[Scons-dev] Mini announcement: v2.4 is near...

[Bill Deegan]

Run the test with PRESERVE=1 then goto the created dir and run scons
--debug=explain ?

On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 7:20 AM, William Blevins <wblevins001 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Would it be wise to try something like changing that line to a build with
> "--explain", so we might be able to figure out why SCons thinks its out of
> date?
>
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 10:18 AM, William Blevins <wblevins001 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I almost wonder whether its related to the Ubuntu rpmbuild setup, since
>> rpmbuild is native to the RHEL (fedora, CentOS) systems, but Ubunut
>> (Debian, etc) use apt and dpkg.
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 3:20 AM, Dirk Bächle <tshortik at gmx.de> wrote:
>>
>>> William,
>>>
>>> On 07.08.2015 03:39, William Blevins wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 9:23 PM, William Blevins <wblevins001 at gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:wblevins001 at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>     I ran that test in a loop for 10m or so and never got a failure
>>>> though it might only happen when you thread it with other tests?
>>>>
>>>>     I see two potential issues:
>>>>     1.  WhereIs('rpm') vs WhereIs('rpmbuild'); those two processes have
>>>> been split out for a very long time.
>>>>     2. If rpm_build_root is not unique then it could conflict with the
>>>> other rpmbuild tests.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I tried running all the rpm tests with -j6 in a loop; again there were
>>>> no errors, so I don't know for sure.  Do you get a stack
>>>> trace or something?
>>>>
>>>>
>>> there is no stacktrace, the test fails because within the build an
>>> update is triggered, when there should be none. (see below)
>>> But this happens only spuriously...calling the single test seems to make
>>> the frequency of failure lower, while running all "rpm" tests makes it
>>> occur more often (can't back this up with data right now, just a first
>>> impression).
>>>
>>> Dirk
>>>
>>>
>>> ==========================================================
>>>
>>>
>>> dirk at ubuntu:~/workspace/scons_commit$ python runtest.py
>>> test/packaging/rpm
>>> 1/6 (16.67%) /usr/bin/python -tt test/packaging/rpm/cleanup.py
>>> STDOUT
>>> =========================================================================
>>> 1,6c1,6
>>> < scons\:\ Reading\ SConscript\ files\ \.\.\.\
>>> < scons\:\ done\ reading\ SConscript\ files\.\
>>> < scons\:\ Building\ targets\ \.\.\.\
>>> < scons\:\ \`\.\'\ is\ up\ to\ date\.\
>>> < scons\:\ done\ building\ targets\.\
>>> < .*
>>> ---
>>> > scons: Reading SConscript files ...
>>> > scons: done reading SConscript files.
>>> > scons: Building targets ...
>>> > tar -zc -f foo-1.2.3.tar.gz foo-1.2.3/SConstruct foo-1.2.3/src/main.c
>>> foo-1.2.3/foo-1.2.3.spec
>>> > TAR_OPTIONS=--wildcards LC_ALL=C rpmbuild -ta --buildroot
>>> /tmp/testcmd.3749._NfA8E/rpm_build_root
>>> /tmp/testcmd.3749._NfA8E/foo-1.2.3.tar.gz
>>> > scons: done building targets.
>>> FAILED test of /home/dirk/workspace/scons_commit/src/script/scons.py
>>>         at line 605 of
>>> /home/dirk/workspace/scons_commit/QMTest/TestCommon.py (_complete)
>>>         from line 701 of
>>> /home/dirk/workspace/scons_commit/QMTest/TestCommon.py (run)
>>>         from line 390 of
>>> /home/dirk/workspace/scons_commit/QMTest/TestSCons.py (run)
>>>         from line 427 of
>>> /home/dirk/workspace/scons_commit/QMTest/TestSCons.py (up_to_date)
>>>         from line 88 of test/packaging/rpm/cleanup.py
>>> 2/6 (33.33%) /usr/bin/python -tt test/packaging/rpm/explicit-target.py
>>> PASSED
>>> 3/6 (50.00%) /usr/bin/python -tt
>>> test/packaging/rpm/internationalization.py
>>> PASSED
>>> 4/6 (66.67%) /usr/bin/python -tt test/packaging/rpm/multipackage.py
>>> PASSED
>>> 5/6 (83.33%) /usr/bin/python -tt test/packaging/rpm/package.py
>>> PASSED
>>> 6/6 (100.00%) /usr/bin/python -tt test/packaging/rpm/tagging.py
>>> PASSED
>>>
>>> Failed the following test:
>>>         test/packaging/rpm/cleanup.py
>>> dirk at ubuntu:~/workspace/scons_commit$
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Scons-dev mailing list
>>> Scons-dev at scons.org
>>> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
>>>
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Scons-dev mailing list
> Scons-dev at scons.org
> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist2.pair.net/pipermail/scons-dev/attachments/20150807/93d4141f/attachment-0001.html>