I ran 0.98 test suite using hadoop-2 and it passed. Here is the OS: Linux k.net 2.6.32-220.23.1.el6.YAHOO.20120713.x86_64 #1 SMP Fri Jul 13 11:40:51 CDT 2012 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
I will run the suite again. FYI [INFO] HBase ............................................. SUCCESS [1.577s] [INFO] HBase - Common .................................... SUCCESS [20.219s] [INFO] HBase - Protocol .................................. SUCCESS [0.286s] [INFO] HBase - Client .................................... SUCCESS [36.419s] [INFO] HBase - Hadoop Compatibility ...................... SUCCESS [5.076s] [INFO] HBase - Hadoop Two Compatibility .................. SUCCESS [1.506s] [INFO] HBase - Prefix Tree ............................... SUCCESS [2.605s] [INFO] HBase - Server .................................... SUCCESS [1:08:43.945s] [INFO] HBase - Testing Util .............................. SUCCESS [1.242s] [INFO] HBase - Thrift .................................... SUCCESS [2:02.400s] [INFO] HBase - Shell ..................................... SUCCESS [1:41.594s] [INFO] HBase - Integration Tests ......................... SUCCESS [0.895s] [INFO] HBase - Examples .................................. SUCCESS [5.421s] [INFO] HBase - Assembly .................................. SUCCESS [0.895s] [INFO] ------------------------------------------------------------------------ [INFO] BUILD SUCCESS [INFO] ------------------------------------------------------------------------ [INFO] Total time: 1:13:44.733s [INFO] Finished at: Thu Jun 26 22:02:13 UTC 2014 On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 1:39 PM, Andrew Purtell <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm finding that repeated runs of the unit test suite at the head of branch > 0.98 intermittently fail. Individual tests do not, so this likely a lagging > shutdown, port/resource conflict, and/or zombie test issue. I am currently > bisecting commits on 0.98 branch since the last release in the hope of > pinning this down to a single change. Depending on how quickly that can > happen, the RC might happen on Monday or not. As things stand at the head > of the branch, I'd not +1 the RC given the release criteria I've been using > up to now. > > > On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 6:09 PM, Andrew Purtell <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Planning to roll the 0.98.4 RC on Monday 6/30. > > > > I should have done it this week. Sorry, got a little sidetracked. > > > > -- > > Best regards, > > > > - Andy > > > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein > > (via Tom White) > > > > > > -- > Best regards, > > - Andy > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein > (via Tom White) >
