Online report :
http://vmbuild.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=267250projectId=22
Build statistics:
State: Failed
Previous State: Error
Started at: Fri 8 Jan 2010 06:29:25 -0800
Finished at: Fri 8 Jan 2010 06:29:34 -0800
Total time: 9s
Build Trigger: Schedule
Build
Online report :
http://vmbuild.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=267362projectId=22
Build statistics:
State: Failed
Previous State: Error
Started at: Fri 8 Jan 2010 10:52:02 -0800
Finished at: Fri 8 Jan 2010 10:52:09 -0800
Total time: 7s
Build Trigger: Schedule
Build
Online report :
http://vmbuild.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=267398projectId=22
Build statistics:
State: Failed
Previous State: Error
Started at: Sun 10 Jan 2010 07:29:15 -0800
Finished at: Sun 10 Jan 2010 07:29:24 -0800
Total time: 8s
Build Trigger: Forced
Build
From the debugging added to some previously failed builds, I saw
loop = 2 for some threads. Threads should not be looping. Second
loop by a thread that succeeded the first time that throws will not
change success state - so it looks like a success - not enough
failures.
Phil
pste...@apache.org
Online report :
http://vmbuild.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=267471projectId=22
Build statistics:
State: Ok
Previous State: Failed
Started at: Sun 10 Jan 2010 10:53:50 -0800
Finished at: Sun 10 Jan 2010 10:55:38 -0800
Total time: 1m 47s
Build Trigger: Forced
Build
Online report :
http://vmbuild.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=267522projectId=22
Build statistics:
State: Failed
Previous State: Error
Started at: Sun 10 Jan 2010 13:13:43 -0800
Finished at: Sun 10 Jan 2010 13:13:50 -0800
Total time: 6s
Build Trigger: Forced
Build
Thanks.
Looks like I did not complete the fixes properly when I added the
loopOnce parameter to PoolTest.
It was quite tricky following the Continuum build output, as the date
was 2 days behind, and the mail for the failed runs is not always
accurate - if the Exit code is 127, then most of the
sebb wrote:
Thanks.
Looks like I did not complete the fixes properly when I added the
loopOnce parameter to PoolTest.
It was quite tricky following the Continuum build output, as the date
was 2 days behind, and the mail for the failed runs is not always
accurate - if the Exit code is
On 10/01/2010, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
sebb wrote:
Thanks.
Looks like I did not complete the fixes properly when I added the
loopOnce parameter to PoolTest.
It was quite tricky following the Continuum build output, as the date
was 2 days behind, and the mail
sebb wrote:
Thanks.
Looks like I did not complete the fixes properly when I added the
loopOnce parameter to PoolTest.
I think I found (and fixed) another problem. See r897720.
It was quite tricky following the Continuum build output, as the date
was 2 days behind, and the mail for the
On 10/01/2010, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
sebb wrote:
Thanks.
Looks like I did not complete the fixes properly when I added the
loopOnce parameter to PoolTest.
I think I found (and fixed) another problem. See r897720.
The wait in question is purely to allow the
sebb wrote:
On 10/01/2010, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
sebb wrote:
Thanks.
Looks like I did not complete the fixes properly when I added the
loopOnce parameter to PoolTest.
I think I found (and fixed) another problem. See r897720.
The wait in question is purely to
On 10/01/2010, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
sebb wrote:
On 10/01/2010, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
sebb wrote:
Thanks.
Looks like I did not complete the fixes properly when I added the
loopOnce parameter to PoolTest.
I think I found (and
Online report :
http://vmbuild.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=267564projectId=22
Build statistics:
State: Failed
Previous State: Ok
Started at: Sun 10 Jan 2010 15:13:35 -0800
Finished at: Sun 10 Jan 2010 15:15:26 -0800
Total time: 1m 50s
Build Trigger: Forced
Build
sebb wrote:
On 10/01/2010, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
sebb wrote:
On 10/01/2010, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
sebb wrote:
Thanks.
Looks like I did not complete the fixes properly when I added the
loopOnce parameter to PoolTest.
I think I
sebb wrote:
It is starting to look like Continuum cannot handle mixed Maven and
Ant groups, so perhaps it would be worth experimenting with a
standalone group?
That may be what we have to do. It doesn't make sense, since there
is a build environment object that should determine what happens.
On 10/01/2010, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
sebb wrote:
On 10/01/2010, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
sebb wrote:
On 10/01/2010, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
sebb wrote:
Thanks.
Looks like I did not complete the fixes properly
sebb wrote:
On 10/01/2010, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
sebb wrote:
On 10/01/2010, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
sebb wrote:
On 10/01/2010, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
sebb wrote:
Thanks.
Looks like I did not complete the
On 11/01/2010, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
sebb wrote:
It is starting to look like Continuum cannot handle mixed Maven and
Ant groups, so perhaps it would be worth experimenting with a
standalone group?
That may be what we have to do. It doesn't make sense, since there
Online report :
http://vmbuild.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=267625projectId=22
Build statistics:
State: Failed
Previous State: Failed
Started at: Sun 10 Jan 2010 18:15:28 -0800
Finished at: Sun 10 Jan 2010 18:18:03 -0800
Total time: 2m 35s
Build Trigger: Schedule
Without any further input (over a week), I say it's safe to divest.
On Sun, Jan 3, 2010 at 5:58 AM, Luc Maisonobe luc.maison...@free.fr wrote:
Henri Yandell a écrit :
On Sat, Jan 2, 2010 at 1:57 PM, Paul Benedict pbened...@apache.org wrote:
This is how I believe the commons.lang.math package
21 matches
Mail list logo
