Re: [Zope-dev] Windows Binaries for 2.8b1
On Apr 26, 2005, at 2:22, Florent Guillaume wrote: Tim Peters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Technical details of permanent failure: PERM_FAILURE: SMTP Error (state 9): 553 5.3.0 Spam blocked see: http://spamcop.net/bl.shtml?64.233.184.203 Yeah this goes to show that you have to be extremely careful in choosing your RBL sources... And that spamcop is definitely not a good one. Not true. I've been using SpamCop for years now and had exactly four addresses that required me to create exceptions for them because their SMTP server got listed. I see what gets rejected because my Postfix sends me email about it, so I retain full control over the situation. jens ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Windows Binaries for 2.8b1
Great. And the current situation doesn't even catch too much spam. We're relying on some central spam filtering infrastructure here. Looks like I got to tune it again... Am Montag, den 25.04.2005, 17:46 -0400 schrieb Tim Peters: You should really be using SpamBayes 0.9 wink. -- gocept gmbh co. kg - schalaunische str. 6 - 06366 koethen - germany www.gocept.com - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - phone +49 3496 30 99 112 - fax +49 3496 30 99 118 - zope and plone consulting and development signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Windows Binaries for 2.8b1
Howdy, Am Montag, den 25.04.2005, 16:37 -0400 schrieb Tim Peters: AFAIK, nobody looks at WinBuilders between releases. It's traditionally been the job of whoever builds the Windows installer to sort out whatever troubles WinBuilders has gotten into since the last release. Certainly most Linux contributors aren't even aware of WinBuilder's existence. Which isn't actually a good idea I suppose. Relying on a fragile infrastructure to find out it doesn't work when you need it. Well... What exactly do you do to run tests? This is exactly what I do: svn up python setup.py build_ext -i python test.py -vv --all I go to the build directory of the WinBuilders and run bin/test.py The same two tests have been failing on Windows that way since last October, but all other tests pass. BTW, I don't have a guess about what your doctest complaint is. Since, e.g., all the doctest-based tests _do_ pass from a checkout, hard to guess what you're saying there. It's documented that, e.g., relative paths passed to DocFileSuite must use '/' as the path separator, and AFAIK all the code that's checked in does do that. I don't know of any other piece of doctest that cares about path separators. Hmm. Then it might have only be the missing files. I just have a really hard time trying to poke into that stuff and make it work. It just feels like poking a hairy cat. Or in the case of WinBuilders, a few dozen buttons, shell scripts, makefiles, and tricks building on 1.6 gigabytes of Cygwin code wink. Well. It's not that bad if it would work. - bumping a version number - run WinBuilders/buildout zope - do build/bin/test.py - Upload the .exe file I suspect it's worse than just that. When the two tests in collector 1728 started failing last October on Windows, I noted at the time that FYI, on WinXP, Zope 2.8 appears to use localhost no matter what ip-address is set to in zope.conf. No reason to suspect that got better, since the two failing tests that inspired that little investigation are still failing. Looks like the pain we go through is really wanted. I hate it when the estimated number of unknown cases (that appreciate the Windows installers) is high. I just liked the contrast in those two lines wink. Human contradictions. I'm happy with them. Kind of sanity test for me. ;) Christian -- gocept gmbh co. kg - schalaunische str. 6 - 06366 koethen - germany www.gocept.com - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - phone +49 3496 30 99 112 - fax +49 3496 30 99 118 - zope and plone consulting and development signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Windows Binaries for 2.8b1
... [Tim Peters] What exactly do you do to run tests? This is exactly what I do: svn up python setup.py build_ext -i python test.py -vv --all [Christian Theune] I go to the build directory of the WinBuilders and run bin/test.py 1. Is there a reason to _expect_ that to work? The WinBuilders README.txt doesn't claim that it should. Would sure be nice if it did work. 2. Which Python do you use to run bin\test.py? I hope you're using bin\python.exe for that attempt anyway. 