Re: Re: Re: [classlib][TestNG] groups of Harmony test

On 9/5/06, Vladimir Ivanov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 9/5/06, Andrew Zhang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > If test fails on linux than (for example): > > - the test/ implementation should be fixed or > > > What if the behaviour is different on different platforms? Seems, that it may be jus

Re: Re: Re: [classlib][TestNG] groups of Harmony test

On 9/5/06, Andrew Zhang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If test fails on linux than (for example): > - the test/ implementation should be fixed or What if the behaviour is different on different platforms? Seems, that it may be just 2 different tests. - the test should define platform and rep

Re: [classlib][logging] a test suite shouldn't touch any of JRE config files!!!

Stepan Mishura wrote: On 9/4/06, *Paulex Yang* wrote: Stepan Mishura wrote: > On 9/1/06, Paulex Yang wrote: >> >> Stepan Mishura wrote: >> > Hi Andrew, >> > >> > I've just looked into static initialization block and then to the >> > spec. for >> > LogManager c

Re: Re: Re: [classlib][TestNG] groups of Harmony test

On 9/5/06, Richard Liang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 9/5/06, Alex Blewitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 04/09/06, Richard Liang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 9/4/06, Alex Blewitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > If you've got fast and slow tests, then have a group for fast and slow

Re: [classlib][logging] a test suite shouldn't touch any of JRE config files!!!

On 9/4/06, Paulex Yang wrote: Stepan Mishura wrote:> On 9/1/06, Paulex Yang wrote: Stepan Mishura wrote: >> > Hi Andrew,>> >>> > I've just looked into static initialization block and then to the>> > spec. for>> > LogManager class.>> > My impression is that Harmony implementation doesn't follow

Re: Re: Re: [classlib][TestNG] groups of Harmony test

On 9/5/06, Vladimir Ivanov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 9/5/06, Andrew Zhang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 9/5/06, Vladimir Ivanov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > OK, let's return back to the usage model. > > If I understood it correctly, before the commit of any changes each > > develop

Re: Re: Re: [classlib][TestNG] groups of Harmony test

On 9/5/06, Andrew Zhang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 9/5/06, Vladimir Ivanov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > OK, let's return back to the usage model. > If I understood it correctly, before the commit of any changes each > developer run *all* tests (at least all which we have now) on all > avail

Re: Re: Re: [classlib][TestNG] groups of Harmony test

One more note (seems it already was said sorry if I repeat): the test without any marks should be run in all configurations (i.e. we have 'default' group but declaration of this group may be missed). thanks, Vladimir On 9/5/06, Vladimir Ivanov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: OK, let's return back

Re: Re: Re: [classlib][TestNG] groups of Harmony test

On 9/5/06, Vladimir Ivanov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: OK, let's return back to the usage model. If I understood it correctly, before the commit of any changes each developer run *all* tests (at least all which we have now) on all available to him platforms. Yes. But as you mentioned, what's "

Re: [classlib][TestNG] groups of Harmony test

2006/9/4, Richard Liang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Alex Blewitt wrote: > IMNSO it doesn't make sense to arbitrarily partition the tests based > on a moniker, such as 'integration test', 'unit test', 'regression > test' etc. For one thing, developers are generally not good at > agreeing on the differe

Re: Re: Re: [classlib][TestNG] groups of Harmony test

OK, let's return back to the usage model. If I understood it correctly, before the commit of any changes each developer run *all* tests (at least all which we have now) on all available to him platforms. In this context seems we don't need in any 'level' group (while 'stress' tests require reasona

Re: [classlib][TestNG] groups of Harmony test

Alex Blewitt wrote: IMNSO it doesn't make sense to arbitrarily partition the tests based on a moniker, such as 'integration test', 'unit test', 'regression test' etc. For one thing, developers are generally not good at agreeing on the difference between them :-) This is really a problem, howe

Re: [classlib][TestNG] groups of Harmony test

Vladimir Ivanov wrote: On 9/4/06, Richard Liang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Mikhail Loenko wrote: > Hi Vladimir > > Could you please decribe for what purpose it will be used? > > I mean why one might have to either exclude or run only regression tests? If running all tests takes up much tim

