On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 9:58 AM, Trent Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > In the py3k branch I've assigned the audio resource to the winsound
> > > tests. Only regrtest.py -uall or -uaudio runs the winsound test.
> > Reason:
> > > the test sound was freaking out my poor cat. :/
> >
> > I f
> > In the py3k branch I've assigned the audio resource to the winsound
> > tests. Only regrtest.py -uall or -uaudio runs the winsound test.
> Reason:
> > the test sound was freaking out my poor cat. :/
>
> I feel with your cat ;-).
> This would not help on the buildbot since it runs 'rt.bat -d -q
On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 11:15 AM, Bill Janssen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 3:31 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Neal> Anything that connects to a remote host is definitely flaky.
> > >
> > > Would it maybe help to set up a dedicated host (or virtual h
> On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 3:31 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Neal> Anything that connects to a remote host is definitely flaky.
> >
> > Would it maybe help to set up a dedicated host (or virtual host) to serve
> > as
> > the sole target of all network tests?
>
> It would help, but
On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 3:31 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Neal> Anything that connects to a remote host is definitely flaky.
>
> Would it maybe help to set up a dedicated host (or virtual host) to serve as
> the sole target of all network tests?
It would help, but not fix the problem.
Neal> Anything that connects to a remote host is definitely flaky.
Would it maybe help to set up a dedicated host (or virtual host) to serve as
the sole target of all network tests?
Skip
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail
On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 11:31 AM, Bill Janssen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > There
> > have been other tests that have also been flaky like test_asynchat,
> > test_smtplib, test_ssl, test_urllib2net, test_urllibnet,
> > test_xmlrpc_net and some of the tests that use networking.
>
> Some of t
On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 7:21 AM, Neal Norwitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * test_xmlrpc transient socket errors
>-
> http://www.python.org/dev/buildbot/stable/g4%20osx.4%20trunk/builds/3101/step-test/0
>
>
These are caused by the accept call returning a nonblocking socket, when the
listenin
Jean-Paul Calderone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> There's a bug in some configurations (I have never managed to track down
> the details) where the ping action actually prevents any further builds
> from happening on that slave until the master is restarted. Not sure if
> this is related to the p
On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 11:43:25 -0700, Neal Norwitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 5:52 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> The next releases of 2.6/3.0 are planned for April 2, just over a
>> >> week from now. There is much work that needs to be done. The
>> >> bu
On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 5:52 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> The next releases of 2.6/3.0 are planned for April 2, just over a
> >> week from now. There is much work that needs to be done. The
> >> buildbots are in a pretty sad state and the gods are seeing too much
> >> red.
Bill Janssen wrote:
>> There
>> have been other tests that have also been flaky like test_asynchat,
>> test_smtplib, test_ssl, test_urllib2net, test_urllibnet,
>> test_xmlrpc_net and some of the tests that use networking.
>>
>
> Some of the *other* tests that use networking, I think you mean
> There
> have been other tests that have also been flaky like test_asynchat,
> test_smtplib, test_ssl, test_urllib2net, test_urllibnet,
> test_xmlrpc_net and some of the tests that use networking.
Some of the *other* tests that use networking, I think you mean.
Sounds like networking tests in g
>> The next releases of 2.6/3.0 are planned for April 2, just over a
>> week from now. There is much work that needs to be done. The
>> buildbots are in a pretty sad state and the gods are seeing too much
>> red.
>>
>> http://www.python.org/dev/buildbot/stable/
>> htt
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mar 26, 2008, at 5:10 PM, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
> There are also some backporting issues in that pile. Should those
> hold up
> betas? (when we get there)
Yes, but I would simply release the monthly alpha and push the beta
back a month.
-
On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 1:21 AM, Neal Norwitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The next releases of 2.6/3.0 are planned for April 2, just over a week
> from now. There is much work that needs to be done. The buildbots
> are in a pretty sad state and the gods are seeing too much red.
>
> http://www.
On 26/03/2008, Thomas Heller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What I would like to see is a way to disable certain tests on certain
> machines;
> maybe by setting environment variables?
Could this be done by something like the following (completely
untested no time at the moment) change to regrte
17 matches
Mail list logo