3. How did you get that far? When I change a current WinBuilders checkout to point at Zope-2.8.0-b1.tgz, doing: WinBuilders/buildout zope dies like so: ... Zope binaries installed successfully. Now run 'c:\Code\build\bin\python.exe c:\Code\build\bin\mkzopeinstance.py' touch /cygdrive/c/Code/build/lib/python/Zope/Startup/run.py touch: cannot touch `/cygdrive/c/Code/build/lib/python/Zope/Startup/run.py': No such file or directory make: *** [/cygdrive/c/Code/build/lib/python/Zope/Startup/run.py] Error 1 And indeed, there is no Startup directory under lib/python/zope in SVN trunk. Which version of WinBuilders are you using? (I used current CVS HEAD) I can get beyond that by editing three lines in mk\zope.mk to refer to Zope2/Startup instead of Zope/Startup. Then the make completes. Trying bin\python.exe bin\test.py -v from the build directory then doesn't get anywhere, crapping out at once because (as I think you implied before) build\lib\python\ZClasses\_pmc.txt doesn't exist. ... Hmm. Then it might have only be the missing files. I just have a really hard time trying to poke into that stuff and make it work. It just feels like poking a hairy cat. It's related to this: Or in the case of WinBuilders, a few dozen buttons, shell scripts, makefiles, and tricks building on 1.6 gigabytes of Cygwin code wink. Well. It's not that bad if it would work. - bumping a version number - run WinBuilders/buildout zope - do build/bin/test.py - Upload the .exe file It is that simple for a given release, _after_ the kinks specific to that release have been worked out. But it can't stay that simple across releases because we massively rearrange code for the Windows release, trying to make a single directory under which everything on Earth lives (alll of Zope, our own Python, our own pywin32 extensions). The way that's stitched together requires sorting out all the messy interactions among a large pile of shell scripts, makefiles, and tricks, so you get sucked into all of that stuff when anything new happens. Like ZClasses growing important .txt, and even .fs, files, since the last release. However, I don't think this _specific_ one is WinBuilder's fault. When I look at Zope 2.8's setup.py, I see that nothing has been added here: # ZClasses setup( name='ZClasses', author=AUTHOR, packages=['ZClasses'], data_files=[['ZClasses', ['ZClasses/*.gif']], ['ZClasses/dtml', ['ZClasses/dtml/*']]], ) to record that ZClasses (or at least its tests) now requires some .txt and .fs files. That WinBuilders didn't copy those files to the build tree appears to be just a consequence of that setup.py install doesn't know anything about these new files (WinBuilders does an install to get the appropriate files copied from its src/ directory to its build/ directory). If so, that's an all-platform bug in Zope trunk's setup.py, but one that isn't visible in daily checkout testing. BTW, it's also traditional that the person building the Windows installer find and fix the new bugs in Zope's setup.py wink. ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Re: ZEO, FastCGI and Shibboleth
On 2005-04-25 06:58:17 -0400, John Snowdon [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Has anyone any thoughts about how to go about shibboleth enabling a whole host of ZEO instances... without each one having an Apache server sitting in front of it? Or is there an alternative method out there that perhaps is not widely known? We'd contemplated doing more work with PAS and Shibboleth to actually get Zope to do the equivalent of mod_shibboleth, but it never went anywhere. We stick Zope behind Apache (or some other proxying system - Squid, et al.) as a matter of course, so it was a no-brainer to just use mod_shibboleth in situ. We've posted the contents (modulo any specific policy) of our Shibboleth implementation for PAS. It amounts to a few Scriptable Plugins to handle the specific HTTP headers that get scribbled on a Shibboleth session. Here's the message: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-pas/2005-March/000314.html Zac ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Windows Binaries for 2.8b1
Howdy, Am Dienstag, den 26.04.2005, 11:38 -0400 schrieb Tim Peters: [Christian Theune] I go to the build directory of the WinBuilders and run bin/test.py 1. Is there a reason to _expect_ that to work? The WinBuilders README.txt doesn't claim that it should. Would sure be nice if it did work. Dunno. I'm tapping in the dark there. That's the runner I use for ages on Linux and it was around on the windows build. So I started using it and it worked (for a while). 2. Which Python do you use to run bin\test.py? I hope you're using bin\python.exe for that attempt anyway. The one test.py refers to. (Yep, still tapping around blindly.) 3. How did you get that far? When I change a current WinBuilders checkout to point at Zope-2.8.0-b1.tgz, doing: Which version of WinBuilders are you using? (I used current CVS HEAD) A local version that already contains the fixes described by you. The box I use it on isn't configured to be able to talk to the Zope CVS/SVN so I wanted to make this work and then put it back to the repository. It is that simple for a given release, _after_ the kinks specific to that release have been worked out. But it can't stay that simple across releases because we massively rearrange code for the Windows release, trying to make a single directory under which everything on Earth lives (alll of Zope, our own Python, our own pywin32 extensions). The way that's stitched together requires sorting out all the messy interactions among a large pile of shell scripts, makefiles, and tricks, so you get sucked into all of that stuff when anything new happens. Like ZClasses growing important .txt, and even .fs, files, since the last release. ... which is why I intended to start putting the WinBuilders under the Zope tree for versioning, so It's always around in the correct (historic) version. However, I don't think this _specific_ one is WinBuilder's fault. When I look at Zope 2.8's setup.py, I see that nothing has been added here: I thought so. But I'm not comfortable with prepping the setup.py unfortunately and some tries didn't work out, so I dropped it. to record that ZClasses (or at least its tests) now requires some .txt and .fs files. That WinBuilders didn't copy those files to the build tree appears to be just a consequence of that setup.py install doesn't know anything about these new files (WinBuilders does an install to get the appropriate files copied from its src/ directory to its build/ directory). If so, that's an all-platform bug in Zope trunk's setup.py, but one that isn't visible in daily checkout testing. Feels like that. That's why I'm running the tests from the result of the WinBuilders! BTW, it's also traditional that the person building the Windows installer find and fix the new bugs in Zope's setup.py wink. Great. I didn't read that job description well enough. Theuni-the-blind-windows-monkey -- gocept gmbh co. kg - schalaunische str. 6 - 06366 koethen - germany www.gocept.com - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - phone +49 3496 30 99 112 - fax +49 3496 30 99 118 - zope and plone consulting and development signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Windows Binaries for 2.8b1
Sticking to this thread ...
Now the unit tests look like this:
==
ERROR: testCorrectFactories
(zope.app.publisher.browser.tests.test_directoryreso
urce.Test)
--
Traceback (most recent call last):
File c:\zope\build_28\build\lib\python\zope\app\publisher\browser
\tests\test_
directoryresource.py, line 107, in testCorrectFactories
file = resource['png']
File c:\zope\build_28\build\lib\python\zope\app\publisher\browser
\directoryre
source.py, line 77, in __getitem__
raise KeyError, name
KeyError: 'png'
==
ERROR: test_dochttp (zope.app.tests.test_dochttp.Test)
--
Traceback (most recent call last):
File c:\zope\build_28\build\lib\python\zope\app\tests
\test_dochttp.py, line
120, in test_dochttp
dochttp(['-p', 'test', directory])
File c:\zope\build_28\build\lib\python\zope\app\tests\dochttp.py,
line 75, i
n dochttp
names = [name[:-len(.request)]
WindowsError: [Errno 3] Das System kann den angegebenen Pfad nicht
finden: 'c:\\
zope\\build_28\\build\\lib\\python\\zope\\app\\tests\\recorded/*.*'
==
FAIL: test_http_factory
(ZServer.tests.test_config.ZServerConfigurationTestCase)
--
Traceback (most recent call last):
File c:\zope\build_28\build\lib\python\ZServer\tests\test_config.py,
line 11
0, in test_http_factory
self.assertEqual(server.ip, '127.0.0.1')
File c:\zope\build_28\build\bin\lib\unittest.py, line 302, in
failUnlessEqua
l
raise self.failureException, \
AssertionError: 'localhost' != '127.0.0.1'
==
FAIL: test_webdav_source_factory
(ZServer.tests.test_config.ZServerConfiguration
TestCase)
--
Traceback (most recent call last):
File c:\zope\build_28\build\lib\python\ZServer\tests\test_config.py,
line 12
8, in test_webdav_source_factory
self.assertEqual(server.ip, '127.0.0.1')
File c:\zope\build_28\build\bin\lib\unittest.py, line 302, in
failUnlessEqua
l
raise self.failureException, \
AssertionError: 'localhost' != '127.0.0.1'
==
FAIL: Doctest: zope.app.onlinehelp.onlinehelptopic.OnlineHelpTopic
--
Traceback (most recent call last):
File c:\zope\build_28\build\lib\python\zope\testing\doctest.py, line
2102, i
n runTest
raise self.failureException(self.format_failure(new.getvalue()))
AssertionError: Failed doctest test for
zope.app.onlinehelp.onlinehelptopic.Onli
neHelpTopic
File c:\zope\build_28\build\lib\python\zope\app\onlinehelp
\onlinehelptopic.py
, line 72, in OnlineHelpTopic
--
File c:\zope\build_28\build\lib\python\zope\app\onlinehelp
\onlinehelptopic.py,
line 122, in zope.app.onlinehelp.onlinehelptopic.OnlineHelpTopic
Failed example:
topic = OnlineHelpTopic('help','Help',path,'')
Exception raised:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File c:\zope\build_28\build\lib\python\zope\testing\doctest.py,
line 131
5, in __run
compileflags, 1) in test.globs
File doctest
zope.app.onlinehelp.onlinehelptopic.OnlineHelpTopic[16],
line 1, in ?
topic = OnlineHelpTopic('help','Help',path,'')
File c:\zope\build_28\build\lib\python\zope\app\onlinehelp
\onlinehelptopi
c.py, line 163, in __init__
raise ConfigurationError(
ConfigurationError: Help Topic definition c:\zope\build_28\build\lib
\python\
zope\app\onlinehelp\tests\help.rst does not exist
--
File c:\zope\build_28\build\lib\python\zope\app\onlinehelp
\onlinehelptopic.py,
line 125, in zope.app.onlinehelp.onlinehelptopic.OnlineHelpTopic
Failed example:
topic.type
Expected:
'zope.source.rest'
Got:
'zope.source.stx'
--
Ran 5634 tests in 1433.151s
FAILED (failures=3, errors=2)
Any comments? Still hesitating to release the binaries, but I have them
around.
--
gocept gmbh co. kg - schalaunische str. 6 - 06366 koethen - germany
www.gocept.com - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - phone +49 3496 30 99 112 -
fax +49 3496 30 99 118 - zope and plone consulting and development
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
Re: [Zope-dev] Windows Binaries for 2.8b1
Sticking to this thread ... Now the unit tests look like this: The Zope trunk test_http_factory and test_webdav_source_factory tests have been failing on Windows this way since last October (even when running tests from a checkout tree). See: http://www.zope.org/Collectors/Zope/1728 for those. I haven't seen the other failures before. The obvious guess for ConfigurationError: Help Topic definition c:\zope\build_28\build\lib\python\ zope\app\onlinehelp\tests\help.rst does not exist is that the help.rst file in question didn't get copied to the build tree, right? That is, another setup.py oversight. FAILED (failures=3, errors=2) That seems remarkably good, considering ... ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Windows Binaries for 2.8b1
[Tim] 2. Which Python do you use to run bin\test.py? I hope you're using bin\python.exe for that attempt anyway. [Christian] The one test.py refers to. (Yep, still tapping around blindly.) I'm not following. #! lines don't mean anything on Windows, and that's the only sense in which I can imagine test.py refers to a Python. I showed exactly how I tried running them later in my msg: Trying bin\python.exe bin\test.py -v from the build directory ... although I didn't say there that I did that from a DOS (not Cygwin bash shell) box. Then that explicitly names the Python that ships with Zope. If you just try bin\test.py instead, you'll pick up whatever Python installation you most recently happened to associate with the .py extension. It's certainly better to use the Python Zope will actually run with on Windows. ... ... which is why I intended to start putting the WinBuilders under the Zope tree for versioning, so It's always around in the correct (historic) version. That's still a good idea, if you're asking me wink. That's what I do, e.g., for ZRS (it has a WinBuilder subdirectory). However, I don't think this _specific_ one is WinBuilder's fault. When I look at Zope 2.8's setup.py, I see that nothing has been added here: ... I thought so. But I'm not comfortable with prepping the setup.py unfortunately and some tries didn't work out, so I dropped it. Someone with setup.py courage needs to step up to the plate then. The Windows build process is way hard enough to follow already without adding reams of arbitrary new makefile cruft to paper over setup.py bugs. Perhaps someone on Linux could volunteer to run Zope trunk tests from the result of doing setup.py install ..., and add missing files to setup.py until that works. The WinBuilders tests can't possibly work either so long as setup.py neglects to install necessary files. ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Re: Windows Binaries for 2.8b1
Christian Theune wrote: Sticking to this thread ... [...] -- Ran 5634 tests in 1433.151s FAILED (failures=3, errors=2) Any comments? Still hesitating to release the binaries, but I have them around. I changed setup.py to add the files you added manually. Besides the 2 ZServer tests the same tests fail on Linux. The setup code for the Zope 3 stuff works different and I don't want to fork it. So these errors should be discussed with the Zope 3 people. I think you should release what you have now. But for the next beta these errors should be release blockers. Maybe you can run Windows tests *before* Andreas tags the next beta release? Cheers, Yuppie ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Re: Windows Binaries for 2.8b1
Tim Peters wrote: Someone with setup.py courage needs to step up to the plate then. The Windows build process is way hard enough to follow already without adding reams of arbitrary new makefile cruft to paper over setup.py bugs. Perhaps someone on Linux could volunteer to run Zope trunk tests from the result of doing setup.py install ..., and add missing files to setup.py until that works. The WinBuilders tests can't possibly work either so long as setup.py neglects to install necessary files. Done. (besides the Zope 3 failures) I did that more than once, but why can't people clean up after themselves? AFAICS two things could help them: - giving feedback by running nightly test on a not-in-place installation - reducing the need for setup.py updates by switching to the Zope 3 setup code Just my 2 cents. Yuppie ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Re: Windows Binaries for 2.8b1
