Thanks Mark. I've just reproduced this on my Windows machine by switching to Sun's Java 6. It's happening because they've changed the javap format in Java 6 to have some extra blank lines in.
Nathan - I can send you a patch that ignores blank lines in the test if you would like to confirm this, or I can check it in. I will try to rewrite these tests to be a bit more robust at some point before the next milestone because we've had a couple of situations now where differences in javap output or not having javap available have caused the tests to fail. On 19/08/2008, Mark Hindess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Ok. Using our incomplete javap is probably a bad idea so I've re-run the > same tests with a sun javap from: > > Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.6.0_07-b06) > Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 10.0-b23, mixed mode) > > And now I get the same errors as you. Hopefully now Sian can see > what the problem is. > > -Mark. > > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > Mark Hindess writes: > > > > > > I've given Sian access to an ubuntu 64-bit machine. However, I get > > different errors - I'm using a javap from a harmony-5.0-jdk debian > > package that I'm testing for M7. > > > > Nathan, what javap are you using? The output from: > > > > update-alternatives --display javap > > > > might help. Then I should be able to reproduce your environment more > > accurately. > > > > -Mark > > > > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Si > > an > > January" writes: > > > > > > Ok - thanks. I have not seen this before and unfortunately I don't > > > have access to a 64-bit Ubuntu machine to try it out. It's possibly > > > happening because your version of javap has a bug in it or prints > > > things in a different order, but I would need to look at the class > > > file to find this out. > > > > > > Would you be able to run unpack200 manually against HelloWorld.pack > > > and send me the resulting jar if you have time? HelloWorld.pack is > > > under pack200/src/test/resources/org/apache/harmony/pack200/tests. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Sian > > > > > > On 19/08/2008, Nathan Beyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Test: testWithSql > > > > Class: org.apache.harmony.unpack200.tests.ArchiveTest > > > > > > > > junit.framework.ComparisonFailure: expected:<[ LocalVariableTable: ]> > > > > but was:<[]> > > > > at > > > > org.apache.harmony.unpack200.tests.ArchiveTest.testWithSql(Arch > > iv > > > eTest.java:94) > > > > at java.lang.reflect.VMReflection.invokeMethod(VMReflection.java) > > > > Test: testHelloWorld > > > > Class: org.apache.harmony.unpack200.tests.SegmentTest > > > > > > > > junit.framework.ComparisonFailure: expected:<[ LocalVariableTable: ]> > > > > but was:<[]> > > > > at > > > > org.apache.harmony.unpack200.tests.SegmentTest.testHelloWorld(S > > eg > > > mentTest.java:125) > > > > at java.lang.reflect.VMReflection.invokeMethod(VMReflection.java) > > > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 3:07 AM, Sian January > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Nathan - would you mind posting more the failure messages for the > > > > > unpack200 tests? > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > > > Sian > > > > > > > > > > On 18/08/2008, Nathan Beyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > >> -1 I'm not able to reproduce the same results on x86_64 Ubuntu Hardy > > > > >> > > > > >> Here are the failures I'm seeing, consistently, in classlib-test. The > > > > >> unpack200 test failures concern me. > > > > >> > > > > >> error testGetAttribute > > > > >> org.apache.harmony.lang.management.MemoryPoolMXBeanImplTest > > > > >> error testGetCollectionUsage > > > > >> > > > > >> org.apache.harmony.lang.management.tests.java.lang.management.M > > em > > > oryPoolMXBeanTest > > > > >> failure testWithSql > > > > >> org.apache.harmony.unpack200.tests.Arc > > hi > > > veTest > > > > >> failure testHelloWorld > > > > >> org.apache.harmony.unpack200.tests.Seg > > me > > > ntTest > > > > >> failure test_impliesLjava_security_Permission > > > > >> tests.api.java.security.PermissionCollectionTest > > > > >> > > > > >> Here are the failures I'm seeing, consistently, in jdktools-test. > > > > >> > > > > >> error testDebuggerLaunch001 > > > > >> > > > > >> org.apache.harmony.jpda.tests.jdwp.DebuggerOnDemand.OnthrowDebu > > gg > > > erLaunchTest > > > > >> error testDebuggerLaunch002 > > > > >> > > > > >> org.apache.harmony.jpda.tests.jdwp.DebuggerOnDemand.OnthrowDebu > > gg > > > erLaunchTest > > > > >> error testDebuggerLaunch003 > > > > >> > > > > >> org.apache.harmony.jpda.tests.jdwp.DebuggerOnDemand.OnthrowDebu > > gg > > > erLaunchTest > > > > >> error testDebuggerLaunch004 > > > > >> > > > > >> org.apache.harmony.jpda.tests.jdwp.DebuggerOnDemand.OnthrowDebu > > gg > > > erLaunchTest > > > > >> error testAttachConnector001 > > > > >> > > > > >> org.apache.harmony.jpda.tests.jdwp.MultiSession.AttachConnector > > Te > > > st > > > > >> error testClearBreakpoint001 > > > > >> org.apache.harmony.jpda.tests.jdwp.MultiSession.BreakpointTest > > > > >> error testMethodEvent001 > > > > >> > > > > >> org.apache.harmony.jpda.tests.jdwp.MultiSession.MethodEntryExit > > Te > > > st > > > > >> error testResume > > > > >> org.apache.harmony.jpda.tests.jdwp.MultiSessio > > n. > > > ResumeTest > > > > >> error testThreadEnd001 > > > > >> org.apache.harmony.jpda.tests.jdwp.MultiSession.ThreadEndTest > > > > >> error testThreadStart001 > > > > >> > > > > >> org.apache.harmony.jpda.tests.jdwp.MultiSession.ThreadStartTest > > > > >> > > > > >> drlvm-test and drlvm-reg-test are passing. > > > > >> > > > > >> -Nathan > > > > >> > > > > >> On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 8:26 AM, Sian January > > > > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > >> > Hi everyone, > > > > >> > > > > > >> > We have completed a testing cycle for r681495 and evaluated the > > > > >> > resu > > lt > > > s [1]. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > There are some test failures, but most of them are either > > > > >> > intermitte > > nt > > > > >> > or were also failing in M6. However if anyone thinks any of these > > > > >> > test failures are blockers and has not yet had a chance to say, > > > > >> > plea > > se > > > > >> > speak up now. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Otherwise, shall we declare r681495 as M7? > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Thanks, > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Sian > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > [1] http://harmony.markmail.org/message/cpfcnslv53doueeg?q= > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > -- > > > > >> > Unless stated otherwise above: > > > > >> > IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with > > > > >> > nu > > mb > > > er 741598. > > > > >> > Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire > > > > >> > P > > O6 > > > 3AU > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Unless stated otherwise above: > > > > > IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with > > > > > numbe > > r > > > 741598. > > > > > Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 > > 3A > > > U > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Unless stated otherwise above: > > > IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number > > > 74 > > 15 > > > 98. > > > Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU > > > > > > > -- Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU
