Tested just now on Windows 10. Signature: passes Checksums: pass make check: fails repeatedly, times out on these two tests:
chttpd_socket_buffer_size_test:71: buffer_too_small_url_fails... chttpd_socket_buffer_size_test:83: buffer_too_small_header_fails... Full log of the failures is at: https://gist.github.com/wohali/94c22ca493f60ba6353c13e6c09b4f35 NOTE that Windows logging always has SASL errors on, I've never been able to suppress those log lines, so just search on *timed out* and you'll find the two failures. I can make a release with this, but it's probably not right to ignore these tests. -1 :( -Joan ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jan Lehnardt" <m...@jan.io> > To: dev@couchdb.apache.org > Sent: Friday, March 1, 2019 2:49:38 PM > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache CouchDB 2.3.1 RC2 > > Russell confirmed on IRC. The vote can proceed. > > For extra safety: if anyone runs make check on this tarball and find > test fails in the log, please post them here, that would block the > release. > > It's all fine on Travis and I think Jenkins. > > Cheers > Jan > — > > > On 1. Mar 2019, at 11:17, Jan Lehnardt <j...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > I have a hard time reconciling those statements with what I’m > > seeing in the logs: > > > > Consider this snippet from the latest 2.3.x build log[1]: > > https://gist.github.com/janl/3c7db5f3ff466f9985306253d61abc3b > > > > It is the output for couchdb_views_tests[2], which has 5 test > > groups defined, and all test groups with all their inside them > > get an `...ok` line. > > > > 4/5 groups get a `erl_child_setup: failed with error 32 on line > > 253` message *after* the tests in each group ran to successful > > completion. > > > > As such, I’d suggest we do NOT need to abort this vote just yet. > > > > It’d be great to figure out what causes those messages to avoid > > confusion, and we’ve addressed an unrelated but related issue > > about hard failing the test suite if a sub-group fails, but the > > 2.3.x log does not exhibit this. > > > > Obligatory statement that votes don’t happen on IRC. > > > > Best > > Jan > > — > > > > [1]: full log here: > > https://api.travis-ci.org/v3/job/494557908/log.txt > > [2]: > > https://github.com/apache/couchdb/blob/2.3.x/src/couch/test/couchdb_views_tests.erl > > > > > > > > > >> On 27. Feb 2019, at 22:26, Joan Touzet <woh...@apache.org> wrote: > >> > >> Based on discussion with Russell Branca (chewbranca) in IRC, we > >> need to > >> abort this RC vote as he is effectively voting -1. Here's the full > >> transcript of our discussion: > >> > >> ------------------------ > >> > >> 16:06 <+Wohali> chewbranca: you there? are you seeing these eunit > >> context setup errors in 2.3.0 as well as the 2.3.1 > >> RC > >> and master? > >> 16:06 <+Wohali> I don't want to hold up 2.3.1 over something that > >> was a > >> pre-existing condition, but if it's something that > >> changed between 2.3.0 and 2.3.1/master, we need to > >> fix > >> it > >> 16:07 <chewbranca> Wohali: well the fundamental issue right now is > >> test > >> suite failures don't fail the build, which IMO > >> should > >> be fixed before any further builds > >> 16:08 <chewbranca> I've been using this diff locally, which fails > >> the > >> `make eunit` check upon an eunit failure: > >> > >> https://gist.github.com/chewbranca/65d2969ac191a5dfaf87172ace18d2ee > >> 16:08 <chewbranca> not sure that's the best approach, but we need > >> something like that > >> 16:08 <+Wohali> What I'm asking is: do you think this should block > >> the > >> release of 2.3.1? > >> 16:08 <+Wohali> By all means PR that to master and let's get shit > >> in > >> gear > >> 16:08 <+Wohali> I'm trying to work out when this problem started > >> occurring, though. > >> 16:09 <chewbranca> yes, should definitely block any further > >> releases, > >> because unless someone is manually inspecting the > >> eunit output, then we could have test failures > >> bubbling through > >> 16:11 <chewbranca> in theory this particular issue was introduced > >> 26 > >> days ago with the change to running individual > >> eunit > >> tests: > >> > >> https://github.com/apache/couchdb/commit/20bbfbf972ad1f822e2ef1edfb3d47f2cec3f639 > >> 16:11 <chewbranca> so this is probably a new thing, but we've > >> definitely > >> had issues with eunit over the years > >> 16:12 <chewbranca> Wohali: I can make a quick PR with the diff I > >> pasted > >> above and then we should be good to go IMO, but > >> it > >> wouldn't hurt to see if there's a more proper way > >> to > >> do that in a Makefile than just `|| exit 1` > >> 16:16 <+Wohali> chewbranca: are you 100% sure that context setup > >> failures mean the tests are actually failing? They > >> seem > >> to be running and passing even after that. I'm too > >> unfamiliar to know for sure. > >> 16:17 <+Wohali> chewbranca: that change you linked isn't in 2.3.1. > >> 16:17 <chewbranca> context setup failure means that setting up a > >> series > >> of eunit test generators failed and those tests > >> aren't being executed > >> 16:17 <+Wohali> ok. > >> 16:18 <chewbranca> those will fail if you do `|| exit 1`, but they > >> continue running today because we don't exit on > >> the > >> individual eunit runs > >> 16:18 <+Wohali> 2.3.1 has a critical fix for buffer sizes that we > >> need > >> to get out there. WOuld you accept me manually > >> reviewing > >> the output of 2.3.1's test suite to ensure no > >> context > >> setup failures? > >> 16:18 <+Wohali> then we make this a blocker for 2.4.0? > >> 16:18 <chewbranca> what I linked above is just a diff that I've > >> been > >> using locally because I wanted the suite to fail, > >> and > >> it works > >> 16:19 <chewbranca> Wohali: IMO let's just add that diff and then > >> if > >> folks know a more proper Makefile approach to > >> doing > >> that type of thing then they can fix it later > >> 16:19 <+Wohali> to both 2.3.1 and master? And to Makefile.Win I > >> presume? > >> ;) Then we'll have to cancel the current RC and > >> re-spin. > >> ... > >> 16:25 <chewbranca> https://github.com/apache/couchdb/pull/1951 > >> > >> ------------------------ > >> > >> > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >>> From: "Dave Cottlehuber" <d...@skunkwerks.at> > >>> To: dev@couchdb.apache.org > >>> Sent: Monday, February 25, 2019 6:10:05 AM > >>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache CouchDB 2.3.1 RC2 > >>> > >>>> On Mon, 25 Feb 2019, at 10:56, Dave Cottlehuber wrote: > >>>> On Thu, 21 Feb 2019, at 06:27, Jan Lehnardt wrote: > >>>> > >>>> FreeBSD 12.0-RELEASE-p3 amd64 + OTP 21.2.6 custom > >>>> > >>>> - OK sigs and checksums > >>>> - OK release > >>>> - fauxton verify is happy > >>>> - make check fails with the C.UTF-8 issues Joan has mentioned > >>>> previously > >>>> > >>>> belated +1 from me > >>>> > >>>> BTW the port will be a bit delayed this time as I need to bump > >>>> OTP > >>>> version and that usually has a bit of ports tree shakeout. My > >>>> patch > >>>> for > >>>> that is https://reviews.freebsd.org/D18820 > >>> > >>> I forgot to mention that the tarball has the annoying -RC2 suffix > >>> in > >>> filenames, which makes the downstream packaging diffs fiddly. I > >>> have > >>> that unfinished PR https://github.com/apache/couchdb/pull/1927 > >>> hopefully to fix that for next time. > >>> > >>> A+ > >>> Dave > >>> > > > > -- > > Professional Support for Apache CouchDB: > > https://neighbourhood.ie/couchdb-support/ > > > >