zope-tests - FAILED: 44, OK: 21
This is the summary for test reports received on the zope-tests list between 2013-02-16 00:00:00 UTC and 2013-02-17 00:00:00 UTC: See the footnotes for test reports of unsuccessful builds. An up-to date view of the builders is also available in our buildbot documentation: http://docs.zope.org/zopetoolkit/process/buildbots.html#the-nightly-builds Reports received ---------------- [1] Still Failing - zopetoolkit_trunk - Build # 176 [2] Still Failing - zopetoolkit_trunk_app - Build # 158 Total languishing bugs for zope2: 0 [3] Total languishing bugs for zope: 66 [4] Total languishing bugs for zopeapp: 1 [5] Total languishing bugs for zopetoolkit: 205 [6] Zope 3.4 Known Good Set / py2.4-64bit-linux Zope 3.4 Known Good Set / py2.5-64bit-linux Zope-2.10 Python-2.4.6 : Linux Zope-2.11 Python-2.4.6 : Linux Zope-2.12 Python-2.6.8 : Linux Zope-2.13 Python-2.6.8 : Linux Zope-2.13 Python-2.7.3 : Linux Zope-trunk Python-2.6.8 : Linux Zope-trunk Python-2.7.3 : Linux [7] winbot / BTrees_py_265_32 winbot / ZODB_dev py_265_win32 winbot / ZODB_dev py_265_win64 winbot / ZODB_dev py_270_win32 winbot / ZODB_dev py_270_win64 [8] winbot / z3c.authenticator_py_265_32 [9] winbot / z3c.baseregistry_py_265_32 [10] winbot / z3c.breadcrumb_py_265_32 [11] winbot / z3c.configurator_py_265_32 [12] winbot / z3c.contents_py_265_32 [13] winbot / z3c.language.negotiator_py_265_32 [14] winbot / z3c.language.switch_py_265_32 [15] winbot / z3c.layer.ready2go_py_265_32 [16] winbot / z3c.macro_py_265_32 [17] winbot / z3c.pagelet_py_265_32 [18] winbot / z3c.password_py_265_32 [19] winbot / z3c.pdftemplate_py_265_32 [20] winbot / z3c.sampledata_py_265_32 [21] winbot / z3c.table_py_265_32 [22] winbot / z3c.tabular_py_265_32 [23] winbot / z3c.template_py_265_32 [24] winbot / z3c.testing_py_265_32 [25] winbot / z3c.viewtemplate_py_265_32 [26] winbot / zc.sourcefactory_py_265_32 [27] winbot / zope.app.applicationcontrol_py_265_32 [28] winbot / zope.app.authentication_py_265_32 [29] winbot / zope.app.component_py_265_32 [30] winbot / zope.app.container_py_265_32 [31] winbot / zope.app.exception_py_265_32 [32] winbot / zope.app.form_py_265_32 [33] winbot / zope.app.i18n_py_265_32 [34] winbot / zope.app.publisher_py_265_32 [35] winbot / zope.app.renderer_py_265_32 [36] winbot / zope.app.rotterdam_py_265_32 [37] winbot / zope.app.schema_py_265_32 [38] winbot / zope.app.security_py_265_32 [39] winbot / zope.app.server_py_265_32 [40] winbot / zope.app.session_py_265_32 [41] winbot / zope.app.testing_py_265_32 [42] winbot / zope.app.zcmlfiles_py_265_32 [43] winbot / zope.formlib_py_265_32 [44] winbot / zope.security_py_265_32 winbot / ztk_10 py_254_win32 winbot / ztk_10 py_265_win32 winbot / ztk_10 py_265_win64 winbot / ztk_11 py_254_win32 winbot / ztk_11 py_265_win32 winbot / ztk_11 py_265_win64 winbot / ztk_11 py_270_win32 winbot / ztk_11 py_270_win64 Non-OK results -------------- [1] FAILED Still Failing - zopetoolkit_trunk - Build # 176 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2013-February/072510.html [2] FAILED Still Failing - zopetoolkit_trunk_app - Build # 158 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2013-February/072509.html [3] FAILED Total languishing bugs for zope: 66 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2013-February/072506.html [4] FAILED Total languishing bugs for zopeapp: 1 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2013-February/072504.html [5] FAILED Total languishing bugs for zopetoolkit: 205 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2013-February/072505.html [6] FAILED Zope 3.4 Known Good Set / py2.4-64bit-linux https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2013-February/072508.html [7] FAILED winbot / BTrees_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2013-February/072544.html [8] FAILED winbot / z3c.authenticator_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2013-February/072542.html [9] FAILED winbot / z3c.baseregistry_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2013-February/072534.html [10] FAILED winbot / z3c.breadcrumb_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2013-February/072535.html [11] FAILED winbot / z3c.configurator_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2013-February/072502.html [12] FAILED winbot / z3c.contents_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2013-February/072532.html [13] FAILED winbot / z3c.language.negotiator_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2013-February/072550.html [14] FAILED winbot / z3c.language.switch_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2013-February/072500.html [15] FAILED winbot / z3c.layer.ready2go_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2013-February/072552.html [16] FAILED winbot / z3c.macro_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2013-February/072547.html [17] FAILED winbot / z3c.pagelet_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2013-February/072548.html [18] FAILED winbot / z3c.password_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2013-February/072495.html [19] FAILED winbot / z3c.pdftemplate_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2013-February/072545.html [20] FAILED winbot / z3c.sampledata_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2013-February/072538.html [21] FAILED winbot / z3c.table_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2013-February/072491.html [22] FAILED winbot / z3c.tabular_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2013-February/072531.html [23] FAILED winbot / z3c.template_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2013-February/072536.html [24] FAILED winbot / z3c.testing_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2013-February/072533.html [25] FAILED winbot / z3c.viewtemplate_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2013-February/072540.html [26] FAILED winbot / zc.sourcefactory_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2013-February/072501.html [27] FAILED winbot / zope.app.applicationcontrol_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2013-February/072497.html [28] FAILED winbot / zope.app.authentication_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2013-February/072555.html [29] FAILED winbot / zope.app.component_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2013-February/072539.html [30] FAILED winbot / zope.app.container_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2013-February/072537.html [31] FAILED winbot / zope.app.exception_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2013-February/072546.html [32] FAILED winbot / zope.app.form_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2013-February/072493.html [33] FAILED winbot / zope.app.i18n_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2013-February/072551.html [34] FAILED winbot / zope.app.publisher_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2013-February/072553.html [35] FAILED winbot / zope.app.renderer_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2013-February/072496.html [36] FAILED winbot / zope.app.rotterdam_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2013-February/072503.html [37] FAILED winbot / zope.app.schema_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2013-February/072549.html [38] FAILED winbot / zope.app.security_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2013-February/072492.html [39] FAILED winbot / zope.app.server_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2013-February/072494.html [40] FAILED winbot / zope.app.session_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2013-February/072554.html [41] FAILED winbot / zope.app.testing_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2013-February/072541.html [42] FAILED winbot / zope.app.zcmlfiles_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2013-February/072543.html [43] FAILED winbot / zope.formlib_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2013-February/072499.html [44] FAILED winbot / zope.security_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2013-February/072498.html
On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 01:00:02AM +0000, Zope tests summarizer wrote:
This is the summary for test reports received on the zope-tests list between 2013-02-16 00:00:00 UTC and 2013-02-17 00:00:00 UTC:
See the footnotes for test reports of unsuccessful builds.
An up-to date view of the builders is also available in our buildbot documentation: http://docs.zope.org/zopetoolkit/process/buildbots.html#the-nightly-builds
Reports received ----------------
[1] Still Failing - zopetoolkit_trunk - Build # 176 [2] Still Failing - zopetoolkit_trunk_app - Build # 158
Added zope.untrustedpython to the ZTK, hopefully next build will be OK (and by "next build" I mean # 178 / # 160).
[6] Zope 3.4 Known Good Set / py2.4-64bit-linux
No progress here.
[7] winbot / BTrees_py_265_32
Interesting. This looks to be new.
