Re: [Openvpn-devel] [PATCH] Another fix related to unit test framework

On 07/06/16 10:14, Gert Doering wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 10:39:12PM +0200, David Sommerseth wrote: >>> On top of that, adding unit tests into an existing code like openvpn >>> will involve a lot of refactoring. The ROI on backporting any such tests >>> to 2.3 does not look worth th

Re: [Openvpn-devel] [PATCH] Another fix related to unit test framework

On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 6:31 AM, Samuli Seppänen wrote: > > Given that we do not have plenty of developer time around, we should > focus > > *development* time on git master / 2.4 - and that includes adding testing > > frameworks. > > +1. We should focus on doing what it takes to (finally) get 2.4

Re: [Openvpn-devel] [PATCH] Another fix related to unit test framework

hi, On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 01:23:55PM +0500, ?? wrote: mingw is an official way of building windows packages. I guess something like that appliable for ARM as well (I haven't heard about compilers running on those machines) $ uname -mo armv5tel GNU/Linux $ gcc -v Using

Re: [Openvpn-devel] [PATCH] Another fix related to unit test framework

It seems that a summary of how Vagrant operates is in order here. Vagrant uses pre-built images as a starting point. These images do not (and should not) be built by OpenVPN developers. The only things _we_ have to maintain are the Vagrant files, which are basically recipies for configuring the

Re: [Openvpn-devel] [PATCH] Another fix related to unit test framework

Given that we do not have plenty of developer time around, we should focus *development* time on git master / 2.4 - and that includes adding testing frameworks. +1. We should focus on doing what it takes to (finally) get 2.4 out of the door. Fairly soon afterwards we can stop worrying about 2.3

Re: [Openvpn-devel] [PATCH] Another fix related to unit test framework

hi, On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 01:23:55PM +0500, ?? wrote: > mingw is an official way of building windows packages. I guess something > like that appliable for ARM as well (I haven't heard about compilers > running on those machines) $ uname -mo armv5tel GNU/Linux $ gcc -v Using

Re: [Openvpn-devel] [PATCH] Another fix related to unit test framework

Hi, On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 01:27:52PM +0500, ?? wrote: > as for Travis-CI builds, there's such possibility already > > 1) register at github.com > 2) add your own repo to travis-ci.org > 3) voila, you can attack Pentagon from travis-ci cloud > > the way of "add some attacki

Re: [Openvpn-devel] [PATCH] Another fix related to unit test framework

oops, I was wrong. 2016-06-07 13:28 GMT+05:00 Arne Schwabe : > Am 07.06.16 um 10:23 schrieb Илья Шипицин: > > mingw is an official way of building windows packages. I guess something > > like that appliable for ARM as well (I haven't heard about compilers > > running on those machines) > > > > Ra

Re: [Openvpn-devel] [PATCH] Another fix related to unit test framework

Am 07.06.16 um 10:23 schrieb Илья Шипицин: > mingw is an official way of building windows packages. I guess something > like that appliable for ARM as well (I haven't heard about compilers > running on those machines) > Raspberry pi! Arne

Re: [Openvpn-devel] [PATCH] Another fix related to unit test framework

as for Travis-CI builds, there's such possibility already 1) register at github.com 2) add your own repo to travis-ci.org 3) voila, you can attack Pentagon from travis-ci cloud the way of "add some attacking code to openvpn codebase" seems to be much more complicated 2016-06-07 13:20 GMT+05:00 G

Re: [Openvpn-devel] [PATCH] Another fix related to unit test framework

mingw is an official way of building windows packages. I guess something like that appliable for ARM as well (I haven't heard about compilers running on those machines) so, if we can catch an issue during such compile, it is good. 2016-06-07 12:58 GMT+05:00 Samuli Seppänen : > I stand corrected

Re: [Openvpn-devel] [PATCH] Another fix related to unit test framework

Hi, On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 10:58:42AM +0300, Samuli Seppänen wrote: > I stand corrected. However, cross-building is not a replacement for > building on the actual OS. > > Do cross-builds generally catch useful issues, or do they tend to catch > issues related to the cross-building environment

Re: [Openvpn-devel] [PATCH] Another fix related to unit test framework

Hi, On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 11:08:47AM +0300, Samuli Seppänen wrote: > > we can't open this to the world, as the t_client tests need sudo > > privileges, so anyone who can push a patch to a testing tree can run > > arbitrary commands on the buildslaves ("just build whatever you want > > into somet

Re: [Openvpn-devel] [PATCH] Another fix related to unit test framework

Hi, On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 10:39:12PM +0200, David Sommerseth wrote: > > On top of that, adding unit tests into an existing code like openvpn > > will involve a lot of refactoring. The ROI on backporting any such tests > > to 2.3 does not look worth the effort. > > Yes, lots of the code may nee

Re: [Openvpn-devel] [PATCH] Another fix related to unit test framework

Hi, On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 10:30:57AM +0300, Samuli Seppänen wrote: This is probably correct: the codebase is complex enough to cause breakage on many types of changes, no matter how carefully the code is reviewed. This is often because of the sheer number of options and their invisible inter

Re: [Openvpn-devel] [PATCH] Another fix related to unit test framework

I stand corrected. However, cross-building is not a replacement for building on the actual OS. Do cross-builds generally catch useful issues, or do they tend to catch issues related to the cross-building environment itself? -- Samuli Seppänen Community Manager OpenVPN Technologies, Inc irc f

Re: [Openvpn-devel] [PATCH] Another fix related to unit test framework

Hi, On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 10:30:57AM +0300, Samuli Seppänen wrote: > This is probably correct: the codebase is complex enough to cause > breakage on many types of changes, no matter how carefully the code is > reviewed. This is often because of the sheer number of options and their > invisibl

