-X does not work, there are predefined options already like -Xverify or -Xint, while we need arbitrary key[=value] strings. As for -XD vs -XX, I feel no strong preference, just thought that -XD is comprehensible enough... So if we have more than 1 voice to do the renaming, I will do it.
-- Alexey 2006/12/18, Mikhail Fursov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Alexey Varlamov was the person who completed and applied this patch. Let's wait for him, if he agree to create and apply another one. On 12/18/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Mikhail Fursov wrote: > > What is the plus to have -X or -XX instead of -XD? These are internal > > options anyway, we can't be compatible here with RI. > > Convention, really. People grok that -XX are internal options... they > won't have to ask the question like I did :) > > geir > > > > > On 12/18/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> Elena Semukhina wrote: > >> > On 12/18/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Elena Semukhina wrote: > >> >> > On 12/18/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >> >> > >> >> >> How could the window be closed manually with the automated > >> framework? > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > It was fully automated until HARMONY-1925 had been committed. > After > >> >> that > >> >> > setting -Dvm.assert_dialog=0 in smoke.test.xml stopped working and > >> >> assert > >> >> > dialogs might pop up. This has just been fixed in HARMONY-2763 (-D > >> >> replaced > >> >> > with -XD). > >> >> > >> >> What's an "-XD" option again? > >> > > >> > > >> > AFAIK, HARMONY-1925 separated "standard" and "internal" properties > >> > passing to VM. "Standard" properties are set with -D while "internal" > >> are > >> > set with -XD. > >> > > >> > >> Why not just "X" or "XX"? > >> > >> > >> > Elena > >> > > >> > geir > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > Elena > >> >> > > >> >> > geir > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Elena Semukhina wrote: > >> >> >> > On 12/18/06, Evgueni Brevnov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> On 12/18/06, Elena Semukhina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > >> >> >> >> > On 12/18/06, Vladimir Ivanov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> >> > > The other problem, even with this return code the 'build > >> test' > >> >> >> >> reports > >> >> >> >> > > SUCCESSFUL status :( > >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> > Possibly it is SUCCESSFUL because some assert dialogs > appeared > >> >> and > >> >> >> have > >> >> >> >> ?> been closed manually. > >> >> >> >> No. The build is successful because all tests are actually > >> passed. > >> >> >> >> Current mechanism doesn't use java result to determine if the > >> test > >> >> is > >> >> >> >> passed or not. Instead it looks into log file for a "PASSED" > or > >> >> >> >> "FAILED" key word to decide if test was successful. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > If the Assert dialog window is closed manually, "PASSED" could > be > >> >> >> > written to > >> >> >> > the log file. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > Elena > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > Evgueni > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> After HARMONY-1925 has been applied, we should pass > >> >> >> >> > internal VM properties with -XD option. The > >> >> >> vm.assert_dialogproperty=0 > >> >> >> >> is > >> >> >> >> > still passed with -D. I created > >> >> >> >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-2763 with > patch > >> for > >> >> >> >> > smoke.test.xml. > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> > Thanks, > >> >> >> >> > Elena > >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> > Thanks, Vladimir > >> >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> >> > > PS Should we exclude this test if it failed time-to-time > for > >> >> >> ~month? > >> >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> >> > > On 12/18/06, Evgueni Brevnov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> wrote: > >> >> >> >> > > > > >> >> >> >> > > > Hi, > >> >> >> >> > > > > >> >> >> >> > > > The only suspicious place is "[exec] [java] Java Result: > >> >> >> >> -1073741819". > >> >> >> >> > > > I've observed such behaviour from time to time for a one > >> >> >> month at > >> >> >> >> > > > least."[exec][java] Java Result: 1" & "[exec][java] Java > >> >> Result: > >> >> >> >> 130" > >> >> >> >> > > > are expected results. > >> >> >> >> > > > > >> >> >> >> > > > Evgueni > >> >> >> >> > > > > >> >> >> >> > > > On 12/18/06, Vladimir Ivanov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> wrote: > >> >> >> >> > > > > The smoke tests of DRLVM failed today on the > WindowsXP. > >> >> Could > >> >> >> >> somebody > >> >> >> >> > > > > reproduce/fix it? > >> >> >> >> > > > > > >> >> >> >> > > > > Thanks, Vladimir > >> >> >> >> > > > > > >> >> >> >> > > > > > >> >> >> >> > > > > >> >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> > >> > C:\cc.harmony\trunk\cc\projects\drlvm\trunk\build\make\excludes\exclude.drlvm_smoke.windows.x86.jit > >> > >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > > > > <snip> > >> >> >> >> > > > > [exec] [echo] PASSED : > >> >> >> perf.CreateManyExceptions_depth > >> >> >> >> > > > > [exec] [java] Java Result: -1073741819 > >> >> >> >> > > > > [exec] [echo] PASSED : > perf.MultiThreadsSimple > >> >> >> >> > > > > [exec] [echo] PASSED : perf.SeveralThreads > >> >> >> >> > > > > [exec] [echo] PASSED : perf.StressCornerSize > >> >> >> >> > > > > [exec] [echo] PASSED : > perf.StressCornerSize_a > >> >> >> >> > > > > [exec] [echo] PASSED : perf.ThrowMany > >> >> >> >> > > > > [exec] [echo] PASSED : > >> perf.ThrowManyExceptions > >> >> >> >> > > > > [exec] [echo] PASSED : > >> >> >> perf.ThrowManyExceptions_depth > >> >> >> >> > > > > [exec] [echo] PASSED : perf.ThrowMany_depth > >> >> >> >> > > > > [exec] [echo] PASSED : reflect.GetMethod > >> >> >> >> > > > > [exec] [java] Java Result: 1 > >> >> >> >> > > > > [exec] [echo] PASSED : > shutdown.TestFatalError > >> >> >> >> > > > > [exec] [java] Java Result: 130 > >> >> >> >> > > > > [exec] [echo] PASSED : > shutdown.TestInterrupt > >> >> >> >> > > > > [exec] [echo] PASSED : shutdown.TestLock > >> >> >> >> > > > > > >> >> >> >> > > > > > >> >> >> >> > > > > >> >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> > -- > >> >> >> >> > Thanks, > >> >> >> >> > Elena > >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > -- Mikhail Fursov
