On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 6:32 AM, David Blevins <[email protected]> wrote: > > On May 29, 2009, at 7:51 PM, Jonathan Gallimore wrote: > >> Well done for finding it - having fiddled around with a debugger for a >> while >> and getting nowhere, I was thinking of doing a similar thing myself. > > Yeah, first time I've pulled that trick out. Been tempted to do it several > times but have usually been lucky enough to find the issue sooner with the > debugger approach. Usually I'm the one who breaks things, makes it easier > to guess what happened :) > >> I have absolutely no idea why the tests pass on the VM I set up (I'm >> running >> them on the VM again to make sure I wasn't seeing things, and they still >> pass), I'm seeing the same error as everyone else on my work laptop >> though. >> >> I have also run the tests on Ubuntu 9.04 (Jaunty) on both x86 and x86_64. >> The 32 bit machine was running Java 1.6.0_13 while the 64 bit machine was >> running Java 1.6.0_11. The tests passed on both. >> >> I can probably find a Windows machine to run a CI server on - is that any >> use, or does it need to run on official Apache machines? > > That would be fantastic.
If it is not applicable to have a windwos machine soon, I can build the source code daily - for the revisions applied on that day - as a solution till we have a CI Windows machine available all time. I hope this can help :). > > > -David > > >> On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 3:22 AM, David Blevins >> <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> >>> On May 29, 2009, at 5:14 PM, David Blevins wrote: >>> >>> >>>> On May 29, 2009, at 12:52 PM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> ubuntu jaunty (9.04) 64 bits / JDK Sun 1.6.0_13-b03 64-Bit >>>>> --> Test fails >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> http://www.nabble.com/file/p23786057/ubuntu-jaunty-64Bit_JDK1.6.0_13-64-64Bit.log >>>>> ubuntu-jaunty-64Bit_JDK1.6.0_13-64-64Bit.log >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> This failure looks like tomcat may have taken too long to start and the >>>> client timed out. The second log posted definitely looks like what I'm >>>> seeing. >>>> >>>> I tried a route similar to Jon and grabbed a copy of Parallels and set >>>> it >>>> up with WinXP SP2. >>>> >>>> cd \test >>>> set JAVA_HOME=C:\Program Files\Java\jdk1.6.0_14 >>>> set ANT_HOME=C:\test\apache-ant-1.7.1 >>>> set PATH=%PATH%;%ANT_HOME%\bin >>>> ant test:all >>>> >>>> >>>> Got the expected 29 failures. >>>> >>>> >>>> All these CI systems we have are on linux and mac.. we totally need a >>>> windows setup that runs this script like every day. Stuff like this >>>> takes >>>> so much less time when you can narrow it down to an svn revision. >>>> >>> >>> So on the notion that it's easier to fix if we knew the revision I went >>> ahead and did a binary search. Basically just started with middle >>> revision >>> between now and when 3.1 was released and kept splitting it in half till >>> i >>> pinned down the revision. >>> >>> svn up -r $(( ($BEGIN + $END) / 2 )) && mvn clean install $skip >>> -Dassemble >>> && installjars.sh >>> >>> If the tests failed I'd set END to the current version, if they passed >>> I'd >>> set BEGIN to the current version and then just rerun. >>> >>> So anyway, this is the commit that did it: >>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=769395&view=rev >>> >>> It claims to be for windows, still checking it out. If I revert the >>> change >>> on my copy of trunk then all itests pass on windows with no issues. I >>> suspect the context path we get from Tomcat is URL syntax and not path >>> syntax, so the fix actually breaks things on windows rather than fixes >>> anything. I suspect that it's the test case that is faulty. Not sure >>> what >>> the issue is, but I remember seeing people on Tuscany complain with >>> similar >>> path issues. >>> >>> Still looking at the test case in question.. >>> >>> Anyway we should be good to re-roll soon. >>> >>> -David >>> >>> > > -- ---- Thanks - Mohammad Nour - LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/mnour ---- "Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep moving" - Albert Einstein
