Re: protozero test failure
On 02-09-15 15:04, Jochen Topf wrote:
> I saw you disabled the tests in protozero? Any reason for that? It seems to me
> 1.1.0-2 built fine for most architectures and the tests are there for a reason.
> (Or, if you remove the tests anyway, you can drop quite a lot of build
> dependencies.)
>
> If I read the logs right only armfh failed for -2 and not for -3 and that Bus
> error looks bad. I don't really understand whats different about armfh to
> even begin to figure out what could have went wrong here.
And that's exactly the reason why I ignore test failures (not disable
the tests entirely). The build failure on armhf would prevent testing
migration of libosmium that built successfully on armhf before but
cannot be built without protozero anymore.
I inspect the build logs before upload, and most often after upload too.
So any issues uncovered by the tests will get noticed, it just won't
prevent testing migration anymore because of missing builds on some of
the architectures.
My take on test failures on ports is to fix what I can to get tests to
succeed, and I ignore failures on some of the less well supported ports.
We've had those Bus errors for sfgcal on mips too, it's very likely
caused by the ongoing GCC 5 transitions through which the slower ports
are out of sync. Those ports also suffer from general performance in the
case of mips & mipsel (they'll likely be dropped after stretch), or
missing FPU support in the case of armel.
Kind Regards,
Bas
--
GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146 50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
Reply to: