On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 7:16 PM, Peter Kasting wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 4:54 PM, Dirk Pranke wrote:
>>
>> So, you then get the following algorithm:
>>
>> 1) if there is a ':' in the URI, you split the URI into scheme and
>> scheme-specific part
I'm not sure if we reached a conclusion on this, but I don't like a
couple of aspects of the Firefox logic (assuming I understood it
correctly).
The way I would look at it, the browser always has a "current context"
that indicates the current base to use for relative URIs. In the case
where you ar
Hi,
That's something that changed a couple days ago in revision 36214. If
your build is older than that, you do need to put the "Layout/" in
front.
-- Dirk
On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 12:27 AM, MORITA Hajime wrote:
> Hi folks,
> I've tried to run a subset of webkit layout test using run_webkit_test
Hi all,
If you never run layout tests or modify test_expectations.txt, you can
stop reading.
As part of the process to upstream our layout test infrastructure, I
have just checked in a change that changes our test infrastructure to
conform to WebKit's in how we specify test names.
Specifically,
As a side thread to the "Core Principles" / "home button" thread that
just went around, I have the following question:
Is it by design that if I click on a new tab or a new window, and I
have my preference set to "open this page" on the home page rather
than "use the new tab page", we still show t
at 6:59 PM, Dirk Pranke wrote:
> I have either deleted or submitted patches to upstream all of the
> remaining tests under chrome/ . There are a few that appear to be
> platform-specific, but most weren't. Assuming they clear the review
> process over the weekend, I intended to remove
If you're in the Bay Area, you may find this interesting and/or worthwhile:
http://www.yuiblog.com/blog/2009/12/22/crockford-on-javascript/
Doug is brilliant and his talks are excellent. Most of them exist in
earlier versions available on video, if you can't make it or prefer
alternate viewing me
I have either deleted or submitted patches to upstream all of the
remaining tests under chrome/ . There are a few that appear to be
platform-specific, but most weren't. Assuming they clear the review
process over the weekend, I intended to remove the chrome/ dir on
Monday and submit patches to run_
s done of making the other tools use the upstream
> copy. We should minimize as much as possible, the amount of time that we
> have these scripts forked. Can we move (13) to be (6)? Then we can delete
> the downstream run_webkit_tests.py.
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 5:18 PM, Dirk Pranke wrot
Hi all,
A number of us have drawn up a plan for getting the rest of our layout
tests infrastructure upstreamed to webkit.org. You can read about it
here:
http://www.chromium.org/developers/design-documents/upstreaminglayouttests
In addition to making us resemble other webkit ports by doing this
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 11:36 AM, Ojan Vafai wrote:
> I thought we had agreed on printing out any unexpected failures in
> real-time, no?
> Also, I do think it would be worthwhile to print each directory as it
> finishes. We're getting to the point where we shard all the big directories,
> so the
If I'm running on Windows, I know to ignore the latter. That's a
pretty big difference.
-- Dirk
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 7:39 AM, Avi Drissman wrote:
> What the difference between:
>
> ★ this extension doesn't work at all wh
>
> and
>
> ★ As mentioned, this extension is incomp
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 12:04 AM, Dirk Pranke wrote:
> The current implementation tells you that tests have failed as it
> goes, but not which tests (of course, the webkit script doesn't tell
> you either, apart from which directory the failure might be in). That
> would be eas
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 11:28 PM, David Levin wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 10:57 PM, Dirk Pranke wrote:
>>
>> We could do this, but we'd have to add logic to track when directories
>> were "done", and arbitrarily delay printing results about
and when that directory is
> done, display the results for the next directory until it is done, etc. The
> ordering of the directories may be different but the output is very similar
> to what they have now.
> The effect is quite satisfying and clear.
> dave
> On Thu, Dec 10, 2
this version upstream.
> dave
> On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 7:23 PM, Dirk Pranke wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> If you never run the webkit layout tests, you can stop reading.
>>
>> Otherwise, earlier today I checked in a patch that should make the
>> outp
Hi all,
If you never run the webkit layout tests, you can stop reading.
Otherwise, earlier today I checked in a patch that should make the
output much less verbose in the normal case. From the CL:
First, a number of log messages have had their levels changed (mostly to
make them quieter).
Secon
Isn't the shared worker tied to the SOP? If so, then it seems to me
that you would want the secure status to change just as if the parent
window had done the request directly.
If I think I'm on a secure page, I certainly don't want my app doing
insecure activities behind my back.
I almost feel th
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 10:25 AM, Ojan Vafai wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 10:21 AM, Dimitri
> Glazkov wrote:
>>
>> How about we turn red for unexpected crashiness?
>
> Makes sense to me. We can just not retry tests that unexpectedly crash.
I'll make this change if we have a consensus. Do we?
Our messages crossed in the ether ...
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 10:07 AM, Ojan Vafai wrote:
> +chromium-dev as others who look at the waterfall might also be confused.
> On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 8:50 AM, Dimitri Glazkov wrote:
>>
>> Sending out random people, because it's early :)
>>
>> There's a cou
As an aside, have we looked at using DirectWrite() on Windows?
-- Dirk
On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 12:58 PM, Jeremy Moskovich wrote:
> Re http://crbug.com/27195 & https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=31802 :
>
> Dan Bernstein says that Core Text on Leopard has performance issues vs ATSUI
> so I'm
On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 10:52 AM, Chris Bentzel wrote:
> How do most people do cross-platform validation prior to submitting code?
> Do you mostly rely on the try-bots, or do you also patch the diffs to your
> different dev environments and build and test locally?
I build on the different environ
t; On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 20:27, Dirk Pranke wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Just a heads' up ... we've discovered a bug in Issue Tracker that has
>> caused a few of our issues (along with a issues from other projects)
>> to be partially deleted from the d
Hi all,
Just a heads' up ... we've discovered a bug in Issue Tracker that has
caused a few of our issues (along with a issues from other projects)
to be partially deleted from the database. The team is aware of the
problem and working on a solution, but it may not be fully patched
until after Than
Having just come off sheriffing four days in the past two weeks ...
On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 12:31 PM, Peter Kasting wrote:
> At lunch today, a few of us discussed the idea of moving from two sheriffs
> to four.
> There are several reasons we contemplated such a change:
> * The team is large enoug
I started getting this on my mac at home, and haven't taken the time
to track it down yet. Is it possible your environment got switched
from the svn:// checkout to an https:// read-only checkout?
-- Dirk
On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 10:41 AM, Jens Alfke wrote:
> A few days ago I started getting an er
+1. Great idea!
-- Dirk
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 1:52 AM, Paweł Hajdan Jr.
wrote:
> I was just looking at the buildbot cycle stats
> at http://build.chromium.org/buildbot/waterfall/stats and realized that on
> many bots the most frequently failing tests are browser_tests and ui_tests.
> Then I ch
Hi all,
Who are the moderators for this list? There was someone (djodoin) who
has joined as a new member and apparently is waiting for his message
to be sent, but I'm wondering if all of the likely moderators are on
vacation or otherwise out ...
-- Dirk
--
Chromium Developers mailing list: chro
Yeah, we would have to work out a way of handling these sorts of features.
-- Dirk
On Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 3:01 PM, Jeremy Orlow wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 2:46 PM, Dirk Pranke wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 1:59 PM, Marshall Greenblatt
>> wrote:
>> >
On Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 1:59 PM, Marshall Greenblatt
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 4:32 PM, Dirk Pranke wrote:
>>
>> test_shell being a test shell used mostly for non-interactive testing,
>> we haven't given a lot of concern to its perfomance AFAIK. I
test_shell being a test shell used mostly for non-interactive testing,
we haven't given a lot of concern to its perfomance AFAIK. I'm not
even sure how long of a lifespan it'll have since we aim to
merge/replace it with WebKit's DumpRenderTree at some point soon.
Is there some reason you're not j
+1. I also wonder if it might be useful to have a names file/service
for configs so I don't have to remember the full URL when doing a
gclient config ...
-- Dirk
On Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 12:50 PM, Ben Goodger (Google) wrote:
>
> +1. This would be fab. There are so many test executables now it's n
Anyone who wants to follow along on this, I've filed
http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=26659 to track it.
-- Dirk
On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 5:01 PM, Dirk Pranke wrote:
> Sure. I was floating the idea first before doing any work, but I'll
> just grab an existing t
Hi all,
I have just checked in a new set of baselines that should allow you to
run the layout tests on Win 7 as well as Vista and XP.
For those of you playing along at home, this means that if you have a
baseline that is windows 7 specific, or is the same across 7, Vista,
and XP, check it into
s
use is a usage of SkCanvas::drawIRect() with kStroke_Style. It
> draws right/bottom lines outside of the specified SkIRect. I confirmed this
> was an intentional behavior at skia-discuss.
>
> On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 20:26, Dirk Pranke wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I
>
> On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 3:43 PM, Dirk Pranke wrote:
>>
>> If you've never run run_webkit_tests to run the layout test
>> regression, or don't care about it, you can stop reading ...
>>
>> If you have run it, and you're like me, you
If you've never run run_webkit_tests to run the layout test
regression, or don't care about it, you can stop reading ...