Re: [classlib][security] Exception compatibility

On 9/4/06, Boris Kuznetsov wrote: Usually Harmony behavior is compared with RI behavior. But in security area RI behavior depends on provider. With different providers RI behave differently. For example, RI passes incorrect method arguments to provider. In such cases provider may throw exceptio

Re: Re: Re: [classlib][TestNG] groups of Harmony test

On 9/5/06, Alex Blewitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 04/09/06, Richard Liang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 9/4/06, Alex Blewitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > If you've got fast and slow tests, then have a group for fast and slow > > tests. Then you can choose to just run the fast tests, a

Re: [classlib][security] Exception compatibility

On 9/4/06, Boris Kuznetsov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Usually Harmony behavior is compared with RI behavior. But in security area RI behavior depends on provider. With different providers RI behave differently. For example, RI passes incorrect method arguments to provider. In such cases provider

Re: [classlib][luni] signalis interruptus in hysock

Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: Artem Aliev wrote: The hyport and hy* are a porting layer that provides os independent interface. hysock_select() does not return EINTR on windows why it should do it under linux? either user presses Ctrl-c or ctrl-\ or VM uses other signals for its owns needs. I t

Re: [classlib][security] Exception compatibility

On 9/4/06, Boris Kuznetsov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Usually Harmony behavior is compared with RI behavior. But in security area RI behavior depends on provider. With different providers RI behave differently. For example, RI passes incorrect method arguments to provider. In such cases provide

[drlvm] [jvmti] Implementation of SingleStep event through TRAP breakpoints

Hello Now that DRLVM has some basic implementation of breakpoints in JIT mode as HARMONY-1363 has been created I've decided the same mechanism may be used for implementation of SingleStep JVMTI event [1]. I've thought of some draft design for SingleStep implementation using just int3 breakpoin

Re: Re: Re: [classlib][TestNG] groups of Harmony test

On 04/09/06, Richard Liang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 9/4/06, Alex Blewitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > If you've got fast and slow tests, then have a group for fast and slow > tests. Then you can choose to just run the fast tests, and any > automated build system can handle running the slow

Re: [drlvm] DRLVM, jre/bin/default and launcher

Salikh Zakirov wrote: Andrey Chernyshev wrote: 1. Fix the DRLVM layout - rename vmcore to "harmonyvm" and move ..dll/.so into the "default" subdirectory such that one doesn't have to type -vm and -vmdir options; While would you want to rename DRLVM to Harmony VM? It feels to me like claimi

Re: [drlvm] DRLVM, jre/bin/default and launcher

Andrey Chernyshev wrote: On 9/1/06, Evgueni Brevnov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi Geir, I'm very enthusiastic about making DRLVM to work with the launcher. It requires implementation of the Invocation API to a certain extent. For example it's enougth to have only partial support for To some

Re: [drlvm] DRLVM, jre/bin/default and launcher

Cool. I guess the question is, can it load resources from the directory where the VM itself came from? We want to package things such that they all go into jre/bin/ with the default for that being 'default' (although it shouldn't matter). We also want to avoid setting LD_LIBRARY_PATH and

Re: [drlvm] DRLVM, jre/bin/default and launcher

Salikh Zakirov wrote: Andrey Chernyshev wrote: 1. Fix the DRLVM layout - rename vmcore to "harmonyvm" and move ..dll/.so into the "default" subdirectory such that one doesn't have to type -vm and -vmdir options; While would you want to rename DRLVM to Harmony VM? It feels to me like

Re: [general] jira issues tracking

Richard Liang wrote: Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: Salikh Zakirov wrote: Hi, I have just tried to use JIRA to see how many unapplied patches are there for DRLVM, but couldn't search just for the issues with patch provided. Does anyone know of a good way to find just the issues with patche

Re: [classlib][TestNG] groups of Harmony test

On 9/4/06, Andrew Zhang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 9/4/06, Richard Liang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 9/4/06, Mikhail Loenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Well, my question was for what particular reason? for example? > > > > Tio verify correctness of bug-fixing IMHO all the unit, interg

Re: [drlvm]A subject to profiling instrumenting

在06-9-4，Salikh Zakirov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 写道： zouqiong wrote: >> > I am now doing two things: >> > 1. track accesses to the three things you refer. And just the same >> > implementation as some >> > rt_helper_***, but the following error happens: >> > java.exec: >> > /root/harmony/enhanced/drlv

RE: [classlib][TestNG] groups of Harmony test

>-Original Message- >From: Andrew Zhang [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Monday, September 04, 2006 6:18 PM >To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org >Subject: Re: [classlib][TestNG] groups of Harmony test > >On 9/4/06, Richard Liang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> On 9/4/06, Mikhail Loenko <[

Re: [classlib] [ldap] support for multiple VMs?

