| [08:34] <vila> wgz: windows slave seems in better shape, as for debug-windows, a bare 'make' has been deleted, just restored it and running a test right now | |
| [08:35] <vila> wgz: i.e. removing the 'import win32utils' was the only needed bit apparently | |
| [08:40] <vila> wgz: oh, and having jenkins version controlled made it trivial to detect the removed 'make' which is a very good example of why I dislike clickety GUI to define jobs | |
| [08:47] <vila> wgz: 'make clean' does not delete .pyd, cleaning up the debug-windows workspace manually was required, something fishy there but probably not worth digging for now | |
| [08:48] <vila> wgz: in the other hand, http://babune.ladeuil.net:24842/job/debug-windows/102/console may give a hint about the (subunit/testtools ?) stream leak | |
| [08:48] <vila> s/in the/on the/ | |
| [09:09] <mgz> morning all | |
| [09:09] <vila> hey mgz :) | |
| [09:10] <vila> mgz: let me re-paste previous remarks | |
| [09:10] <vila> <vila> wgz: windows slave seems in better shape, as for debug-windows, a bare 'make' has been deleted, just restored it and running a test right now | |
| [09:10] <vila> <vila> wgz: i.e. removing the 'import win32utils' was the only needed bit apparently | |
| [09:10] <vila> <vila> wgz: oh, and having jenkins version controlled made it trivial to detect the removed 'make' which is a very good example of why I dislike clickety GUI to define jobs | |
| [09:10] <vila> <vila> wgz: 'make clean' does not delete .pyd, cleaning up the debug-windows workspace manually was required, something fishy there but probably not worth digging for now | |
| [09:10] <vila> <vila> wgz: in the other hand, http://babune.ladeuil.net:24842/job/debug-windows/102/console may give a hint about the (subunit/testtools ?) stream leak | |
| [09:10] <vila> <vila> s/in the/on the/ | |
| [09:13] <mgz> yeah, seemed like the compiled modules were just sticking around from an older build and breaking things | |
| [09:16] <vila> yup, caused by the removed 'make' | |
| [09:17] <vila> but debug-windows jobs 100, 101, 102 failing when no tests failed... ? | |
| [09:17] <vila> jelmer: around ? | |
| [09:20] <mgz> vila: I'm not sure on that, I only messed around with the make calls after a few runs had already failed | |
| [09:20] <vila> ha ! | |
| [09:20] <vila> dependency not correctly tracked then ? | |
| [09:20] <mgz> I had the setup sh script, followed by make realclean; make for a couple of the runs | |
| [09:22] <vila> realclean deletes the .pyd files ? | |
| [09:23] <mgz> it should, but doesn't | |
| [09:23] <mgz> (clean should, but doesn't) | |
| [09:23] <mgz> basically, the makefile isn't written to work on windows | |
| [09:23] <mgz> but something else is going on as well I think | |
| [09:57] <mgz> vila: possibly something is wrong with the pipeline for subunit handling | |
| [09:57] <mgz> (causing the 'lost connection' issue) | |
| [09:58] <mgz> the output text on the server at least contains \r\n and \r\r\n rather than the expected line endings | |
| [09:59] <vila> ha ha, progress ? | |
| [09:59] <vila> 'server' ? | |
| [10:01] <mgz> if you do view console output as text on babune and download it | |
| [10:04] <vila> wow | |
| [10:04] <vila> that's *inside* the multipart stuff, wth ? | |
| [10:04] <mgz> might be after the fact mangling, it's not completely clear | |
| [10:05] <mgz> I note the current selftest template doesn't run ./bzr selftest but has a sh script for that as well | |
| [10:06] <vila> yup, part of the babune branch bin/selftest.sh | |
| [10:06] <vila> do you want a paste ? | |
| [10:07] <mgz> no, it's alright | |
| [10:07] <mgz> well, can look | |
| [10:07] <vila> http://paste.ubuntu.com/792536/ | |
| [10:07] <mgz> anyway, this is mostly output log-cosmetic, the junit xml gets generated correctly | |
| [10:08] <mgz> so I'm guessing it's the 2junit | 2pyunit pipe at fault | |
| [10:08] <mgz> I bet splitting into ./bzr selftest > out; 2junit < out; 2pyunit < out; would work. | |
| [10:09] <mgz> subunit probably forgets to set binary when forwarding from the filters? | |
| [10:10] <vila> breaking the pipe means no report while running selftest, better if we can avoid it in the end, yeah, or one of the filters forget to set binary | |
| [10:11] <mgz> yup, that'll be it. | |
| [10:12] <mgz> what's the easiest way to try out a fixed subunit on babune? | |
| [10:13] <vila> ask me :) | |
| [10:15] <vila> the always-falling-down-in-the-stack next task for babune is to add setup/deployment step that could be used for that kind of tests | |
| [10:16] <vila> I'm using subunit revno 151 for now | |
| [10:16] <vila> could probably update to 156 if it helps | |
| [10:17] <vila> testtools revno 224, same remark | |
| [10:19] <mgz> vila: lp:~gz/subunit/binary_forward_stream | |
| [10:21] <mgz> shouldn't need to update testtools | |
| [10:23] <vila> meh, there is already an unconditional make_stream_binary two lines above ? | |
| [10:23] <mgz> it's for a different stream :) | |
| [10:23] <mgz> ...I didn't change it | |
| [10:23] * mgz corrects | |
| [10:25] <mgz> pull --overwrite as I'm pretending I never made that mistake :) | |
| [10:25] <mgz> thanks for checking vila :) | |
| [10:25] <vila> pull -ooverwrite and I don't know what mistake you're talking about | |
| [10:26] <vila> the reason I checked is that I wanted to cherry-pick manually for the test ;) | |
| [10:28] <vila> running at http://babune.ladeuil.net:24842/job/debug-windows/104/console | |
| [10:28] <vila> looks pretty good no ? | |
| [10:28] <mgz> much more like it | |
| [10:29] <mgz> will propose branch for merging | |
| [10:29] <vila> Really looks pretty good to me and jenkins agrees :) | |
| [10:29] <mgz> thanks vila! | |
| [10:29] <vila> omg, thanks to you ! | |
| [10:29] <vila> this one has been such a pita... | |
| [10:29] <vila> ... for so long | |
| [10:30] <vila> running a windows full test suite to celebrate ;) | |
| [10:31] <vila> gee, I'm so glad I nudged you on the reduced run... | |
| [10:39] <mgz> I have a nasty feeling I broke this in the first place... | |
| [10:40] <vila> bah, as long as it's fixed now... | |
| [10:41] <vila> and remember it has been there for.... ages | |
| [10:41] <vila> and 'False' for a default value stream.... is suspicious at best | |
| [10:46] <mgz> yeah, I'm guessing that's why I made the mistake, why would you want to set binary on a boolean? | |
| [10:47] <vila> indeed | |
| [10:47] <vila> another case for doc not matching code ;) | |
| [11:49] <mgz> okay, I'm out over lunch for a bit | |
| [15:20] <vila> jelmer, mgz: https://code.launchpad.net/~mbp/bzr/261315-stacked-hpss weird warning there... | |
| [15:20] <vila> did we break compatibility with BzrBranch6 format at one point ? | |
| [15:21] * jelmer looks | |
| [15:22] <jelmer> vila: not that I'm aware of | |
| [15:22] <jelmer> vila: I don't see how that's related to BzrBranch6 though | |
| [15:22] <vila> ha, sorry | |
| [15:23] <vila> well, it seems our parametrized tests (for smart server) covers only BzrBranch7 and 8 | |
| [15:23] <vila> and... damn, what was it... | |
| [15:24] <vila> while debugging yesterday I went across some piece of code that made me think that the smart server was more or less not supporting anything older than that for branches | |
| [15:25] <vila> coming cross the branch above while trying to understand why Branch.get_stacked_on_url was always called for smart branches | |
| [15:25] <mgz> you mean that it's out of date? | |
| [15:25] <vila> it may just be that this branch is stacked on the old trunk | |
| [15:26] <mgz> yeah. | |
| [15:26] <vila> and something broke around that | |
| [15:26] <mgz> that's the context I've seen that note in before | |
| [15:35] <vila> ha, good enough then | |