If you have run it, and you're like me, you've probably wondered a lot
about the output ... questions like:
1) what do the numbers printed at the beginning of the test mean?
2
Hm. I actually wrote that test, and I'm surprised that it's timing
out. I'll take a look at it as well. It is a slow test, because it's
basically trying to reproduce a stack overflow.
-- Dirk
On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 12:07 AM, Yuta Kitamura wrote:
> I'm also looking at LayoutTests/fast/css/large
+1
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 10:20 PM, Pam Greene wrote:
> If there are areas that nobody knows anything about, that's a lack that's
> hobbling us. Suppose we take the entire list of directories, slap it into a
> doc, and assign at least one owner to everything. For the areas that don't
> yet have
Hi all,
Someone from Mozilla is talking about their proposed new security
spec, CSP, today at Stanford.
I'm planning to go; was anyone else from MTV aware of this and hoping
to go? I can send out a summary of the talk afterwards if there's
interest.
https://wiki.mozilla.org/Security/CSP/Spec
I
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 10:31 AM, Dimitri Glazkov wrote:
>
> I think we need to change something. I am not sure what -- I have
> ideas, but -- I would appreciate some collective thinking on this.
>
> PROBLEM: We accumulate more test failures via WebKit rolls than we fix
> with our LTTF effort. Th
Stephen's right; if that doesn't fix things, let me know and I'll look at it.
-- Dirk
On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 9:59 AM, Stephen White wrote:
> I think that's a Release builder, and the tests are marked DEBUG, no?
> Stephen
>
> On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 12:34 PM, Avi Drissman wrote:
>>
>> Latest Mac
Ojan,
As you know, run_webkit_tests doesn't have the concept of "it's okay
that there are no expected results".
Several other people have also mentioned to me that it would be nice
if it did, but I don't feel strongly about it one way or another. I
don't know that I would consider tests marked W
Hi all,
If you don't run layout_tests or ever need to modify
test_expecations.txt, you can ignore this ...
As discussed earlier this week, we've added the ability to indicate
whether or not a test is expected to produce incorrect text output
(either a bad render tree or bad simplified text outpu
>> On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 3:11 PM, Ojan Vafai wrote:
>>>
>>> I don't think this is just about ignoring image-only results on mac for
>>> the short-term. My subjective sense is that we have many tests that start
>>> out as failing only image comparisons (e.g. due to theming), but over time
>>> an
I think this plan sounds good, too.
I'm mucking with those scripts a bit at the moment for the LTTF
reporting, so I can make this change tomorrow, unless someone else
would rather do it.
I might actually prefer FAIL-TEXT and FAIL-IMAGE, but that's just me.
I agree that TEXTFAIL is better than TE
No, there's no way to do that but it would be easy enough to add.
-- Dirk
On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 12:16 PM, Avi Drissman wrote:
> I've been looking into the pixel test situation on the Mac, and it isn't bad
> at all. Of ~5300 tests that have png results, we're failing ~800, most of
> which fall
Yes, exactly. I'm working on some additional reports and dashboards
that will allow us to track the funnel of finds/fixes better as well.
-- Dirk
On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 11:38 AM, Dimitri Glazkov wrote:
>
> Yep. Dirk was the one to suggest bringing it back. I didn't put this
> in the documentat
pid question in advance.
>
> Regards,
>
> Hironori Bono
> E-mail: hb...@chromium.org
>
> On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 8:26 PM, Dirk Pranke wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I have just landed a patch that enables us to run layout tests on
>> Vista as well as XP.
>&g
On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 2:15 PM, Ojan Vafai wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 4:26 AM, Dirk Pranke wrote:
>>
>> I have just landed a patch that enables us to run layout tests on
>> Vista as well as XP.
>
> Thanks for doing this! Needing to run the tests on a 32bit
Hi all,
I have just landed a patch that enables us to run layout tests on
Vista as well as XP.
In theory, you should continue to use the tools just as you have in
the past, and everything will work transparently. In practice, I may
have screwed up something, so if you notice problems please let
>From what I've poked around at, many of the LayoutTest flaky failures
are timeout-related. There's something in the test harness and web
server configurations that cause tests to be unpredictably slower. I
don't think Apple has this problem, and I think that's because they
use the built in apache
On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 1:52 PM, David Levin wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 1:37 PM, Dirk Pranke wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 11:37 AM, Ojan Vafai wrote:
>> > The end goal is to be in a state where we have near zero failing tests
>> > that
On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 11:37 AM, Ojan Vafai wrote:
> The end goal is to be in a state where we have near zero failing tests that
> are not for unimplemented features. And new failures from the merge get
> addressed within a week.
