> On 20 Oct 2014, at 21:06, Morten Johan Sørvig wrote:
>
>
>> On 20 Oct 2014, at 15:04, Saether Jan-Arve
>> wrote:
>>
>> Change: https://codereview.qt-project.org/97600
>>
> (comment from 97600)
> // On OS X the windows might get positioned exactly on top of each other
> // that means no re
2014 21:57
Til: Sorvig Morten; Qt Development Group
Emne: Re: [Development] CI broken again
Great analysis - thanks guys for fixing this!
Simon
Original Message
From: Morten Johan Sørvig
Sent: Monday, October 20, 2014 21:06
To: Qt Development Group
Subject: Re: [Development] CI broken again
&
Great analysis - thanks guys for fixing this!
Simon
Original Message
From: Morten Johan Sørvig
Sent: Monday, October 20, 2014 21:06
To: Qt Development Group
Subject: Re: [Development] CI broken again
> On 20 Oct 2014, at 15:04, Saether Jan-Arve
> wrote:
>
> Change: https://c
> On 20 Oct 2014, at 15:04, Saether Jan-Arve
> wrote:
>
> Change: https://codereview.qt-project.org/97600
>
(comment from 97600)
// On OS X the windows might get positioned exactly on top of each other
// that means no repaint for the bottom window will ever occur
And why did this start to fa
Change: https://codereview.qt-project.org/97600
Fra: development-bounces+jan-arve.saether=theqtcompany@qt-project.org
på vegne
av Sarajärvi Tony
Sendt: 20. oktober 2014 09:37
Til: BogDan; Qt Development Group
Emne: Re: [Development] CI broken again
That
bject: Re: [Development] CI broken again
Some tests fails even the patches that we are trying to push are not released.
Check
https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/97244<https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/97244/>
and
https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/96681<https://codereview.qt-p
an [bog_dan...@yahoo.com]
> Sendt: 17. oktober 2014 15:03
> Til: Sarajärvi Tony; Qt Development Group
> Emne: Re: [Development] CI broken again
>
> Some tests fails even the patches that we are trying to push are not released.
> Check
> https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/9724
av BogDan [bog_dan...@yahoo.com]
Sendt: 17. oktober 2014 15:03
Til: Sarajärvi Tony; Qt Development Group
Emne: Re: [Development] CI broken again
Some tests fails even the patches that we are trying to push are not released.
Check
https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/97244<https://codereview
: Friday, October 17, 2014 3:58 PM
Subject: RE: [Development] CI broken again
Hi
What exactly is broken?
-T
From:development-bounces+tony.sarajarvi=theqtcompany@qt-project.org
[mailto:development-bounces+tony.sarajarvi=theqtcompany@qt-project.org] On
Behalf Of BogDan
Sent: 17
Hi
What exactly is broken?
-T
From: development-bounces+tony.sarajarvi=theqtcompany@qt-project.org
[mailto:development-bounces+tony.sarajarvi=theqtcompany@qt-project.org] On
Behalf Of BogDan
Sent: 17. lokakuuta 2014 10:54
To: Qt Development Group
Subject: [Development] CI broken again
Hello,
It seems that CI is broken for a few days, is anyone working on it? When
should we expect a fix?
Thanks!
Cheers,
BogDan.
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
On Friday 15 August 2014 11:36:14 BogDan wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Is CI broken again? It seems it fails on the same (unrelated) places
> https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/92216,
> https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/92236,
> https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/92238.
> Can somebody check the
Hello,
Is CI broken again? It seems it fails on the same (unrelated) places
https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/92216,
https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/92236,
https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/92238.
Can somebody check the CI?
Cheers,
BogDan.
___
Fredag 28. februar 2014 14.46.06 skrev Thiago Macieira:
> Em qui 20 fev 2014, às 06:21:44, Sarajärvi Tony escreveu:
> > QDEBUG : tst_QTcpSocket::blockingIMAP(WithSocks5Proxy SSL)
> > QSocks5SocketEngine(0x99e730) _q_controlSocketReadNotification more bytes
> > available, calling _q_controlSocketRea
On 05.03.2014 10:11, BogDan wrote:
> Hi,
>
>Can you please share the link with us, personally I want to wait until
> that patch goes in.
>
https://codereview.qt-project.org/79948
changes staged after 11:00 CET should not be rejected because of tst_bic
(hopefully).
--
Sergio Ahumada
sahum.
.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2014 10:01 AM
> To: Rutledge Shawn; development
> Subject: Re: [Development] CI broken again?
>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I'm trying to push this patch:
>> https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,79826 but CI doesn&#
>
> Well, I pushed again the submit button (after I said a little pray) and it
> fails in the same please (it seems God doesn't like me anymore). I really
> don't believe it has something to do with the heavy multi-tasking on the CI
> machines (or with God) ... to me it looks that the test is
-project.org
[development-bounces+laszlo.agocs=digia@qt-project.org] on behalf of BogDan
[bog_dan...@yahoo.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2014 10:01 AM
To: Rutledge Shawn; development
Subject: Re: [Development] CI broken again?
>> Hi,
>>
>>I'm trying to push this patch:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm trying to push this patch:
> https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,79826 but CI doesn't like me.
>>
>> Because CI seems to be based on luck, can CI folks give us a daily CI
> horoscopes forecast on this matter? E.g. if you are not born on the end of
> March
> and
On 05 Mar 2014, at 09:32, Rutledge Shawn wrote:
> Sometimes though, we try to fix the autotests that fail the most frequently.
> If you can't reproduce the failure on your own machine, with the same OS,
> often the cause seems to be heavy multi-tasking on the CI machines, which
> will slow do
On 5 Mar 2014, at 9:01 AM, BogDan wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to push this patch:
> https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,79826 but CI doesn't like me.
>
> Because CI seems to be based on luck, can CI folks give us a daily CI
> horoscopes forecast on this matter? E.g. if you are not b
Hi,
I'm trying to push this patch:
https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,79826 but CI doesn't like me.
Because CI seems to be based on luck, can CI folks give us a daily CI
horoscopes forecast on this matter? E.g. if you are not born on the end of
March and you don't have have only two
Em qui 20 fev 2014, às 06:21:44, Sarajärvi Tony escreveu:
> QDEBUG : tst_QTcpSocket::blockingIMAP(WithSocks5Proxy SSL)
> QSocks5SocketEngine(0x99e730) _q_controlSocketReadNotification more bytes
> available, calling _q_controlSocketReadNotification() again , read
> notifications enabled? false
Thi
Em ter 25 fev 2014, às 15:32:21, Frederik Gladhorn escreveu:
> Hi Thiago,
>
> it sounds like you have a pretty good understanding what's going wrong here.
> Since this sounds like a real issue and it is still the test failure that
> blocks most integrations, it would be extremely great if we could
Hi Thiago,
it sounds like you have a pretty good understanding what's going wrong here.
Since this sounds like a real issue and it is still the test failure that
blocks most integrations, it would be extremely great if we could fix the
issue.
I know Peter and Tony worked on this, but so far the
Em qui 20 fev 2014, às 06:21:44, Sarajärvi Tony escreveu:
> QDEBUG : tst_QTcpSocket::blockingIMAP(WithSocks5Proxy SSL) [QSocks5] sending
> "size: 33 data: { 5 1 0 3 26 113 116 45 116 101 115 116 45 115 101 114 118
> 101 114 46 113 116 45 116 101 115 116 45 110 101 116 0 143 }"
SOCKS 5
Command: CON
Em qui 20 fev 2014, às 06:21:44, Sarajärvi Tony escreveu:
> Here's the debug print from the client side of one failure I suspect falls
> under this category we're discussing here:
Hi Tony
Could you get the network self test to fail? The debug output is a little
easier to read...
--
Thiago Macie
ForReadyRead(5000)' returned FALSE. ()
Loc: [../tst_qtcpsocket.cpp(633)]
Regards,
-Tony
> -Original Message-
> From: development-bounces+tony.sarajarvi=digia@qt-project.org
> [mailto:development-bounces+tony.sarajarvi=digia@qt-project.org] On
> Behalf Of Th
Em qua 19 fev 2014, às 17:43:15, Peter Hartmann escreveu:
> On 02/19/2014 05:22 PM, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> > Em qua 19 fev 2014, às 17:20:13, Peter Hartmann escreveu:
> >> What I think the problem is: We get 2 Socks messages in 1 TCP packet, so
> >> the read notifier only fires once, then we neve
On 02/19/2014 05:22 PM, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> Em qua 19 fev 2014, às 17:20:13, Peter Hartmann escreveu:
>> What I think the problem is: We get 2 Socks messages in 1 TCP packet, so
>> the read notifier only fires once, then we never parse the 2nd Socks
>> message.
