For reference, I found similar timing issues and filed bugs for the
following packages:
node-foreground-child #894797
node-tap #895312
node-once #895316
node-commander #895317
In Ubuntu, we relaxed the timing of the failing tests until they
passed on all release architectures.
Hi Graham and thanks for bringing this up again.
Il 07/04/2018 18:13, Graham Inggs ha scritto:
> Hi
>
> This situation seems to get worse with each new version of nodejs.
>
> In Ubuntu, where autopkgtests are run for every release architecture,
> node-liftoff failed on armhf [1] and arm64 [2] si
Hi Graham,
> > I'm pretty hardcore on tests being determinstic, so merely increasing
> > the wait time feels especially gross to me. :)
>
> Would you please explain your objection to timeouts in tests?
Well, we should probably separate the cases of using /timing/ in tests as
part of, say, checki
Hi Chris
On 7 April 2018 at 18:22, Chris Lamb wrote:
> Well, just to be 100% clear, I don't propose increasing the timeout at
> all: I'm pretty hardcode on tests being determinstic so merely increasing
> the wait time feels especially gross to me. :)
Would you please explain your objection to ti
[Resending including 853...@bugs.debian.org in CC this time..]
Hi Graham,
Thanks for the followup.
> Chris, you wrote "...the test would still be unreliable whatever value
> you choose", can you propose something other than increasing the
> timeout?
Well, just to be 100% clear, I don't propose
Hi
This situation seems to get worse with each new version of nodejs.
In Ubuntu, where autopkgtests are run for every release architecture,
node-liftoff failed on armhf [1] and arm64 [2] since the upload of
nodejs 8.9.3.
We resorted to increasing the timeout from 5000 to 1 in
debian/rules an
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
control: severity -1 important
> In the log you attached this line:
> [0m[31m Error: timeout of 5000ms exceeded[0m[90m
> looks different from what you report in the bug:
> [0m[31m Error: timeout of 1ms exceeded[0m[90m
> The te
Praveen Arimbrathodiyil wrote:
> Can you try to increase the timeout to say 1 or 2 and see
> if it succeeds.
I'm sure it will, but the test would still be unreliable whatever value
you choose…
Regards,
--
,''`.
: :' : Chris Lamb
`. `'` la...@debian.org / chri
Source: node-liftoff
Version: 2.3.0-2
Severity: serious
Justification: fails to build from source
User: reproducible-bui...@lists.alioth.debian.org
Usertags: ftbfs
X-Debbugs-Cc: reproducible-b...@lists.alioth.debian.org
Dear Maintainer,
node-liftoff's testsuite appears to use method timing/benchm
9 matches
Mail list logo
