On Wed, Jul 01, 2015 at 01:23:13PM +0200, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 01, 2015 at 01:19:15PM +0200, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 01, 2015 at 01:14:43PM +0200, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
>>> So, on my master tree:
>>> make clean && make CppunitTest_libreofficekit_tiledrender
On 07/01/2015 01:19 PM, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:
On Wed, Jul 01, 2015 at 01:14:43PM +0200, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
So, on my master tree:
make clean && make CppunitTest_libreofficekit_tiledrendering
failed, but
make check
succeeded, and subsequent
make CppunitTest_libreofficekit_tiled
On Wed, Jul 01, 2015 at 01:19:15PM +0200, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 01, 2015 at 01:14:43PM +0200, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
> > So, on my master tree:
> > make clean && make CppunitTest_libreofficekit_tiledrendering
> > failed, but
> > make check
> > succeeded, and subsequent
> >
On Wed, Jul 01, 2015 at 01:14:43PM +0200, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
> So, on my master tree:
> make clean && make CppunitTest_libreofficekit_tiledrendering
> failed, but
> make check
> succeeded, and subsequent
> make CppunitTest_libreofficekit_tiledrendering
> succeed several times in a row.
On Wed, Jul 01, 2015 at 11:00:10AM +0200, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 09:27:13AM +0200, Miklos Vajna wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 04:02:56PM +0200, Lionel Elie Mamane
> > wrote:
>
> >> I deleted the "instdir" directory and it still fails.
>
> > You can check if
On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 09:27:13AM +0200, Miklos Vajna wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 04:02:56PM +0200, Lionel Elie Mamane
> wrote:
>> I deleted the "instdir" directory and it still fails.
> You can check if 'make clean' does a difference.
Actually, a "make clean" makes my master build fai
Hi Lionel,
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 04:02:56PM +0200, Lionel Elie Mamane
wrote:
> I deleted the "instdir" directory and it still fails.
You can check if 'make clean' does a difference.
Regards,
Miklos
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 02:00:51PM +0200, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 02:32:23PM +0200, Miklos Vajna wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 02:54:45PM +0200, Lionel Elie Mamane
>> wrote:
What are those autogen.input options? Can you follow the
instructions of the fai
On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 02:32:23PM +0200, Miklos Vajna wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 02:54:45PM +0200, Lionel Elie Mamane
> wrote:
>>> What are those autogen.input options? Can you follow the instructions of
>>> the failed test and get a backtrace?
>> Both are attached. To me the backtrace l
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 10:37:34PM +0800, Matthew J. Francis wrote:
> On 18/06/2015 22:23, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
>> Nope, branch point is not good. Given that a recompile takes hours,
>> I'm rather unlikely to pursue this in detail. I started a "git
>> bisect", let's see if I have enough patie
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 10:38:44PM +0800, Matthew J. Francis wrote:
> On 18/06/2015 22:36, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
>> Grrr... "git bisect" refuses to work in the direction "find the
>> commit that fixed this", it insists to do "find the commit that
>> broke this". So I cannot bisect between (kno
On 18/06/2015 22:36, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
Grrr... "git bisect" refuses to work in the direction "find the commit
that fixed this", it insists to do "find the commit that broke
this". So I cannot bisect between (known bad) branch point and (known
good) master.
In this case you have to driv
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 10:38:44PM +0800, "Matthew J. Francis"
wrote:
> I.e. reverse the meanings of "git bisect good" and "git bisect bad"
Right, I use that a lot to find out what commit to backport to release
branches when something is fixed on master.
Regards,
Miklos
signature.asc
Descrip
On 18/06/2015 22:23, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
Nope, branch point is not good. Given that a recompile takes hours,
I'm rather unlikely to pursue this in detail. I started a "git
bisect", let's see if I have enough patience to get to the end.
Note that if you have an automated reproducer - a fai
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 04:23:36PM +0200, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 02:32:23PM +0200, Miklos Vajna wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 02:54:45PM +0200, Lionel Elie Mamane
> > wrote:
> > > > What are those autogen.input options? Can you follow the instructions of
> > > >
On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 02:32:23PM +0200, Miklos Vajna wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 02:54:45PM +0200, Lionel Elie Mamane
> wrote:
> > > What are those autogen.input options? Can you follow the instructions of
> > > the failed test and get a backtrace?
> >
> > Both are attached. To me the bac
Hi Lionel,
On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 02:54:45PM +0200, Lionel Elie Mamane
wrote:
> > What are those autogen.input options? Can you follow the instructions of
> > the failed test and get a backtrace?
>
> Both are attached. To me the backtrace looks unrelated to "tile
> rendering", but then this is
On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 10:11:55AM +0200, Miklos Vajna wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 02, 2015 at 03:23:27PM +0200, Lionel Elie Mamane
> wrote:
>> FWIW, the libreoffice-5-0 reproducibly fails the
>> libreofficekit_tiledrendering unittest with a segfault for me, while
>> master passes it. I use the same au
Hi Lionel,
On Tue, Jun 02, 2015 at 03:23:27PM +0200, Lionel Elie Mamane
wrote:
> FWIW, the libreoffice-5-0 reproducibly fails the
> libreofficekit_tiledrendering unittest with a segfault for me, while
> master passes it. I use the same autogen.input for both.
What are those autogen.input option
19 matches
Mail list logo
