Menu
▾
▴
check-devel — Check unit test framework development
You can subscribe to this list here.
| 2001 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
(5) |
Jul
|
Aug
(1) |
Sep
|
Oct
(3) |
Nov
(2) |
Dec
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2002 |
Jan
(2) |
Feb
|
Mar
(2) |
Apr
(14) |
May
(1) |
Jun
(2) |
Jul
(11) |
Aug
(8) |
Sep
|
Oct
(6) |
Nov
(3) |
Dec
(21) |
| 2003 |
Jan
|
Feb
(1) |
Mar
(4) |
Apr
|
May
(2) |
Jun
(1) |
Jul
(1) |
Aug
(5) |
Sep
(10) |
Oct
(2) |
Nov
(2) |
Dec
(3) |
| 2004 |
Jan
(1) |
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
(2) |
May
(1) |
Jun
|
Jul
(4) |
Aug
|
Sep
(2) |
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2005 |
Jan
(1) |
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
(2) |
Jul
(2) |
Aug
|
Sep
(1) |
Oct
|
Nov
(2) |
Dec
(3) |
| 2006 |
Jan
(10) |
Feb
(7) |
Mar
(32) |
Apr
(7) |
May
(9) |
Jun
(24) |
Jul
(8) |
Aug
(4) |
Sep
(7) |
Oct
(30) |
Nov
(34) |
Dec
(29) |
| 2007 |
Jan
(36) |
Feb
(26) |
Mar
(30) |
Apr
(80) |
May
(70) |
Jun
(94) |
Jul
(132) |
Aug
(75) |
Sep
(24) |
Oct
(19) |
Nov
(17) |
Dec
|
| 2008 |
Jan
|
Feb
(4) |
Mar
(34) |
Apr
(4) |
May
(1) |
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
(16) |
Dec
(28) |
| 2009 |
Jan
(9) |
Feb
(19) |
Mar
(4) |
Apr
(22) |
May
(18) |
Jun
(11) |
Jul
|
Aug
(1) |
Sep
(20) |
Oct
(8) |
Nov
(7) |
Dec
(7) |
| 2010 |
Jan
(2) |
Feb
(25) |
Mar
(2) |
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
(1) |
Jul
(2) |
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
(5) |
Dec
(5) |
| 2011 |
Jan
(12) |
Feb
(6) |
Mar
|
Apr
(2) |
May
(1) |
Jun
(4) |
Jul
(1) |
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
(9) |
Nov
(3) |
Dec
(1) |
| 2012 |
Jan
(1) |
Feb
|
Mar
(3) |
Apr
(2) |
May
(6) |
Jun
(7) |
Jul
|
Aug
(1) |
Sep
|
Oct
(21) |
Nov
(30) |
Dec
|
| 2013 |
Jan
(14) |
Feb
(36) |
Mar
(5) |
Apr
(28) |
May
(13) |
Jun
(1) |
Jul
(1) |
Aug
|
Sep
(10) |
Oct
(14) |
Nov
(15) |
Dec
(28) |
| 2014 |
Jan
(30) |
Feb
(11) |
Mar
(4) |
Apr
(15) |
May
(2) |
Jun
(9) |
Jul
(1) |
Aug
|
Sep
(10) |
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2015 |
Jan
(4) |
Feb
|
Mar
(5) |
Apr
(7) |
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
(6) |
Aug
(2) |
Sep
(2) |
Oct
|
Nov
(3) |
Dec
(11) |
| 2016 |
Jan
|
Feb
(2) |
Mar
(4) |
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
(2) |
Jul
(6) |
Aug
(1) |
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
(2) |
Dec
|
| 2017 |
Jan
|
Feb
(3) |
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2019 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
(2) |
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2020 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
(16) |
Jun
(1) |
Jul
|
Aug
(7) |
Sep
(11) |
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
(3) |
| 2021 |
Jan
(1) |
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2022 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
(1) |
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2024 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
(1) |
Nov
|
Dec
|
|
From: <skv...@sk...> - 2024-10-07 07:39:09
|
Dear colleagues Please find the attached log file Best Regards Dmitri Skvortsov |
|
From: Sinan K. <kay...@gm...> - 2022-03-14 07:24:23
|
Hello, I was using MSYS to install check and during make check, test_output.sh step failed and it prompted to ask me send an email to this mail address. The generated log file is in the attachment. Related terminal lines: PASS: check_check_export.exe PASS: check_check.exe FAIL: test_output.sh PASS: test_check_nofork.sh PASS: test_check_nofork_teardown.sh PASS: test_xml_output.sh PASS: test_log_output.sh PASS: test_set_max_msg_size.sh PASS: test_tap_output.sh ============================================================================ Testsuite summary for Check 0.15.2 ============================================================================ # TOTAL: 9 # PASS: 8 # SKIP: 0 # XFAIL: 0 # FAIL: 1 # XPASS: 0 # ERROR: 0 ============================================================================ See tests/test-suite.log Please report to check-devel at lists dot sourceforge dot net ============================================================================ |
|
From: Branden A. <b.m...@gm...> - 2021-01-01 01:15:35
|
> I have a few ideas that I can contribute back to the project. Welcome! > Valgrind reports a lot of memory issues; leaks and invalid reads and writes. > My idea is to fix everything what can be fixed. My recollection was that the failures which were found were due to the unit test program creating forks (one for each unit test), and those unit tests not "cleaning up" the memory from the parent before terminating. Those were noise rather than finding issues, if I recall correctly. When the testing program was created I did not find any invalid memory reads or writes, for example. If there are any of those, they certainly should be fixed (: > Continuing from the first one; maybe it is better if project uses just one build system? If you guys agree with this, I propose that we keep using GNU Autotools and ditch CMake since this is a "pure UNIX" software; Windows users needs to install MinGW, MSYS or Cygwin. I agree with Mikko. The project leverages CMake to support some Windows toolchains which do not use Autotools. Checkout the docs on installing on Windows for some examples: https://libcheck.github.io/check/web/install.html > Write a Dockerfile that can be used to build the project,... > Integrate this Docker Container into Travis CI so that it can automatically do all steps mentioned from the previous step. The project currently uses GitHub Actions to run automated tests on Linux, macOS, and Windows hosts. Over time the project has used a few different platforms for testing, including Cloudbees (Jenkins), Travis CI, AppVeyor, and GitHub Actions. As GitHub Actions now supports all three OSs that we support, the testing has been migrated to Github Actions: https://github.com/libcheck/check/tree/master/.github/workflows That testing does not require creating a Docker image, as Github Actions runs the tests in a container already. If you have ideas for how to improve our testing strategy, let us know. On Sun, Dec 27, 2020 at 5:57 AM Hrvoje Varga <hrv...@gm...> wrote: > Thanks for the insights. I'll start with the housekeeping. :) > > Happy holidays guys! > > On Sat, Dec 26, 2020 at 5:01 PM Mikko Johannes Koivunalho < > mik...@ik...