[Tim Peters] Someone with setup.py courage needs to step up to the plate then. The Windows build process is way hard enough to follow already without adding reams of arbitrary new makefile cruft to paper over setup.py bugs. Perhaps someone on Linux could volunteer to run Zope trunk tests from the result of doing setup.py install ..., and add missing files to setup.py until that works. The WinBuilders tests can't possibly work either so long as setup.py neglects to install necessary files. [yuppie] Done. (besides the Zope 3 failures) Thank you! I did that more than once, Did what more than once? but why can't people clean up after themselves? Which people, cleaning up what? Sorry, I'm not following this. AFAICS two things could help them: - giving feedback by running nightly test on a not-in-place installation That would be helpful. - reducing the need for setup.py updates by switching to the Zope 3 setup code I think this gets worse with Zope3 code, and especially when mixed in with Zope2. Zope3 still uses setup.py for testing from a checkout, but uses zpkgtools for building a distribution: those two subsystems have nothing in common, and get out of synch with each other. It would be better if Z3's setup.py used zpkgtools too, but it doesn't now. In any case, nothing in Z2 (including WinBuilders) knows anything about how to live with zpkgtools now. For Zope 2.8, there may not be a realistic alternative to teaching Zope 2.8's setup.py how to install the Z3 bits in Zope 2.8. It already does this for other pieces. For example, ZODB 3.4 (which Zope 2.8 uses) inherited the same setup.py-vs-zpkgtools schizophrenia from Zope3, but Zope 2.8's setup.py learned how to install ZODB 3.4 independent of that (indeed, ZODB's own setup.py has never been part of any Zope checkout that I know of). ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Re: Windows Binaries for 2.8b1
Hi! Tim Peters wrote: [yuppie] I did that more than once, Did what more than once? Updating setup.py. (Or reminding people to do it themselves if they add new files and forget to update setup.py.) but why can't people clean up after themselves? Which people, cleaning up what? Sorry, I'm not following this. Contributers. setup.py. AFAICS two things could help them: - giving feedback by running nightly test on a not-in-place installation That would be helpful. - reducing the need for setup.py updates by switching to the Zope 3 setup code I think this gets worse with Zope3 code, and especially when mixed in with Zope2. Zope3 still uses setup.py for testing from a checkout, but uses zpkgtools for building a distribution: those two subsystems have nothing in common, and get out of synch with each other. It would be better if Z3's setup.py used zpkgtools too, but it doesn't now. In any case, nothing in Z2 (including WinBuilders) knows anything about how to live with zpkgtools now. For Zope 2.8, there may not be a realistic alternative to teaching Zope 2.8's setup.py how to install the Z3 bits in Zope 2.8. It already does this for other pieces. For example, ZODB 3.4 (which Zope 2.8 uses) inherited the same setup.py-vs-zpkgtools schizophrenia from Zope3, but Zope 2.8's setup.py learned how to install ZODB 3.4 independent of that (indeed, ZODB's own setup.py has never been part of any Zope checkout that I know of). Seems I wasn't specific enough. I just meant setup.py, not the other setup code from Zope 3. The Zope 2 code requires to specify each directory. The Zope 3 code walks through all subdirectories and searchs for files with the specified file extensions. That code is already part of the Zope 2 setup.py, but only used for the Zope 3 stuff. I didn't try it, but I guess it would not be too hard to use it for all the other packages as well. Cheers, Yuppie ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Re: Windows Binaries for 2.8b1
Tim Peters wrote: [Tim Peters] ... I think this gets worse with Zope3 code, and especially when mixed in with Zope2. Zope3 still uses setup.py for testing from a checkout, but uses zpkgtools for building a distribution: those two subsystems have nothing in common, and get out of synch with each other. It would be better if Z3's setup.py used zpkgtools too, but it doesn't now. Yup. We encountered this pain in working on the 3.1 release. I'm hoping to spend some time with Fred tomorrow to see if we can make a checkout use more of zpkgtools. zpkgtools is still a work in progress though. I expect we'll evolve it a bit more in the course of the 3.1 release. In any case, nothing in Z2 (including WinBuilders) knows anything about how to live with zpkgtools now. Yup. I'd like to fix this for 2.9. :) Jim -- Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered! CTO (540) 361-1714http://www.python.org Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com http://www.zope.org ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Windows Binaries for 2.8b1
