You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@subversion.apache.org by "Hyrum K. Wright" <hy...@mail.utexas.edu> on 2010/12/20 18:31:55 UTC
Will we release 1.5.9? (was Re: 1.5.9 up for testing/signing)
We got two sigs for each of Windows and Unix for 1.5.9, but the
signing process has stalled from there. I'd still like to release
this, if possible, but we should probably make a decision at some
point.
-Hyrum
On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 3:55 PM, Hyrum K. Wright
<hy...@mail.utexas.edu> wrote:
> 1.5.9 tarballs are up for testing and signing. The magic revision is r1041577:
> http://people.apache.org/~hwright/svn/1.5.9/
>
> To sign the release, please input your signatures using the script here:
> http://work.hyrumwright.org/pub/svn/collect_sigs.py
>
> (The script worked pretty well for 1.6.15, but if you discover any
> bugs please let me know.)
>
> Testing by enthusiastic users is also welcomed (but remember that this
> is not yet a blessed release, with all that that implies). If you are
> a package maintainer, please do not included this release in your
> distribution until after it has been formally released.
>
> I'd like to collect all the signatures in time to do a release by December 6.
>
> -Hyrum
>
Re: Will we release 1.5.9? (was Re: 1.5.9 up for testing/signing)
Posted by Julian Foad <ju...@wandisco.com>.
On Tue, 2010-12-21 at 14:01 +0000, Julian Foad wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-12-21 at 13:43 +0000, Julian Foad wrote:
> > > > 1.5.9 tarballs are up for testing and signing. [...]
> >
> > I had some trouble building this but have now got the main tests
>
> ... working.
>
> I have not been able to run any of the bindings tests. Details at
> <http://pastebin.com/z9k8Qp62> or on IRC.
With more help from Philip, now all the bindings tests run and PASS as
well:
javahl
swig-py
swig-pl
swig-rb
My configuration/build/test script ended up looking like this (I'm
showing just the essentials here):
[[[
# Ubuntu's DB4.8 isn't detected without this...
export LDFLAGS="-ldb-4"
SRC_DIR="$PWD"
BASENAME="`basename "$SRC_DIR"`"
INSTALL_PREFIX="$HOME/local/$BASENAME"
TEST_CONFIGURE_OPTIONS="--prefix=$INSTALL_PREFIX
--with-apache-libexecdir=$INSTALL_PREFIX/lib/apache2/modules
--disable-mod-activation --with-ssl --with-berkeley-db=/usr
--enable-javahl --with-jdk=/usr/lib/jvm/java-6-sun
--with-junit=/usr/share/java/junit4.jar --with-ruby-sitedir=
$INSTALL_PREFIX/site_ruby"
CFLAGS=-DNDEBUG ./configure $TEST_CONFIGURE_OPTIONS
# Make and test the main code
make
make install || true # ### Ignore failure to install Apache modules: it
tries the system dir and doesn't understand "--with-apache-libexecdir".
[... Not shown: at this point, 8-way combinations of "make check" ...]
# Make and test the bindings
make javahl
make swig-py
make swig-pl
make swig-rb
make install-javahl
make install-swig-py
#make install-swig-pl # tries to install to system path - need
XXX_PREFIX?
make install-swig-rb
# During all four sets of bindings tests, the in-tree build of Neon
fails to link to libgssapi_krb5 without this...
export LD_PRELOAD=/usr/lib/libgssapi_krb5.so
make check-javahl 2>&1 | tee tests-javahl.log
make check-swig-py 2>&1 | tee tests-py.log
make check-swig-pl 2>&1 | tee tests-pl.log
make check-swig-rb SWIG_RB_TEST_VERBOSE=verbose 2>&1 | tee tests-rb.log
]]]
- Julian
> >
> > Summary:
> >
> > +1 to release (Unix).
> >
> > My two signatures were successfully collected by your script.
> >
> > Tested:
> >
> > [ bdb | fsfs ] x [ ra_local | ra_svn | ra_neon | ra_serf ]
> >
> > Environment:
> >
> > OS/Platform:
> > Ubuntu 10.04, 2.6.32-26-generic i686 GNU/Linux
> >
> > Using in-tree build of subversion-deps-1.5.9 packages:
> > apr
> > apr-util
> > neon
> > serf
> > zlib
> >
> > Using Ubuntu distribution-supplied packages:
> > libdb4.8-dev 4.8
> > openssl 0.9.8k-7ubuntu8.5
> >
> > Results:
> >
> > make check ... (8 ways): No failures.
> >
[...]
Re: Will we release 1.5.9? (was Re: 1.5.9 up for testing/signing)
Posted by Julian Foad <ju...@wandisco.com>.
On Tue, 2010-12-21 at 13:43 +0000, Julian Foad wrote:
> > > 1.5.9 tarballs are up for testing and signing. [...]
>
> I had some trouble building this but have now got the main tests
... working.
I have not been able to run any of the bindings tests. Details at
<http://pastebin.com/z9k8Qp62> or on IRC.
- Julian
>
> Summary:
>
> +1 to release (Unix).
>
> My two signatures were successfully collected by your script.