> wrote: > >> Hello Hrvoje, >> >> Many good points. Thanks for taking them up. Just a few comments on some >> of them. >> >> - check_mem_leaks >> Missing in CMake build. Some things are still missing in the CMake >> build. And a few things could take more fine tuning, e.g. how we use >> Subunit. >> >> - CMake >> Actually, we have been moving towards CMake for a while. CMake is >> better supported in Windows and in Microsoft tools, e.g. Visual Studio. >> >> https://devblogs.microsoft.com/cppblog/cmake-support-in-visual-studio/ >> CMake also supports using Check as a sub project of the main (CMake) >> project, so you don't have to install libcheck into the system, which is >> how you normally operate with GNU Autotools. CMake builds are used. Earlier >> this year we fixed an issue in CMake configuration relating to this way of >> using Check: https://github.com/libcheck/check/issues/238. >> >> - Valgrind >> There is still memory issues. If you can find and fix some of those, >> it would great. Thanks. >> >> Cheers, >> Mikko Koivunalho >> >> Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year! >> >> >> On 2020-12-26 11:23, Hrvoje Varga wrote: >> >> Hi everyone, >> >> I am new to the project, both from user and dev perspective. In a couple >> of days with playing around with the check, I have a few ideas that I can >> contribute back to the project. Sorry if this was previously discussed. >> >> 1. It seems that check_mem_leaks is not part of the CMake build >> although it is integrated into GNU Autotools scripts. Integration into GNU >> Autotools scripts was done brarcher. See his commit >> 8699473b65011b50766d536222329eeb3953f1cc: >> >> commit 8699473b65011b50766d536222329eeb3953f1cc >> Author: brarcher <brarcher@64e312b2-a51f-0410-8e61-82d0ca0eb02a> >> Date: Wed Dec 18 21:37:09 2013 +0000 >> >> check_mem_leaks: add new unit test for use against valgrind >> >> I am not sure if that was intention. Is there a possibility that >> author forgot to include it into CMake scripts? >> >> In any case, I have prepared a commit that adds check_mem_leaks to >> CMake scripts. I just haven't created a pull request. >> 2. Continuing from the first one; maybe it is better if project uses >> just one build system? If you guys agree with this, I propose that we keep >> using GNU Autotools and ditch CMake since this is a "pure UNIX" software; >> Windows users needs to install MinGW, MSYS or Cygwin. >> >> I strongly encourage only one build system, whichever the choice. I >> can prepare a commit for this if we can agree with this. >> 3. Valgrind reports a lot of memory issues; leaks and invalid reads >> and writes. >> My idea is to fix everything what can be fixed. >> 4. Write a Dockerfile that can be used to build the project, run >> tests including running Valgrind to check for memory errors, generate API >> documentation, and to have a static code analysis of the whole codebase. >> 5. Integrate this Docker Container into Travis CI so that it can >> automatically do all steps mentioned from the previous step. >> >> I do apologies if I sound like I am trying to impose myself into the >> project since I am a newbie to it. I just feel like I need to contribute my >> know-how. Let me know what do you think about this. If you do agree about >> any or all of the points above, I can create an issue for each individual >> point so that we can track them. >> >> br, >> Hrvoje >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Check-devel mailing lis...@li...https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/check-devel >> >> >> -- >> Mikko Koivunalho >> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/MikkoKoivunalho >> AboutMe: http://about.me/mikkokoivunalho >> Blog: http://www.koivunalho.org/blogs/exercises-in-integration-and-delivery/ >> [ This message has been signed with PGP. Public key attached. ] >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Check-devel mailing list >> Che...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/check-devel >> > _______________________________________________ > Check-devel mailing list > Che...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/check-devel > |
|
From: Hrvoje V. <hrv...@gm...> - 2020-12-27 13:57:47
|
Thanks for the insights. I'll start with the housekeeping. :) Happy holidays guys! On Sat, Dec 26, 2020 at 5:01 PM Mikko Johannes Koivunalho < mik...@ik...> wrote: > Hello Hrvoje, > > Many good points. Thanks for taking them up. Just a few comments on some > of them. > > - check_mem_leaks > Missing in CMake build. Some things are still missing in the CMake > build. And a few things could take more fine tuning, e.g. how we use > Subunit. > > - CMake > Actually, we have been moving towards CMake for a while. CMake is > better supported in Windows and in Microsoft tools, e.g. Visual Studio. > https://devblogs.microsoft.com/cppblog/cmake-support-in-visual-studio/ > CMake also supports using Check as a sub project of the main (CMake) > project, so you don't have to install libcheck into the system, which is > how you normally operate with GNU Autotools. CMake builds are used. Earlier > this year we fixed an issue in CMake configuration relating to this way of > using Check: https://github.com/libcheck/check/issues/238. > > - Valgrind > There is still memory issues. If you can find and fix some of those, > it would great. Thanks. > > Cheers, > Mikko Koivunalho > > Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year! > > > On 2020-12-26 11:23, Hrvoje Varga wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > I am new to the project, both from user and dev perspective. In a couple > of days with playing around with the check, I have a few ideas that I can > contribute back to the project. Sorry if this was previously discussed. > > 1. It seems that check_mem_leaks is not part of the CMake build > although it is integrated into GNU Autotools scripts. Integration into GNU > Autotools scripts was done brarcher. See his commit > 8699473b65011b50766d536222329eeb3953f1cc: > > commit 8699473b65011b50766d536222329eeb3953f1cc > Author: brarcher <brarcher@64e312b2-a51f-0410-8e61-82d0ca0eb02a> > Date: Wed Dec 18 21:37:09 2013 +0000 > > check_mem_leaks: add new unit test for use against valgrind > > I am not sure if that was intention. Is there a possibility that > author forgot to include it into CMake scripts? > > In any case, I have prepared a commit that adds check_mem_leaks to > CMake scripts. I just haven't created a pull request. > 2. Continuing from the first one; maybe it is better if project uses > just one build system? If you guys agree with this, I propose that we keep > using GNU Autotools and ditch CMake since this is a "pure UNIX" software; > Windows users needs to install MinGW, MSYS or Cygwin. > > I strongly encourage only one build system, whichever the choice. I > can prepare a commit for this if we can agree with this. > 3. Valgrind reports a lot of memory issues; leaks and invalid reads > and writes. > My idea is to fix everything what can be fixed. > 4. Write a Dockerfile that can be used to build the project, run tests > including running Valgrind to check for memory errors, generate API > documentation, and to have a static code analysis of the whole codebase. > 5. Integrate this Docker Container into Travis CI so that it can > automatically do all steps mentioned from the previous step. > > I do apologies if I sound like I am trying to impose myself into the > project since I am a newbie to it. I just feel like I need to contribute my > know-how. Let me know what do you think about this. If you do agree about > any or all of the points above, I can create an issue for each individual > point so that we can track them. > > br, > Hrvoje > > > _______________________________________________ > Check-devel mailing lis...@li...https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/check-devel > > > -- > Mikko Koivunalho > LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/MikkoKoivunalho > AboutMe: http://about.me/mikkokoivunalho > Blog: http://www.koivunalho.org/blogs/exercises-in-integration-and-delivery/ > [ This message has been signed with PGP. Public key attached. ] > > _______________________________________________ > Check-devel mailing list > Che...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/check-devel > |
