You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to log4net-dev@logging.apache.org by Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org> on 2013/08/08 12:36:08 UTC
Tagging 1.2.12
Hi,
I now think I have a build environment (again) that allows me to cut a
release. One thing I noticed is that the same XP VM I used to build the
1.2.11 release from no longer wants to build the Compact Framework 2.x
binaries. One of the software updates of the past two years must have
"improved" my stack far enough to drop the corresponding platform.
Anyway, I could tag and build a release candidate in the next few days.
Is there anything I should wait for or can I just go ahead when I see a
slice of time big enough to juggle with building on several machines.
Stefan
AW: Tagging 1.2.12
Posted by Dominik Psenner <dp...@gmail.com>.
That's awesome Stefan! Let's tag, build and start a vote as soon as you find
the time to.
Cheers
>-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>Von: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:bodewig@apache.org]
>Gesendet: Donnerstag, 8. August 2013 15:08
>An: Log4NET Dev
>Betreff: Re: Tagging 1.2.12
>
>On 2013-08-08, Dominik Psenner wrote:
>
>> I've just run the tests and the RemotingAppenderTests seem to fail. Until
>> now I don't know why. Ideas?
>
>All tests pass for me in trunk now.
>
>Stefan
Re: Tagging 1.2.12
Posted by Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>.
On 2013-09-06, Dominik Psenner wrote:
> And yet another month went past and I've got to apologize for being unable
> to test this so far on another machine. However, since this is no regression
> from 1.2.11 and the tests fail only for me and I was unable to find out
> what's actually going on on this machine, it is probably okay to throw out
> 1.2.12. Do you agree?
Yes, I do.
Sorry, I've been offline for a couple of days - I'll proceed with the
release process in the coming week.
Stefan
AW: Tagging 1.2.12
Posted by Dominik Psenner <dp...@gmail.com>.
And yet another month went past and I've got to apologize for being unable
to test this so far on another machine. However, since this is no regression
from 1.2.11 and the tests fail only for me and I was unable to find out
what's actually going on on this machine, it is probably okay to throw out
1.2.12. Do you agree?
>-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>Von: Dominik Psenner [mailto:dpsenner@gmail.com]
>Gesendet: Freitag, 9. August 2013 13:58
>An: 'Log4NET Dev'
>Betreff: AW: Tagging 1.2.12
>
>I've already tried the 1.2.11 binary with the current tests (except the
>DynamicPatternLayout tests) and the RemotingAppenderTests fail too.
>Nevermind, I'll try it later on another machine as soon as I get home.
>
>>-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>>Von: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:bodewig@apache.org]
>>Gesendet: Freitag, 9. August 2013 13:13
>>An: Log4NET Dev
>>Betreff: Re: Tagging 1.2.12
>>
>>On 2013-08-09, Dominik Psenner wrote:
>>
>>> Do you have the possibility to try the tests on a win7?
>>
>>Not without quite a bit of effort (i.e. obtaining an Apache MSDN
>>subscription and installing win7 in the first place :-).
>>
>>You may want to check out the svn tag of log4net 1.2.11 and see whether
>>the tests pass there - so we know whether we've introduced a new bug or
>>are dealing with an old issue that may only affect the test. We'd
>>certainly know by now if the RemotingAppender didn't work at all in
>>1.2.11.
>>
>>Stefan
AW: Tagging 1.2.12
Posted by Dominik Psenner <dp...@gmail.com>.
I've already tried the 1.2.11 binary with the current tests (except the
DynamicPatternLayout tests) and the RemotingAppenderTests fail too.
Nevermind, I'll try it later on another machine as soon as I get home.
>-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>Von: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:bodewig@apache.org]
>Gesendet: Freitag, 9. August 2013 13:13
>An: Log4NET Dev
>Betreff: Re: Tagging 1.2.12
>
>On 2013-08-09, Dominik Psenner wrote:
>
>> Do you have the possibility to try the tests on a win7?
>
>Not without quite a bit of effort (i.e. obtaining an Apache MSDN
>subscription and installing win7 in the first place :-).
>
>You may want to check out the svn tag of log4net 1.2.11 and see whether
>the tests pass there - so we know whether we've introduced a new bug or
>are dealing with an old issue that may only affect the test. We'd
>certainly know by now if the RemotingAppender didn't work at all in
>1.2.11.
>
>Stefan
Re: Tagging 1.2.12
Posted by Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>.
On 2013-08-09, Dominik Psenner wrote:
> Do you have the possibility to try the tests on a win7?
Not without quite a bit of effort (i.e. obtaining an Apache MSDN
subscription and installing win7 in the first place :-).
