On 20 Oct 2014, at 21:06, Morten Johan Sørvig morten.sor...@digia.com wrote:
On 20 Oct 2014, at 15:04, Saether Jan-Arve
jan-arve.saet...@theqtcompany.com wrote:
Change: https://codereview.qt-project.org/97600
(comment from 97600)
// On OS X the windows might get positioned exactly
: Re: [Development] CI broken again
Some tests fails even the patches that we are trying to push are not released.
Check
https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/97244https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/97244/
and
https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/96681https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c
. oktober 2014 09:37
Til: BogDan; Qt Development Group
Emne: Re: [Development] CI broken again
That QtDeclarative 5.4 needs our attention. As of now we have no idea why it
has begun failing. We can't recall changing anything on the macs except
updating xcode
-Tony
From: BogDan [mailto:bog_dan
On 20 Oct 2014, at 15:04, Saether Jan-Arve
jan-arve.saet...@theqtcompany.com wrote:
Change: https://codereview.qt-project.org/97600
(comment from 97600)
// On OS X the windows might get positioned exactly on top of each other
// that means no repaint for the bottom window will ever occur
Great analysis - thanks guys for fixing this!
Simon
Original Message
From: Morten Johan Sørvig
Sent: Monday, October 20, 2014 21:06
To: Qt Development Group
Subject: Re: [Development] CI broken again
On 20 Oct 2014, at 15:04, Saether Jan-Arve
jan-arve.saet...@theqtcompany.com wrote
-project.org på vegne
av Hausmann Simon simon.hausm...@theqtcompany.com
Sendt: 20. oktober 2014 21:57
Til: Sorvig Morten; Qt Development Group
Emne: Re: [Development] CI broken again
Great analysis - thanks guys for fixing this!
Simon
Original Message
From: Morten Johan Sørvig
Sent: Monday, October
av BogDan [bog_dan...@yahoo.com]
Sendt: 17. oktober 2014 15:03
Til: Sarajärvi Tony; Qt Development Group
Emne: Re: [Development] CI broken again
Some tests fails even the patches that we are trying to push are not released.
Check
https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/97244https://codereview.qt
: 17. oktober 2014 15:03
Til: Sarajärvi Tony; Qt Development Group
Emne: Re: [Development] CI broken again
Some tests fails even the patches that we are trying to push are not released.
Check
https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/97244https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/97244/
and
https
Hello,
It seems that CI is broken for a few days, is anyone working on it? When
should we expect a fix?
Thanks!
Cheers,
BogDan.
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Hi
What exactly is broken?
-T
From: development-bounces+tony.sarajarvi=theqtcompany@qt-project.org
[mailto:development-bounces+tony.sarajarvi=theqtcompany@qt-project.org] On
Behalf Of BogDan
Sent: 17. lokakuuta 2014 10:54
To: Qt Development Group
Subject: [Development] CI broken again
Hello,
Is CI broken again? It seems it fails on the same (unrelated) places
https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/92216,
https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/92236,
https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/92238.
Can somebody check the CI?
Cheers,
BogDan.
On Friday 15 August 2014 11:36:14 BogDan wrote:
Hello,
Is CI broken again? It seems it fails on the same (unrelated) places
https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/92216,
https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/92236,
https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/92238.
Can somebody check the CI?
Fredag 28. februar 2014 14.46.06 skrev Thiago Macieira:
Em qui 20 fev 2014, às 06:21:44, Sarajärvi Tony escreveu:
QDEBUG : tst_QTcpSocket::blockingIMAP(WithSocks5Proxy SSL)
QSocks5SocketEngine(0x99e730) _q_controlSocketReadNotification more bytes
available, calling
Hi,
I'm trying to push this patch:
https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,79826 but CI doesn't like me.
Because CI seems to be based on luck, can CI folks give us a daily CI
horoscopes forecast on this matter? E.g. if you are not born on the end of
March and you don't have have only
On 05 Mar 2014, at 09:32, Rutledge Shawn shawn.rutle...@digia.com wrote:
Sometimes though, we try to fix the autotests that fail the most frequently.
If you can't reproduce the failure on your own machine, with the same OS,
often the cause seems to be heavy multi-tasking on the CI machines,
Hi,
I'm trying to push this patch:
https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,79826 but CI doesn't like me.
Because CI seems to be based on luck, can CI folks give us a daily CI
horoscopes forecast on this matter? E.g. if you are not born on the end of
March
and you don't
Well, I pushed again the submit button (after I said a little pray) and it
fails in the same please (it seems God doesn't like me anymore). I really
don't believe it has something to do with the heavy multi-tasking on the CI
machines (or with God) ... to me it looks that the test is
On 05.03.2014 10:11, BogDan wrote:
Hi,
Can you please share the link with us, personally I want to wait until
that patch goes in.
https://codereview.qt-project.org/79948
changes staged after 11:00 CET should not be rejected because of tst_bic
(hopefully).
--
Sergio Ahumada
Em qui 20 fev 2014, às 06:21:44, Sarajärvi Tony escreveu:
QDEBUG : tst_QTcpSocket::blockingIMAP(WithSocks5Proxy SSL)
QSocks5SocketEngine(0x99e730) _q_controlSocketReadNotification more bytes
available, calling _q_controlSocketReadNotification() again , read
notifications enabled? false
This
Hi Thiago,
it sounds like you have a pretty good understanding what's going wrong here.