|
From: Mikko J. K. <mik...@ik...> - 2020-12-26 16:01:40
|
Hello Hrvoje, Many good points. Thanks for taking them up. Just a few comments on some of them. - check_mem_leaks Missing in CMake build. Some things are still missing in the CMake build. And a few things could take more fine tuning, e.g. how we use Subunit. - CMake Actually, we have been moving towards CMake for a while. CMake is better supported in Windows and in Microsoft tools, e.g. Visual Studio. https://devblogs.microsoft.com/cppblog/cmake-support-in-visual-studio/ CMake also supports using Check as a sub project of the main (CMake) project, so you don't have to install libcheck into the system, which is how you normally operate with GNU Autotools. CMake builds are used. Earlier this year we fixed an issue in CMake configuration relating to this way of using Check: https://github.com/libcheck/check/issues/238. - Valgrind There is still memory issues. If you can find and fix some of those, it would great. Thanks. Cheers, Mikko Koivunalho Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year! On 2020-12-26 11:23, Hrvoje Varga wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I am new to the project, both from user and dev perspective. In a > couple of days with playing around with the check, I have a few ideas > that I can contribute back to the project. Sorry if this was > previously discussed. > > 1. It seems that check_mem_leaks is not part of the CMake build > although it is integrated into GNU Autotools scripts. Integration > into GNU Autotools scripts was done brarcher. See his commit > 8699473b65011b50766d536222329eeb3953f1cc: > > commit 8699473b65011b50766d536222329eeb3953f1cc > Author: brarcher <brarcher@64e312b2-a51f-0410-8e61-82d0ca0eb02a> > Date: Wed Dec 18 21:37:09 2013 +0000 > > check_mem_leaks: add new unit test for use against valgrind > > I am not sure if that was intention. Is there a possibility that > author forgot to include it into CMake scripts? > > In any case, I have prepared a commit that adds check_mem_leaks to > CMake scripts. I just haven't created a pull request. > 2. Continuing from the first one; maybe it is better if project uses > just one build system? If you guys agree with this, I propose that > we keep using GNU Autotools and ditch CMake since this is a "pure > UNIX" software; Windows users needs to install MinGW, MSYS or Cygwin. > > I strongly encourage only one build system, whichever the choice. > I can prepare a commit for this if we can agree with this. > 3. Valgrind reports a lot of memory issues; leaks and invalid reads > and writes. > My idea is to fix everything what can be fixed. > 4. Write a Dockerfile that can be used to build the project, run > tests including running Valgrind to check for memory errors, > generate API documentation, and to have a static code analysis of > the whole codebase. > 5. Integrate this Docker Container into Travis CI so that it can > automatically do all steps mentioned from the previous step. > > I do apologies if I sound like I am trying to impose myself into the > project since I am a newbie to it. I just feel like I need to > contribute my know-how. Let me know what do you think about this. If > you do agree about any or all of the points above, I can create an > issue for each individual point so that we can track them. > > br, > Hrvoje > > > _______________________________________________ > Check-devel mailing list > Che...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/check-devel -- Mikko Koivunalho LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/MikkoKoivunalho AboutMe: http://about.me/mikkokoivunalho Blog: http://www.koivunalho.org/blogs/exercises-in-integration-and-delivery/ [ This message has been signed with PGP. Public key attached. ] |
|
From: Hrvoje V. <hrv...@gm...> - 2020-12-26 10:24:10
|
Hi everyone,
I am new to the project, both from user and dev perspective. In a couple of
days with playing around with the check, I have a few ideas that I can
contribute back to the project. Sorry if this was previously discussed.
1. It seems that check_mem_leaks is not part of the CMake build although
it is integrated into GNU Autotools scripts. Integration into GNU Autotools
scripts was done brarcher. See his commit
8699473b65011b50766d536222329eeb3953f1cc:
commit 8699473b65011b50766d536222329eeb3953f1cc
Author: brarcher <brarcher@64e312b2-a51f-0410-8e61-82d0ca0eb02a>
Date: Wed Dec 18 21:37:09 2013 +0000
check_mem_leaks: add new unit test for use against valgrind
I am not sure if that was intention. Is there a possibility that author
forgot to include it into CMake scripts?
In any case, I have prepared a commit that adds check_mem_leaks to CMake
scripts. I just haven't created a pull request.
2. Continuing from the first one; maybe it is better if project uses
just one build system? If you guys agree with this, I propose that we keep
using GNU Autotools and ditch CMake since this is a "pure UNIX" software;
Windows users needs to install MinGW, MSYS or Cygwin.
I strongly encourage only one build system, whichever the choice. I can
prepare a commit for this if we can agree with this.
3. Valgrind reports a lot of memory issues; leaks and invalid reads and
writes.
My idea is to fix everything what can be fixed.
4. Write a Dockerfile that can be used to build the project, run tests
including running Valgrind to check for memory errors, generate API
documentation, and to have a static code analysis of the whole codebase.
5. Integrate this Docker Container into Travis CI so that it can
automatically do all steps mentioned from the previous step.
I do apologies if I sound like I am trying to impose myself into the
project since I am a newbie to it. I just feel like I need to contribute my
know-how. Let me know what do you think about this. If you do agree about
any or all of the points above, I can create an issue for each individual
point so that we can track them.
