testing 2010-10-04

testing 2010-10-04

[Cliff Brake]

Testing run from last week:
http://cgit.openembedded.org/cgit.cgi/openembedded/tag/?id=testing_2010-09-27

testing-next is updated and ready for clean builds:
http://wiki.openembedded.net/index.php/Testing

Thanks,
Cliff

-- 
=================
http://bec-systems.com

Re: testing 2010-10-04

[Frans Meulenbroeks]

2010/10/4 Cliff Brake <cliff.brake@gmail.com>:
> Testing run from last week:
> http://cgit.openembedded.org/cgit.cgi/openembedded/tag/?id=testing_2010-09-27
>
> testing-next is updated and ready for clean builds:
> http://wiki.openembedded.net/index.php/Testing
>
> Thanks,
> Cliff
>
> --

For me this version fails on native sqlite3_3.6.23.1.bb, do_compile
see e.g. testing_2010-1004: fails on native sqlite3_3.6.23.1.bb, do_compile
See also http://tinderbox.openembedded.net/public/logs/task/8402014.txt

this fails both minimal/console-image as well as slugos/slugos-image

Frans

Re: testing 2010-10-04

[Frans Meulenbroeks]

2010/10/5 Frans Meulenbroeks <fransmeulenbroeks@gmail.com>:
> 2010/10/4 Cliff Brake <cliff.brake@gmail.com>:
>> Testing run from last week:
>> http://cgit.openembedded.org/cgit.cgi/openembedded/tag/?id=testing_2010-09-27
>>
>> testing-next is updated and ready for clean builds:
>> http://wiki.openembedded.net/index.php/Testing
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Cliff
>>
>> --
>
> For me this version fails on native sqlite3_3.6.23.1.bb, do_compile
> see e.g. testing_2010-1004: fails on native sqlite3_3.6.23.1.bb, do_compile
> See also http://tinderbox.openembedded.net/public/logs/task/8402014.txt
>
> this fails both minimal/console-image as well as slugos/slugos-image
>
> Frans
>
Actually this is already fixed here:
http://cgit.openembedded.org/cgit.cgi/openembedded/commit/?id=9f503dbde0f2f6e9d4a94f6ab4be1b04dfc99950

suggest to make a new testing-next label and restart this weeks' test.

Frans

Re: testing 2010-10-04

[Stefan Schmidt]

Hello.

On Mon, 2010-10-04 at 14:05, Cliff Brake wrote:
> Testing run from last week:
> http://cgit.openembedded.org/cgit.cgi/openembedded/tag/?id=testing_2010-09-27
> 
> testing-next is updated and ready for clean builds:
> http://wiki.openembedded.net/index.php/Testing

Openjdk-6 build fails on cacao:
http://tinderbox.openembedded.net/public/logs/task/8408323.txt

regards
Stefan Schmidt

Re: testing 2010-10-04

[Frans Meulenbroeks]

Oh, one other thing.

Personally I would prefer it if the testing branch could be made on friday.
That way I (and I guess others) can use unused CPU cycles @ work
during the weekend to do the test builds.
How do others feel about that?

Frans

Re: testing 2010-10-04

[Koen Kooi]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 05-10-10 14:32, Stefan Schmidt wrote:
> Hello.
> 
> On Mon, 2010-10-04 at 14:05, Cliff Brake wrote:
>> Testing run from last week:
>> http://cgit.openembedded.org/cgit.cgi/openembedded/tag/?id=testing_2010-09-27
>>
>> testing-next is updated and ready for clean builds:
>> http://wiki.openembedded.net/index.php/Testing
> 
> Openjdk-6 build fails on cacao:
> http://tinderbox.openembedded.net/public/logs/task/8408323.txt

Openjdk fails in a lot of ways. Building it is a lottery. When changing
nothing (host system and OE) I can do 2 builds from scratch and have one
building openjdk and the other will fail. Or hang in icedtea compilation
taking 0% cpu.

So openjdk is not a good measure of passing judgement over a branch.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFMqygFMkyGM64RGpERAl3IAJ4vJYGwEXChO71TA78gdqaNRhxrNgCeJqHE
omItxJtxs9R2Ceoi67DHAuA=
=Yimx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: testing 2010-10-04

[Stefan Schmidt]

Hello.

