The other failures seem like they might be an encoding issue?
The first failure you included is supposed to output an infoset that
looks like:
<foo>ábcde</foo>
So it contains the an accented "a". But the infoset in the error message
has replaced that "a" with a question mark, likely the unicode
replacement character, which happens when that character is supported in
the encoding. And for some reason SAX is outputting two unicode
replacement characters, while non-SAX outputs one (both are incorrect).
What is your LANG variable set to?
I wonder if your default encoding has issues with the accented-a
character and there is a bug in Daffodil where it is incorrectly using
the system default encoding?
On 12/5/21 9:14 PM, Interrante, John A (GE Research, US) wrote:
Hi Brandon,
I don't know what the first type of error is (SAX parse output not matching
DataProcessor Parse output, ), ??bcde != ?bcde), but I know what the second
type of error is (undefined reference to `mxmlNewOpaquef').
Your Linux Mint 19.1 system is based on Ubuntu 18.04 LTS and you're using libmxml-dev
2.10 which is too old (the xmlNewOpaquef function was added in 3.0 which was released
in March 2019). You'll have to find a newer .deb or build mxml from source (see
daffodil/BUILD.md at main * apache/daffodil
(github.com)<https://github.com/apache/daffodil/blob/main/BUILD.md>).
John
From: Sloane, Brandon <bslo...@owlcyberdefense.com>
Sent: Sunday, December 5, 2021 5:25 PM
To: dev@daffodil.apache.org
Subject: EXT: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Daffodil 3.2.0-rc1
WARNING: This email originated from outside of GE. Please validate the sender's
email address before clicking on links or attachments as they may not be safe.
-1
I tried verifying the release candidate and ran into numerous failures on the
unit tests (full output attached). This is the first time in a while I have
tried Daffodil on this particular system (Linux Mint 19.1), particularly, this
is the first time I have used this system since we added the C backend.
[info] Test run
org.apache.daffodil.section23.dfdl_expressions.TestDFDLExpressions finished: 6
failed, 0 ignored, 779 total, 127.132s
[error] Failed: Total 3980, Failed 79, Errors 0, Passed 3898, Skipped 3
[error] Failed tests:
[error] org.apache.daffodil.section12.lengthKind.TestLengthKindPrefixed
[error] org.apache.daffodil.section05.facets.TestPatternRanges
[error] org.apache.daffodil.section12.length_properties.TestLengthProperties
[error]
org.apache.daffodil.section10.representation_properties.TestRepProps2
[error] org.apache.daffodil.section23.dfdl_expressions.TestDFDLExpressions2
[error] org.apache.daffodil.runtime2.TestNested
[error] org.apache.daffodil.section05.facets.TestNulChars
[error] org.apache.daffodil.runtime2.TestMpuGreenToOrange60004
[error] org.apache.daffodil.runtime2.TestEgressXdccBw
[error] org.apache.daffodil.runtime2.TestIsrmOrangeToGreen60002
[error] org.apache.daffodil.runtime2.TestIsrmGreenToOrange60000
[error] org.apache.daffodil.section00.general.TestUnparserGeneral
[error]
org.apache.daffodil.section11.content_framing_properties.TestContentFramingProperties
[error] org.apache.daffodil.runtime2.TestMpuOrangeToGreen60006
[error] org.apache.daffodil.runtime2.TestOrion
[error] org.apache.daffodil.runtime2.TestIngressXdccBw
[error] org.apache.daffodil.section12.lengthKind.TestLengthKindPattern
[error] org.apache.daffodil.section00.general.TestUnparserFileBuffering
[error] org.apache.daffodil.runtime2.TestExNums
[error] org.apache.daffodil.section10.representation_properties.TestRepProps
[error] org.apache.daffodil.section23.dfdl_expressions.TestDFDLExpressions
[error] (daffodil-test / Test / test) sbt.TestsFailedException: Tests
unsuccessful
[error] (daffodil-tdml-processor / Test / test) sbt.TestsFailedException: Tests
unsuccessful
[error] (daffodil-runtime2 / Test / test) sbt.TestsFailedException: Tests
unsuccessful
[error] (daffodil-test-ibm1 / Test / test) sbt.TestsFailedException: Tests
unsuccessful
I haven't thoroughly reviewed the failures, but I noticed two types of errors,
with representative samples shown below:
[error] Test
org.apache.daffodil.section12.lengthKind.TestLengthKindPrefixed.test_pl_text_string_txt_bytes_includes
failed: org.apache.daffodil.tdml.TDMLExceptionImpl: SAX parse output (actual)
does not match DataProcessor Parse output (expected)
[error]
[error] Comparison failed.
