On Wednesday, November 11, 2015 10:22:13 AM CET Jan Kundrát wrote: > On Tuesday, 10 November 2015 08:34:02 CET, Martin Graesslin wrote: > > Yes, most tests don't require a WM. Especially the Net* tests > > simulate being a > > window manager. Only the KWindow* tests need a window manager. > > Interesting; it was a Heisenbug, apparently. I cannot reproduce it anymore, > but I've added code which at least prints out a warning if the Xvfb and/or > openbox dies for some reason. > > > Well for me there is not much to do. I don't get them failing > > on my system, so > > I have no clue what I should fix to make them work again. > > I believe that the CI system and the tests together should be designed to > provide enough diagnostic information. If you as a developer say "I cannot > reproduce it on my system, therefore I cannot help you", what can I do as a > CI administrator to improve the situation? Should we perhaps reduce the > number of CI-specific scripting to make the deployments closer to what the > developers run? Would you like pre-built VM images?
Well I did what the CI system does. I started Xvfb with exactly the same command as in the build output and also used openbox on that Xvfb and run the unit test on the Xvfb. So I think I reproduced the setup. I really tried hard to get to the broken state and tried also a few different setups which all did not result in a broken test. It takes a long time till I give up on trying to reproduce a test, in this case it has happened. (I also must point out that I think there is something somewhere horribly broken if we need to adjust our tests because Qt changed - currently I need to adjust the tests for each release, I'm rather pissed by the "ABI stability" Qt provides). I wouldn't know what further information the tests could provide to debug it. I could tell if I were able to reproduce them and see what goes wrong. At the moment all I have is "wm might have crashed" which is nothing the tests can check for. In the long run I want to spend some time in getting our "Xvfb + openbox" setup replaced by kwin_wayland on the virtual backend. It would mean KWin gets automatically more testing (that's the selfish part) and we have a known base for our tests and don't depend on openbox. Cheers Martin
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Kde-frameworks-devel mailing list Kde-frameworks-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-frameworks-devel