Re: [Openvpn-devel] [PATCH] Another fix related to unit test framework

it is not true that Travis-CI is limited to Linux/Ubuntu, at least there's Mac OS X. and we can set up (later) cross builds for MIPS/ARM/Windows/whatever (not sure about "make check") cross build would be good starting point, if there was such thing already, we could notice that mingw build got br

Re: [Openvpn-devel] [PATCH] Another fix related to unit test framework

… IMO, the unit testing patches shouldn't have been merged into the release branch I agree. This patch was in retrospective clearly not ready for a release branch. A lot of people spend time to hot fix a broken build. My root cause analysis boils down to: Developers cannot detect multi-

Re: [Openvpn-devel] [PATCH] Another fix related to unit test framework

On 06/06/16 22:08, Selva Nair wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 3:05 PM, David Sommerseth > > wrote: > > > > IMO, the unit testing patches shouldn't have been merged into the > > release branch > > I did think consider this, but ended

Re: [Openvpn-devel] [PATCH] Another fix related to unit test framework

Hi, On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 3:05 PM, David Sommerseth < open...@sf.lists.topphemmelig.net> wrote: > > > IMO, the unit testing patches shouldn't have been merged into the > > release branch > > I did think consider this, but ended up applying them to release/2.3 as > well. My thought is that once

Re: [Openvpn-devel] [PATCH] Another fix related to unit test framework

On 04/06/16 07:17, Selva Nair wrote: > > > On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 2:37 PM, Selva Nair > wrote: > > > On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 2:14 PM, Gert Doering > wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 07:49:23PM +0200, David Sommerseth w

Re: [Openvpn-devel] [PATCH] Another fix related to unit test framework

Hi, On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 12:44:38AM +0200, Jens Neuhalfen wrote: > I agree to remove them from the next stable, but honestly think we really > should go the last step and make them work in master. > > Is anything besides mingw still an issue with the unit testing patchset? As far as I can see

Re: [Openvpn-devel] [PATCH] Another fix related to unit test framework

> >> IMO, the unit testing patches shouldn't have been merged into the release >> branch > > I have discussed this with David (after the fact, meh) and we couldn't > really come to an conclusion on this - but since you and Jens now both > argue that way (and especially Jens as the original auth

Re: [Openvpn-devel] [PATCH] Another fix related to unit test framework

Hi, On Sat, Jun 04, 2016 at 01:17:25AM -0400, Selva Nair wrote: > The joy was short-lived. mingw cross-compile from release/2.3 tarball is > also broken: > > error: cannot find input file: `vendor/Makefile.in' > > Thankfully, cherry-pick 41ab12f06253c fixes it. I have cherry-picked 41ab12f0

Re: [Openvpn-devel] [PATCH] Another fix related to unit test framework

… > IMO, the unit testing patches shouldn't have been merged into the release > branch I agree. This patch was in retrospective clearly not ready for a release branch. A lot of people spend time to hot fix a broken build. My root cause analysis boils down to: Developers cannot detect multi

Re: [Openvpn-devel] [PATCH] Another fix related to unit test framework

On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 2:37 PM, Selva Nair wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 2:14 PM, Gert Doering wrote: > >> On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 07:49:23PM +0200, David Sommerseth wrote: >> > From: David Sommerseth >> > >> > Continuing to fix breakage caused by commit 40cb4cfc5d011102. >> [..] >> >> Not

Re: [Openvpn-devel] [PATCH] Another fix related to unit test framework

On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 2:14 PM, Gert Doering wrote: > On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 07:49:23PM +0200, David Sommerseth wrote: > > From: David Sommerseth > > > > Continuing to fix breakage caused by commit 40cb4cfc5d011102. > [..] > > Not having actually tested this, looking at it seems to properly quo

Re: [Openvpn-devel] [PATCH] Another fix related to unit test framework

Hi, On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 07:49:23PM +0200, David Sommerseth wrote: > From: David Sommerseth > > Continuing to fix breakage caused by commit 40cb4cfc5d011102. [..] Not having actually tested this, looking at it seems to properly quote the bits that caused buildbot explosion and "make dist" fa

[Openvpn-devel] [PATCH] Another fix related to unit test framework

From: David Sommerseth Continuing to fix breakage caused by commit 40cb4cfc5d011102. It seems it was a conflict in vendor/Makefile.am's distdir target, confusing autotools so it wouldn't actually parse that directory properly. The result was that 'make distcheck' would fail and tarballs created

Re: [Openvpn-devel] [PATCH] Another fix related to unit test framework

This patch seems to do what it promises, so a feature-ACK from me. -- Samuli Seppänen Community Manager OpenVPN Technologies, Inc irc freenode net: mattock From: David Sommerseth Continuing to fix breakage caused by commit 40cb4cfc5d011102. It seems it was a conflict in vendor/Makefile.am's

Re: [Openvpn-devel] [PATCH] Another fix related to unit test framework

Hi, On Thu, Jun 02, 2016 at 06:08:58PM +0200, David Sommerseth wrote: > if CMOCKA_INITIALIZED > + mkdir -p $(cmockabuild) $(cmockainstall) This will still blow up if the source or build directory contain whitespace - if absolute paths outside Makefile's control are used, they must be quoted

[Openvpn-devel] [PATCH] Another fix related to unit test framework

From: David Sommerseth Continuing to fix breakage caused by commit 40cb4cfc5d011102. It seems it was a conflict in vendor/Makefile.am's distdir target, confusing autotools so it wouldn't actually parse that directory properly. The result was that 'make distcheck' would fail and tarballs created