[error] Expected (attributes compared for diff)
[error] <ex:pl_text_string_txt_bytes_includes xmlns:ex="http://example.com";
xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance";>??bcde</ex:pl_text_string_txt_bytes_includes>
[error] Actual (attributes compared for diff)
[error] <ex:pl_text_string_txt_bytes_includes xmlns:ex="http://example.com";
xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance";>?bcde</ex:pl_text_string_txt_bytes_includes>
[error] Differences were (path, expected, actual):
[error] - (pl_text_string_txt_bytes_includes.charAt(1),??bcde,?bcde)
...
[error] /tmp/ccDZa55P.o: In function `xmlSimpleElem':
[error] xml_writer.c:(.text+0x4f5): undefined reference to `mxmlNewOpaquef'
[error] xml_writer.c:(.text+0x524): undefined reference to `mxmlNewOpaquef'
[error] xml_writer.c:(.text+0x56b): undefined reference to `mxmlNewOpaquef'
[error] xml_writer.c:(.text+0x5e5): undefined reference to `mxmlNewOpaquef'
[error] xml_writer.c:(.text+0x60e): undefined reference to `mxmlNewOpaquef'
[error] /tmp/ccDZa55P.o:xml_writer.c:(.text+0x638): more undefined references
to `mxmlNewOpaquef' follow
[error] collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
________________________________
From: Olabusayo Kilo
<ok...@owlcyberdefense.com<mailto:ok...@owlcyberdefense.com>>
Sent: Friday, December 3, 2021 6:56 PM
To: dev@daffodil.apache.org<mailto:dev@daffodil.apache.org>
<dev@daffodil.apache.org<mailto:dev@daffodil.apache.org>>
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Daffodil 3.2.0-rc1
+1 (binding)
Ah, ok!
On 12/3/21 5:48 PM, Steve Lawrence wrote:
The RPM isn't pushed to the artifactory repo until after the vote
passes. Otherwise if people ran dnf update they might install
something that hasn't been verified before the vote closed. So that's
normal.
On 12/3/21 5:05 PM, Olabusayo Kilo wrote:
+1
(as long as absence of 3.2.0-1 rpm in artifactory is addressed)
I checked:
[OK] links in email are correct
[OK] verified Summary of Changes pages (maven, sbt, download and dnf)
[OK] verified download of binary
[QUESTION] verified daffodil-rpm folder on dnf baseUrl site. Are we
supposed to be about to see 3.2.0-1 on there, because it's not there
right now
[OK] JavaDoc and ScalaDoc are correct
[OK] RAT check passes
On 12/1/21 2:03 PM, Mike Beckerle wrote:
Hi all,
I'd like to call a vote to release Apache Daffodil 3.2.0-rc1.
All distribution packages, including signatures, digests, etc. can be
found at:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/daffodil/3.2.0-rc1/
Staging artifacts can be found at:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachedaffodil-1025/
This release has been signed with PGP key 13A680AF, corresponding
to mbecke...@apache.org<mailto:mbecke...@apache.org>, which is included in the
KEYS file here:
https://downloads.apache.org/daffodil/KEYS
The release candidate has been tagged in git with v3.2.0-rc1.
For reference, here is a list of all closed JIRAs tagged with 3.2.0:
https://s.apache.org/daffodil-issues-3.2.0
For a summary of the changes in this release, see:
https://daffodil.apache.org/releases/3.2.0/
Please review and vote. The vote will be open for at least 72 hours
(Monday December 6, 14:00 EST.US).
[ ] +1 approve
[ ] +0 no opinion
[ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
Thanks,
- Mike Beckerle
--
Best Regards,
Lola K.