You may want to check out the svn tag of log4net 1.2.11 and see whether
the tests pass there - so we know whether we've introduced a new bug or
are dealing with an old issue that may only affect the test. We'd
certainly know by now if the RemotingAppender didn't work at all in
1.2.11.
Stefan
AW: Tagging 1.2.12
Posted by Dominik Psenner <dp...@gmail.com>.
Do you have the possibility to try the tests on a win7?
>-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>Von: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:bodewig@apache.org]
>Gesendet: Freitag, 9. August 2013 11:16
>An: Log4NET Dev
>Betreff: Re: Tagging 1.2.12
>
>On 2013-08-09, Dominik Psenner wrote:
>
>> It may be related to some of those new and fancy security restrictions
>> introduced with Win7. On which windows do you run the tests, Stefan?
>
>XP, otherwise I'd be unable to create the .NET 1.x builds.
>
>Stefan
Re: Tagging 1.2.12
Posted by Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>.
On 2013-08-09, Dominik Psenner wrote:
> It may be related to some of those new and fancy security restrictions
> introduced with Win7. On which windows do you run the tests, Stefan?
XP, otherwise I'd be unable to create the .NET 1.x builds.
Stefan
AW: Tagging 1.2.12
Posted by Dominik Psenner <dp...@gmail.com>.
So far I've been unable to find the cause. I first thought it might be a
.NET4.0 thing and swapped to .NET2.0 but it kept failing. Then I thought it
might be related to NUnit but according to TcpView the listening port is
opened and closed properly. On stackoverflow and other resources the most
useful answer is: "this is a .NET error, migrate to WCF".
It may be related to some of those new and fancy security restrictions
introduced with Win7. On which windows do you run the tests, Stefan?
>-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>Von: Dominik Psenner [mailto:dpsenner@gmail.com]
>Gesendet: Freitag, 9. August 2013 09:15
>An: 'Log4NET Dev'
>Betreff: AW: Tagging 1.2.12
>
>*hm* .. Problem identified and working on finding the cause.
>
>To me SetUp keeps failing because he can't register the TCP channel even
>though TcpView doesn't mention a listening tcp socket on port 8085.
>Continuing investigation..
>
>>-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>>Von: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:bodewig@apache.org]
>>Gesendet: Freitag, 9. August 2013 09:02
>>An: Log4NET Dev
>>Betreff: Re: Tagging 1.2.12
>>
>>On 2013-08-09, Dominik Psenner wrote:
>>
>>> I've just re-run the tests and all RemotingAppenderTest are failing.
I've
>>> digged how stacktraces are exchanged in remoted events so that might
>>have
>>> broken something. :-(
>>
>>Strange, they pass for me.
>>
>>Anyway, I'll hold back building the release to give you time to
>>investigate the issue.
>>
>>Stefan
AW: Tagging 1.2.12
Posted by Dominik Psenner <dp...@gmail.com>.
*hm* .. Problem identified and working on finding the cause.
To me SetUp keeps failing because he can't register the TCP channel even
though TcpView doesn't mention a listening tcp socket on port 8085.
Continuing investigation..
>-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>Von: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:bodewig@apache.org]
>Gesendet: Freitag, 9. August 2013 09:02
>An: Log4NET Dev
>Betreff: Re: Tagging 1.2.12
>
>On 2013-08-09, Dominik Psenner wrote:
>
>> I've just re-run the tests and all RemotingAppenderTest are failing. I've
>> digged how stacktraces are exchanged in remoted events so that might
>have
>> broken something. :-(
>
>Strange, they pass for me.
>
>Anyway, I'll hold back building the release to give you time to
>investigate the issue.
>
>Stefan
Re: Tagging 1.2.12
Posted by Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>.
On 2013-08-09, Dominik Psenner wrote:
> I've just re-run the tests and all RemotingAppenderTest are failing. I've
> digged how stacktraces are exchanged in remoted events so that might have
> broken something. :-(
Strange, they pass for me.
Anyway, I'll hold back building the release to give you time to
investigate the issue.
Stefan
AW: Tagging 1.2.12
Posted by Dominik Psenner <dp...@gmail.com>.
I've just re-run the tests and all RemotingAppenderTest are failing. I've
digged how stacktraces are exchanged in remoted events so that might have
broken something. :-(
>-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>Von: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:bodewig@apache.org]
>Gesendet: Donnerstag, 8. August 2013 15:08
>An: Log4NET Dev
>Betreff: Re: Tagging 1.2.12
>
>On 2013-08-08, Dominik Psenner wrote:
>
>> I've just run the tests and the RemotingAppenderTests seem to fail. Until
>> now I don't know why. Ideas?
>
>All tests pass for me in trunk now.
>
>Stefan
Re: Tagging 1.2.12
Posted by Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>.
On 2013-08-08, Dominik Psenner wrote:
> I've just run the tests and the RemotingAppenderTests seem to fail. Until
> now I don't know why. Ideas?
All tests pass for me in trunk now.
Stefan
Re: Tagging 1.2.12
Posted by Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>.
On 2013-08-08, Dominik Psenner wrote:
> * Further I changed PatternLayoutTest like this:
> -Assert.AreEqual("RuntimeMethodHandle._InvokeMethodFast >
> PatternLayoutTest.TestStackTracePattern", stringAppender.GetString(), "stack
> trace value set");
> +Assert.AreEqual("System.RuntimeMethodHandle.InvokeMethod >
> log4net.Tests.Layout.PatternLayoutTest.TestStackTracePattern",
> stringAppender.GetString(), "stack trace value set");
this is where things break for me, I do get _InvokeMethodFast on my XP
box.
I think we should be able to test what needs to be tested without
relying on the details of reflection logic.
Stefan
AW: Tagging 1.2.12
Posted by Dominik Psenner <dp...@gmail.com>.
>-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>Von: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:bodewig@apache.org]
>Gesendet: Donnerstag, 8. August 2013 13:37
>An: Log4NET Dev
>Betreff: Re: Tagging 1.2.12
>
>On 2013-08-08, Dominik Psenner wrote:
>
>> There is:
>
>> I've just run the tests and the RemotingAppenderTests seem to fail. Until
>> now I don't know why. Ideas?
>
>Line 103? Yes, fails for me as well. I'll look into it later, can't
>promise to come up with an idea, though :-)
>
>I get two more test errors in PatternLayoutTest and
>DynamciPatternLayoutTest - TestStacktracePattern in both cases. Some
>internal changes to the .NET framework are leaking into the test
>assertions and it now fails because it expects InvokeMethod but gets
>_InvokeMethodFast - we'd better make the test more robust.
Three things I've done there:
* I fixed XmlLayoutTest by dropping " in " at the end of the string
* Further I changed PatternLayoutTest like this:
-Assert.AreEqual("RuntimeMethodHandle._InvokeMethodFast >
PatternLayoutTest.TestStackTracePattern", stringAppender.GetString(), "stack
trace value set");
+Assert.AreEqual("System.RuntimeMethodHandle.InvokeMethod >
log4net.Tests.Layout.PatternLayoutTest.TestStackTracePattern",
stringAppender.GetString(), "stack trace value set");
* Further I fixed the issues with leaking exception translation
Re: Tagging 1.2.12
Posted by Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>.
On 2013-08-08, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> On 2013-08-08, Dominik Psenner wrote:
>> There is:
>> I've just run the tests and the RemotingAppenderTests seem to fail. Until
>> now I don't know why. Ideas?
> Line 103? Yes, fails for me as well. I'll look into it later, can't
> promise to come up with an idea, though :-)
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/logging/log4net/trunk/src/Core/LoggingEvent.cs?r1=1489889&r2=1511303
The test relies on UserName not being available if the event data isn't
fixed. By "promoting" it in LOG4NET-205 this is no longer true and the
test should use a different property. I'll look into it.
Stefan
Re: Tagging 1.2.12
Posted by Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>.
On 2013-08-08, Dominik Psenner wrote:
> There is:
> I've just run the tests and the RemotingAppenderTests seem to fail. Until
> now I don't know why. Ideas?
Line 103? Yes, fails for me as well. I'll look into it later, can't
promise to come up with an idea, though :-)
I get two more test errors in PatternLayoutTest and
DynamciPatternLayoutTest - TestStacktracePattern in both cases. Some
internal changes to the .NET framework are leaking into the test
assertions and it now fails because it expects InvokeMethod but gets
_InvokeMethodFast - we'd better make the test more robust.
Stefan
AW: Tagging 1.2.12
Posted by Dominik Psenner <dp...@gmail.com>.
There is:
I've just run the tests and the RemotingAppenderTests seem to fail. Until
now I don't know why. Ideas?
Cheers,
D.
>-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>Von: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:bodewig@apache.org]
>Gesendet: Donnerstag, 8. August 2013 12:36
>An: log4net-dev@logging.apache.org
>Betreff: Tagging 1.2.12
>
>Hi,
>
>I now think I have a build environment (again) that allows me to cut a
>release. One thing I noticed is that the same XP VM I used to build the
>1.2.11 release from no longer wants to build the Compact Framework 2.x
>binaries. One of the software updates of the past two years must have
>"improved" my stack far enough to drop the corresponding platform.
>
>Anyway, I could tag and build a release candidate in the next few days.
>Is there anything I should wait for or can I just go ahead when I see a
>slice of time big enough to juggle with building on several machines.
>
>Stefan