[Monotone-devel] Re: lua testsuite progress (was: Re: Summer of Code kick-off)

[Timothy Brownawell]

On Wed, 2006-06-07 at 06:33 -0500, Timothy Brownawell wrote:
> It now works under Windows/VC8, except for the non-english tests.

One of these also fails under msys, but in a different way.

> Next up is to convert more tests (maybe all of the rest?) and get the
> *nix-ish build env installed on my windows so I can verify that things
> work there.

I got 50 more tests converted, and got mingw/msys installed, and the
empty_environment tests works there now. The cvs tests have trouble with
cleanup because the cvs that came with my mingw seems to like making
read-only repositories. So what's next is to fix the cleanup code to
deal with this.

> I can also (but probably not this week) poke at our
> dependency graph more, to try to get the test program to depend less on
> general monotone code (besides sanity and libplatform) (maybe enough to
> have a 'libsanity'?).
> 
> The 200 converted tests run in 27 minutes walltime on Windows/vmplayer,
> with 10 skipped (These are either tests that don't make sense on
> Windows, or tests that use unavailable commands (such as the cvs
> tests).) On Linux, they run in 9 minutes walltime, with 5 minutes user
> and 1 minutes system time. The first 200 tests from the old testsuite
> (on Linux) take 20m/5m/10m wall/user/sys time.

This also takes about 26 minutes when compiled under mingw, while the
old testsuite takes about 7 hours.

Tim


=

I'll be offline from this weekend until the end of the month.




___
Monotone-devel mailing list
Monotone-devel@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel

Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: [RFC] M.T. phone home

[Rob Schoening]

as a user, my self-interest wants monotone to be stable and bulletproof above all else.  
 
so if this issue distracts from that...
 
RS 
On 6/13/06, Graydon Hoare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Nathaniel Smith wrote:> We all definitely agree that (0) is fine, and that (6) is not.> Therefore, we probably each have some first number that we think would
> be unacceptable.  When you say "Don't do it", do you mean that for> you, the line of acceptability falls between (0) and (1), (1) is> already too much, or, can you expand on where exactly you think the
> line is?I think that (1) is too far. I'd like to stick to surveys. Maybe surveysplus a line asking for a voluntary dump of "mtn db info" and your--full-version string. Maybe a command like "mtn db profile" that runs a
loopback file:// sync with a bunch of internal scoped timers andcounters, and some deeper analysis of the db structure.I have two lines of reasoning here.First, I fear setting up any sort of subconscious association between
our tool and privacy invasion. People believe the first and/or worstrumor they hear. That's not about reasoning, it's about avoidingirrational rumors and reputations.Second, I think that it would be hard to implement properly:
  - Get the set of data to record just right  - Get the sending-to-us system just right  - Get the interacting-with-user system just rightThis will distract a lot of attention from other tasks; each of them is
a sort of mother-of-all-bikeshed topic.Don't get me wrong: I'd love to see trustworthy, privacy-blinded,full-system profiling of some sort enabled on computers -- in general --so that the system-makers could see all the annoyances they unwittingly
foist on users. But I don't think we're there yet, and I don't reallywant our tool going down the road exploring it.-graydon___Monotone-devel mailing list
Monotone-devel@nongnu.orghttp://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel

___
Monotone-devel mailing list
Monotone-devel@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel