-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 8/30/2011 6:02 PM, Gary Poster wrote: > > On Aug 30, 2011, at 11:14 AM, Jonathan Lange wrote: > >> On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 9:27 PM, Gary Poster >> <gary.pos...@canonical.com> wrote: >>> I believe this is affecting other ec2 users. I dug into it >>> with abentley's help. It's a bug in bzrlib (symptom details >>> are in http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/675476/ , problem details are >>> in http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/675505/). >>> >>> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bzr/+bug/835035 >>> >>> I'm going to write a test and fix for bzr, make an MP, and make >>> a Launchpad egg. >>> >> >> This looks a lot like >> https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad/+bug/721166, which Martin >> Pool started fixing in June. > > Yes, it does! Martin said on 835035 that he thought it was not a > dupe. Martin, maybe you could clarify what looks different? > > I am pretty sure I have a fix for 835035, landed in bzr 2.3 thanks > to jam. Aaron advised me that if I wanted it in Launchpad with 2.4 > in the next couple of weeks, I should roll my own branch with a fix > and add that to db-devel (where we have 2.4 ready for deployment > Friday AIUI), so I plan to do that. > > Gary
Technically, they are 2 different things. You had a test that was triggering a failure (what happens when the fallback repository is incompatible), which explicitly left a repository locked. The fact that LockWarner was telling us "you left a repository locked" meant that we actually were discovering there was a bug. Without LockWarner, we would have silently garbage collected the otherwise locked repository. The proposed fix for bug #721166 is to get rid of LockWarner because __del__ is triggering at a time that is causing confusion. (It may not trigger in the middle of the actual test, etc.) I'm not entirely sure whether the tests are buggy (doing repo.lock_read() without .unlock()) whether they are testing something which is slightly buggy in bzr (such as what you found for bug #835035), or whether it is something else entirely. You can argue that a test that just doesn't unlock its repository isn't worth failing. Now, it sounds like disabled_test_sphinxdocs.py wasn't actually where the bug was. It was just a test that happened to check stderr where LockWarner content was being written. So it is possible that fixing bug #835035 (properly unlock the repository) will have already fixed the sphinx tests. It at least sounds like a case where Martin's fix for bug #721166 was wrong. The __del__ methods were hard to debug (they don't trigger deterministically), but they were actually a symptom of a real bug in bzrlib. Anyway, without upgrading to bzr-2.4 can you enable the disabled sphinx tests? John =:-> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk5dEBQACgkQJdeBCYSNAAPptwCdEczD02O+GS7k98lW/tyPivYK DlgAoJ0VfyHyFoI1vZ1c62NgCQpsmoe/ =7VXB -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev Post to : launchpad-dev@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