br,
Hrvoje
|
|
From: Андрей Т. <tru...@li...> - 2020-09-17 22:24:52
|
>Пятница, 18 сентября 2020, 1:20 +03:00 от Андрей Трунов via Check-devel <che...@li...>: > >Making check in lib >make[1]: вход в каталог «/home/cppcheck/check-0.15.2/lib» >make[1]: Цель «check» не требует выполнения команд. >make[1]: выход из каталога «/home/cppcheck/check-0.15.2/lib» >Making check in src >make[1]: вход в каталог «/home/cppcheck/check-0.15.2/src» >make[1]: Цель «check» не требует выполнения команд. >make[1]: выход из каталога «/home/cppcheck/check-0.15.2/src» >Making check in doc >make[1]: вход в каталог «/home/cppcheck/check-0.15.2/doc» >make[1]: Цель «check» не требует выполнения команд. >make[1]: выход из каталога «/home/cppcheck/check-0.15.2/doc» >Making check in . >make[1]: вход в каталог «/home/cppcheck/check-0.15.2» >make[1]: выход из каталога «/home/cppcheck/check-0.15.2» >Making check in checkmk >make[1]: вход в каталог «/home/cppcheck/check-0.15.2/checkmk» >make check-TESTS >make[2]: вход в каталог «/home/cppcheck/check-0.15.2/checkmk» >make[3]: вход в каталог «/home/cppcheck/check-0.15.2/checkmk» >FAIL: test/check_checkmk >============================================================================ >Testsuite summary for Check 0.15.2 >============================================================================ ># TOTAL: 1 ># PASS: 0 ># SKIP: 0 ># XFAIL: 0 ># FAIL: 1 ># XPASS: 0 ># ERROR: 0 >============================================================================ >See checkmk/test-suite.log >Please report to check-devel at lists dot sourceforge dot net >============================================================================ >make[3]: *** [Makefile:646: test-suite.log] Ошибка 1 >make[3]: выход из каталога «/home/cppcheck/check-0.15.2/checkmk» >make[2]: *** [Makefile:754: check-TESTS] Ошибка 2 >make[2]: выход из каталога «/home/cppcheck/check-0.15.2/checkmk» >make[1]: *** [Makefile:827: check-am] Ошибка 2 >make[1]: выход из каталога «/home/cppcheck/check-0.15.2/checkmk» >make: *** [Makefile:566: check-recursive] Ошибка 1 > > > >-- >Андрей Трунов > >_______________________________________________ >Check-devel mailing list >Che...@li... >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/check-devel > -- Андрей Трунов |
|
From: Андрей Т. <tru...@li...> - 2020-09-17 22:20:12
|
Making check in lib make[1]: вход в каталог «/home/cppcheck/check-0.15.2/lib» make[1]: Цель «check» не требует выполнения команд. make[1]: выход из каталога «/home/cppcheck/check-0.15.2/lib» Making check in src make[1]: вход в каталог «/home/cppcheck/check-0.15.2/src» make[1]: Цель «check» не требует выполнения команд. make[1]: выход из каталога «/home/cppcheck/check-0.15.2/src» Making check in doc make[1]: вход в каталог «/home/cppcheck/check-0.15.2/doc» make[1]: Цель «check» не требует выполнения команд. make[1]: выход из каталога «/home/cppcheck/check-0.15.2/doc» Making check in . make[1]: вход в каталог «/home/cppcheck/check-0.15.2» make[1]: выход из каталога «/home/cppcheck/check-0.15.2» Making check in checkmk make[1]: вход в каталог «/home/cppcheck/check-0.15.2/checkmk» make check-TESTS make[2]: вход в каталог «/home/cppcheck/check-0.15.2/checkmk» make[3]: вход в каталог «/home/cppcheck/check-0.15.2/checkmk» FAIL: test/check_checkmk ============================================================================ Testsuite summary for Check 0.15.2 ============================================================================ # TOTAL: 1 # PASS: 0 # SKIP: 0 # XFAIL: 0 # FAIL: 1 # XPASS: 0 # ERROR: 0 ============================================================================ See checkmk/test-suite.log Please report to check-devel at lists dot sourceforge dot net ============================================================================ make[3]: *** [Makefile:646: test-suite.log] Ошибка 1 make[3]: выход из каталога «/home/cppcheck/check-0.15.2/checkmk» make[2]: *** [Makefile:754: check-TESTS] Ошибка 2 make[2]: выход из каталога «/home/cppcheck/check-0.15.2/checkmk» make[1]: *** [Makefile:827: check-am] Ошибка 2 make[1]: выход из каталога «/home/cppcheck/check-0.15.2/checkmk» make: *** [Makefile:566: check-recursive] Ошибка 1 -- Андрей Трунов |
|
From: Fredrik H. <fre...@ax...> - 2020-09-16 06:52:28
|
Hi Nabila! PLEASE always reply to the list. That will get you help faster. Instructions for installing on windows is available here: https://libcheck.github.io/check/web/install.html Best regards, /Fredrik From: Nabila Hannania <nab...@gm...> Sent: den 16 september 2020 03:38 To: Fredrik Hugosson <fre...@ax...> Subject: Re: [Check-devel] help I use Windows 10, Microsoft Windows version 1903. So, can you tell me the right step to install it? Pada tanggal Sen, 14 Sep 2020 pukul 19.35 Fredrik Hugosson <fre...@ax...<mailto:fre...@ax...>> menulis: Hi Nabila! Please always reply to the list. That will get you help faster. It seems that you missed to do the first step from the README.md file $ autoreconf –install When I run according to the instructions, on a (recently updated) Debian system, I get the expected result. Which OS and version are you running? Best regards /Fredrik From: Nabila Hannania <nab...@gm...<mailto:nab...@gm...>> Sent: den 10 september 2020 05:04 To: Fredrik Hugosson <fre...@ax...<mailto:fre...@ax...>> Subject: Re: [Check-devel] help It became like this when i run make check. The steps : ./configure make make check [Image removed by sender.]<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail> Virus-free. www.avast.com<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail> Pada tanggal Rab, 9 Sep 2020 15.09, Fredrik Hugosson <fre...@ax...<mailto:fre...@ax...>> menulis: Hi! Could you please also send the output and the steps you have taken to get there. It is really hard to know what may be the problem otherwise. BR /Fredrik From: Nabila Hannania <nab...@gm...<mailto:nab...@gm...>> Sent: den 9 september 2020 07:51 To: che...@li...<mailto:che...@li...> Subject: [Check-devel] help hai! i'm Nabila. Today i try to install Check uses autotools as a build system, and the default steps work on GNU/Linux systems. But when i run "make check" there is a error, it says "See tests/test-suite.log Please report to check-devel at lists dot sourceforge dot net". There are error in check_check and check_check_export. what should i do now? Error! Filename not specified.<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail> Virus-free. www.avast.com<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail> |
|
From: Fredrik H. <fre...@ax...> - 2020-09-14 12:36:18
|
Hi Nabila! Please always reply to the list. That will get you help faster. It seems that you missed to do the first step from the README.md file $ autoreconf –install When I run according to the instructions, on a (recently updated) Debian system, I get the expected result. Which OS and version are you running? Best regards /Fredrik From: Nabila Hannania <nab...@gm...> Sent: den 10 september 2020 05:04 To: Fredrik Hugosson <fre...@ax...> Subject: Re: [Check-devel] help It became like this when i run make check. The steps : ./configure make make check [Image removed by sender.]<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail> Virus-free. www.avast.com<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail> Pada tanggal Rab, 9 Sep 2020 15.09, Fredrik Hugosson <fre...@ax...<mailto:fre...@ax...>> menulis: Hi! Could you please also send the output and the steps you have taken to get there. It is really hard to know what may be the problem otherwise. BR /Fredrik From: Nabila Hannania <nab...@gm...<mailto:nab...@gm...>> Sent: den 9 september 2020 07:51 To: che...@li...<mailto:che...@li...> Subject: [Check-devel] help hai! i'm Nabila. Today i try to install Check uses autotools as a build system, and the default steps work on GNU/Linux systems. But when i run "make check" there is a error, it says "See tests/test-suite.log Please report to check-devel at lists dot sourceforge dot net". There are error in check_check and check_check_export. what should i do now? Error! Filename not specified.<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail> Virus-free. www.avast.com<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail> |
|
From: Fredrik H. <fre...@ax...> - 2020-09-09 08:09:44
|
Hi! Could you please also send the output and the steps you have taken to get there. It is really hard to know what may be the problem otherwise. BR /Fredrik From: Nabila Hannania <nab...@gm...> Sent: den 9 september 2020 07:51 To: che...@li... Subject: [Check-devel] help hai! i'm Nabila. Today i try to install Check uses autotools as a build system, and the default steps work on GNU/Linux systems. But when i run "make check" there is a error, it says "See tests/test-suite.log Please report to check-devel at lists dot sourceforge dot net". There are error in check_check and check_check_export. what should i do now? [Image removed by sender.]<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail> Virus-free. www.avast.com<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail> |
