On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 8:44 AM, Martin Packman
martin.pack...@canonical.com wrote:
On 04/03/2015, Andrew Wilkins andrew.wilk...@canonical.com wrote:
Curtis and I have talked about also doing a ppc64 test run as part of
the gating job, that gets us the map ordering stuff as a newer go
would,
On 04/03/15 19:05, Andrew Wilkins wrote:
The bugs were fixed in this branch: https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/1738
- invalid printf-style formatting will cause go vet to fail
My bad. I had deleted the pre-push hook script some time ago when go vet
failed continuously, and I hadn't reinstated
On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 10:24 AM, Tim Penhey tim.pen...@canonical.com
wrote:
On 04/03/15 19:05, Andrew Wilkins wrote:
The bugs were fixed in this branch:
https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/1738
- invalid printf-style formatting will cause go vet to fail
My bad. I had deleted the pre-push
One option is to run the test suite with go 1.3 and just make sure that
juju compiles with all the other compilers (1.2, gccgo, etc). That gives us
a fast precommit check, which won't catch everything, but should catch most
1.2 compat bugs. And leave the full test suite runs as CI tests.
John
=:-
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 2015-03-04 08:53 AM, Dimiter Naydenov wrote:
If it's about catching map ordering issues, let's use go 1.3+ as
an extra step, rather than gccgo, which is buggy and slow and
randomly segfaults. It's likely we'll slow down merge gating
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 1:05 AM, Andrew Wilkins
andrew.wilk...@canonical.com wrote:
The bot is currently running (I think) Go 1.2. I'm running 1.4, Ian's
running 1.3, and I'm sure Dave's running tip ;) Go 1.3+ made map iteration
less deterministic, so these sorts of bugs are much more likely to
On 04/03/2015, Andrew Wilkins andrew.wilk...@canonical.com wrote:
Hi all,
Ian asked me to mail the list about a couple of bugs that managed to get
past the bot; first so that we can all be mindful of these sorts of bugs,
and second to highlight the fact that they could have been caught by the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 4.03.2015 15:44, Martin Packman wrote:
On 04/03/2015, Andrew Wilkins andrew.wilk...@canonical.com
wrote:
Hi all,
Ian asked me to mail the list about a couple of bugs that managed
to get past the bot; first so that we can all be mindful of
Hi all,
Ian asked me to mail the list about a couple of bugs that managed to get
past the bot; first so that we can all be mindful of these sorts of bugs,
and second to highlight the fact that they could have been caught by the
bot.
The bugs were fixed in this branch:
