On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 06:16:58PM +0500, ???? ??????? wrote: > ??, 28 ???. 2020 ?. ? 18:15, Willy Tarreau <w...@1wt.eu>: > > > On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 06:02:16PM +0500, ???? ??????? wrote: > > > ??, 28 ???. 2020 ?. ? 16:02, Willy Tarreau <w...@1wt.eu>: > > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 02:13:15PM +0500, ???? ??????? wrote: > > > > > btw, we can remove "allowed failure" since this test is slow and > > excluded > > > > > > > > > > https://travis-ci.com/haproxy/haproxy/jobs/280882138 > > > > > > > > My understanding of the commit message was that it was excluded because > > > > of issue #429. Am I wrong ? > > > > > > > > > > it was excluded 2 times. > > > > > > first, we marked openssl-1.0.2 as "allowed failure" because of #429 > > > second, it was excluded, because it is "slow" test > > > > Hmmm no, we instead disabled slow regtests, but I'm not seeing anything > > > > yep. > > Skip reg-tests/ssl/set_ssl_cert.vtc because its type 'slow' is excluded
Ah got it. Well, that's just a coicidence because the problem met in this test is not that it is slow but that it fails on 1.0.2, so even if we were to re-enable slow tests later, it would fail again. Let's wait for #429 to be addressed first. Thanks, Willy
