  But
> > > even on IBM VME it is not able to work longer than about 10 minutes.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > 2007/4/4, Alexey Petrenko <alexey.a.petrenko@gmail.com>:
> > > > 2007/4/4, Stepan Mishura <stepan.mishura@gmail.com>:
> > > > > On 4/4/07, Alexey Petrenko wrote:
> > > > > <SNIP>
> > > > > > > > I'd like to propose the next approach that may help
us to
> know
> > > about
> > > > > > > > instabilities: develop (or take existing one, for
example,
> > > Eclipse
> > > > > > > > hello world) a scenario for testing stability and
configure
> CC
> > > to run
> > > > > > > > it at all times. The stability scenario must be the
only one
> > > scenario
> > > > > > > > for CC; it must be short (no longer then an hour),
test JRE
> in
> > > stress
> > > > > > > > conditions and cover most of functionality. If the
scenario
> > > fails then
> > > > > > > > all newly committed updates are subject for investigation
> and
> > > fix (or
> > > > > > > > rollback).
> > > > > > > Actually, I prefer something without GUI
> > > > > > I do not think that remove GUI testing from CC and other
> stability
> > > > > > testing is a good way to go. Because awt and swing modules are
> > > really
> > > > > > big and complicated pieces of code.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Sorry for the confusion - I agree that we should continue running
> > > > > AWT/Swing tests under CC. But we are talking about scenario that
> can
> > > > > be used for testing stability in terms of race conditions. The
> first
> > > > > scenario that spread in my mind was Eclipse hello world testing
> > > > > scenario: it is quite short, verifies core functionality and so
> on.
> > > > > But Vladimir claimed that there might be some issues related to
> GUI
> > > > > testing and we may have a number of 'false alarms'.
> > > > In fact Eclipse does not use awt and swing at all so it can not be
> > > > used as a test for these modules.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > BTW, do you have any scenario in mind that can be used a stability
> > > > > criteria (of cause in terms of race conditions)?
> > > > jEdit?
> > > > But I'm not sure that it works ok on current class library :)
> > > >
> > > > SY, Alexey
> > > >
> > > > > > > or at least without using
> > > > > > > special 'GUI testing" tools. It should improve quality
of this
> > > testing
> > > > > > > (than less tools than more predictable results :)) Current
> > > "Eclipse
> > > > > > > hello world" scenario based on the AutoIT for Win and
> X11GuiTest
> > > for
> > > > > > > Linux platform. Also we have this scenario based on API
calls
> > > which
> > > > > > > should emulate GUI scenario. From these 2 approaches I
prefer
> > > second
> > > > > > > to minimize 'false alarms'. Or may be some other scenarios
> > > (non-GUI)?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >  Thanks, Vladimir
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thought? Objections?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > Stepan.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I read the discussion on naming, and M1, M2,
... is fine
> by
> > > me.  How
> > > > > > > > > about we pick a proposed date for Apache Harmony
M1?
>
> --
> Alexei Zakharov,
> Intel ESSD
>



-- 
Mikhail Fursov

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message