>
> Tested:
>
> [ bdb | fsfs ] x [ ra_local | ra_svn | ra_neon | ra_serf ]
>
> Environment:
>
> OS/Platform:
> Ubuntu 10.04, 2.6.32-26-generic i686 GNU/Linux
>
> Using in-tree build of subversion-deps-1.5.9 packages:
> apr
> apr-util
> neon
> serf
> zlib
>
> Using Ubuntu distribution-supplied packages:
> libdb4.8-dev 4.8
> openssl 0.9.8k-7ubuntu8.5
>
> Results:
>
> make check ... (8 ways): No failures.
>
> Paranoia:
>
> Verified that all 6 distribution packages match their md5sums,
> sha1sums and to-tigris copies.
>
> Verified that *.bz2 vs *.gz uncompress to exactly the same tarball,
> for both deps and non-deps.
>
> Signatures:
>
> ::: subversion-1.5.9.tar.bz2 :::
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iEYEABECAAYFAk0QqiUACgkQNR8z5DU+Jbw8BACfRO8c8/skKZyzD+MpVcHXhP/A
> /IgAniZLY1UvHP679sxTwCm1eUiXRAge
> =1Y6A
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> ::: subversion-1.5.9.tar.gz :::
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iEYEABECAAYFAk0QqiUACgkQNR8z5DU+JbxegwCeLyGv7BosyvZSWu/uodvCp3lm
> eDsAn1UpsIEAKfHI2e9BwjeL2xpsbdhM
> =gSqT
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
> - Julian
>
>
>
>
Re: Will we release 1.5.9? (was Re: 1.5.9 up for testing/signing)
Posted by Julian Foad <ju...@wandisco.com>.
> > 1.5.9 tarballs are up for testing and signing. [...]
I had some trouble building this but have now got the main tests
Summary:
+1 to release (Unix).
My two signatures were successfully collected by your script.
Tested:
[ bdb | fsfs ] x [ ra_local | ra_svn | ra_neon | ra_serf ]
Environment:
OS/Platform:
Ubuntu 10.04, 2.6.32-26-generic i686 GNU/Linux
Using in-tree build of subversion-deps-1.5.9 packages:
apr
apr-util
neon
serf
zlib
Using Ubuntu distribution-supplied packages:
libdb4.8-dev 4.8
openssl 0.9.8k-7ubuntu8.5
Results:
make check ... (8 ways): No failures.
Paranoia:
Verified that all 6 distribution packages match their md5sums,
sha1sums and to-tigris copies.
Verified that *.bz2 vs *.gz uncompress to exactly the same tarball,
for both deps and non-deps.
Signatures:
::: subversion-1.5.9.tar.bz2 :::
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEABECAAYFAk0QqiUACgkQNR8z5DU+Jbw8BACfRO8c8/skKZyzD+MpVcHXhP/A
/IgAniZLY1UvHP679sxTwCm1eUiXRAge
=1Y6A
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
::: subversion-1.5.9.tar.gz :::
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEABECAAYFAk0QqiUACgkQNR8z5DU+JbxegwCeLyGv7BosyvZSWu/uodvCp3lm
eDsAn1UpsIEAKfHI2e9BwjeL2xpsbdhM
=gSqT
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
- Julian
Re: Will we release 1.5.9? (was Re: 1.5.9 up for testing/signing)
Posted by Stefan Sperling <st...@elego.de>.
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 07:58:47PM +0100, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 12:31:55PM -0600, Hyrum K. Wright wrote:
> > We got two sigs for each of Windows and Unix for 1.5.9, but the
> > signing process has stalled from there. I'd still like to release
> > this, if possible, but we should probably make a decision at some
> > point.
>
> I have run tests but haven't gotten around to send a sig yet.
> Will try to do so later tonight.
There are 3 or 4 failing tests.
I haven't had time to investigate further yet.
Re: Will we release 1.5.9? (was Re: 1.5.9 up for testing/signing)
Posted by Stefan Sperling <st...@elego.de>.
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 12:31:55PM -0600, Hyrum K. Wright wrote:
> We got two sigs for each of Windows and Unix for 1.5.9, but the
> signing process has stalled from there. I'd still like to release
> this, if possible, but we should probably make a decision at some
> point.
I have run tests but haven't gotten around to send a sig yet.
Will try to do so later tonight.
Stefan
RE: Will we release 1.5.9? (was Re: 1.5.9 up for testing/signing)
Posted by Bert Huijben <be...@qqmail.nl>.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: hyrum@hyrumwright.org [mailto:hyrum@hyrumwright.org] On Behalf Of
> Hyrum K. Wright
> Sent: maandag 20 december 2010 19:32
> To: Subversion Development
> Subject: Will we release 1.5.9? (was Re: 1.5.9 up for testing/signing)
>
> We got two sigs for each of Windows and Unix for 1.5.9, but the
> signing process has stalled from there. I'd still like to release
> this, if possible, but we should probably make a decision at some
> point.
Ok, got my apache httpd issue resolved (not sure what exactly happened, but
httpd starts correctly from 1.5.x now).
+1 for release.
Windows 7 x64. 32 bit test run [bdb | fsfs] x [local | svn | neon | serf].
The usual dependencies (same as 1.5.8)
Bert