| === yofel_ is now known as yofel | |
| [15:53] <jelmer> hah | |
| [15:53] <jelmer> commit in lightweight checkouts, from 220 to 30 roundtrips | |
| [15:53] <jelmer> with Vincent's config changes, that'll probably end up < 25 | |
| [15:54] <vila> BOOM | |
| [15:54] <vila> \o/ | |
| [15:54] <vila> emacs devs (among others) will be delighted :) | |
| [16:39] <vila> jelmer: just found back the bug that makes me hesitant to say we support subtrees in 2a: bug #634470 | |
| [16:39] <ubot5> Launchpad bug 634470 in Bazaar "bzrdir.destroy_workingtree ignores conflicts (which means that subtree support is broken for treeless branches)" [Medium,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/634470 | |
| [16:39] <vila> jelmer: but I can't find your merge proposal about that anymore... | |
| [16:41] <vila> jelmer: also look at comments in test_sprout_recursive_treeless in bt.test_bzrdir | |
| [16:51] <jelmer> vila: I don't think we'll be able to use the 2a working tree format for nested trees | |
| [16:51] <jelmer> but we should be able to use the 2a repository format | |
| [16:52] <vila> ooooh, sry for the misunderstanding then | |
| [16:56] <vila> jelmer: ... but what's the point of having a repo we can't checkout from then ? | |
| [16:57] <vila> hmm, I mean, you surely have a use case in mind, what is it ? | |
| === deryck is now known as deryck[lunch] | |
| [18:25] <Wiz_KeeD> hey guys! | |
| [18:30] <jelmer> hi Wiz_KeeD | |
| [18:30] <Wiz_KeeD> hello jelmer | |
| [18:30] <Wiz_KeeD> i'm going to ask a noob question for which i might be accused but here goes, after downloading a branch (from launchpad) to just update it to the lastest revision | |
| [18:31] <Wiz_KeeD> do i still use bzr branch and be in the same place with the dir that has the same name | |
| [18:31] <Wiz_KeeD> ?> | |
| [18:35] <mgz> nope, you use `bzr pull` | |
| [18:35] <jelmer> Wiz_KeeD: if you want to update an existing branch you created with "bzr branch", you can use "bzr pull" | |
| [18:35] <mgz> from inside the directory where you created the branch | |
| [18:35] <Wiz_KeeD> so i do bzr pull lp:blabla in that directory, but is there something wrong using branch to pull an existing branch? | |
| [18:36] <mgz> `bzr branch X` means 'create a new branch of X in a new location | |
| [18:37] <mgz> `bzr pull` means get the newest revisions of a branch existing in the current directory | |
| [18:37] <mgz> they're for different situations. | |
| [18:37] <Wiz_KeeD> i should have paid more attention, i intend just to get the latest version and use it, thus pull is for me | |
| [18:37] <fullermd> Also, you don't need the lp:Blah on pull. It'll pull from where you branched from automatically. | |
| [18:38] <mgz> generally you use branch once to get a copy of someone else's work, then pull thereafter to keep it updated | |
| [18:38] <Wiz_KeeD> so i did good by using branch first? | |
| [18:38] <Wiz_KeeD> or should i have used pull from the getgo | |
| [18:38] <fullermd> 'branch' is how you get the branch in the first place. 'pull' is how you update it once you have it. | |
| [18:39] <Wiz_KeeD> then i've got a good start | |
| [18:39] <mgz> yup. | |
| [18:39] <Wiz_KeeD> now i just need to use pull | |
| [18:40] <Wiz_KeeD> what about checkout, what's that about? | |
| [18:40] <fullermd> That's a whole different thing that will probably just add confusion to talk about. | |
| [18:42] <Wiz_KeeD> i know it's different i was just asking cause someone asked me if i had used that | |
| [18:44] <Wiz_KeeD> and i use bzr pull inside the directory which was created by bzr branch? | |
| === deryck[lunch] is now known as deryck | |
| [18:49] <mgz> Wiz_KeeD: that's right. | |
| [18:49] <Wiz_KeeD> that's cool, at least now i have some sort of control :D | |
| [19:29] <mgz> okay, fun done for the day | |
| === cody-somerville_ is now known as cody-somerville | |