I don't understand how your change to build.properties helps. Running -createImages creates new baselines, so you would expect all tests to pass. But if you check those in, then it will fail for other swf-versions. I think the swf-version needs to be set at the SWF level in the .compile file.
But before we go off and do this, I want to ponder the implications, such as, then we'd be running fewer SWFs in the newer swf-versions, and we could miss something important. On 10/27/12 9:29 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <webdoubl...@hotmail.com> wrote: > If we can be sure that the swf-version drives how flash player draws fonts, > the correction is done. > > Do you want me to attach a patch to the issue ? > > -----Message d'origine----- > From: Frédéric THOMAS > Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2012 6:13 PM > To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org > Subject: Re: About Flex runtime > > I updated the build.properties like that : > > #10.3 > swf.version = 12 > #11.0 > #swf.version = 13 > #11.1 > #swf.version = 14 > #11.3 > #swf.version = 15 > #11.4 > #swf.version = 16 > > building the framework against 10.3 and running the tests like that : sh > mini_run.sh tests/components/Label -createImages > > The result was : > > > [java] ===================================================== > [java] Failed: > [java] ===================================================== > [java] > [java] > [java] ===================================================== > [java] Passes: 255 > [java] Fails: 0 > [java] ===================================================== > [java] > [java] > [java] Wrote summary to results.txt > [java] Wrote failures to failures.txt > > call_runners: > > run: > > BUILD SUCCESSFUL > Total time: 1 minute 24 seconds > > -----Message d'origine----- > From: Frédéric THOMAS > Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2012 5:09 PM > To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org > Subject: Re: About Flex runtime > >> We could try changing the swf version on every test that doesn't require >> it > to a lower number and re-create all the baseline images. > > is the createImages option enough to build the baseline images? > >> Explictly setting swf version might be the easiest to implement, and will > help expose where the SDK has dependencies on higher swf versions (if > anywhere). > > Sounds good. > swf-version from flex-config.xml could be replace by a variable set in > build.properties > > > -----Message d'origine----- > From: Alex Harui > Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2012 4:51 PM > To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org > Subject: Re: About Flex runtime > > > > > On 10/27/12 5:02 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <webdoubl...@hotmail.com> wrote: > >> Back on 10.3, I did some adjustments: setting >> DEFAULT_NUM_COLOR_VARIANCES:int = 255 and the default value of >> ignoreMaxColorVariance to true in the CompareBitmap class, I've been able >> to >> reduce the number of failed tests to 1 (only >> text_long_property_Label_Spark.png doesn't pass and I can't get why >> because >> whatever the number of color variance I allowed, it always said they >> exeeded >> by 4). >> >> Well, anyway, it's not a solution, that's only to hide the failures, if we >> go anyway that way, what I'm not sure, we'll need to have a conditional >> compilation to say we're in a lower version of the player and the tests >> should be more tolerants. >> > Using ignoreMaxColorVariance is not a valid option as you say. > > We could see if we can set maxColorVariances to a small number like 10. > Then the odds of missing a mistake is much lower. > > We could try changing the swf version on every test that doesn't require it > to a lower number and re-create all the baseline images. > > We could try to install a new system that compares certain display list > properties instead of the actual bitmap output. I've argued for years that > we should do that since really, that's all our code can control. What the > player does with the display list properties at render time is not in our > control. But it is sensitive to different kinds of changes in our code, > like changing the z-order of two things that do not overlap or have > transparency. > > Explictly setting swf version might be the easiest to implement, and will > help expose where the SDK has dependencies on higher swf versions (if > anywhere). -- Alex Harui Flex SDK Team Adobe Systems, Inc. http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
