On 4 September 2012 13:11, David T. Lewis <lewis at mail.msen.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 04, 2012 at 11:55:17AM +0100, Frank Shearar wrote:
>> On 4 September 2012 11:41, Frank Shearar <frank.shearar at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > I meant to nag a lot more about the failing tests, and I haven't.
>> > Sorry for not being sufficiently annoying!
>> >
>> > We still have a bunch of failing tests -
>> >
>> > KernelTests.Chronology.TimeStampTest.testFromSeconds
>> > CollectionsTests.Streams.RWBinaryOrTextStreamTest.testExisiting
>> > KernelTests.Chronology.TimeStampTest.testReadFromA1
>> > NetworkTests.Kernel.SocketTest.testSendTimeout
>> > Tests.Localization.LocaleTest.testLocaleChanged
>> > Tests.Monticello.MCFileInTest.testStWriter
>> > Tests.Monticello.MCMczInstallerTest.testInstallFromFile
>> > Tests.Monticello.MCMczInstallerTest.testInstallFromStream
>> > Tests.Release.ReleaseTest.testNoObsoleteClasses
>> > Tests.Release.ReleaseTest.testUndeclared
>>
>> Correction: 11 tests.
>> KernelTests.Numbers.LargeNegativeIntegerTest.testMinimumNegativeIntegerArithmetic
>> fails: http://squeakci.org/job/UpdateFromLastRelease/lastCompletedBuild/testReport/KernelTests.Numbers/LargeNegativeIntegerTest/testMinimumNegativeIntegerArithmetic/
>>
>
> This is a newly added test that documents a problem in all currently
> distributed VMs. The problem will not be corrected in time for the
> next image release.
>
> Nicolas Cellier identified the problem and provided a fix for the VM
> issue, which has been discussed on the vm-dev list. Pointers are at
> http://bugs.squeak.org/view.php?id=7705.

Thanks. I knew it was Nicolas' commit without even looking at author
initials :) but then I think that for the 4.4 release we should mark
it as an expected failure (and mark it as a test requiring addressing
in 4.5, at http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/6188)

I suppose I'm semi-asking permission from the community to move these
failing tests into expected failures so I can get a green bar.

frank

> Dave
>
>> frank
>>
>> > - and I'd really like them to be green for a release. The Monticello
>> > tests cause noise, and so the ReleaseTests should pass if we don't run
>> > the MC tests. The SocketTest is, as I understand it, an issue specific
>> > to Linux, and doesn't occur on Window.
>> >
>> > If I _have_ to, I'll move the tests into "expected failures", and
>> > re-enable them when we start work on 4.5.
>> >
>> > One big gap in our testing infrastructure is testing on non-Linux
>> > platforms. I would like a kind soul to take up CI-like duties and
>> > commit to run the entire suite on OS X and Windows reasonably often.
>> > Any takers? (Ideally we'd have build slaves for this, but...)
>> >
>> > frank
>