|
From: Nabila H. <nab...@gm...> - 2020-09-09 05:51:05
|
hai! i'm Nabila. Today i try to install Check uses autotools as a build system, and the default steps work on GNU/Linux systems. But when i run "make check" there is a error, it says "See tests/test-suite.log Please report to check-devel at lists dot sourceforge dot net". There are error in check_check and check_check_export. what should i do now? <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail> Virus-free. www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2> |
|
From: Mikko J. K. <mik...@ik...> - 2020-09-08 21:31:42
|
Hi, Subunit is a streaming protocol for test results. https://github.com/testing-cabal/subunit It is not a required dependency, only optional. When you are compiling Check, the build system (CMake or GNU Autotools) automatically detects if your system has libsubunit installed and either includes it in the build or leaves it out. As a quick fix, you can rebuild libcheck. Are you using CMake or Autotools (commands autoreconf and ./configure)? -- Mikko Koivunalho On 2020-09-08 13:21, Billy Julius wrote: > Hello, I'm Billy > > So, yesterday I tried make test and it worked fine. But today, i got > the message > > /usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lsubunit > collect2: error : ld returned 1 exit status > make : *** [Makefile:23: check_arraypos_tests] Error 1 > > I tried removing the -lsubunit in the MakeFile, but it looks like it > is needed, because I got another type of error. > > Is there any way to resolve this problem? > Thank You. > > > _______________________________________________ > Check-devel mailing list > Che...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/check-devel -- Mikko Koivunalho LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/MikkoKoivunalho AboutMe: http://about.me/mikkokoivunalho Blog: http://www.koivunalho.org/blogs/exercises-in-integration-and-delivery/ [ This message has been signed with PGP. Public key attached. ] |
|
From: Billy J. <bil...@gm...> - 2020-09-08 11:21:43
|
Hello, I'm Billy So, yesterday I tried make test and it worked fine. But today, i got the message /usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lsubunit collect2: error : ld returned 1 exit status make : *** [Makefile:23: check_arraypos_tests] Error 1 I tried removing the -lsubunit in the MakeFile, but it looks like it is needed, because I got another type of error. Is there any way to resolve this problem? Thank You. |
|
From: Branden A. <b.m...@gm...> - 2020-09-06 15:17:34
|
>From seeing this in your output: 100%: Checks: 29, Failures: 0, Errors: 0 It seems your tests did run, all 29 of them. And they all passed. Also, your unit tests covered 91% of your source lines. Your concern is that there are no code coverage metrics for the unit tests, right? Typically the code coverage instrumentation is for the source code and not the tests themselves. I dont think it's necessary to check the code coverage of the unit tests. Maybe change the gcovr command to check only the files under your src directory. > Does having a --disable-timeout-tests means that I can't use check normally? That only affects what tests Check runs on itself. It will not change the behavior of Check. > Is there any way to fix my "CPU constrained" system? If you are not using Check's test timeout functionality in your unit tests for your project I'd not worry about the timeout tests. It appears that your tests are passing. On Sat, Sep 5, 2020 at 8:02 PM Billy Julius <bil...@gm...> wrote: > Hi Branden, thanks for the response. > > Firstly, yes I need the latest version of check. I tried with the sudo > apt-get install check, but it doesn't work on my homework project. I asked > my friend whose check is able to work and he said that I need the latest > one. > > I just did the ./configure --disable-timeout-tests, and the other tests > went fine, no errors for check_check_export and check_check. So I tried > sudo make install, then I go and do "make all" command on my homework > project, yet the file check_point.c in the tests folder was not executed at > all, with details as the following : > > gcc point.o check_point.o -lcheck -lm -lpthread -lrt -lgcov -coverage -o > check_point_tests > ./check_point_tests > libgcov profiling error:/home/null/Desktop/Billy > Julius/Point/check_point.gcda:Version mismatch - expected 10.0 > (experimental) (B00e) got 10.2 (release) (B02*) > Running suite(s): Point > 100%: Checks: 29, Failures: 0, Errors: 0 > gcovr -s -d > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > GCC Code Coverage Report > Directory: . > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > File Lines Exec Cover Missing > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > src/point.c 74 68 91% > 26,39-41,44,55 > tests/check_point.c 222 0 0% > 8,12-15,17,21,23-24,26-28,31,33-34,36-38,41,43-44,46-48,51,53-54,56-58,61,63,65-67,70,72,74-76,79,81,83-85,88,90,92-94,97,99,101-103,106,108,110-112,115,117,119-121,124,126,128-130,133,135,137-139,142,144,146-148,151,153,155-157,160,162-164,166-169,172,174-176,178-181,184,186-188,190-192,194-197,200,203-204,206-208,211,214-215,217-219,222,224-225,227-228,231,233-235,237-238,241,243-244,246-248,251,253-254,256-258,261,263-264,266-268,271,273-274,276-278,281,283-284,286-288,291,293,295-296,298-299,301-303,306,310,312-314,316-321,323-335,337-351,353,356-357,361-362,364-367 > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > TOTAL 296 68 23% > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > lines: 23.0% (68 out of 296) > branches: 21.2% (28 out of 132) > > Does having a --disable-timeout-tests means that I can't use check > normally? Is there any way to fix my "CPU constrained" system? > > Thank You. > > On Sun, 6 Sep 2020, 05:16 Branden Archer, <b.m...@gm...> wrote: > >> For Ubuntu you should be able to install libcheck using the following >> instructions: >> >> https://libcheck.github.io/check/web/install.html#aptitude >> >> That way you will not need to rebuild Check, unless you want a newer >> version than Ubuntu provides. >> >> Looking at the logs I see failures around timeout tests. For example, >> this test >> >> >> https://github.com/libcheck/check/blob/c94962c5ed3120291557e978fa523780a802ac93/tests/check_check_sub.c#L2650 >> >> should take longer than 9 seconds to run, and is configured to fail if it >> runs longer than 6 seconds: >> >> >> https://github.com/libcheck/check/blob/c94962c5ed3120291557e978fa523780a802ac93/tests/check_check_sub.c#L3242 >> >> This test confirms that Check is able to detect when tests take too long >> to run and properly time them out. The provided test logs show that instead >> of timing the test out it said the test passed: >> >> check_check_master.c:683:F:Core Tests:test_check_all_msgs:226: For test >> 226:Timeout Integer Scaling Tests:test_sleep9_fail expected 'Test timeout >> expired', got 'Passed' >> >> I'm not sure why that would be. I've seen behavior like this on some >> systems that are very CPU constrained, such as when many VMs are running >> when the tests are also running. >> >> These tests are not as deterministic as the others, as they assume some >> behaviors of the OSs CPU scheduler. If you would like to skip them and see >> if the rest of the tests pass, try this >> <https://github.com/libcheck/check/blob/master/configure.ac#L66>: >> >> ./configure --disable-timeout-tests >> make >> make check >> >> >> - Branden >> >> >>> >>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >>> From: Billy Julius <bil...@gm...> >>> To: che...@li... >>> Cc: >>> Bcc: >>> Date: Sat, 5 Sep 2020 13:04:19 +0700 >>> Subject: check_check_export and check_check fails when make check command >>> Hello, I'm Billy >>> >>> I just tried installing check to my PC but I encountered a problem. So >>> after I downloaded the latest check source from >>> https://github.com/libcheck/check/releases, I used Ubuntu and move to >>> the unpacked directory, run these following commands : >>> ./configure >>> make >>> make check >>> >>> The make check step fails, with details test_suite.log attached. >>> Is there anything wrong with my PC and anything to solve this problem? >>> >>> Thank You. >>> >>> >>> >>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >>> From: che...@li... >>> To: >>> Cc: >>> Bcc: >>> Date: Sat, 05 Sep 2020 06:04:51 +0000 >>> Subject: confirm ce2627daf3ad4d37dcda3cd36b2e6b20a754d2aa >>> If you reply to this message, keeping the Subject: header intact, >>> Mailman will discard the held message. Do this if the message is >>> spam. If you reply to this message and include an Approved: header >>> with the list password in it, the message will be approved for posting >>> to the list. The Approved: header can also appear in the first line >>> of the body of the reply. >> >> |
|
From: Billy J. <bil...@gm...> - 2020-09-06 03:02:12
|
Hi Branden, thanks for the response.
Firstly, yes I need the latest version of check. I tried with the sudo
apt-get install check, but it doesn't work on my homework project. I asked
my friend whose check is able to work and he said that I need the latest
one.
I just did the ./configure --disable-timeout-tests, and the other tests
went fine, no errors for check_check_export and check_check. So I tried
sudo make install, then I go and do "make all" command on my homework
project, yet the file check_point.c in the tests folder was not executed at
all, with details as the following :
gcc point.o check_point.o -lcheck -lm -lpthread -lrt -lgcov -coverage -o
check_point_tests
./check_point_tests
libgcov profiling error:/home/null/Desktop/Billy
Julius/Point/check_point.gcda:Version mismatch - expected 10.0
(experimental) (B00e) got 10.2 (release) (B02*)
Running suite(s): Point
100%: Checks: 29, Failures: 0, Errors: 0
gcovr -s -d
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GCC Code Coverage Report
Directory: .
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
File Lines Exec Cover Missing
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
src/point.c 74 68 91%
26,39-41,44,55
tests/check_point.c 222 0 0%
8,12-15,17,21,23-24,26-28,31,33-34,36-38,41,43-44,46-48,51,53-54,56-58,61,63,65-67,70,72,74-76,79,81,83-85,88,90,92-94,97,99,101-103,106,108,110-112,115,117,119-121,124,126,128-130,133,135,137-139,142,144,146-148,151,153,155-157,160,162-164,166-169,172,174-176,178-181,184,186-188,190-192,194-197,200,203-204,206-208,211,214-215,217-219,222,224-225,227-228,231,233-235,237-238,241,243-244,246-248,251,253-254,256-258,261,263-264,266-268,271,273-274,276-278,281,283-284,286-288,291,293,295-296,298-299,301-303,306,310,312-314,316-321,323-335,337-351,353,356-357,361-362,364-367
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL 296 68 23%
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
lines: 23.0% (68 out of 296)
branches: 21.2% (28 out of 132)
Does having a --disable-timeout-tests means that I can't use check
normally? Is there any way to fix my "CPU constrained" system?
Thank You.
On Sun, 6 Sep 2020, 05:16 Branden Archer, <b.m...@gm...> wrote:
> For Ubuntu you should be able to install libcheck using the following
> instructions:
>
> https://libcheck.github.io/check/web/install.html#aptitude
>
> That way you will not need to rebuild Check, unless you want a newer
> version than Ubuntu provides.
>
> Looking at the logs I see failures around timeout tests. For example, this
> test
>
>
> https://github.com/libcheck/check/blob/c94962c5ed3120291557e978fa523780a802ac93/tests/check_check_sub.c#L2650
>
> should take longer than 9 seconds to run, and is configured to fail if it
> runs longer than 6 seconds:
>
>
> https://github.com/libcheck/check/blob/c94962c5ed3120291557e978fa523780a802ac93/tests/check_check_sub.c#L3242
>
> This test confirms that Check is able to detect when tests take too long
> to run and properly time them out. The provided test logs show that instead
> of timing the test out it said the test passed:
>
> check_check_master.c:683:F:Core Tests:test_check_all_msgs:226: For test
> 226:Timeout Integer Scaling Tests:test_sleep9_fail expected 'Test timeout
> expired', got 'Passed'
>
> I'm not sure why that would be. I've seen behavior like this on some
> systems that are very CPU constrained, such as when many VMs are running
> when the tests are also running.
>
> These tests are not as deterministic as the others, as they assume some
> behaviors of the OSs CPU scheduler. If you would like to skip them and see
> if the rest of the tests pass, try this
> <https://github.com/libcheck/check/blob/master/configure.ac#L66>:
>
> ./configure --disable-timeout-tests
> make
> make check
>
>
> - Branden
>
>
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: Billy Julius <bil...@gm...>
>> To: che...@li...
>> Cc:
>> Bcc:
>> Date: Sat, 5 Sep 2020 13:04:19 +0700
>> Subject: check_check_export and check_check fails when make check command
>> Hello, I'm Billy
>>
>> I just tried installing check to my PC but I encountered a problem. So
>> after I downloaded the latest check source from
>> https://github.com/libcheck/check/releases, I used Ubuntu and move to
>> the unpacked directory, run these following commands :
>> ./configure
>> make
>> make check
>>
>> The make check step fails, with details test_suite.log attached.
>> Is there anything wrong with my PC and anything to solve this problem?
>>
>> Thank You.
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: che...@li...
>> To:
>> Cc:
>> Bcc:
>> Date: Sat, 05 Sep 2020 06:04:51 +0000
>> Subject: confirm ce2627daf3ad4d37dcda3cd36b2e6b20a754d2aa
>> If you reply to this message, keeping the Subject: header intact,
>> Mailman will discard the held message. Do this if the message is
>> spam. If you reply to this message and include an Approved: header
>> with the list password in it, the message will be approved for posting
>> to the list. The Approved: header can also appear in the first line
>> of the body of the reply.
>
>
|
|
From: Branden A. <b.m...@gm...> - 2020-09-05 22:17:00
|
For Ubuntu you should be able to install libcheck using the following instructions: https://libcheck.github.io/check/web/install.html#aptitude That way you will not need to rebuild Check, unless you want a newer version than Ubuntu provides. Looking at the logs I see failures around timeout tests. For example, this test https://github.com/libcheck/check/blob/c94962c5ed3120291557e978fa523780a802ac93/tests/check_check_sub.c#L2650 should take longer than 9 seconds to run, and is configured to fail if it runs longer than 6 seconds: https://github.com/libcheck/check/blob/c94962c5ed3120291557e978fa523780a802ac93/tests/check_check_sub.c#L3242 This test confirms that Check is able to detect when tests take too long to run and properly time them out. The provided test logs show that instead of timing the test out it said the test passed: check_check_master.c:683:F:Core Tests:test_check_all_msgs:226: For test 226:Timeout Integer Scaling Tests:test_sleep9_fail expected 'Test timeout expired', got 'Passed' I'm not sure why that would be. I've seen behavior like this on some systems that are very CPU constrained, such as when many VMs are running when the tests are also running. These tests are not as deterministic as the others, as they assume some behaviors of the OSs CPU scheduler. If you would like to skip them and see if the rest of the tests pass, try this <https://github.com/libcheck/check/blob/master/configure.ac#L66>: ./configure --disable-timeout-tests make make check - Branden > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Billy Julius <bil...@gm...> > To: che...@li... > Cc: > Bcc: > Date: Sat, 5 Sep 2020 13:04:19 +0700 > Subject: check_check_export and check_check fails when make check command > Hello, I'm Billy > > I just tried installing check to my PC but I encountered a problem. So > after I downloaded the latest check source from > https://github.com/libcheck/check/releases, I used Ubuntu and move to the > unpacked directory, run these following commands : > ./configure > make > make check > > The make check step fails, with details test_suite.log attached. > Is there anything wrong with my PC and anything to solve this problem? > > Thank You. > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: che...@li... > To: > Cc: > Bcc: > Date: Sat, 05 Sep 2020 06:04:51 +0000 > Subject: confirm ce2627daf3ad4d37dcda3cd36b2e6b20a754d2aa > If you reply to this message, keeping the Subject: header intact, > Mailman will discard the held message. Do this if the message is > spam. If you reply to this message and include an Approved: header > with the list password in it, the message will be approved for posting > to the list. The Approved: header can also appear in the first line > of the body of the reply. |
|
From: Fredrik H. <fre...@ax...> - 2020-08-18 13:54:20
|
Hi Branden and Chris! I was on vacation and the work had piled up when I was back, therefore the silence. Great initiative to try to get new blood into the development of check! BR /Fredrik -----Original Message----- From: Chris Pickett <chr...@ma...> Sent: den 2 augusti 2020 09:37 To: Branden Archer <b.m...@gm...> Cc: che...@li...; Fredrik Hugosson <fre...@ax...> Subject: Re: [Check-devel] Seeking volunteers to maintain Check On 2020-08-01 20:28, Branden Archer wrote: > > Technically Fredrik and I are still maintainers too > > Sorry, was not trying to undercut you both. (: Haha, no worries. > It would be nice to have time to work on the project more. Such is > life sometimes. It was a pleasure to work on the project. I think my > available time commitment is not doing the project justice, and the > project can go further if one or more additional maintainers joined. > I'm hoping that by opening up the request to a broader audience there > may be others who use the project and may be interested in joining. Makes sense. > Chris and Fredrik, I don't think that you were added as Owners of > Check on GitHub yet. I'll send you both invites. Thanks for doing that. Chris > > > On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 7:55 PM <chr...@ma... > <mailto:chr...@ma...>> wrote: > > Thanks for asking Branden. Technically Fredrik and I are still > maintainers too, but of course you've been doing all the work. I'm > also > happy to bring someone else on board. There are various > refactoring-type changes I've always wanted to make, but I never > seem to > get around to it. > > If you know of any contributors that you think would make good > maintainers, you could try asking them directly. That's how we found > you, after all. Thanks for all the effort over the years. > > Chris > > On 2020-08-01 18:18, Branden Archer wrote: > > Hi! I'm the maintainer of Check. For the last several years I've > helped > > maintain the project, including bringing it from Sourceforge to > GitHub, > > expanding the platforms that are officially supported, and enabling > > automated vetting of contributions on Linux, OSX, and Windows. > > > > Over the last year I've found myself with less time to dedicate > to the > > project. There are a number of users of Check, and many ideas for > > improving the project. I'm seeking volunteers who are interested in > > continuing the project going forward, which involves: > > > > - Contributing changes, > > - Reviewing pull requests from the community, > > - Creating releases, and > > - Determining the future path of the project > > > > If you are interested, either email me or respond to the request > on GitHub: > > https://github.com/libcheck/check/issues/296 > > > > Thanks > > - Branden > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Check-devel mailing list > > Che...@li... > <mailto:Che...@li...> > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/check-devel > > > |
|
From: Branden A. <b.m...@gm...> - 2020-08-02 18:59:24
|
Hi Fabian,
>From the error you posted when building Check in msys:
../config.h:332:19: error: unexpected identifier or '(' before 'int'
32 | #define clockid_t int
| ^~~
I suspect that the configuration is not finding the definition of
clockid_t. I don't have a Windows system to reproduce this on. All I can
say is the MSYS autotools build listed here is successful:
https://github.com/libcheck/check/blob/master/.github/workflows/windows.yml#L82
Perhaps it is an issue with different versions of MSYS? Maybe the build
steps listed above are a little different from what you have attempted and
Check needs to include that in its testing setup.
Can you create an issue on Check's bug tracker and include the details?
https://github.com/libcheck/check/issues
>From there someone from the community who has more experience for Windows
may be able to help.
- Branden
On Sun, Aug 2, 2020 at 4:54 AM <che...@li...>
wrote:
> As list administrator, your authorization is requested for the
> following mailing list posting:
>
> List: Che...@li...
> From: fab...@li...
> Subject: Make and Make check doesn't work
> Reason: Message body is too big: 194124 bytes with a limit of 40 KB
>
> At your convenience, visit:
>
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/admindb/check-devel
>
> to approve or deny the request.
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Fabian Faraz Farid <fab...@li...>
> To: "che...@li..." <che...@li...
> >
> Cc:
> Bcc:
> Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2020 11:22:12 +0000
> Subject: Make and Make check doesn't work
>
> Hello,
>
> I have Problems installing check on Windows 10. I already whitelisted the
> Folders and started msys in admin mode, but everytime I get this error:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Could you help me?
>
>
>
> Kindly regard,
>
>
>
> Fabian F.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: che...@li...
> To:
> Cc:
> Bcc:
> Date: Sun, 02 Aug 2020 11:54:44 +0000
> Subject: confirm 3183a14f1eece6fbb6a1d827b056055d5930fbdc
> If you reply to this message, keeping the Subject: header intact,
> Mailman will discard the held message. Do this if the message is
> spam. If you reply to this message and include an Approved: header
> with the list password in it, the message will be approved for posting
> to the list. The Approved: header can also appear in the first line
> of the body of the reply.
|
|
From: Fabian F. F. <fab...@li...> - 2020-08-02 11:54:42
|
Hello, I have Problems installing check on Windows 10. I already whitelisted the Folders and started msys in admin mode, but everytime I get this error: [cid:image001.png@01D668CC.C5541F50] [cid:image002.png@01D668CC.D5DC9AF0] Could you help me? Kindly regard, Fabian F. |
|
From: Chris P. <chr...@ma...> - 2020-08-02 07:37:10
|
On 2020-08-01 20:28, Branden Archer wrote: > > Technically Fredrik and I are still maintainers too > > Sorry, was not trying to undercut you both. (: Haha, no worries. > It would be nice to have time to work on the project more. Such is life > sometimes. It was a pleasure to work on the project. I think my > available time commitment is not doing the project justice, and the > project can go further if one or more additional maintainers joined. I'm > hoping that by opening up the request to a broader audience there may be > others who use the project and may be interested in joining. Makes sense. > Chris and Fredrik, I don't think that you were added as Owners of Check > on GitHub yet. I'll send you both invites. Thanks for doing that. Chris > > > On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 7:55 PM <chr...@ma... > <mailto:chr...@ma...>> wrote: > > Thanks for asking Branden. Technically Fredrik and I are still > maintainers too, but of course you've been doing all the work. I'm > also > happy to bring someone else on board. There are various > refactoring-type changes I've always wanted to make, but I never > seem to > get around to it. > > If you know of any contributors that you think would make good > maintainers, you could try asking them directly. That's how we found > you, after all. Thanks for all the effort over the years. > > Chris > > On 2020-08-01 18:18, Branden Archer wrote: > > Hi! I'm the maintainer of Check. For the last several years I've > helped > > maintain the project, including bringing it from Sourceforge to > GitHub, > > expanding the platforms that are officially supported, and enabling > > automated vetting of contributions on Linux, OSX, and Windows. > > > > Over the last year I've found myself with less time to dedicate > to the > > project. There are a number of users of Check, and many ideas for > > improving the project. I'm seeking volunteers who are interested in > > continuing the project going forward, which involves: > > > > - Contributing changes, > > - Reviewing pull requests from the community, > > - Creating releases, and > > - Determining the future path of the project > > > > If you are interested, either email me or respond to the request > on GitHub: > > https://github.com/libcheck/check/issues/296 > > > > Thanks > > - Branden > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Check-devel mailing list > > Che...@li... > <mailto:Che...@li...> > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/check-devel > > > |
|
From: Branden A. <b.m...@gm...> - 2020-08-02 03:28:45
|
> Technically Fredrik and I are still maintainers too Sorry, was not trying to undercut you both. (: It would be nice to have time to work on the project more. Such is life sometimes. It was a pleasure to work on the project. I think my available time commitment is not doing the project justice, and the project can go further if one or more additional maintainers joined. I'm hoping that by opening up the request to a broader audience there may be others who use the project and may be interested in joining. Chris and Fredrik, I don't think that you were added as Owners of Check on GitHub yet. I'll send you both invites. On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 7:55 PM <chr...@ma...> wrote: > Thanks for asking Branden. Technically Fredrik and I are still > maintainers too, but of course you've been doing all the work. I'm also > happy to bring someone else on board. There are various > refactoring-type changes I've always wanted to make, but I never seem to > get around to it. > > If you know of any contributors that you think would make good > maintainers, you could try asking them directly. That's how we found > you, after all. Thanks for all the effort over the years. > > Chris > > On 2020-08-01 18:18, Branden Archer wrote: > > Hi! I'm the maintainer of Check. For the last several years I've helped > > maintain the project, including bringing it from Sourceforge to GitHub, > > expanding the platforms that are officially supported, and enabling > > automated vetting of contributions on Linux, OSX, and Windows. > > > > Over the last year I've found myself with less time to dedicate to the > > project. There are a number of users of Check, and many ideas for > > improving the project. I'm seeking volunteers who are interested in > > continuing the project going forward, which involves: > > > > - Contributing changes, > > - Reviewing pull requests from the community, > > - Creating releases, and > > - Determining the future path of the project > > > > If you are interested, either email me or respond to the request on > GitHub: > > https://github.com/libcheck/check/issues/296 > > > > Thanks > > - Branden > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Check-devel mailing list > > Che...@li... > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/check-devel > > > |
|
From: <chr...@ma...> - 2020-08-02 03:11:17
|
Thanks for asking Branden. Technically Fredrik and I are still maintainers too, but of course you've been doing all the work. I'm also happy to bring someone else on board. There are various refactoring-type changes I've always wanted to make, but I never seem to get around to it. If you know of any contributors that you think would make good maintainers, you could try asking them directly. That's how we found you, after all. Thanks for all the effort over the years. Chris On 2020-08-01 18:18, Branden Archer wrote: > Hi! I'm the maintainer of Check. For the last several years I've helped > maintain the project, including bringing it from Sourceforge to GitHub, > expanding the platforms that are officially supported, and enabling > automated vetting of contributions on Linux, OSX, and Windows. > > Over the last year I've found myself with less time to dedicate to the > project. There are a number of users of Check, and many ideas for > improving the project. I'm seeking volunteers who are interested in > continuing the project going forward, which involves: > > - Contributing changes, > - Reviewing pull requests from the community, > - Creating releases, and > - Determining the future path of the project > > If you are interested, either email me or respond to the request on GitHub: > https://github.com/libcheck/check/issues/296 > > Thanks > - Branden > > > _______________________________________________ > Check-devel mailing list > Che...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/check-devel > |
|
From: Branden A. <b.m...@gm...> - 2020-08-02 01:19:17
|
Hi! I'm the maintainer of Check. For the last several years I've helped maintain the project, including bringing it from Sourceforge to GitHub, expanding the platforms that are officially supported, and enabling automated vetting of contributions on Linux, OSX, and Windows. Over the last year I've found myself with less time to dedicate to the project. There are a number of users of Check, and many ideas for improving the project. I'm seeking volunteers who are interested in continuing the project going forward, which involves: - Contributing changes, - Reviewing pull requests from the community, - Creating releases, and - Determining the future path of the project If you are interested, either email me or respond to the request on GitHub: https://github.com/libcheck/check/issues/296 Thanks - Branden |
|
From: Ken M. <zar...@nt...> - 2020-06-07 15:48:24
|
On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 11:12:30PM +0100, Ken Moffat wrote: > On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 12:35:41PM -0700, chr...@ma... wrote: > > On 2020-05-27 00:47, Branden Archer wrote: > (re attempts to raise sigfpe not succeeding) > At the moment it looks as if there is something odd going on in most > of my systems (not sure if I mentioned here, but my athlon 200ge > built with -O2 -march=native on gcc-9.2 works as expected, other > machines don't). > Finally got through a fresh build - on the system with detuned glibc I'd expected the tests to pass, but still both check and bash had sigfpe errors. I then tried running the check tests on my desktop (the host system with detuned glibc) and was surprised to find they too failed. Booted the new system, the tests passed. Gradually building the new system, running the check tests from time to time, all good. Completed enough to use startx - in the tty the tests passed, but in my term they again failed. Turns out I'v been looking in the wrong place: I use rxvt-unicode. Once I started to suspect that might be the problem, google found http://lists.schmorp.de/pipermail/rxvt-unicode/2013q3/001839.html and at the beginning of that thread is a link to the perl issue: https://github.com/Perl/perl5/issues/12349 In (embedded) perl, sigfpe doesn't get passed through. Thanks again for your assistance, ĸen -- +++ OUT OF CHEESE ERROR. REDO FROM START +++ |
517 messages has been excluded from this view by a project administrator.
