Actually, https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-4278 is not a regression it was reproduced on Harmony r547521, r548930, r549703 That crash was not identified earlier because test org.apache.harmony.test.func.jit.HLO.lazyexc.Finalize.Finalize almost always failed by timeout during suite runs, but recently test was fixed - its timeout was increased
Thanks, Tanya On 6/26/07, tatyana doubtsova <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Stepan, thanks. you results are for regression testing. I updated http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/milestones/M2 with pass rates on snapshot r550333. 1 regression is detected so far (on functional test suite, https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-4278 ) EGA x 48 hours, reliability are slill running. Scenarios axis, Jetty, struts - passed. Thanks, Tanya On 6/26/07, Stepan Mishura <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > > On 6/25/07, tatyana doubtsova < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > > Hello, > > > > I've started testing of > > http://people.apache.org/builds/harmony/snapshots/r550333/ on windows > x86 > > with the following workloads from > > > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/harmony/enhanced/buildtest/branches/2.0: > > EGA x 48 hours, reliability, axis, Jetty, struts, functional, stress, > eut, > > gut, tptp, vtsvm. > > SciMark and Dacapo already passed. I'll report results, as they are > > available. > > > > Tatyana, > > The results for some test are already available at [1]. The include > Axis, Jetty, Struts testing scenarios, Geromino unit tests, SciMark > and Dacapo for Linux/Windows x86. You don't need to run them again. > > [1] http://people.apache.org/~smishura/r550333/index.html > > Thanks, > Stepan. > > > Thanks, > > Tanya > > > > > > > > On 6/25/07, Stepan Mishura < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > > > > > > On 6/25/07, Mikhail Loenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > 2007/6/25, Stepan Mishura < [EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > On 6/25/07, Mark Hindess wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On 25 June 2007 at 13:59, "Stepan Mishura" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > On 6/24/07, Mikhail Loenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We have passed our code freeze date for M2 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mikhail, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Just to be clear - M1 milestone published snapshots include > build > > > for > > > > > > > Windows x86, Linux (libstdc++ v5 and libstdc++ v6) x86 and > Windows > > > > > > > x86_64. > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you think it would be possible to produce source > snapshots? The > > > > > > Apache release FAQ (at http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html) > > > says: > > > > > > > > > > > > The Apache Software Foundation produces open source software. > All > > > > > > releases are in the form of the source materials needed to > make > > > > > > changes to the software being released. In some cases, > > > binary/bytecode > > > > > > packages are also produced as a convenience to users that > might > > > > > > not have the appropriate tools to build a compiled version of > the > > > > > > source. In all such cases, the binary/bytecode package must > have > > > > > > the same version number as the source release and may only > add > > > > > > binary/bytecode files that are the result of compiling that > version > > > of > > > > > > the source code release. > > > > > > > > > > > > Currently binaries are our primary artifact. I appreciated > that it > > > may > > > > > > be a little late to try to correct this for this release, but > I > > > think it > > > > > > is important that we try to correct this before we get too > > > comfortable > > > > > > with the current release process. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'd suggest to switch to using source snapshots right after M2. > > > > > > > > > > > It should now be possible to do: > > > > > > > > > > > > ant bundle_src > > > > > > mkdir /tmp/build > > > > > > tar -C /tmp/build -xzf target/apache- > > > harmony-src-r550411-snapshot.tar.gz > > > > > > cd /tmp/build/harmony-src-550411 > > > > > > ant -Dauto.fetch=true > > > > > > > > > > > > which would seem to me to be more in-keeping with the Apache > release > > > > > > guidelines. > > > > > > > > > > > > On this subject, I'd like to permission to commit a patch to > correct > > > the > > > > > > top-level directory name in the source tar.gz/zip files from: > > > > > > > > > > > > harmony-src-550411 > > > > > > > > > > > > to: > > > > > > > > > > > > apache-harmony-src-r550411 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm OK with it. > > > > > > > > will it require rebuild of the release candidate? > > > > > > > > > > I think it is not required. > > > > > > OK, I've built and uploaded milestone candidates (r550333) for > > > - Linux x86/x86_64 libstdc++ v5 (and v6 for x86 is in progress) > > > - Windows x86/x86_64 > > > > > > The snapshots are available from "snapshots v5" page[1] (or can be > > > taken from dir [2]) > > > > > > [1] http://harmony.apache.org/snapshots_v5.html > > > [2] http://people.apache.org/builds/harmony/snapshots/r550333/ > > > > > > -Stepan. > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Mikhail > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Stepan. > > > > > > > > > > > The format of the archive names changed over time and these > have > > > become > > > > > > inconsistent. > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Mark. > > > > > > > > > > > > > I assume that we still aimed to x86 architecture and I need > to > > > build > > > > > > > milestone candidates for: > > > > > > > - Windows x86 > > > > > > > - Linux x86. BWT, again for both libstdc++ versions? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And what about x86_64? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As I said M1 includes Windows x86_64. Should we publish them > to > > > let > > > > > > > the community test them to see how good they are? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > Stepan. > > > > > > > > -- > Stepan Mishura > Intel Enterprise Solutions Software Division >