Since this sounds like a real issue and it is still the test failure that
blocks most integrations, it would be extremely great if we could fix the
issue.
I know Peter and Tony worked on this, but so far
Em ter 25 fev 2014, às 15:32:21, Frederik Gladhorn escreveu:
Hi Thiago,
it sounds like you have a pretty good understanding what's going wrong here.
Since this sounds like a real issue and it is still the test failure that
blocks most integrations, it would be extremely great if we could fix
Em qua 19 fev 2014, às 17:20:13, Peter Hartmann escreveu:
What I think the problem is: We get 2 Socks messages in 1 TCP packet, so
the read notifier only fires once, then we never parse the 2nd Socks
message.
What 2 SOCKS messages are those and which command did we send?
--
Thiago Macieira
On 02/19/2014 05:22 PM, Thiago Macieira wrote:
Em qua 19 fev 2014, às 17:20:13, Peter Hartmann escreveu:
What I think the problem is: We get 2 Socks messages in 1 TCP packet, so
the read notifier only fires once, then we never parse the 2nd Socks
message.
What 2 SOCKS messages are those and
Em qua 19 fev 2014, às 17:43:15, Peter Hartmann escreveu:
On 02/19/2014 05:22 PM, Thiago Macieira wrote:
Em qua 19 fev 2014, às 17:20:13, Peter Hartmann escreveu:
What I think the problem is: We get 2 Socks messages in 1 TCP packet, so
the read notifier only fires once, then we never parse
: development-bounces+tony.sarajarvi=digia@qt-project.org
[mailto:development-bounces+tony.sarajarvi=digia@qt-project.org] On
Behalf Of Thiago Macieira
Sent: 19. helmikuuta 2014 21:26
To: development@qt-project.org
Subject: Re: [Development] CI broken again?
Em qua 19 fev 2014, às 17:43
The latest test failures seemed to be due to timeout rather than anything
else. The 'waitForDone()' function is exiting with a failure due to DNS
lookup timeout. The current timeout is set to 10 secs. This is quite
large,
but still, could there be a network issue with the CI setup?
Yes,
CI continues to fail during build AND tests at seemingly random places. Any
idea whats going on or when it'll be fixed?
-mandeep
On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 3:17 PM, Mandeep Sandhu
mandeepsandhu@gmail.comwrote:
Something similar happened to me too on the dev branch. Tried merging a
change.
Em qui 06 fev 2014, às 14:28:52, Mandeep Sandhu escreveu:
CI continues to fail during build AND tests at seemingly random places. Any
idea whats going on or when it'll be fixed?
It's normal operating procedure. Some tests are flaky and are known to cause
issues every now and then.
In your
In your case, the QDnsLookup failure is caused by your code. It happened
100%
of the time that the QDnsLookup test was executed and it did not happen
when
your change wasn't present.
It can't be related to my change as the same tests pass 100% of the time on
my local setup (Ubuntu 13.10)
Hi,
In your case, the QDnsLookup failure is caused by your code. It happened 100%
of the time that the QDnsLookup test was executed and it did not happen when
your change wasn't present.
It can't be related to my change as the same tests pass 100% of the time on my
local setup (Ubuntu 13.10)
-project.org
[mailto:development-bounces+tony.sarajarvi=digia@qt-project.org] On
Behalf Of BogDan
Sent: 6. helmikuuta 2014 14:26
To: Mandeep Sandhu; Thiago Macieira
Cc: development@qt-project.org
Subject: Re: [Development] CI broken again?
Hi,
In your case, the QDnsLookup failure is caused
Em qui 06 fev 2014, às 12:54:59, Sarajärvi Tony escreveu:
We've discovered (just lately) that in some cases incoming TCP packages are
bundled together. Somewhere along the line in our network code the first
TCP packet is drawn from buffers, but the remainders are left there.
That's normal. We
Em qui 06 fev 2014, às 16:01:05, Mandeep Sandhu escreveu:
It can't be related to my change as the same tests pass 100% of the time on
my local setup (Ubuntu 13.10) and moreover my changes do not kick-in if the
name server is not specified (which is the case with all the failing test
cases).
On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 10:10 PM, Thiago Macieira
thiago.macie...@intel.comwrote:
Em qui 06 fev 2014, às 16:01:05, Mandeep Sandhu escreveu:
It can't be related to my change as the same tests pass 100% of the time
on
my local setup (Ubuntu 13.10) and moreover my changes do not kick-in if
the
Em qui 06 fev 2014, às 22:39:29, Mandeep Sandhu escreveu:
Ok, I'll dig in more into this problem. IF only I could replicate it
somehow, it'll be that much easier to fix! :/
If there's more debugging that could help you, you can modify the change to
add it to the test and we'll stage it during
Hello,
I'm trying for two days to merge this https://codereview.qt-project.org/77207
patch, but CI doesn't like me.
It is a know issue or just me? Should I wait for other patches to be merged
before I'll try the 8th time? :)
Cheers,
BogDan.
___
Something similar happened to me too on the dev branch. Tried merging a
change. First a test case failed (tst_QDnsLookup) even though it runs fine
on my local setup. I tried re-staging the change but now I got some merge
errors. Local update of dev and rebase worked.
-mandeep
On Wed, Feb 5,
37 matches
Mail list logo
