I created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DAFFODIL-2600 https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DAFFODIL-2601
as issues about the things Brandon tripped over in trying to get daffodil to build. On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 9:43 AM Sloane, Brandon <bslo...@owlcyberdefense.com> wrote: > My LANG was set to en_US. Updating to en_US.UTF-8 appears to fix the ? > issues. Having said that, my Ubuntu 20.04 machine has no issue with > LANG=en_US > > I confirmed that by libxml version is lower than the listed required > version. I'll try updating libxml tonight to see if that resolves both > issues. > ________________________________ > From: Steve Lawrence <slawre...@apache.org> > Sent: Monday, December 6, 2021 7:25 AM > To: dev@daffodil.apache.org <dev@daffodil.apache.org> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Daffodil 3.2.0-rc1 > > 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. > > > >
