harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "chunrong lai" <chunrong...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: testing for the newer EUT
Date Fri, 26 Dec 2008 04:32:54 GMT
hi, colleagues:
    I'd like to update my running status of EUT35 with you. As reported in
HARMONY-6062, I have not been able to run EUT35 with Harmony (although it is
fine to run EUT33 with it).
    The failure can be reproduced with the long java command line option
"java -jar
eclipse\plugins\org.eclipse.equinox.launcher_1.0.200.v20080825-1800.jar
-application org.eclipse.test.uitestapplication -data workspace -dev bin
formatter=org.apache.tools.ant.taskdefs.optional.junit.XMLJUnitResultFormatter,d:\eclipse-testing\eclipse\org.eclipse.jdt.text.tests.JdtTextTestSuite.xml
-testPluginName org.eclipse.jdt.text.tests -className
org.eclipse.jdt.text.tests.JdtTextTestSuite -os win32 -ws win32 -arch x86".
I also attached the output file in the JIRA, where I guess the root cause
are from some Harmony jar file constrains, "!MESSAGE Missing Constraint:
Bundle-RequiredExecutionEnvironment: JavaSE-1.6".
    Another interesting point is that after the test case had successfully
runed (so the configuration phase has been finished) with RI (with above
command), it would be no problem for Harmony to run it again. This somehow
supports our guess of some verification failures in the configuration phase.
On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 8:37 PM, chunrong lai <chunronglai@gmail.com> wrote:

> I am running the tests, not finished yet.
>
> Thanks.
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 9:28 PM, Tim Ellison <t.p.ellison@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Are you looking at this Chunrong?
>>
>>
>> Tim Ellison wrote:
>> > chunrong lai wrote:
>> >>   So far Harmony has only EUT3.3 in testing. It looks like it is time
>> to
>> >> include EUT3.4 now. Your suggestions/comments are welcome.
>> >
>> > Skip 3.4 and go straight to the 3.5 stream tests [1].
>> >
>> > It would be prudent to test using the latest milestone build first [2],
>> > but if we want to remain current then catching any issues earlier in the
>> > integration builds would be the thing to do.
>> >
>> > How about running then using the Apache infrastructure, which would give
>> > us better control of the jobs and insight into the failures?
>> >
>> > [1] http://download.eclipse.org/eclipse/downloads/
>> > [2]
>> >
>> http://download.eclipse.org/eclipse/downloads/drops/S-3.5M3-200810301917/index.php
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Tim
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>

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