On Fri, Apr 6, 2012 at 11:32 AM, Joe Swatosh <joe.swatosh_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 2:30 AM, Philip Martin
> <philip.martin_at_wandisco.com> wrote:
>> Philip Martin <philip.martin_at_wandisco.com> writes:
>>
>>> There is another failure in the ruby testsuite:
>>>
>>> http://ci.apache.org/builders/svn-x64-ubuntu-gcc/builds/4626
>>>
>>> 1) Failure:
>>> test_changelists_get_with_block(SvnClientTest)
>>> /var/lib/buildbot/svn-buildslave/svn-x64-ubuntu/build/subversion/bindings/swig/ruby/test/test_client.rb:2296:in `assert_changelists'
>>> /var/lib/buildbot/svn-buildslave/svn-x64-ubuntu/build/subversion/bindings/swig/ruby/test/util.rb:204:in `make_context'
>>> /var/lib/buildbot/svn-buildslave/svn-x64-ubuntu/build/subversion/bindings/swig/ruby/test/test_client.rb:2288:in `assert_changelists'
>>> /var/lib/buildbot/svn-buildslave/svn-x64-ubuntu/build/subversion/bindings/swig/ruby/test/test_client.rb:2349:in `test_changelists_get_with_block':
>>> <{nil=>
>>> ["/tmp/d20120322-8616-qtl2ah/wc",
>>> "/tmp/d20120322-8616-qtl2ah/wc/hello1.txt",
>>> "/tmp/d20120322-8616-qtl2ah/wc/hello2.txt"]}> expected but was
>>> <{nil=>
>>> ["/tmp/d20120322-8616-qtl2ah/wc",
>>> "/tmp/d20120322-8616-qtl2ah/wc/hello2.txt",
>>> "/tmp/d20120322-8616-qtl2ah/wc/hello1.txt"]}>.
>>
>> Another failure that looks like a similar problem in a different place:
>>
>> 1) Failure:
>> test_diff_callbacks_for_backward_compatibility(SvnWcTest)
>> /var/lib/buildbot/svn-buildslave/svn-x64-ubuntu/build/subversion/bindings/swig/ruby/test/test_wc.rb:756:in `assert_diff_callbacks'
>> /var/lib/buildbot/svn-buildslave/svn-x64-ubuntu/build/subversion/bindings/swig/ruby/svn/wc.rb:136:in `_open'
>> /var/lib/buildbot/svn-buildslave/svn-x64-ubuntu/build/subversion/bindings/swig/ruby/svn/wc.rb:114:in `open'
>> /var/lib/buildbot/svn-buildslave/svn-x64-ubuntu/build/subversion/bindings/swig/ruby/test/test_wc.rb:711:in `assert_diff_callbacks'
>> /var/lib/buildbot/svn-buildslave/svn-x64-ubuntu/build/subversion/bindings/swig/ruby/svn/ra.rb:52:in `open'
>> /var/lib/buildbot/svn-buildslave/svn-x64-ubuntu/build/subversion/bindings/swig/ruby/test/test_wc.rb:699:in `assert_diff_callbacks'
>> /var/lib/buildbot/svn-buildslave/svn-x64-ubuntu/build/subversion/bindings/swig/ruby/test/util.rb:204:in `make_context'
>> /var/lib/buildbot/svn-buildslave/svn-x64-ubuntu/build/subversion/bindings/swig/ruby/test/test_wc.rb:696:in `assert_diff_callbacks'
>> /var/lib/buildbot/svn-buildslave/svn-x64-ubuntu/build/subversion/bindings/swig/ruby/test/test_wc.rb:764:in `test_diff_callbacks_for_backward_compatibility':
>> <[[:dir_props_changed,
>> "/tmp/d20120327-16259-17t4nz8/wc",
>> [#<Svn::Core::Prop:0x2ac09bd95450
>> @name="svn:entry:committed-date",
>> @value=nil>,
>> #<Svn::Core::Prop:0x2ac09bd95428
>> @name="svn:entry:committed-rev",
>> @value=nil>,
>> #<Svn::Core::Prop:0x2ac09bd95400 @name="svn:entry:last-author", @value=nil>,
>> #<Svn::Core::Prop:0x2ac09bd95360 @name="svn:entry:uuid", @value=nil>]],
>> [:file_changed,
>> "/tmp/d20120327-16259-17t4nz8/wc/dir/hello.txt",
>> [#<Svn::Core::Prop:0x2ac09bd952e8 @name="my-prop", @value="value">]],
>> [:file_added, "/tmp/d20120327-16259-17t4nz8/wc/dir/hello2.txt", []]]> expected but was
>> <[[:dir_props_changed,
>> "/tmp/d20120327-16259-17t4nz8/wc",
>> [#<Svn::Core::Prop:0x2ac09bd95ea0
>> @name="svn:entry:committed-date",
>> @value=nil>,
>> #<Svn::Core::Prop:0x2ac09bd95e50
>> @name="svn:entry:committed-rev",
>> @value=nil>,
>> #<Svn::Core::Prop:0x2ac09bd95f18 @name="svn:entry:last-author", @value=nil>,
>> #<Svn::Core::Prop:0x2ac09bd95dd8 @name="svn:entry:uuid", @value=nil>]],
>> [:file_added, "/tmp/d20120327-16259-17t4nz8/wc/dir/hello2.txt", []],
>> [:file_changed,
>> "/tmp/d20120327-16259-17t4nz8/wc/dir/hello.txt",
>> [#<Svn::Core::Prop:0x2ac09bd95860 @name="my-prop", @value="value">]]]>.
>>
>> We fix these by converting the arrays to sets so that the order is
>> irrelevant. The open question is whether we do this solely within the
>> testsuite, changing both sides of the comparison, or whether we change
>> the bindings to return a set and adjust the testsuite to match.
>>
>
> I think I've addressed the first failure in r1310535. I will continue
> looking into the wc failure.
>
I think r1310594 takes care of the wc failures in the Ruby bindings.
I'm not seeing other test failures locally, please let me know if
others start failing....
--
Joe
Received on 2012-04-06 23:22:30 CEST