[8] winbot / z3c.authenticator_py_265_32 [9] winbot / z3c.baseregistry_py_265_32 [10] winbot / z3c.breadcrumb_py_265_32 [11] winbot / z3c.configurator_py_265_32 [12] winbot / z3c.contents_py_265_32 [13] winbot / z3c.language.negotiator_py_265_32 [14] winbot / z3c.language.switch_py_265_32 [15] winbot / z3c.layer.ready2go_py_265_32 [16] winbot / z3c.macro_py_265_32 [17] winbot / z3c.pagelet_py_265_32 [18] winbot / z3c.password_py_265_32 [19] winbot / z3c.pdftemplate_py_265_32 [20] winbot / z3c.sampledata_py_265_32 [21] winbot / z3c.table_py_265_32 [22] winbot / z3c.tabular_py_265_32 [23] winbot / z3c.template_py_265_32 [24] winbot / z3c.testing_py_265_32 [25] winbot / z3c.viewtemplate_py_265_32 [26] winbot / zc.sourcefactory_py_265_32 [27] winbot / zope.app.applicationcontrol_py_265_32 [28] winbot / zope.app.authentication_py_265_32 [29] winbot / zope.app.component_py_265_32 [30] winbot / zope.app.container_py_265_32 [31] winbot / zope.app.exception_py_265_32 [32] winbot / zope.app.form_py_265_32 [33] winbot / zope.app.i18n_py_265_32 [34] winbot / zope.app.publisher_py_265_32 [35] winbot / zope.app.renderer_py_265_32 [36] winbot / zope.app.rotterdam_py_265_32 [37] winbot / zope.app.schema_py_265_32 [38] winbot / zope.app.security_py_265_32 [39] winbot / zope.app.server_py_265_32 [40] winbot / zope.app.session_py_265_32 [41] winbot / zope.app.testing_py_265_32 [42] winbot / zope.app.zcmlfiles_py_265_32 [43] winbot / zope.formlib_py_265_32
I assume (haven't checked) it's the same zope.i18n.testing thing. I just released zope.i18n 4.0.0a4 that ought to fix this. I want a script to parse the summary email, crawl all the links and fetch me the actual build logs, then extract error messages and identify duplicates.
[44] winbot / zope.security_py_265_32
No progress here. Zooming in:
[7] FAILED winbot / BTrees_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2013-February/072544.html
LOL: "GitHub is offline for maintenance. See http://status.github.com for more info."
[44] FAILED winbot / zope.security_py_265_32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2013-February/072498.html
This hinges on PyString_FromFormat("%p") differing from "0x%0x" % id(obj) in the padding. PyString_FromFormat uses sprint("%p") so it's really a C runtime issue. http://hg.python.org/cpython/file/627ebd001708/Objects/bytesobject.c#l319 Who wants to come up with something saner than this? diff --git a/src/zope/security/tests/test_proxy.py b/src/zope/security/tests/test_proxy.py index dbf4a1d..885a7e7 100644 --- a/src/zope/security/tests/test_proxy.py +++ b/src/zope/security/tests/test_proxy.py @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@ """Security proxy tests """ import unittest +import sys from zope.security._compat import PYTHON2 @@ -157,9 +158,13 @@ class ProxyCTests(unittest.TestCase): target = object() checker = DummyChecker(ForbiddenAttribute) proxy = self._makeOne(target, checker) + if sys.platform == 'win32': + address = '0x%08x' % id(target) + else: + address = '0x%0x' % id(target) self.assertEqual(str(proxy), '<security proxied %s.object ' - 'instance at 0x%0x>' % (_BUILTINS, id(target))) + 'instance at %s>' % (_BUILTINS, address)) def test___repr___checker_allows_str(self): target = object() @@ -173,9 +178,13 @@ class ProxyCTests(unittest.TestCase): target = object() checker = DummyChecker(ForbiddenAttribute) proxy = self._makeOne(target, checker) + if sys.platform == 'win32': + address = '0x%08x' % id(target) + else: + address = '0x%0x' % id(target) self.assertEqual(repr(proxy), '<security proxied %s.object ' - 'instance at 0x%0x>' % (_BUILTINS, id(target))) + 'instance at %s>' % (_BUILTINS, address)) @_skip_if_not_Py2 def test___cmp___w_self(self): Marius Gedminas -- http://pov.lt/ -- Zope 3/BlueBream consulting and development
On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 10:59:20AM +0200, Marius Gedminas wrote:
On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 01:00:02AM +0000, Zope tests summarizer wrote:
[6] Zope 3.4 Known Good Set / py2.4-64bit-linux
No progress here.
I disabled emails from this buildbot because who cares about stuff this ancient, right? Marius Gedminas -- http://pov.lt/ -- Zope 3/BlueBream consulting and development
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 02/18/2013 10:21 AM, Marius Gedminas wrote:
On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 10:59:20AM +0200, Marius Gedminas wrote:
On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 01:00:02AM +0000, Zope tests summarizer wrote:
[6] Zope 3.4 Known Good Set / py2.4-64bit-linux
No progress here.
I disabled emails from this buildbot because who cares about stuff this ancient, right?
Dunno about that, but the doctest failure in zope.testing.testrunner might be due to some local configuration: basically, there is coverage info jammed into a test summery:: Total: 405 tests, 0 failures, 0 errors in N.NNN seconds. lines cov% module (path) ... testrunner-ex/sample1/sampletests/test1.py) testrunner-ex/sample1/sampletests/test11.py) testrunner-ex/sample1/sampletests/test111.py) testrunner-ex/sample1/sampletests/test112.py) testrunner-ex/sample1/sampletests/test12.py) testrunner-ex/sample1/sampletests/test121.py) testrunner-ex/sample1/sampletests/test122.py) ... False instead of:: Total: 405 tests, 0 failures, 0 errors in N.NNN seconds. False Tres. - -- =================================================================== Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 tseaver@palladion.com Palladion Software "Excellence by Design" http://palladion.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with undefined - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlEiW9QACgkQ+gerLs4ltQ4NuACgwC/HpbhhVc7E5tJbNKfi0+7T sv4AnAzGijTA5MOe0aRdZ8HnEOE6kXRB =KuKD -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 11:50:28AM -0500, Tres Seaver wrote:
On 02/18/2013 10:21 AM, Marius Gedminas wrote:
On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 10:59:20AM +0200, Marius Gedminas wrote:
On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 01:00:02AM +0000, Zope tests summarizer wrote:
[6] Zope 3.4 Known Good Set / py2.4-64bit-linux
No progress here.
I disabled emails from this buildbot because who cares about stuff this ancient, right?
Dunno about that, but the doctest failure in zope.testing.testrunner might be due to some local configuration: basically, there is coverage info jammed into a test summery::
Total: 405 tests, 0 failures, 0 errors in N.NNN seconds. lines cov% module (path) ... testrunner-ex/sample1/sampletests/test1.py) testrunner-ex/sample1/sampletests/test11.py) testrunner-ex/sample1/sampletests/test111.py) testrunner-ex/sample1/sampletests/test112.py) testrunner-ex/sample1/sampletests/test12.py) testrunner-ex/sample1/sampletests/test121.py) testrunner-ex/sample1/sampletests/test122.py) ... False
instead of::
Total: 405 tests, 0 failures, 0 errors in N.NNN seconds. False
Just the reverse, actually. That test is trying to make sure that zope.testing's testrunner has a working --coverage option that prints coverage results. I tried to pdb and saw that the trace.Trace() object created by the test runner gives it back an empty result object (self.calledfuncs is {}). Experiments with python2.4 -m trace --trace helloworld.py show that /usr/lib/python2.4/trace.py seems to work. I gave up at that point. This used to work a few months ago (before I upgraded the OS?), but I can't figure out how to dig out old buildbot build results through its web interface. Marius Gedminas -- http://pov.lt/ -- Zope 3/BlueBream consulting and development
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 02/18/2013 03:59 AM, Marius Gedminas wrote:
[7] winbot / BTrees_py_265_32 Interesting. This looks to be new.
The error:: fatal: remote error: GitHub is offline for maintenance. See http://status.github.com for more info. - -- =================================================================== Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 tseaver@palladion.com Palladion Software "Excellence by Design" http://palladion.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with undefined - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlEiWMwACgkQ+gerLs4ltQ4VXACfTu9gbDgS0WQ57vCe4qyZAHcl fYMAoJtxZf2fRok3NLFmLQNqAlkvHweN =R848 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 02/18/2013 03:59 AM, Marius Gedminas wrote:
Who wants to come up with something saner than this?
Python doesn't seem to expose a mechanism for asking for the '%p' form from Python:
print '%p' % id(object()) Traceback (most recent call last): File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module> ValueError: unsupported format character 'p' (0x70) at index 1
Stackoverflow[1] suggests as an alternative that we avoid the '%p' format character and use the following (its example uses 'printf'): #include <inttypes.h> #include <stdint.h> ... printf("%016" PRIxPTR "\n", (uintptr_t)ptr); I prefer your workaround, frankly: I'd rather interoduce the weird code in the tests than in C. [1] http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1255099/whats-the-proper-use-of-printf-to... Tres. - -- =================================================================== Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 tseaver@palladion.com Palladion Software "Excellence by Design" http://palladion.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with undefined - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlEiYswACgkQ+gerLs4ltQ771wCgqtdB/w7v48CnU7EG0lIn82f/ e34AoINlQRwRLGG10vbzgtmrIganS4vH =IaW7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
participants (3)
-
Marius Gedminas -
Tres Seaver -
Zope tests summarizer