Hi, Am Dienstag, den 26.04.2005, 12:57 -0400 schrieb Tim Peters: [Tim] 2. Which Python do you use to run bin\test.py? I hope you're using bin\python.exe for that attempt anyway. [Christian] The one test.py refers to. (Yep, still tapping around blindly.) I'm not following. #! lines don't mean anything on Windows, and I think cygwin does. But still you're right. I'll refer to it explicitly in the future. That's still a good idea, if you're asking me wink. That's what I do, e.g., for ZRS (it has a WinBuilder subdirectory). I'm just trying to get that stuff working at least once, then I'll drop it in. Someone with setup.py courage needs to step up to the plate then. The [...] possibly work either so long as setup.py neglects to install necessary files. Yuppie did, so I'll push out the stuff I have now. Andreas: Can you please consider a beta2 instead of a rc as the next step? Thanks. I promise to try running the test before the tag then. Cheers, Christian -- gocept gmbh co. kg - schalaunische str. 6 - 06366 koethen - germany www.gocept.com - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - phone +49 3496 30 99 112 - fax +49 3496 30 99 118 - zope and plone consulting and development signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Windows Binaries for 2.8b1
[Tim] 2. Which Python do you use to run bin\test.py? I hope you're using bin\python.exe for that attempt anyway. [Christian] The one test.py refers to. (Yep, still tapping around blindly.) [Tim] I'm not following. #! lines don't mean anything on Windows, and [Christian] I think cygwin does. But still you're right. I'll refer to it explicitly in the future. Yes, cygwin pays attention to #!, but we _certainly_ don't want to test the code going into the Windows installer using Cygwin's Python -- the Windows installer installs an entirely different Python (Zope2 repackages and installs the native Windows Python from python.org). That's why it's a good idea too to do all testing from a DOS box; getting any part of Cygwin into the testing means it's testing stuff we're not shipping. [on a WinBuilder subdirectory] I'm just trying to get that stuff working at least once, then I'll drop it in. Good plan. Someone with setup.py courage needs to step up to the plate then. The [...] possibly work either so long as setup.py neglects to install necessary files. Yuppie did That's not my understanding. My understanding (confirmed by eyeballing the checkins) is that Yuppie changed setup.py to add some test files used by ZClasses and ZODB, but left the failing tests in the Zope3 part of the code broken. I expect setup.py needs more changes to get those working. so I'll push out the stuff I have now. Good enough for now, I agree. Andreas: Can you please consider a beta2 instead of a rc as the next step? Thanks. I would if I were him. I promise to try running the test before the tag then. It probably helps if you're in the same time zone as Andreas. He always does things half a day before the earliest I expect him to do them 0.9 wink. ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Windows Binaries for 2.8b1
[Tim]
Someone with setup.py courage needs to step up to the plate then. The
[...] possibly work either so long as setup.py neglects to install necessary
files.
[Christian]
Yuppie did
[Tim]
That's not my understanding. My understanding (confirmed by
eyeballing the checkins) is that Yuppie changed setup.py to add some
test files used by ZClasses and ZODB, but left the failing tests in
the Zope3 part of the code broken. I expect setup.py needs more
changes to get those working.
FYI, I repaired those tonight. At least 6 necessary files from the
Zope3 code were missed by setup.py install, covering three
extensions (.rst, .request, .response), and one file with no extension
at all ('png').
The only tests that fail from a WinBuilders build/ directory now
(well, after changing CVS HEAD to use the right Zope version number,
and editing 3 lines to look for Startup in Zope2) are the 2 tests that
have been failing on Windows since last October.
I can't make time to dig into those; for that matter, I couldn't make
time to look at setup.py either 0.9 wink.
___
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Windows Binaries for 2.8b1
--On Dienstag, 26. April 2005 23:55 Uhr +0200 Christian Theune [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Andreas: Can you please consider a beta2 instead of a rc as the next step? Thanks. You mean 2.8 b2? The next scheduled 2.8 release is b2 according to the posted release plan *wink*. -aj pgpbxpUn0lQjr.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
