Michael Chletsos writes:
> Initial support for ruby 1.9.3 when creating swig bindings for subversion.
I tweaked the format a little and committed in r1407206. Thanks!
--
Certified & Supported Apache Subversion Downloads:
http://www.wandisco.com/subversion/download
Thank you!
Ruby community will be excited, I will continue to improve the tests.
On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 8:29 AM, Philip Martin
wrote:
> Michael Chletsos writes:
>
>> Initial support for ruby 1.9.3 when creating swig bindings for subversion.
>
> I tweaked the format a little and committed in r14
Initial support for ruby 1.9.3 when creating swig bindings for subversion.
* Makefile.in:
Ruby 1.8 uses --verbose, 1.9 does not for run-test.rb
* subversion/bindings/swig/ruby/test/test_core.rb:
Updated for ruby1.9 time, which uses nanoseconds
* subversion/bindings/swig/ruby/test/test_repos.rb
Michael Chletsos writes:
> OK - this should fix your issues, tested on ruby1.9.3 and ruby1.8.7 -
> passed for me, let me know what you get.
That works for me. It needs a log message before it can be committed.
If you want to write it look at some old log messages and
http://subversion.apache.or
OK - this should fix your issues, tested on ruby1.9.3 and ruby1.8.7 -
passed for me, let me know what you get.
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 4:40 PM, Philip Martin
wrote:
> Michael Chletsos writes:
>
>> Here is a complete patch that I tested - more work needs to be done on
>> the tests, but currently a
Michael Chletsos writes:
> Here is a complete patch that I tested - more work needs to be done on
> the tests, but currently all tests that are run, succeed on my system.
It breaks the tests when run with ruby 1.8.7 on my Debian/testing
machine which is a regression since they pass without the p
Here is a complete patch that I tested - more work needs to be done on
the tests, but currently all tests that are run, succeed on my system.
I based this on trunk today.
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 8:57 AM, Michael Chletsos wrote:
> Sorry - I am having one of those morning - this one should be good,
Sorry - I am having one of those morning - this one should be good, I
keep reversing my files and my thoughts . . .
I will check out trunk later and fix the patches and this patch and
make them all nice and be real.
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 8:54 AM, Peter Samuelson wrote:
>
> [Michael Chletsos]
[Michael Chletsos]
> sorry about confusion - here is the updated patch, with swig updates.
Your patch seems to be reversed ('diff -u {new} {old}' whereas what
everyone wants to see is 'diff -u {old} {new}' or 'svn diff'), and also
seems to have been developed against something older than Subversi
sorry about confusion - here is the updated patch, with swig updates.
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 8:06 AM, Philip Martin
wrote:
> Michael Chletsos writes:
>
>> Sorry for delay. Patch for configure is attached.
>
> You don't patch configure, that's a generated file. You patch
> configure.ac.
>
> -
Philip Martin writes:
> Michael Chletsos writes:
>
>> Sorry for delay. Patch for configure is attached.
>
> You don't patch configure, that's a generated file. You patch
> configure.ac.
Some of configure is generated from build/ac-macros/swig.m4.
The original patch for the testsuite no longe
Michael Chletsos writes:
> Sorry for delay. Patch for configure is attached.
You don't patch configure, that's a generated file. You patch
configure.ac.
--
Certified & Supported Apache Subversion Downloads:
http://www.wandisco.com/subversion/download
Sorry for delay. Patch for configure is attached.
It also updates Config to RbConfig which will remove annoying errors
and is backwards compatible.
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 5:43 AM, Philip Martin
wrote:
> Michael Chletsos writes:
>
>> The current patch I used does not fix the configure script, I
Michael Chletsos writes:
> The current patch I used does not fix the configure script, I could
> modify that to only use <= 1.8.7 or >= 1.9.3 if you like.
yes, please.
--
Certified & Supported Apache Subversion Downloads:
http://www.wandisco.com/subversion/download
I would support 1.9.3 - ruby 1.9.2 and 1.9.1 are not considered good
versions and are problematic.
The current patch I used does not fix the configure script, I could
modify that to only use <= 1.8.7 or >= 1.9.3 if you like.
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 5:31 AM, Philip Martin
wrote:
> Michael Chletsos
Michael Chletsos writes:
> OK - first, I would not support ruby 1.9.1 - I assume that you really
> have 1.9.2 (debian/ubuntu uses a meta-package)- can you show me the
> output of ruby -v
>
> I would support ruby 1.9.3 and above - there were issues with 1.9.1 and 1.9.2.
I used whatever was part o
OK - first, I would not support ruby 1.9.1 - I assume that you really
have 1.9.2 (debian/ubuntu uses a meta-package)- can you show me the
output of ruby -v
I would support ruby 1.9.3 and above - there were issues with 1.9.1 and 1.9.2.
If installing on debian/ubuntu, here are the steps for 1.9.3:
Michael Chletsos writes:
> Hi Philip -
>
> Not sure if you remember me from the Subversion Live! event the other
> week (Michael with Assembla), anyhow . . . I was able to run the ruby
> swig tests - though one test failed because of encoding, not a huge
> deal breaker, and the regular make test
Hi Philip -
Not sure if you remember me from the Subversion Live! event the other
week (Michael with Assembla), anyhow . . . I was able to run the ruby
swig tests - though one test failed because of encoding, not a huge
deal breaker, and the regular make test ran fine - were you talking
about some
mpchlets writes:
> I am also very interested in seeing this get to a state of usability -
> I am willing to help also.