On Tue, 2010-10-05 at 15:28, Koen Kooi wrote:
> On 05-10-10 14:32, Stefan Schmidt wrote:
> > Hello.
> > 
> > On Mon, 2010-10-04 at 14:05, Cliff Brake wrote:
> >> Testing run from last week:
> >> http://cgit.openembedded.org/cgit.cgi/openembedded/tag/?id=testing_2010-09-27
> >>
> >> testing-next is updated and ready for clean builds:
> >> http://wiki.openembedded.net/index.php/Testing
> > 
> > Openjdk-6 build fails on cacao:
> > http://tinderbox.openembedded.net/public/logs/task/8408323.txt
> 
> Openjdk fails in a lot of ways. Building it is a lottery. When changing
> nothing (host system and OE) I can do 2 builds from scratch and have one
> building openjdk and the other will fail. Or hang in icedtea compilation
> taking 0% cpu.

It was the first fail for all testing-next builds that have been done until now.

I agree that building it is not as stable as I would like it, but it is also not
as bad as described. The only problem i have been run into for a long time is a
segfault of the host javavm when bringing up other packages. Restarting the
build always gaves me a working image.

> So openjdk is not a good measure of passing judgement over a branch.

It failed in 1 out of 7 testing cycles for now. Not that bad imho. Surely it
gives no idea of the overall usability of a certain branch, but thats why we
have more images and distros to cover up more areas.

regards
Stefan Schmidt

Re: testing 2010-10-04

[Stefan Schmidt]

Hello.

On Tue, 2010-10-05 at 15:23, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
> 
> Personally I would prefer it if the testing branch could be made on friday.
> That way I (and I guess others) can use unused CPU cycles @ work
> during the weekend to do the test builds.
> How do others feel about that?

I think it makes sense. I normally do the build directly after the new testing
branch gets created and doing that at a weekend would be good from my view. Put
monday is not that bad either.

Cliff, for now you have done all the branch creating and tagging, etc. Thanks
for that. If you need help or some weeks relaxing from the monotone tasks let us
know.

regards
Stefan Schmidt

Re: testing 2010-10-04

[Cliff Brake]

On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 7:39 AM, Frans Meulenbroeks
<fransmeulenbroeks@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2010/10/5 Frans Meulenbroeks <fransmeulenbroeks@gmail.com>:
>> 2010/10/4 Cliff Brake <cliff.brake@gmail.com>:
>>> Testing run from last week:
>>> http://cgit.openembedded.org/cgit.cgi/openembedded/tag/?id=testing_2010-09-27
>>>
>>> testing-next is updated and ready for clean builds:
>>> http://wiki.openembedded.net/index.php/Testing
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Cliff
>>>
>>> --
>>
>> For me this version fails on native sqlite3_3.6.23.1.bb, do_compile
>> see e.g. testing_2010-1004: fails on native sqlite3_3.6.23.1.bb, do_compile
>> See also http://tinderbox.openembedded.net/public/logs/task/8402014.txt
>>
>> this fails both minimal/console-image as well as slugos/slugos-image
>>
>> Frans
>>
> Actually this is already fixed here:
> http://cgit.openembedded.org/cgit.cgi/openembedded/commit/?id=9f503dbde0f2f6e9d4a94f6ab4be1b04dfc99950
>
> suggest to make a new testing-next label and restart this weeks' test.

Hi Frans,

I would prefer to simply wait till next week.  The reason is some
people may have already done builds, and I don't want to burden them
with rebuilding, and sorting out the confusion who built on what
version of testing-next.  I don't think its a big deal if we miss a
weak as long as we identify the issues and fix them for next week.
But, I'm open to other thoughts on this.

Thanks,
Cliff

-- 
=================
http://bec-systems.com

Re: testing 2010-10-04

[Cliff Brake]

On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 9:23 AM, Frans Meulenbroeks
<fransmeulenbroeks@gmail.com> wrote:
> Oh, one other thing.
>
> Personally I would prefer it if the testing branch could be made on friday.
> That way I (and I guess others) can use unused CPU cycles @ work
> during the weekend to do the test builds.
> How do others feel about that?

I think this is a good idea -- so the testing cycle would run from Fri
to Fri instead of Mon to Mon.  As this weeks build is broken for many
combinations, it would be good time to shift to Fri as we will not
lose any testing time.  I'll plan for this Fri unless there are
objections.

