Great. Actually there is a latent bug in there we hit yesterday, when there is a platform set but it doesn't start with "remote-" (we assume the match result has a first matched group and blow up). I'll submit a patch that both fixes that up and strips out the darwin ones. I think the rerun logic now fully covers us on the Darwin side.
On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 5:18 AM, Pavel Labath <lab...@google.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I have removed all of our expected timeouts from dosep.py (there are > still some freebsd and darwin ones left, but I don't know If anyone is > looking at those), so I think we're not using any part of the old test > runner at the moment. All clear for removal on our part. > > pl > > > On 14 December 2015 at 16:06, Todd Fiala <todd.fi...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Oh yeah, that's fine. I won't take that code out. > > > > Hmm at least some of the builds went through this weekend, I made a > number > > of changes Saturday morning (US Pacific time) that I saw go through the > > Ubuntu 14.04 cmake bot. > > > > On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 6:29 AM, Pavel Labath <lab...@google.com> wrote: > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> we've had an unrelated breaking change, so the buildbots were red over > >> the weekend. I've fixed it now, and it seems to be turning green. > >> We've also had power outage during the weekend and not all of the > >> buildbots are back up yet, as we need to wait for MTV to wake up. I'd > >> like to give this at least one more day, to give them a chance to > >> stabilize. Is this blocking you from making further changes to the > >> test event system? > >> > >> pl > >> > >> On 12 December 2015 at 00:20, Todd Fiala <todd.fi...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > Hey Pavel and/or Tamas, > >> > > >> > Let me know when we're definitely all clear on the expected timeout > >> > support > >> > I added to the (now once again) newer default test results. > >> > > >> > As soon as we don't need the legacy summary results anymore, I'm going > >> > to > >> > strip out the code that manages it. It is quite messy and duplicates > >> > the > >> > content that is better handled by the test event system. > >> > > >> > Thanks! > >> > > >> > -Todd > >> > > >> > On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 2:03 PM, Todd Fiala <todd.fi...@gmail.com> > >> > wrote: > >> >> > >> >> I went ahead and added the expected timeout support in r255363. > >> >> > >> >> I'm going to turn back on the new BasicResultsFormatter as the > default. > >> >> We can flip this back off if it is still not doing everything we > need, > >> >> but I > >> >> *think* we cover the issue you saw now. > >> >> > >> >> -Todd > >> >> > >> >> On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 10:14 AM, Todd Fiala <todd.fi...@gmail.com> > >> >> wrote: > >> >>> > >> >>> Hi Pavel, > >> >>> > >> >>> I'm going to adjust the new summary output for expected timeouts. I > >> >>> hope > >> >>> to do that in the next hour or less. I'll put that in and flip the > >> >>> default > >> >>> back on for using the new summary output. > >> >>> > >> >>> I'll do those two changes separately, so you can revert the flip > back > >> >>> on > >> >>> to flip it back off if we still have an issue. > >> >>> > >> >>> Sound good? > >> >>> > >> >>> (This can be orthogonal to the new work to mark up expected > timeouts). > >> >>> -- > >> >>> -Todd > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> -- > >> >> -Todd > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > -Todd > > > > > > > > > > -- > > -Todd > -- -Todd
_______________________________________________ lldb-dev mailing list lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