>
> If there is a current status or anyone working on this, I would love
> to pitch in and get this finalized.
The patch allowed the tests to build when I tried it but I could n
-ruby-in-the-subversion-build-tp71512p175607.html
Sent from the Subversion Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Any follow-ups on this? We need to support Ruby 1.9 eventually and
it would be great to get these patches into a state where they can
be committed.
On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 12:32:58PM +, Philip Martin wrote:
> Philip Martin writes:
>
> > The line is:
> >
> >require "test/unit/ui/testrunne
Philip Martin writes:
> The line is:
>
>require "test/unit/ui/testrunnermediator"
>
> ruby-1.8 works because testrunnermediator.rb is part of libruby1.8 on my
> machine, it does not appear to be part of the standard ruby-1.9.1
> install.
So I can install a gem:
export GEM_HOME=$HOME/.rubyge
Philip Martin writes:
>> from :29:in `require'
>> from
>> /home/pm/sw/subversion/src2/subversion/bindings/swig/ruby/test/test-unit-ext/always-show-result.rb:20:in
>> `'
>> from :29:in `require'
>> from :29:in `require'
>> from
>> /home/pm/sw/subversion/s
Philip Martin writes:
> Vincent Batts writes:
>
>> On 19/12/11 10:04 +0200, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
>>>Please send separate patches for separate functional changes. Getting
>>>the tests to pass with ruby1.8 would be a separate functional change than
>>>supporting ruby1.9.
>>
>> Okay after a bit of
Vincent Batts writes:
> On 19/12/11 10:04 +0200, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
>>Please send separate patches for separate functional changes. Getting
>>the tests to pass with ruby1.8 would be a separate functional change than
>>supporting ruby1.9.
>
> Okay after a bit of familiarizing myself with the sv
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012, at 10:58, Vincent Batts wrote:
> I haven't seen any commits or conversation about these patches. What's
> the next step?
Notwithstanding attempts to get attention to this thread, please file
them as bugs --- with the 'patch' keyword and milestone 1.8-consider.
On 20/12/11 21:08 -0800, Vincent Batts wrote:
On 19/12/11 10:04 +0200, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
Please send separate patches for separate functional changes. Getting
the tests to pass with ruby1.8 would be a separate functional change than
supporting ruby1.9.
Okay after a bit of familiarizing mys
On 19/12/11 10:04 +0200, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
Please send separate patches for separate functional changes. Getting
the tests to pass with ruby1.8 would be a separate functional change than
supporting ruby1.9.
Okay after a bit of familiarizing myself with the svn library, attached
are two patc
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 05:01:05PM +, Philip Martin wrote:
> Vincent Batts writes:
>
> > On 19/12/11 10:55 +, Philip Martin wrote:
> >>Stefan Sperling writes:
> >>
> >>> The tests are passing for me locally with ruby 1.8.
> >>
> >>And on my Debian machine with ruby 1.8.
> >
> > curious,
Vincent Batts writes:
> On 19/12/11 10:55 +, Philip Martin wrote:
>>Stefan Sperling writes:
>>
>>> The tests are passing for me locally with ruby 1.8.
>>
>>And on my Debian machine with ruby 1.8.
>
> curious, which exact version of ruby?
> i was testing on:
> ruby 1.8.7 (2011-06-30 patchleve
Stefan Sperling wrote on Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 11:46:14 +0100:
> On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 10:04:55AM +0200, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 18, 2011, at 18:37, Vincent Batts wrote:
> > > I will start by working on all of the 'E' errors in the ruby tests
> > > straight. I primarily want to see th
On 19/12/11 10:55 +, Philip Martin wrote:
Stefan Sperling writes:
The tests are passing for me locally with ruby 1.8.
And on my Debian machine with ruby 1.8.
curious, which exact version of ruby?
i was testing on:
ruby 1.8.7 (2011-06-30 patchlevel 352) [i686-linux]
--
Vincent Batts
Stefan Sperling writes:
> The tests are passing for me locally with ruby 1.8.
And on my Debian machine with ruby 1.8.
--
uberSVN: Apache Subversion Made Easy
http://www.uberSVN.com
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 10:04:55AM +0200, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 18, 2011, at 18:37, Vincent Batts wrote:
> > I will start by working on all of the 'E' errors in the ruby tests
> > straight. I primarily want to see these ruby bindings back into the main
> > bundle of bindings, now that
On Sun, Dec 18, 2011, at 18:37, Vincent Batts wrote:
> I will start by working on all of the 'E' errors in the ruby tests
> straight. I primarily want to see these ruby bindings back into the main
> bundle of bindings, now that many distributions are defaulting to ruby
> 1.9.x. Arch linux has follo
On 17/12/11 17:36 +0100, Stefan Sperling wrote:
Thanks for working on this! It's badly needed.
Your test logs show failures for both versions.
Do you get the same failures without your patch?
The tests are supposed to pass.
Yeah, I wondered about that as well.
In fact none of the failures/erro
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 08:49:13PM -0800, Vincent Batts wrote:
> All,
>
> Attached is a patch to allow the building of ruby bindings, for ruby
> greater than 1.9.3, in addition to the 1.8.x series.
>
> It includes updates to several of the ruby/tests/ items so that it can
> work in both rubies.
All,
Attached is a patch to allow the building of ruby bindings, for ruby
greater than 1.9.3, in addition to the 1.8.x series.
It includes updates to several of the ruby/tests/ items so that it can
work in both rubies. I've tested it in ruby-1.8.7 and 1.9.3-p0, and
attached the output of 'check
39 matches
Mail list logo