Thanks,
Cliff

-- 
=================
http://bec-systems.com

Re: testing 2010-10-04

[dfoley]

On 10-10-05 05:32 AM, Stefan Schmidt wrote:
> Hello.
>
> On Mon, 2010-10-04 at 14:05, Cliff Brake wrote:
>> Testing run from last week:
>> http://cgit.openembedded.org/cgit.cgi/openembedded/tag/?id=testing_2010-09-27
>>
>> testing-next is updated and ready for clean builds:
>> http://wiki.openembedded.net/index.php/Testing
>
> Openjdk-6 build fails on cacao:
> http://tinderbox.openembedded.net/public/logs/task/8408323.txt
>
> regards
> Stefan Schmidt

May not be correct, but I ran into the same problem and patched.

diff --git a/recipes/cacao/cacao.inc b/recipes/cacao/cacao.inc
index c366b74..70bda75 100644
--- a/recipes/cacao/cacao.inc
+++ b/recipes/cacao/cacao.inc
@@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ EXTRA_OECONF = "\
  	${@['','--enable-softfloat'][bb.data.getVar('TARGET_FPU',d,1) == 'soft']} \
  	--enable-debug \
  	--with-vm-zip=${datadir}/cacao/vm.zip \
-	--with-cacaoh=${STAGING_BINDIR_NATIVE}/cacaoh-${PV} \
+	--with-cacaoh=${STAGING_BINDIR_NATIVE}/cacaoh-${PV}/cacaoh \
      --with-build-java-runtime-library-classes=${STAGING_DATADIR}/classpath/glibj.zip \
      --with-java-runtime-library-classes=${datadir}/classpath/glibj.zip \
      --with-java-runtime-library-libdir=${libdir_jni}:${libdir} \

Re: testing 2010-10-04

[Stefan Schmidt]

Hello.

On Tue, 2010-10-05 at 07:50, dfoley wrote:
> 
> May not be correct, but I ran into the same problem and patched.
> 
> diff --git a/recipes/cacao/cacao.inc b/recipes/cacao/cacao.inc
> index c366b74..70bda75 100644
> --- a/recipes/cacao/cacao.inc
> +++ b/recipes/cacao/cacao.inc
> @@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ EXTRA_OECONF = "\
>  	${@['','--enable-softfloat'][bb.data.getVar('TARGET_FPU',d,1) == 'soft']} \
>  	--enable-debug \
>  	--with-vm-zip=${datadir}/cacao/vm.zip \
> -	--with-cacaoh=${STAGING_BINDIR_NATIVE}/cacaoh-${PV} \
> +	--with-cacaoh=${STAGING_BINDIR_NATIVE}/cacaoh-${PV}/cacaoh \
>      --with-build-java-runtime-library-classes=${STAGING_DATADIR}/classpath/glibj.zip \
>      --with-java-runtime-library-classes=${datadir}/classpath/glibj.zip \
>      --with-java-runtime-library-libdir=${libdir_jni}:${libdir} \

This does it fix for me as well. I wonder from which commit the  directory
change was triggered in the last week.

Care to send a git formatted patch with PR bump I could apply? As you did the
work you should get the credits for it. :)

regards
Stefan Schmidt 

Re: testing 2010-10-04

[dfoley]

On 10-10-06 03:37 AM, Stefan Schmidt wrote:
> Hello.
>
> On Tue, 2010-10-05 at 07:50, dfoley wrote:
>>
>> May not be correct, but I ran into the same problem and patched.
>>
>> diff --git a/recipes/cacao/cacao.inc b/recipes/cacao/cacao.inc
>> index c366b74..70bda75 100644
>> --- a/recipes/cacao/cacao.inc
>> +++ b/recipes/cacao/cacao.inc
>> @@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ EXTRA_OECONF = "\
>>   	${@['','--enable-softfloat'][bb.data.getVar('TARGET_FPU',d,1) == 'soft']} \
>>   	--enable-debug \
>>   	--with-vm-zip=${datadir}/cacao/vm.zip \
>> -	--with-cacaoh=${STAGING_BINDIR_NATIVE}/cacaoh-${PV} \
>> +	--with-cacaoh=${STAGING_BINDIR_NATIVE}/cacaoh-${PV}/cacaoh \
>>       --with-build-java-runtime-library-classes=${STAGING_DATADIR}/classpath/glibj.zip \
>>       --with-java-runtime-library-classes=${datadir}/classpath/glibj.zip \
>>       --with-java-runtime-library-libdir=${libdir_jni}:${libdir} \
>
> This does it fix for me as well. I wonder from which commit the  directory
> change was triggered in the last week.
>
> Care to send a git formatted patch with PR bump I could apply? As you did the
> work you should get the credits for it. :)
>
> regards
> Stefan Schmidt

I don't mind if you commit it. You can put me in signed off by.
Should the maintainer (MAINTAINERS file) verify it ?

Re: testing 2010-10-04

[Khem Raj]

On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 8:34 AM, dfoley <dfoley@telus.net> wrote:
> On 10-10-06 03:37 AM, Stefan Schmidt wrote:
>>
>> Hello.
>>
>> On Tue, 2010-10-05 at 07:50, dfoley wrote:
>>>
>>> May not be correct, but I ran into the same problem and patched.
>>>
>>> diff --git a/recipes/cacao/cacao.inc b/recipes/cacao/cacao.inc
>>> index c366b74..70bda75 100644
>>> --- a/recipes/cacao/cacao.inc
>>> +++ b/recipes/cacao/cacao.inc
>>> @@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ EXTRA_OECONF = "\
>>>        ${@['','--enable-softfloat'][bb.data.getVar('TARGET_FPU',d,1) ==
>>> 'soft']} \
>>>        --enable-debug \
>>>        --with-vm-zip=${datadir}/cacao/vm.zip \
>>> -       --with-cacaoh=${STAGING_BINDIR_NATIVE}/cacaoh-${PV} \
>>> +       --with-cacaoh=${STAGING_BINDIR_NATIVE}/cacaoh-${PV}/cacaoh \
>>>
>>>  --with-build-java-runtime-library-classes=${STAGING_DATADIR}/classpath/glibj.zip
>>> \
>>>      --with-java-runtime-library-classes=${datadir}/classpath/glibj.zip \
>>>      --with-java-runtime-library-libdir=${libdir_jni}:${libdir} \
>>
>> This does it fix for me as well. I wonder from which commit the  directory
>> change was triggered in the last week.
>>
>> Care to send a git formatted patch with PR bump I could apply? As you did
>> the
>> work you should get the credits for it. :)
>>
>> regards
>> Stefan Schmidt
>
> I don't mind if you commit it. You can put me in signed off by.
> Should the maintainer (MAINTAINERS file) verify it ?

what would be your sign off? your email does not reveal your full name :)

>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-devel mailing list
> Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
>

Re: testing 2010-10-04

[Dallas Foley]

On 10-10-07 11:26 AM, Khem Raj wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 8:34 AM, dfoley<dfoley@telus.net>  wrote:
>> On 10-10-06 03:37 AM, Stefan Schmidt wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello.
>>>
>>> On Tue, 2010-10-05 at 07:50, dfoley wrote:
>>>>
>>>> May not be correct, but I ran into the same problem and patched.
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/recipes/cacao/cacao.inc b/recipes/cacao/cacao.inc
>>>> index c366b74..70bda75 100644
>>>> --- a/recipes/cacao/cacao.inc
>>>> +++ b/recipes/cacao/cacao.inc
>>>> @@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ EXTRA_OECONF = "\
>>>>         ${@['','--enable-softfloat'][bb.data.getVar('TARGET_FPU',d,1) ==
>>>> 'soft']} \
>>>>         --enable-debug \
>>>>         --with-vm-zip=${datadir}/cacao/vm.zip \
>>>> -       --with-cacaoh=${STAGING_BINDIR_NATIVE}/cacaoh-${PV} \
>>>> +       --with-cacaoh=${STAGING_BINDIR_NATIVE}/cacaoh-${PV}/cacaoh \
>>>>
>>>>   --with-build-java-runtime-library-classes=${STAGING_DATADIR}/classpath/glibj.zip
>>>> \
>>>>       --with-java-runtime-library-classes=${datadir}/classpath/glibj.zip \
>>>>       --with-java-runtime-library-libdir=${libdir_jni}:${libdir} \
>>>
>>> This does it fix for me as well. I wonder from which commit the  directory
>>> change was triggered in the last week.
>>>
>>> Care to send a git formatted patch with PR bump I could apply? As you did
>>> the
>>> work you should get the credits for it. :)
>>>
>>> regards
>>> Stefan Schmidt
>>
>> I don't mind if you commit it. You can put me in signed off by.
>> Should the maintainer (MAINTAINERS file) verify it ?
>
> what would be your sign off? your email does not reveal your full name :)

No need to include me in the sign off.
I believe I've corrected my full name now.

>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Openembedded-devel mailing list
>> Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
>> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-devel mailing list
> Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel

Re: testing 2010-10-04

[Stefan Schmidt]

Hello.

On Thu, 2010-10-07 at 12:04, Dallas Foley wrote:
> On 10-10-07 11:26 AM, Khem Raj wrote:
> >
> >what would be your sign off? your email does not reveal your full name :)
> 
> No need to include me in the sign off.

To late :)

> I believe I've corrected my full name now.

Thanks. Good for the next time.

regards
Stefan Schmidt