harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Vladimir Ivanov" <ivavladi...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [general][M2] Code frozen
Date Wed, 27 Jun 2007 04:19:47 GMT
On 6/27/07, Stepan Mishura <stepan.mishura@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 6/27/07, Vladimir Ivanov <ivavladimir@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I prefer to exclude this test (at least temporary) and store it in the
> > SVN with some comments about no access to the required site from the
> > tested machine.
> >  thanks, Vladimir
> >
>
> IOW, the tests rely on network connection and may fail due to testing
> machine's configuration. The tests shouldn't depend on network and
> have to be fixed so we exclude them. Correct?

Yes. At least while we can't tune testing machine's configuration
without failures of other tests.
 thanks, Vladimir

>
> Thanks,
> Stepan.
>
> > On 6/27/07, Stepan Mishura <stepan.mishura@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On 6/26/07, Vladimir Ivanov <ivavladimir@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > I look at classlib failures:
> > > >
> > > > org.apache.harmony.prefs.tests.java.util.prefs.AbstractPreferencesTest
> > > > - discussed in the other thread. This test requires direct connect to
> > > > the internet.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Hmm, ...  I'm in doubts. The question is to run tests against new
> > > snapshot should I exclude them locally too or commit the update for
> > > the exclude list to SVN repository (just for the record)?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Stepan.
> > >
> > > > java.awt.geom.Arc2DTest - failed on snapshot but passed on current
> > > > revision (as -Dtest.jre.home=<my_build_of_drlvm>
> > > >
> > > >  thanks, Vladimir
> > > >
> > > > On 6/26/07, Stepan Mishura <stepan.mishura@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > On 6/25/07, Ivan Popov wrote:
> > > > > > I see two failures of jdktools tests, which are not new ones.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Test org.apache.harmony.jpda.tests.jdwp.VirtualMachine.HoldEventsTest
> > > > > > is known as intemittently failing on Windows (HARMONY-3508)
and now it
> > > > > > fails on Linux too. It make sense to move this test to common
exclude
> > > > > > list.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Test mentioned as vmcarsh
> > > > > > (org.apache.harmony.jpda.tests.jdwp.ThreadReference.FramesTest)
failed
> > > > > > due to exceeded timeout for tests run. You may want to increase
> > > > > > default timeout (900000 milliseconds), e.g, specifying
> > > > > > -Dhy.test.timeout=1200000 .
> > > > >
> > > > > Ivan, I've increased timeout to 30000000 but I still see test crash.
> > > > >
> > > > > -Stepan.
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks.
> > > > > > Ivan
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 6/25/07, Stepan Mishura <stepan.mishura@gmail.com>
wrote:
> > > > > > > On 6/25/07, Mikhail Loenko <mloenko@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > 2007/6/25, Stepan Mishura <stepan.mishura@gmail.com>:
> > > > > > > > > On 6/25/07, Mark Hindess wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On 25 June 2007 at 13:59, "Stepan Mishura"
<stepan.mishura@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > On 6/24/07, Mikhail Loenko <mloenko@gmail.com>
wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > We have passed our code freeze
date for M2
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Mikhail,
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Just to be clear - M1 milestone published
snapshots include build for
> > > > > > > > > > > Windows x86, Linux (libstdc++ v5 and
libstdc++ v6) x86 and Windows
> > > > > > > > > > > x86_64.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Do you think it would be possible to produce
source snapshots?  The
> > > > > > > > > > Apache release FAQ (at http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html
) says:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >  The Apache Software Foundation produces
open source software. All
> > > > > > > > > >  releases are in the form of the source
materials needed to make
> > > > > > > > > >  changes to the software being released.
In some cases, binary/bytecode
> > > > > > > > > >  packages are also produced as a convenience
to users that might
> > > > > > > > > >  not have the appropriate tools to build
a compiled version of the
> > > > > > > > > >  source. In all such cases, the binary/bytecode
package must have
> > > > > > > > > >  the same version number as the source release
and may only add
> > > > > > > > > >  binary/bytecode files that are the result
of compiling that version of
> > > > > > > > > >  the source code release.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Currently binaries are our primary artifact.
 I appreciated that it may
> > > > > > > > > > be a little late to try to correct this
for this release, but I think it
> > > > > > > > > > is important that we try to correct this
before we get too comfortable
> > > > > > > > > > with the current release process.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I'd suggest to switch to using source snapshots
right after M2.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > It should now be possible to do:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >  ant bundle_src
> > > > > > > > > >  mkdir /tmp/build
> > > > > > > > > >  tar -C /tmp/build -xzf target/apache-harmony-src-r550411-snapshot.tar.gz
> > > > > > > > > >  cd /tmp/build/harmony-src-550411
> > > > > > > > > >  ant -Dauto.fetch=true
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > which would seem to me to be more in-keeping
with the Apache release
> > > > > > > > > > guidelines.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On this subject, I'd like to permission
to commit a patch to correct the
> > > > > > > > > > top-level directory name in the source tar.gz/zip
files from:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >  harmony-src-550411
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > to:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >  apache-harmony-src-r550411
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I'm OK with it.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > will it require rebuild of the release candidate?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I think it is not required.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > OK, I've built and uploaded milestone candidates (r550333)
for
> > > > > > > - Linux x86/x86_64 libstdc++ v5 (and v6 for x86 is in progress)
> > > > > > > - Windows x86/x86_64
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The snapshots are available from "snapshots v5" page[1]
(or can be
> > > > > > > taken from dir [2])
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > [1] http://harmony.apache.org/snapshots_v5.html
> > > > > > > [2] http://people.apache.org/builds/harmony/snapshots/r550333/
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > -Stepan.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > Mikhail
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > > Stepan.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > The format of the archive names changed
over time and these have become
> > > > > > > > > > inconsistent.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > > > >  Mark.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I assume that we still aimed to x86
architecture and I need to build
> > > > > > > > > > > milestone candidates for:
> > > > > > > > > > > - Windows x86
> > > > > > > > > > > - Linux x86. BWT, again for both libstdc++
versions?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > And what about x86_64?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > As I said M1 includes Windows x86_64.
Should we publish them to let
> > > > > > > > > > > the community test them to see how
good they are?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > > > > Stepan.
>

Mime
View raw message