Frank Shearar uploaded a new version of KernelTests to project The Inbox:
http://source.squeak.org/inbox/KernelTests-fbs.235.mcz ==================== Summary ==================== Name: KernelTests-fbs.235 Author: fbs Time: 27 October 2012, 11:37:53.223 pm UUID: ab0d84db-c1bc-40d0-bd90-786dcd6989b5 Ancestors: KernelTests-ul.234 Mark this test as an expected failure for the 4.4 release. Unmark it at the start of the 4.5 cycle! =============== Diff against KernelTests-ul.234 =============== Item was added: + ----- Method: LargeNegativeIntegerTest>>expectedFailures (in category 'as yet unclassified') ----- + expectedFailures + ^ #(testMinimumNegativeIntegerArithmetic).! |
On 27 October 2012 23:37, <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Frank Shearar uploaded a new version of KernelTests to project The Inbox: > http://source.squeak.org/inbox/KernelTests-fbs.235.mcz > > ==================== Summary ==================== > > Name: KernelTests-fbs.235 > Author: fbs > Time: 27 October 2012, 11:37:53.223 pm > UUID: ab0d84db-c1bc-40d0-bd90-786dcd6989b5 > Ancestors: KernelTests-ul.234 > > Mark this test as an expected failure for the 4.4 release. Unmark it at the start of the 4.5 cycle! > > =============== Diff against KernelTests-ul.234 =============== > > Item was added: > + ----- Method: LargeNegativeIntegerTest>>expectedFailures (in category 'as yet unclassified') ----- > + expectedFailures > + ^ #(testMinimumNegativeIntegerArithmetic).! IIRC this test can only pass with suitable VM changes being made. http://bugs.squeak.org/view.php?id=7705 mentions that the fix is in VMMaker-dtl.286, so does this mean that with the interpreter VM this test will pass, but with Cog (the VM we use in CI tests) the test will fail? frank |
On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 11:41:15PM +0100, Frank Shearar wrote:
> On 27 October 2012 23:37, <[hidden email]> wrote: > > Frank Shearar uploaded a new version of KernelTests to project The Inbox: > > http://source.squeak.org/inbox/KernelTests-fbs.235.mcz > > > > ==================== Summary ==================== > > > > Name: KernelTests-fbs.235 > > Author: fbs > > Time: 27 October 2012, 11:37:53.223 pm > > UUID: ab0d84db-c1bc-40d0-bd90-786dcd6989b5 > > Ancestors: KernelTests-ul.234 > > > > Mark this test as an expected failure for the 4.4 release. Unmark it at the start of the 4.5 cycle! > > > > =============== Diff against KernelTests-ul.234 =============== > > > > Item was added: > > + ----- Method: LargeNegativeIntegerTest>>expectedFailures (in category 'as yet unclassified') ----- > > + expectedFailures > > + ^ #(testMinimumNegativeIntegerArithmetic).! > > IIRC this test can only pass with suitable VM changes being made. > http://bugs.squeak.org/view.php?id=7705 mentions that the fix is in > VMMaker-dtl.286, so does this mean that with the interpreter VM this > test will pass, but with Cog (the VM we use in CI tests) the test will > fail? Yes, that's right. It will fail with older interpreter VMs also. Dave |
On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 12:39:34AM -0400, David T. Lewis wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 11:41:15PM +0100, Frank Shearar wrote: > > On 27 October 2012 23:37, <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > Frank Shearar uploaded a new version of KernelTests to project The Inbox: > > > http://source.squeak.org/inbox/KernelTests-fbs.235.mcz > > > > > > ==================== Summary ==================== > > > > > > Name: KernelTests-fbs.235 > > > Author: fbs > > > Time: 27 October 2012, 11:37:53.223 pm > > > UUID: ab0d84db-c1bc-40d0-bd90-786dcd6989b5 > > > Ancestors: KernelTests-ul.234 > > > > > > Mark this test as an expected failure for the 4.4 release. Unmark it at the start of the 4.5 cycle! > > > > > > =============== Diff against KernelTests-ul.234 =============== > > > > > > Item was added: > > > + ----- Method: LargeNegativeIntegerTest>>expectedFailures (in category 'as yet unclassified') ----- > > > + expectedFailures > > > + ^ #(testMinimumNegativeIntegerArithmetic).! > > > > IIRC this test can only pass with suitable VM changes being made. > > http://bugs.squeak.org/view.php?id=7705 mentions that the fix is in > > VMMaker-dtl.286, so does this mean that with the interpreter VM this > > test will pass, but with Cog (the VM we use in CI tests) the test will > > fail? > > Yes, that's right. It will fail with older interpreter VMs also. > If you want to try running the test suite with an interpreter VM, I installed a locally built VM on box3.squeak.org that can be used to drive the tests. This is installed as /usr/local/bin/squeak, and can be used for running both 32-bit and 64-bit Squeak images. This VM is built from latest VMMaker and squeakvm.org sources using the ~lewis/VMUnixBuild/VMUnixBuild.st script (attached), which now seems to work fairly reliably. It is *not* suitable for general distribution, so I would appreciate if we can all be careful to refer to it as a local build, and not as "the standard VM" or any words to that effect. Note, the latest standard interpreter VM (*) is not working on our box3.squeak.org server due to a Linux glibc compatibility issue (/lib/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.15' not found), hence the need for a local build. (*) http://squeakvm.org/unix/release/Squeak-4.10.2.2614-linux_i386.tar.gz Dave VMUnixBuild.st (13K) Download Attachment |
On 28 October 2012 13:04, David T. Lewis <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 12:39:34AM -0400, David T. Lewis wrote: >> On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 11:41:15PM +0100, Frank Shearar wrote: >> > On 27 October 2012 23:37, <[hidden email]> wrote: >> > > Frank Shearar uploaded a new version of KernelTests to project The Inbox: >> > > http://source.squeak.org/inbox/KernelTests-fbs.235.mcz >> > > >> > > ==================== Summary ==================== >> > > >> > > Name: KernelTests-fbs.235 >> > > Author: fbs >> > > Time: 27 October 2012, 11:37:53.223 pm >> > > UUID: ab0d84db-c1bc-40d0-bd90-786dcd6989b5 >> > > Ancestors: KernelTests-ul.234 >> > > >> > > Mark this test as an expected failure for the 4.4 release. Unmark it at the start of the 4.5 cycle! >> > > >> > > =============== Diff against KernelTests-ul.234 =============== >> > > >> > > Item was added: >> > > + ----- Method: LargeNegativeIntegerTest>>expectedFailures (in category 'as yet unclassified') ----- >> > > + expectedFailures >> > > + ^ #(testMinimumNegativeIntegerArithmetic).! >> > >> > IIRC this test can only pass with suitable VM changes being made. >> > http://bugs.squeak.org/view.php?id=7705 mentions that the fix is in >> > VMMaker-dtl.286, so does this mean that with the interpreter VM this >> > test will pass, but with Cog (the VM we use in CI tests) the test will >> > fail? >> >> Yes, that's right. It will fail with older interpreter VMs also. >> > > Frank, > > If you want to try running the test suite with an interpreter VM, I > installed a locally built VM on box3.squeak.org that can be used to > drive the tests. This is installed as /usr/local/bin/squeak, and can > be used for running both 32-bit and 64-bit Squeak images. > > This VM is built from latest VMMaker and squeakvm.org sources using > the ~lewis/VMUnixBuild/VMUnixBuild.st script (attached), which now seems > to work fairly reliably. It is *not* suitable for general distribution, > so I would appreciate if we can all be careful to refer to it as a local > build, and not as "the standard VM" or any words to that effect. Thanks Dave, I'll be able to pick this up in a few hours, once my boys have gone to bed. I'll add a new script to the squeak-ci repo that refers to the local build. (It's nearly time to refactor the build scripts, too.) > Note, the latest standard interpreter VM (*) is not working on our > box3.squeak.org server due to a Linux glibc compatibility issue > (/lib/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.15' not found), hence the need for > a local build. Yes, I ran into this the last time I tried to set up an interpreter VM build, thanks to the awesomeness of CentOS. frank > (*) http://squeakvm.org/unix/release/Squeak-4.10.2.2614-linux_i386.tar.gz > > Dave > > > > |
