On 1/16/13 3:48 AM, Balchandra Vaidya wrote:
I believe make targets get run during jprt build process and then RE will
create a full build. After that, I take RE build and run tests. So, I think,
running tests with slightly different option is not necessarily a problem -
rather I would think it c
On 1/16/13 2:38 AM, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 16/01/2013 02:58, Stuart Marks wrote:
The problem is that there is some information encoded in the makefile targets
that would be lost if that were done. It's not just the lists of directories.
Some of the targets run the tests in othervm mode, and some
On 01/16/13 02:58 AM, Stuart Marks wrote:
Jon,
I (somewhat) agree! :-)
The current state of affairs is as you say, merely an artifact of our
internal build system. It would indeed be preferable for Balchandra to
gather up the right set of tests and run them in a single run of jtreg.
The p
On 16/01/2013 02:58, Stuart Marks wrote:
:
The problem is that there is some information encoded in the makefile
targets that would be lost if that were done. It's not just the lists
of directories. Some of the targets run the tests in othervm mode, and
some in agentvm mode.
I think the execu
Jon,
I (somewhat) agree! :-)
The current state of affairs is as you say, merely an artifact of our internal
build system. It would indeed be preferable for Balchandra to gather up the
right set of tests and run them in a single run of jtreg.
The problem is that there is some information enco
Uugh uugh uugh.
Stuart, I (somewhat) disagree. The current way of running the tests is
a horrible artifact of our internal JPRT system, and the desire to split
the test load up across machines. It is not something I would
recommend sane person doing by choice.
I agree with the need to hav
Hi Amy,
It's good to know that the TL nightly tests use TOP/jdk/test/Makefile. Our
internal developer build system (JPRT) uses this makefile as well. It would be
good to get everybody at least using the same makefile, even if they have to
copy knowledge of which targets to run.
In the long r
Hi Balchandra,
What you've done seems reasonable given that you're just trying to get the
initial setup going.
I really think it would be preferable to use the actual makefile targets
instead of assembling a directory list. The reason is that the makefile targets
not only have lists of direc
On 01/14/13 07:36 AM, Stuart Marks wrote:
On 1/11/13 2:54 PM, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
I suggest there should be a new test/Makefile target for "run all
recommended
tests in a single jtreg run".
I think this would be ideal. Implicitly, then, Balchandra's script
would just invoke this makefi
--> Then, there are the makefiles. Oh, the makefiles. Mainly, they are
TOP/test/Makefile, TOP/jdk/test/Makefile, and
TOP/langtools/test/Makefile. (I don't know how the JVM tests are
invoked; probably TOP/hotspot/test/Makefile.)
If there's any change in TOP/jdk/test/Makefile, I would like to kn
On 1/11/13 2:54 PM, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
I suggest there should be a new test/Makefile target for "run all recommended
tests in a single jtreg run".
I think this would be ideal. Implicitly, then, Balchandra's script would just
invoke this makefile target, as would other internal build/test
On 01/11/2013 02:26 PM, Stuart Marks wrote:
Hi Rory, Balchandra,
It's great to see test results being posted! Now others on the OpenJDK
mailing list will know what I'm talking about when I occasionally
grumble about test failures. :-)
On 1/11/13 7:13 AM, Balchandra Vaidya wrote:
Finally, how
Hi Rory, Balchandra,
It's great to see test results being posted! Now others on the OpenJDK mailing
list will know what I'm talking about when I occasionally grumble about test
failures. :-)
On 1/11/13 7:13 AM, Balchandra Vaidya wrote:
Finally, how do the jtreg options used to generate the r
On 01/10/13 11:57 AM, Rory O'Donnell Oracle, Dublin Ireland wrote:
Hi Jon, Joe
Thank you both for your feedback.
We will look to post summary.txt in the coming weeks.
Done!
Secondly, we will look at archiving a summary.txt per build.
Balchandra will look at the jtreg options and come bac
Hi Sean,
On 10/01/2013 19:03, Seán Coffey wrote:
Good to see testing getting more focus in the OpenJDK forum Rory.
Any plans to use an OpenJDK binary rather than the EA builds ?
No, we want to execute tests on builds that everyone can access and
expect to
have the same results as we are post
Hi Jon, Joe
Thank you both for your feedback.
We will look to post summary.txt in the coming weeks. Secondly, we will
look at archiving a summary.txt per build.
Balchandra will look at the jtreg options and come back to you on that.
Will update you on our progress.
Rgds, Rory
On 10/01/2013
On 01/09/2013 02:03 PM, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
Rory,
It is good to see that we are now able to publish Early Access Build
Test Results.
What is being done to address the test failures that you report?
Ideally, test failures should have corresponding bugs filed on
JBS/bugs.sun.com.
It wou
Rory,
It is good to see that we are now able to publish Early Access Build
Test Results.
What is being done to address the test failures that you report?
Ideally, test failures should have corresponding bugs filed on
JBS/bugs.sun.com.
It would also be good to see the complete list of tests
18 matches
Mail list logo
