Re: [swift-dev] [Swift CI] Build Failure: 0. OSS - Swift Incremental RA - OS X (master) #7592

Hm. Despite the blamelist, this one isn’t me. > Assertion failed: (isActuallyCanonicalOrNull() && "Forming a CanType out of a > non-canonical type!"), function CanType, file > /Users/buildnode/jenkins/workspace/oss-swift-incremental-RA-osx/swift/include/swift/AST/Type.h, > line 292. > > 0

[swift-corelibs-dev] Add support for gathering test coverage data on XCTest

Hi all, I was wondering if it can be a great idea to build the capability of gathering test coverage data inside the XCTest framework to be able to use it for gathering the data on the various platform without having to relay on the Xcode capability. Today the only way a swift project can be

Re: [swift-dev] [Swift CI] Build Failure: 0. OSS - Swift Incremental RA - OS X (master) #7592

Looks like a non-deterministic failure. Could be the same root cause as https://ci.swift.org//job/oss-swift-incremental-RA-osx/7570/consoleFull#577085863ee1a197b-acac-4b17-83cf-a53b95139a76

Re: [swift-dev] [Swift CI] Build Failure: 0. OSS - Swift Incremental RA - OS X (master) #7598

Does anyone know what happened here? It doesn’t look like any of the patches in the blame log could have caused this: /Users/buildnode/jenkins/workspace/oss-swift-incremental-RA-osx/swift/stdlib/public/SDK/XPC/XPC.swift:14:8: error: no such module '_SwiftXPCOverlayShims' import

Re: [swift-dev] [Swift CI] Build Failure: 0. OSS - Swift Incremental RA - OS X (master) #7598

Smells like a missing build dependency somewhere. > On Dec 14, 2016, at 5:40 PM, Slava Pestov via swift-dev > wrote: > > Does anyone know what happened here? It doesn’t look like any of the patches > in the blame log could have caused this: > >

Re: [swift-dev] [Swift CI] Build Failure: 0. OSS - Swift Incremental RA - OS X (master) #7598

Looks like it was a transient issue :(. #7599 is blue. vedant > On Dec 14, 2016, at 5:40 PM, Slava Pestov wrote: > > Does anyone know what happened here? It doesn’t look like any of the patches > in the blame log could have caused this: > >