>
> What 2 SOCKS messages are th
Em qua 19 fev 2014, às 17:20:13, Peter Hartmann escreveu:
> What I think the problem is: We get 2 Socks messages in 1 TCP packet, so
> the read notifier only fires once, then we never parse the 2nd Socks
> message.
What 2 SOCKS messages are those and which command did we send?
--
Thiago Maciei
kuuta 2014 14:26
>> To: Mandeep Sandhu; Thiago Macieira
>> Cc: development@qt-project.org
>> Subject: Re: [Development] CI broken again?
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>>>
>>> In your case, the QDnsLookup failure is caused by your code. It happened
>> 100%
>&
> > The latest test failures seemed to be due to timeout rather than anything
> > else. The 'waitForDone()' function is exiting with a failure due to DNS
> > lookup timeout. The current timeout is set to 10 secs. This is quite
> large,
> > but still, could there be a network issue with the CI setup
On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 10:50 PM, Thiago Macieira
wrote:
> Em qui 06 fev 2014, às 22:39:29, Mandeep Sandhu escreveu:
> > Ok, I'll dig in more into this problem. IF only I could replicate it
> > somehow, it'll be that much easier to fix! :/
>
> If there's more debugging that could help you, you can
Em qui 06 fev 2014, às 22:39:29, Mandeep Sandhu escreveu:
> Ok, I'll dig in more into this problem. IF only I could replicate it
> somehow, it'll be that much easier to fix! :/
If there's more debugging that could help you, you can modify the change to
add it to the test and we'll stage it during
On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 10:10 PM, Thiago Macieira
wrote:
> Em qui 06 fev 2014, às 16:01:05, Mandeep Sandhu escreveu:
> > It can't be related to my change as the same tests pass 100% of the time
> on
> > my local setup (Ubuntu 13.10) and moreover my changes do not kick-in if
> the
> > name server is
Em qui 06 fev 2014, às 16:01:05, Mandeep Sandhu escreveu:
> It can't be related to my change as the same tests pass 100% of the time on
> my local setup (Ubuntu 13.10) and moreover my changes do not kick-in if the
> name server is not specified (which is the case with all the failing test
> cases).
Em qui 06 fev 2014, às 12:54:59, Sarajärvi Tony escreveu:
> We've discovered (just lately) that in some cases incoming TCP packages are
> bundled together. Somewhere along the line in our network code the first
> TCP packet is drawn from buffers, but the remainders are left there.
That's normal. W
ony.sarajarvi=digia@qt-project.org
> [mailto:development-bounces+tony.sarajarvi=digia@qt-project.org] On
> Behalf Of BogDan
> Sent: 6. helmikuuta 2014 14:26
> To: Mandeep Sandhu; Thiago Macieira
> Cc: development@qt-project.org
> Subject: Re: [Development] CI broken again?
>
Hi,
>
>In your case, the QDnsLookup failure is caused by your code. It happened 100%
>>of the time that the QDnsLookup test was executed and it did not happen when
>>your change wasn't present.
>>
>
>
>It can't be related to my change as the same tests pass 100% of the time on my
>local setup (Ub
> In your case, the QDnsLookup failure is caused by your code. It happened
> 100%
> of the time that the QDnsLookup test was executed and it did not happen
> when
> your change wasn't present.
>
It can't be related to my change as the same tests pass 100% of the time on
my local setup (Ubuntu 13.1
Em qui 06 fev 2014, às 14:28:52, Mandeep Sandhu escreveu:
> CI continues to fail during build AND tests at seemingly random places. Any
> idea whats going on or when it'll be fixed?
It's normal operating procedure. Some tests are flaky and are known to cause
issues every now and then.
In your ca
CI continues to fail during build AND tests at seemingly random places. Any
idea whats going on or when it'll be fixed?
-mandeep
On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 3:17 PM, Mandeep Sandhu
wrote:
> Something similar happened to me too on the dev branch. Tried merging a
> change. First a test case failed (t
Something similar happened to me too on the dev branch. Tried merging a
change. First a test case failed (tst_QDnsLookup) even though it runs fine
on my local setup. I tried re-staging the change but now I got some merge
errors. Local update of dev and rebase worked.
-mandeep
On Wed, Feb 5, 20
Hello,
I'm trying for two days to merge this https://codereview.qt-project.org/77207
patch, but CI doesn't like me.
It is a know issue or just me? Should I wait for other patches to be merged
before I'll try the 8th time? :)
Cheers,
BogDan.
___
D
45 matches
Mail list logo
