Tests are working now and compiling process is working smoothly (at least in my eyes, I don't know much about the compiling process yet). Thanks for the fix.
I still can't get Online on the newest version of Chromium. I can even get my status to Online on IE6. On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 01:55, Yuri Z <vega...@gmail.com> wrote: > I pushed a fix (revision 7e7b23fdf009). Please update from the tip and try > again. > > On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 7:15 PM, Michael MacFadden < > michael.macfad...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I just verified that this test fails for me also. > > > > On Aug 28, 2011, at 8:59 AM, Yuri Z wrote: > > > > > Hmm, just tried to run the ClientFrontendImplTest and all tests passed > > for > > > me... Strange. I ll try to investigate it. > > > > > > On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 5:55 PM, Ruxiao Ma <m...@hcc.im> wrote: > > > > > >> Now recloning the repo to get a clean copy. > > >> > > >> But what about those testing errors? without manually disabling that > > test I > > >> can't even compile it... > > >> > > >> On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 22:52, Yuri Z <vega...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> > > >>> Try to clean the browse rcache. > > >>> > > >>> On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 5:49 PM, Ruxiao Ma <m...@hcc.im> wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> Update: > > >>>> > > >>>> Went back to 1018 , no more test errors, but still get turbulence. > > >>>> > > >>>> Went back to 1015, still can't get it running. > > >>>> > > >>>> Got lots of DBUG::EOF org.eclipse.jetty.io.EofException in the > output. > > >>>> > > >>>> Since there is no xorg on the server, I've bound the server to > > >>>> 0.0.0.0:9898to access it. > > >>>> > > >>>> I'm confused because I've managed to get it running several months > > ago. > > >> I > > >>>> don't know why I can't run it now(looks like others don't have this > > >>>> problem). > > >>>> > > >>>> On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 21:10, Ruxiao Ma <m...@hcc.im> wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>>> Hi everyone, > > >>>>> > > >>>>> I've pulled the tip and tried to compile it on Ubuntu Server > 10.04.3 > > >>>> amd64 > > >>>>> but it always fail on tests. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> In test_out it says: > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Argument(s) are different! Wanted: openListener.onUpdate( > <Capturing > > >>>>> argument>, isNull(), [DeltaSequence empty], isNull(), true, > isNull() > > >> ); > > >>>> -> > > >>>>> at > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>> > > >> > > > org.waveprotocol.box.server.frontend.ClientFrontendImplTest.verifyMarker(ClientFrontendImplTest.java:346) > > >>>>> Actual invocation has different arguments: openListener.onUpdate( > > >>>>> [WaveletName example.com/waveId/example.com/dummy+root], null, > > >>>>> [DeltaSequence empty], null, true, "ch1" ); -> at > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>> > > >> > > > org.waveprotocol.box.server.frontend.ClientFrontendImpl.openRequest(ClientFrontendImpl.java:224) > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Argument(s) are different! Wanted: > > >>>>> openListener.onUpdate( > > >>>>> , > > >>>>> isNull(), > > >>>>> [DeltaSequence empty], > > >>>>> isNull(), > > >>>>> true, > > >>>>> isNull() > > >>>>> ); > > >>>>> -> at > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>> > > >> > > > org.waveprotocol.box.server.frontend.ClientFrontendImplTest.verifyMarker(ClientFrontendImplTest.java:346) > > >>>>> Actual invocation has different arguments: > > >>>>> openListener.onUpdate( > > >>>>> [WaveletName example.com/waveId/example.com/dummy+root], > > >>>>> null, > > >>>>> [DeltaSequence empty], > > >>>>> null, > > >>>>> true, > > >>>>> "ch1" > > >>>>> ); > > >>>>> -> at > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>> > > >> > > > org.waveprotocol.box.server.frontend.ClientFrontendImpl.openRequest(ClientFrontendImpl.java:224) > > >>>>> > > >>>>> at > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>> > > >> > > > org.waveprotocol.box.server.frontend.ClientFrontendImplTest.verifyMarker(ClientFrontendImplTest.java:346) > > >>>>> at > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>> > > >> > > > org.waveprotocol.box.server.frontend.ClientFrontendImplTest.testOpenEmptyWaveReceivesChannelIdAndMarker(ClientFrontendImplTest.java:133) > > >>>>> > > >>>>> and so on. If I skip this test, wiab won't run correctly, I can log > > >> in > > >>>> but > > >>>>> can't get my status to Online and keep getting turbulence. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Now I'm trying to build on an 32-bit machine to see if it works. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> @James Purser, I'm not subscribed so I can't directly reply your > mail > > >>> but > > >>>>> yes, I think we got same errors. > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>> > > >> > > > > >