On 28 October 2012 16:42, Frank Shearar <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On 28 October 2012 13:04, David T. Lewis <[hidden email]> wrote: >> On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 12:39:34AM -0400, David T. Lewis wrote: >>> On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 11:41:15PM +0100, Frank Shearar wrote: >>> > On 27 October 2012 23:37, <[hidden email]> wrote: >>> > > Frank Shearar uploaded a new version of KernelTests to project The Inbox: >>> > > http://source.squeak.org/inbox/KernelTests-fbs.235.mcz >>> > > >>> > > ==================== Summary ==================== >>> > > >>> > > Name: KernelTests-fbs.235 >>> > > Author: fbs >>> > > Time: 27 October 2012, 11:37:53.223 pm >>> > > UUID: ab0d84db-c1bc-40d0-bd90-786dcd6989b5 >>> > > Ancestors: KernelTests-ul.234 >>> > > >>> > > Mark this test as an expected failure for the 4.4 release. Unmark it at the start of the 4.5 cycle! >>> > > >>> > > =============== Diff against KernelTests-ul.234 =============== >>> > > >>> > > Item was added: >>> > > + ----- Method: LargeNegativeIntegerTest>>expectedFailures (in category 'as yet unclassified') ----- >>> > > + expectedFailures >>> > > + ^ #(testMinimumNegativeIntegerArithmetic).! >>> > >>> > IIRC this test can only pass with suitable VM changes being made. >>> > http://bugs.squeak.org/view.php?id=7705 mentions that the fix is in >>> > VMMaker-dtl.286, so does this mean that with the interpreter VM this >>> > test will pass, but with Cog (the VM we use in CI tests) the test will >>> > fail? >>> >>> Yes, that's right. It will fail with older interpreter VMs also. >>> >> >> Frank, >> >> If you want to try running the test suite with an interpreter VM, I >> installed a locally built VM on box3.squeak.org that can be used to >> drive the tests. This is installed as /usr/local/bin/squeak, and can >> be used for running both 32-bit and 64-bit Squeak images. >> >> This VM is built from latest VMMaker and squeakvm.org sources using >> the ~lewis/VMUnixBuild/VMUnixBuild.st script (attached), which now seems >> to work fairly reliably. It is *not* suitable for general distribution, >> so I would appreciate if we can all be careful to refer to it as a local >> build, and not as "the standard VM" or any words to that effect. > > Thanks Dave, I'll be able to pick this up in a few hours, once my boys > have gone to bed. I'll add a new script to the squeak-ci repo that > refers to the local build. (It's nearly time to refactor the build > scripts, too.) OK, I have a SqueakTrunkOnInterpreter job: http://squeakci.org/job/SqueakTrunkOnInterpreter/3/ 5 failures, all rather familiar by now: KernelTests.Chronology.TimeStampTest.testFromSeconds KernelTests.Chronology.TimeStampTest.testReadFromA1 NetworkTests.Kernel.SocketTest.testSendTimeout Tests.Localization.LocaleTest.testLocaleChanged Tests.Release.ReleaseTest.testNoObsoleteClasses frank >> Note, the latest standard interpreter VM (*) is not working on our >> box3.squeak.org server due to a Linux glibc compatibility issue >> (/lib/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.15' not found), hence the need for >> a local build. > > Yes, I ran into this the last time I tried to set up an interpreter VM > build, thanks to the awesomeness of CentOS. > > frank > >> (*) http://squeakvm.org/unix/release/Squeak-4.10.2.2614-linux_i386.tar.gz >> >> Dave >> >> >> >> |
Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |