Stefan Fuhrmann wrote on Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 18:03:48 +0200:
> On 30.10.2010 17:01, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
>> Looks like at least one test fails:
>>
>> [[[
>> lp-shahaf,14:svn/performance% ../runctest fs fs 22
>> subversion/tests/libsvn_fs/fs-test.c:3411: (apr_err=160000)
>> subversion/tests/libsvn_fs/fs-test.c:3229: (apr_err=160000)
>> svn_tests: Error validating revision 1 (youngest is 3)
>> subversion/tests/svn_test_fs.c:492: (apr_err=160000)
>> svn_tests: Repository tree does not look as expected.
>> Corrupt entries:
>> A/D/G/rho
>> Missing entries:
>> Extra entries:
>>
>> FAIL: lt-fs-test 22: after each commit, check all revisions
>> zsh: exit 1 ../runctest fs fs 22
>> ]]]
>>
>> I haven't tested yet whether it's due to the commits this morning or to
>> something else.
> Hm. The tests run fine here. But I'm testing with FSFS only
> and I'm using plain "make -j && make check" with no magic
> environment variables set.
I ran 'make davautocheck' (which would have tested FSFS), and I build
with "-DSVN_FS_FS_DEFAULT_MAX_FILES_PER_DIR=4 -DPACK_AFTER_EVERY_COMMIT"
in CFLAGS.
Can you reproduce the FAIL with these CFLAGS set?
>> Stefan, can you guess what might be causing this?
>>
> This is typically caused by stream_readline() not detecting
> or handling EOF properly. You could try to replace just that
> function with /trunk code and see what happens.
It fails in the same way; see attached.
>> Also: how to detect this when it happens next? When I was working on
>> the atomic-revprops branch I asked to add it to the buildbot, perhaps we
>> should be doing this more regularly (for our feature branches) too?
> +1 for that. The closer we come to a 1.7 release, the more
> import it will be to have a certain level of confidence that
> the patch sources aren't broken.
>
Okay. I'll wait a bit for opinions, and if I don't hear objections I'll
ask infra to add this branch to the buildbot. Are there any other
branches we should consider adding to the buildbot?
> -- Stefan^2.
>
Received on 2010-10-30 19:15:55 CEST