Re: KDE CI: Frameworks » ktexteditor » kf5-qt5 SUSEQt5.15 - Build # 4 - Still Unstable!
Hi, this shows again a different V4 GC error :/ ==3342==ERROR: AddressSanitizer: SEGV on unknown address 0x0028 (pc 0x7f58d0bb98ec bp 0x615f8000 sp 0x7ffe976de5f0 T0) ==3342==The signal is caused by a READ memory access. ==3342==Hint: address points to the zero page. #0 0x7f58d0bb98ec in QV4::MarkStack::drain() (/usr/lib64/libQt5Qml.so.5+0xb28ec) #1 0x7f58d0bba1e4 in QV4::MemoryManager::mark() (/usr/lib64/libQt5Qml.so.5+0xb31e4) #2 0x7f58d0bbc37d (/usr/lib64/libQt5Qml.so.5+0xb537d) #3 0x7f58d0bbdb87 in QV4::MemoryManager::allocData(unsigned long) (/usr/lib64/libQt5Qml.so.5+0xb6b87) #4 0x7f58d0bbdbe2 in QV4::MemoryManager::allocObjectWithMemberData(QV4::VTable const*, unsigned int) (/usr/lib64/libQt5Qml.so.5+0xb6be2) #5 0x7f58d0cd10f0 in QV4::Runtime::CreateMappedArgumentsObject::call(QV4::ExecutionEngine*) (/usr/lib64/libQt5Qml.so.5+0x1ca0f0) #6 0x7f58bc65b06d (/memfd:JITCode:QtQml (deleted)+0x6d) :( Thought 5.15 would have all needed fixes. Greetings Christoph On 2020-07-05 15:47, CI System wrote: BUILD UNSTABLE Build URL https://build.kde.org/job/Frameworks/job/ktexteditor/job/kf5-qt5%20SUSEQt5.15/4/ Project: kf5-qt5 SUSEQt5.15 Date of build: Sun, 05 Jul 2020 13:40:03 + Build duration: 7 min 46 sec and counting BUILD ARTIFACTS * abi-compatibility-results.yaml [1] * acc/KF5TextEditor-5.72.0.xml [2] * compat_reports/KF5TextEditor_compat_report.html [3] * logs/KF5TextEditor/5.72.0/log.txt [4] JUnit Tests Name: (root) Failed: 0 test(s), Passed: 1 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 1 test(s) Name: projectroot Failed: 3 test(s), Passed: 59 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 62 test(s) * Failed: projectroot.autotests.bug313759 * Failed: projectroot.autotests.kateindenttest_testAda * Failed: projectroot.autotests.kateindenttest_testPascal Name: projectroot.autotests.src Failed: 0 test(s), Passed: 5 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 5 test(s) Cobertura Report Project Coverage Summary Name Packages Files Classes Lines Conditionals Cobertura Coverage Report 79% (22/28) 85% (262/307) 85% (262/307) 67% (33050/49269) 49% (14779/30050) Coverage Breakdown by Package Name Files Classes Lines Conditionals autotests.src 97% (37/38) 97% (37/38) 93% (4798/5140) 49% (1812/3680) autotests.src.vimode 100% (9/9) 100% (9/9) 99% (5528/5570) 58% (984/1708) src.buffer 88% (15/17) 88% (15/17) 89% (1677/1892) 74% (1078/1464) src.completion 100% (11/11) 100% (11/11) 57% (1788/3134) 42% (1009/2425) src.completion.expandingtree 100% (3/3) 100% (3/3) 40% (182/457) 21% (73/340) src.dialogs 0% (0/4) 0% (0/4) 0% (0/864) 0% (0/184) src.document 100% (4/4) 100% (4/4) 61% (1936/3179) 48% (1407/2945) src.export 0% (0/4) 0% (0/4) 0% (0/121) 0% (0/156) src.include.ktexteditor 78% (14/18) 78% (14/18) 83% (189/227) 55% (125/226) src.inputmode 100% (8/8) 100% (8/8) 63% (192/304) 51% (39/77) src.mode 88% (7/8) 88% (7/8) 36% (378/1051) 16% (146/891) src.part 0% (0/1) 0% (0/1) 0% (0/7) 100% (0/0) src.printing 0% (0/4) 0% (0/4) 0% (0/862) 0% (0/278) src.render 100% (8/8) 100% (8/8) 77% (950/1227) 67% (610/914) src.schema 22% (2/9) 22% (2/9) 1% (19/1472) 1% (6/625) src.script
D14631: Adds a new RenameDialog to KIO with more options for batch renaming
dfaure added a comment. Only if you can find a way to change BatchRenameJob in a binary and behaviour compatible way. And then it will be a dual-headed thing with two modes of operations, awful. All this sounds to me like much more trouble than writing a different job. REPOSITORY R241 KIO REVISION DETAIL https://phabricator.kde.org/D14631 To: emateli, #frameworks, dfaure, mlaurent, meven, #dolphin Cc: luco, nicopons, meven, chinmoyr, mlaurent, asensi, rkflx, dfaure, aacid, ngraham, kde-frameworks-devel, LeGast00n, cblack, michaelh, bruns
D14631: Adds a new RenameDialog to KIO with more options for batch renaming
luco added a comment. @emateli Thank you, I do understand that `BatchMoveJob` could be more versatile for a various kind of operations, but couldn't it be easier to just edit the `BatchRenameJob`'s hardcoded logic and make it more parametric? If I understand correctly you're referring to the fact that the ctor of `BatchRenameJob` is accepting a QChar and it only substitutes it with numbers, wouldn't be easier to edit that logic instead? I'm asking because I think you already have considered this option and concluded that it was not worth it REPOSITORY R241 KIO REVISION DETAIL https://phabricator.kde.org/D14631 To: emateli, #frameworks, dfaure, mlaurent, meven, #dolphin Cc: luco, nicopons, meven, chinmoyr, mlaurent, asensi, rkflx, dfaure, aacid, ngraham, kde-frameworks-devel, LeGast00n, cblack, michaelh, bruns