> Once we're at that point, would this new infrastructure be useful
On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 6:43 PM, Ojan Vafai wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 4:54 PM, Peter Kasting
> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 4:50 PM, Dirk Pranke wrote:
>>>
>>> This is all good feedback, thanks! To clarify, though: what do you
>>> thi
On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 4:47 PM, Peter Kasting wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 2:33 PM, Pam Greene wrote:
>>
>> I'm not convinced that passing tests we used to fail, or failing tests
>> differently, happens often enough to warrant the extra work of producing,
>> storing, and using expected-bad r
Hi all,
As Glenn noted, we made great progress last week in rebaselining the
tests. Unfortunately, we don't have a mechanism to preserve the
knowledge we gained last week as to whether or not tests need to be
rebaselined or not, and why not. As a result, it's easy to imagine
that we'd need to rep
I also fear that I may have unwanted files sneaking in. This was less
of an issue with Perforce since you have to manually 'p4 edit' files
first anyway.
I'll be curious to see if there's a consensus preference one way or
another. Maybe we can make this a gclient config setting or something?
-- D
I would love to enable that feature ... anyone know how to do that for
Adium on the Mac (IRC support is new in the 1.4 beta)?
Failing that, Colloquy?
-- Dirk
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 5:48 PM, Marc-Antoine Ruel wrote:
> Most irc clients have an option to beep, flash or shutdown your computer
> when
On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 10:10 AM, Darin Fisher wrote:
> I think we need to make it possible for the buildbots to run in a mode where
> there are absolutely no generated files output into the source directory.
> How can we make this happen?
> (I understand that some users like having files output to
(cc'ing chromium-discuss, bcc'ing chromium-dev)
It is? How do you specify keywords in Chrome's Bookmarks editor?
-- Dirk
On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 12:49 PM, Peter Kasting wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 12:46 PM, Igor Gatis wrote:
>>
>> (please forgive me if this not the right list)
>
> It's no
Being the person who perpetrated this crime, if someone could even
tell me how to fix it, that would be an improvement. It seems like
nsylvain is the only one with the appropriate mojo (at least in the
evenings...)
-- Dirk
On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 8:27 PM, Dan Kegel wrote:
>
> Stop me if you've h
-1000 to manual changelog updates
+1 to a changelog populated by a commit trigger. Having a
local/offline copy of the change history can be useful, in the absence
of git.
-100 to reverts deleting stuff from changelogs. changelogs should be
(except in exceptional circumstances) append only, just
It looks for version specific and then falls back
> to generic platform files so we only have to dup the ones that are os
> version specific.
> TVL
>
> On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 3:50 PM, Dirk Pranke wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> (If you don't ever care
Hi all,
(If you don't ever care to run the webkit layout tests, you can skip this note).
As most of you are no doubt aware, we currently can only run the
webkit layout_tests on windows XP. For some of us who primarily
develop on 64-bit Vista, this is inconvenient at best, and this is
only going
2009/7/6 David Jones :
>>Okay, I think I've figured this out and it's a relatively undocumented
>>aspect of our win builds (from what I can tell).
>>
>>The third_party/cygwin install we have has a modified version of
>>cygwin1.dll , which has been patched to tell cygwin the root is
>>third_party/c
Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 7:27 PM, Dirk Pranke wrote:
> Debugging this a bit more ... it seems to be some sort of XP vs. Vista
> thing. If I run "wdiff exp.txt act.txt" in a bash shell or a command
> prompt on Vista, it works. On XP, it works in a bash shell, but in a
> command prompt,
On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 1:49 PM, Andrew Scherkus wrote:
> I just checked in a Chromium-specific version of FFmpeg that only includes
> Ogg+Theora+Vorbis support.
> If you previously had any binaries located in third_party/ffmpeg/binaries,
> you may have to clobber that entire directory and force sy
Oh, I should add that if I run the same binaries under Vista,
everything works fine (no error from wdiff).
-- Dirk
On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 6:07 PM, Dirk Pranke wrote:
> Hi Marc-Antoine,
>
> I am getting the same "wdiff: /tmp/t101c.0: No such file or directory"
> errors ..
Hi Marc-Antoine,
I am getting the same "wdiff: /tmp/t101c.0: No such file or directory"
errors ... I'm running an XP VM on a Vista 64 host, but I've tried
both local files (running the tests on a virtual drive) as well as a
network share to the host VM. I've tried the /etc/fstab, the
CYGWIN=nonts
g
to find the cygwin environment, but isn't, and it is finding it on
Vista. I don't see anything obvious in my environment that is
different.
I am running Cygwin 1.5.25, though. At this point, my knowledge of
cygwin falters, so I'm out of ideas. Anyone else?
-- Dirk
On Thu, Jul 2,
71 matches
Mail list logo
