On 2012-08-30 08:29, Behnaz Bostanipour wrote: > Hello Tom, > > Thanks for your reply. I put some comments on your email below: > > > On 30 août 2012, at 16:13, Tom Henderson wrote: > >> >> On 08/29/2012 06:50 AM, behnaz.bostanip...@unil.ch wrote: >>>> I'm not able to reproduce that error, so I would like to >>>> see some examples of the diffed output. Would you mind >>>> collecting all of the *.test output files for the tests >>>> that failed and send them to me in a tarball, such as: >>>> >>>> cd tcl/tests >>>> find . -name "*.test" -type f | xargs tar cvfj >>>> ns-2-diffs.tbz2 >>>> >>>> and send me the ns-2-diffs.tbz2 file? >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Tom >>> >>> >>> Here you are, I exactly execuuted your command, but not sure >>> if it has all the outputs that we want (i.e., for tests: >>> "test-all-tcpLinux", "test-all-tcpHighspeed", "test-all-red" >>> and "test-all-cbq". >>> >> >> There seem to be a few things going on here. >> >> for the test-all-cbq and test-all-red files, the data seems correct >> but >> the formatting is slightly off: there are commas for periods in >> some of >> the outputs. e.g. >> >> test-output-red/flows-combined.test >>> ==> flows_combined.test <== >>> TitleText: test_flows_combined >>> Device: Postscript >>> >>> "flow 1 >>> 84,8786 74,1902 >>> 48,3181 46,8733 >> >> vs. test-output-red/flows-combined (good output) >>> TitleText: test_flows_combined >>> Device: Postscript >>> >>> "flow 1 >>> 84.8786 74.1902 >>> 48.3181 46.8733 >> >> >> This may have something to do with the version of xgraph on the >> system. > > Yes, if you look at the validation output, whenever a test fails , it > says: > >> > "couldn't execute "xgraph": no such file or directory" > > > So, maybe I should do something about my graph, (e.g., reinstall it > or …, do you have any suggestions?)
xgraph is an optional component, so I think you could safely ignore that warning. > > >> >> for the tcpLinux and tcpHighspeed tests, there are lines missing >> (either >> truncated, or interleaved in the test output) from the output when >> compared to the reference output. I don't know whether this is >> again a >> post-processing error or whether the simulation is not producing the >> same data. >> >> The test-output-xcp data is different: >> >> 0.12186 4200000 >> 0.12186 4200000 >> 0.12186 4200000 >> 0.12228 8 >> 0.12228 8 >> >> vs >> >> 0.12186 4200000 >> 0.12186 4200000 >> 0.12186 4200000 >> 0.12228 8190000 >> 0.12228 8190000 >> >> In summary, I would be suspicious of the use of the tcpLinux, >> tcpHighspeed, and xcp models on this platform. To debug this >> probably >> requires to step through the code at the points where the output >> diverge, using also a platform such as Linux that produces the >> reference >> output. >> >> I don't have ns-2 running on Mountain Lion yet but I'll check >> whether >> similar issues arise there. >> >> - Tom >> >> > > As I explained in my last email, I would like to do some simulations > for IEEE 802.11 MAC layer and also use some routing protocols , I > don't think that validation tests failures for TCP will not be a > problem, my only concern is that these tests fail: > > /test-all-red ./test-all-cbq > > Do you think that will cause a problem for my simulations if I these > models do not work properly on my machine? > Based on what you sent, the models appear to be working properly and the difference is due to the post-processing for the regression tests. - Tom