Hi, Sorry for the late reply, but I have realized that there might be an issue with adopting jtreg6 for Java 8 testing.
Jtreg 6 requires testng 7.3[1] and Jtreg 5 uses 6.9.5[2]. The current jtreg6 package uses 6.9.5 making it suitable for Java 8 testing but not so much for 11 and up. If testng is upgraded to 7.5 it will be still binary compatible, but there will be new regressions due to API breaks. If testng is updated to 7.7.1 (latest), then it will not be binary compatible with Java 8. Using 7.5 will allow tier1 and tier2 tests with minimal exceptions to pass for OpenJDK 20[3] except some memory allocation failures on armhf which need to be investigated[4]. Same applies to 17 from my local testing. Upgrading to 7.3 is a bit complicated due to additional test dependencies present in this version of the package, so 7.5 or 7.7.1 seem like a better option. Best Regards, Vladimir. [1] https://github.com/openjdk/jtreg/blob/jtreg-6.1%2B1/make/build-support/version-numbers [2] https://github.com/openjdk/jtreg/blob/jtreg5.1-b01/make/build-all.sh [3] https://launchpadlibrarian.net/658179660/buildlog_ubuntu-lunar-amd64.openjdk-20_20+36~us1-0ubuntu1~ppa20_BUILDING.txt.gz [4] https://launchpadlibrarian.net/658107824/buildlog_ubuntu-lunar-armhf.openjdk-20_20+36~us1-0ubuntu1~ppa12_BUILDING.txt.gz On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 11:14 AM Vladimir Petko <vladimir.pe...@canonical.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > I see. I will look into those failures to see if it is something that > I can submit upstream, so that jtreg 5 could be phased out. > > Thanks a lot for the help again !!!!!!! > > Best Regards, > Valdimir. > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 11:11 AM Thorsten Glaser <t.gla...@tarent.de> wrote: > > > > On Thu, 16 Mar 2023, Vladimir Petko wrote: > > > > >Regarding using jtreg6 for tests of openjdk-8 it should be noted that > > >some tier1[1] tests fail with jtreg6. > > > > Lots of tests fail there anyway, also due to lack of asmtools. > > > > >For instance jtreg 6 fails: > > […] > > >and with jreg 5 those tests pass: > > […] > > >There are more instances like this and if it is of interest I can > > >provide a full comparison. > > > > Might be useful to pass that on to the 8u developers. > > I won’t be doing anything with it and the ELTS people > > are mostly interested in comparing test results against > > the previous upload’s, to see that nothing broke too badly. > > If upstream makes their tests jtreg6 compatible all the better. > > > > >Would it be possible to consider keeping jtreg 5 version around in > > > > No, we’re targetting jessie and stretch with openjdk-8 mostly, > > which lacks jtreg 5 and where the backported jtreg6 really > > helps, without, we had to disable the tests entirely. > > > > bye, > > //mirabilos > > -- > > Infrastrukturexperte • tarent solutions GmbH > > Am Dickobskreuz 10, D-53121 Bonn • http://www.tarent.de/ > > Telephon +49 228 54881-393 • Fax: +49 228 54881-235 > > HRB AG Bonn 5168 • USt-ID (VAT): DE122264941 > > Geschäftsführer: Dr. Stefan Barth, Kai Ebenrett, Boris Esser, Alexander > > Steeg > > > > **************************************************** > > /⁀\ The UTF-8 Ribbon > > ╲ ╱ Campaign against Mit dem tarent-Newsletter nichts mehr verpassen: > > ╳ HTML eMail! Also, https://www.tarent.de/newsletter > > ╱ ╲ header encryption! > > ****************************************************