2006/8/28, Paulex Yang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Oliver Deakin wrote: > Hi Alexey, > > I have taken a look at the patch - generally it looks good to me, and > if it all > works ok when you test it, it's fine by me. > > I think if there are cases where some functionality is repeated many > times, it >

Re: Re: [classlib][TestNG] groups of Harmony test

On 9/4/06, Andrew Zhang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 9/4/06, Richard Liang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I sent my reply this afternoon, but I have not received it. (it seems > there > is something wrong with my smtp server). So I send it again. :-) > > On 9/4/06, Alex Blewitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED

Re: [drlvm] DRLVM, jre/bin/default and launcher

Andrey Chernyshev wrote: > 1. Fix the DRLVM layout - rename vmcore to "harmonyvm" and move > ..dll/.so into the "default" subdirectory such that one doesn't have to > type -vm and -vmdir options; While would you want to rename DRLVM to Harmony VM? It feels to me like claiming DRLVM to be "the on

Re: [classlib][TestNG] groups of Harmony test

On 9/4/06, Richard Liang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 9/4/06, Mikhail Loenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well, my question was for what particular reason? for example? > > Tio verify correctness of bug-fixing IMHO all the unit, intergration, api, and > regression tests should be run Running a

Re: [drlvm] DRLVM, jre/bin/default and launcher

On 9/1/06, Evgueni Brevnov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi Geir, I'm very enthusiastic about making DRLVM to work with the launcher. It requires implementation of the Invocation API to a certain extent. For example it's enougth to have only partial support for To some extent, some of those invoc

Re: [classlib][TestNG] groups of Harmony test

On 9/4/06, Mikhail Loenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Well, my question was for what particular reason? for example? Tio verify correctness of bug-fixing IMHO all the unit, intergration, api, and regression tests should be run Running all tests are always good to verify our code quality. And I

Re: [drlvm] DRLVM, jre/bin/default and launcher

Ok, I will try to teach DRLVM where to load dlls from before doing other things. Evgueni. On 9/1/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Ok, but can we wack off the biggest problem first, namely that DRLVM doesn't work when it's artifacts (dll's, so's) are in a subdirectory of jre/bin

Re: Re: [classlib][TestNG] groups of Harmony test

On 9/4/06, Richard Liang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I sent my reply this afternoon, but I have not received it. (it seems there is something wrong with my smtp server). So I send it again. :-) On 9/4/06, Alex Blewitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > IMNSO it doesn't make sense to arbitrarily part

Re: [DRLVM][GC] MMTk port now ready for write barrier integration

Weldon, what is the "user-mode"? -- Ivan On 9/1/06, Weldon Washburn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: All, A late night IM debug session with Steve Blackburn got the DRLVM/MMTk port to the point where it makes sense to try write barrier integration. All the mods I have been working on plus simple gc

Re: Re: [classlib][TestNG] groups of Harmony test

I sent my reply this afternoon, but I have not received it. (it seems there is something wrong with my smtp server). So I send it again. :-) On 9/4/06, Alex Blewitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: IMNSO it doesn't make sense to arbitrarily partition the tests based on a moniker, such as 'integration

[classlib][security] Exception compatibility

Usually Harmony behavior is compared with RI behavior. But in security area RI behavior depends on provider. With different providers RI behave differently. For example, RI passes incorrect method arguments to provider. In such cases provider may throw exception (e.g. DigestException or IllegalAr

Re: [DRLVM][GC] proposal: tools to help verify all live references are properly enumerated

We _don't need_ the GC to be the default (performance) GC. This GC can be bundled as separate GC.dll and used when we expect problems in VM/JIT enumeration code. Verification will decrease performance anyway. There is no need to free garbage collected objects in new area: only live objects is cop

Re: [drlvm]A subject to profiling instrumenting

zouqiong wrote: >> > I am now doing two things: >> > 1. track accesses to the three things you refer. And just the same >> > implementation as some >> > rt_helper_***, but the following error happens: >> > java.exec: >> > /root/harmony/enhanced/drlvm/trunk/vm/jitrino/src/jet/cg_ia32.cpp： >> 1621： v

Re: [jira] Updated: (HARMONY-1134) [classlib][rmi] no expected MalformedURLException for RMIClassLoader.getClassLoader("zzz")

Maybe I'm missing something but the tests pass for me on the current Harmony state. It seems like the tests should be fixed or I don't see any reason to apply the patches The same for H-1133 Thanks, Mikhail 2006/8/30, Vladimir Ivanov (JIRA) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: [ http://issues.apache.org/j

Re: [classlib][TestNG] groups of Harmony test

As we agreed earlier [1], for information reasons we include comment // Regression for HARMONY- Thanks, Mikhail [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-harmony-dev/200603.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006/9/4, Ivanov, Alexey A <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >-Original Message- >F

Re: Re: [classlib][TestNG] groups of Harmony test

+1 2006/9/4, Alex Blewitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: IMNSO it doesn't make sense to arbitrarily partition the tests based on a moniker, such as 'integration test', 'unit test', 'regression test' etc. For one thing, developers are generally not good at agreeing on the difference between them :-) If yo

Re: [classlib][TestNG] groups of Harmony test

Well, my question was for what particular reason? for example? Tio verify correctness of bug-fixing IMHO all the unit, intergration, api, and regression tests should be run Thanks, Mikhail 2006/9/4, Richard Liang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Mikhail Loenko wrote: > Hi Vladimir > > Could you please d

Re: [build-test-infra] Build Test Infrastructure

Thanks, These were remains of setup experiments - removed from the list. On 9/4/06, Vladimir Ivanov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Seems, that links upload60551 Europe/Moscow 11.2.0 x86 Wi

Re: [classlib][logging] a test suite shouldn't touch any of JRE config files!!!

Stepan Mishura wrote: On 9/1/06, Paulex Yang wrote: Stepan Mishura wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > I've just looked into static initialization block and then to the > spec. for > LogManager class. > My impression is that Harmony implementation doesn't follow the spec. > > The spec. says: "At startup th

Re: [classlib][logging] a test suite shouldn't touch any of JRE config files!!!

On 9/1/06, Paulex Yang wrote: Stepan Mishura wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > I've just looked into static initialization block and then to the > spec. for > LogManager class. > My impression is that Harmony implementation doesn't follow the spec. > > The spec. says: "At startup the LogManager class is l

Re: [drlvm]A subject to profiling instrumenting

在06-9-3，zouqiong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 写道： 在06-9-3，zouqiong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 写道： > I am now doing two things: > 1. track accesses to the three things you refer. And just the same > implementation as some > rt_helper_***, but the following error happens: > java.exec: > /root/harmony/enhanced/

Re: [general] jira issues tracking

+1 On 9/4/06, Richard Liang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: > > > Salikh Zakirov wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I have just tried to use JIRA to see how many unapplied patches are >> there for DRLVM, >> but couldn't search just for the issues with patch provided. >> >> Does anyone kn

RE: [classlib][TestNG] groups of Harmony test

>-Original Message- >From: Richard Liang [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Monday, September 04, 2006 10:56 AM >To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org >Subject: Re: [classlib][TestNG] groups of Harmony test > > > >Mikhail Loenko wrote: >> Hi Vladimir >> >> Could you please decribe for what pu

Re: [classlib] internationalization and new patches

On 9/4/06, Mikhail Loenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: We have recently starting internationalization of existing modules (thanks to all people involved!) Now when we submit new patches and apply old ones let's make sure that we don't break internationalization for the modules that were already i

Re: Re: [classlib][TestNG] groups of Harmony test

IMNSO it doesn't make sense to arbitrarily partition the tests based on a moniker, such as 'integration test', 'unit test', 'regression test' etc. For one thing, developers are generally not good at agreeing on the difference between them :-) If you've got fast and slow tests, then have a group f

Re: [classlib][TestNG] groups of Harmony test

On 9/4/06, Richard Liang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Mikhail Loenko wrote: > Hi Vladimir > > Could you please decribe for what purpose it will be used? > > I mean why one might have to either exclude or run only regression tests? If running all tests takes up much time, running all regression