You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@subversion.apache.org by Nathan Hartman <ha...@gmail.com> on 2019/07/19 15:57:59 UTC
1.9.12 test failure
FYI:
[067/109]
externals_tests.py.............................................FAILURE
[068/109] getopt_tests.pymake: *** [check] Error 1
Platform: macOS 10.13.6
Investigating... be back soon.
By the way, is there a script that generates the list of dependencies and
their versions?
Re: 1.9.12 test failure
Posted by Nathan Hartman <ha...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 12:08 PM Mark Phippard <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 26, 2019, at 12:06 PM, Nathan Hartman <ha...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 6:03 PM Daniel Shahaf <d....@daniel.shahaf.name>
> wrote:
>
>> Also, I can't think of a reason why you shouldn't sign the tarballs.
>>
>
> I was under the impression that a signature is only meaningful when the
> signer is a committer. :-)
>
>
> The signature only counts as a binding vote for the release when it is
> from a committer but in terms of strengthening the web of trust we ought to
> accept a signature from anyone.
>
In that case, I'll be happy to do that in the future. :-)
Re: 1.9.12 test failure
Posted by Mark Phippard <ma...@gmail.com>.
> On Jul 26, 2019, at 12:06 PM, Nathan Hartman <ha...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 6:03 PM Daniel Shahaf <d....@daniel.shahaf.name> wrote:
>
>> Nathan Hartman wrote on Fri, 19 Jul 2019 17:32 +00:00:
>> > I meant is there a script that generates the list of dependencies
>> > actually used on the test system. E.g., as in this testing/signing
>> > message from a prior release:
>> >
>> > https://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2019-04/0012.shtml
>> >
>> > Because even though I'm not signing, I'd like to report what was actually used.
>>
>> There's 'svn --version --verbose', and I think stsp's distro (tools/dev/unix-build/)
>> has a target for this too, but beyond that, I don't think there's a single script
>> you can use. Many developers use Debian derivatives, though; perhaps one of
>> them will share a script you can use.
>>
>> People usually report what test combinations they ran. (That basically
>> means what FS backend and RA layer you tested. If you set any relevant
>> 'make'- or 'make check'-time knobs, it's useful to say that, too.)
>>
>> Also, I can't think of a reason why you shouldn't sign the tarballs.
>>
>> Thanks for testing,
>>
>> Daniel
>
> Thanks. That does make it much easier to include the dependency info
> for future tests.
>
> I was under the impression that a signature is only meaningful when the
> signer is a committer. :-)
>
> Glad to help. Thanks to everyone for the latest Subversion releases!
The signature only counts as a binding vote for the release when it is from a committer but in terms of strengthening the web of trust we ought to accept a signature from anyone.
Mark
Re: 1.9.12 test failure
Posted by Nathan Hartman <ha...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 6:03 PM Daniel Shahaf <d....@daniel.shahaf.name>
wrote:
> Nathan Hartman wrote on Fri, 19 Jul 2019 17:32 +00:00:
> > I meant is there a script that generates the list of dependencies
> > actually used on the test system. E.g., as in this testing/signing
> > message from a prior release:
> >
> > https://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2019-04/0012.shtml
> >
> > Because even though I'm not signing, I'd like to report what was
> actually used.
>
> There's 'svn --version --verbose', and I think stsp's distro
> (tools/dev/unix-build/)
> has a target for this too, but beyond that, I don't think there's a single
> script
> you can use. Many developers use Debian derivatives, though; perhaps one
> of
> them will share a script you can use.
>
> People usually report what test combinations they ran. (That basically
> means what FS backend and RA layer you tested. If you set any relevant
> 'make'- or 'make check'-time knobs, it's useful to say that, too.)
>
> Also, I can't think of a reason why you shouldn't sign the tarballs.
>
> Thanks for testing,
>
> Daniel
>
Thanks. That does make it much easier to include the dependency info
for future tests.
I was under the impression that a signature is only meaningful when the
signer is a committer. :-)
Glad to help. Thanks to everyone for the latest Subversion releases!
Re: 1.9.12 test failure
Posted by Daniel Shahaf <d....@daniel.shahaf.name>.
Nathan Hartman wrote on Fri, 19 Jul 2019 17:32 +00:00:
> I meant is there a script that generates the list of dependencies
> actually used on the test system. E.g., as in this testing/signing
> message from a prior release:
>
> https://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2019-04/0012.shtml
>
> Because even though I'm not signing, I'd like to report what was actually used.
There's 'svn --version --verbose', and I think stsp's distro (tools/dev/unix-build/)
has a target for this too, but beyond that, I don't think there's a single script
you can use. Many developers use Debian derivatives, though; perhaps one of
them will share a script you can use.
People usually report what test combinations they ran. (That basically
means what FS backend and RA layer you tested. If you set any relevant
'make'- or 'make check'-time knobs, it's useful to say that, too.)
Also, I can't think of a reason why you shouldn't sign the tarballs.
Thanks for testing,
Daniel
Re: 1.9.12 test failure
Posted by Nathan Hartman <ha...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 12:10 PM Julian Foad <ju...@apache.org> wrote:
> Nathan Hartman wrote:
> > Apologies for the noise. This was caused by a volume full error!
> >
> > I'll rerun on a bigger volume and let you know.
>
> Hehe. Glad to know you're testing it.
>
Thanks for your hard work! I'll test the other rc's as well, also on Linux
and Windows.
> By the way, is there a script that generates the list of dependencies and
> their versions?
>
> I think the most 'official' source is 'get-deps.sh' in the source root
> dir. The list of version numbers is near the top of that file.
>
I meant is there a script that generates the list of dependencies actually
used
on the test system. E.g., as in this testing/signing message from a prior
release:
https://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2019-04/0012.shtml
Because even though I'm not signing, I'd like to report what was actually
used.
Re: 1.9.12 test failure
Posted by Julian Foad <ju...@apache.org>.
Nathan Hartman wrote:
> Apologies for the noise. This was caused by a volume full error!
>
> I'll rerun on a bigger volume and let you know.
Hehe. Glad to know you're testing it.
> By the way, is there a script that generates the list of dependencies and their versions?
I think the most 'official' source is 'get-deps.sh' in the source root
dir. The list of version numbers is near the top of that file.
- Julian
Re: 1.9.12 test failure
Posted by Nathan Hartman <ha...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 11:57 AM Nathan Hartman <ha...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> FYI:
>
> [067/109]
> externals_tests.py.............................................FAILURE
>
>
Apologies for the noise. This was caused by a volume full error!
I'll rerun on a bigger volume and let you know.