February 2011 - Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-project] Pharo 1.2 broken on Hudson due to XMLSupport changes
by Marcus Denker Feb. 26, 2011

Feb. 26, 2011

On Feb 26, 2011, at 1:44 AM, Dale Henrichs wrote: > I've downloaded a Pharo1.2 image from Hudson to see what's happening and I notice that there are a number of validation issues with the ConfigurationOfPharo ... so I think that the XMLSupport issues have been addressed ... yes. > this build is yello and the earlier build was red ... > > Is that right? yes > Or are there other things that I don't know about? > Maybe that 1.1 is now broken: https://pharo-ic.lille.inria.fr/hudson/job/Pharo%201.1/ -- Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD.

1 0

[Pharo-project] Issue 3758 in pharo: Metacello has 12 failing tests in 1.2
by pharo＠googlecode.com Feb. 26, 2011

Feb. 26, 2011

Status: Accepted Owner: marcus.d...(a)gmail.com Labels: Milestone-1.2-DevImage Importance-High New issue 3758 by marcus.d...(a)gmail.com: Metacello has 12 failing tests in 1.2 http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=3758 >>> Metacello.TestsMC.MetacelloCurrentVersionTest.testFoo40Loaded1Package1LaterPackage >>> >>> 3.296 22 >>> Metacello.TestsMC.MetacelloGoferBasedAtomicLoaderTest.testBaselineFetch >>> 0.06 22 >>> Metacello.TestsMC.MetacelloGoferBasedAtomicLoaderTest.testBaselineLoad >>> 0.769 22 >>> Metacello.TestsMC.MetacelloGoferBasedAtomicLoaderTest.testIssue49PartialLoadC >>> >>> 1.539 22 >>> Metacello.TestsMC.MetacelloGoferBasedAtomicLoaderTest.testIssue49PartialLoadG >>> >>> 1.726 22 >>> Metacello.TestsMC.MetacelloGoferBasedLoaderTest.testIssue49PartialLoadC >>> 1.529 22 >>> Metacello.TestsMC.MetacelloGoferBasedLoaderTest.testBaselineFetch >>> 0.056 22 >>> Metacello.TestsMC.MetacelloGoferBasedLoaderTest.testBaselineLoad 0.831 >>> 22 >>> Metacello.TestsMC.MetacelloGoferBasedLoaderTest.testIssue49PartialLoadG >>> 1.787 22 >>> Metacello.TestsMC.MetacelloGoferFunctionalTest.testComparison 0.0070 22 >>> Metacello.TestsMC.MetacelloGoferFunctionalTest.testPackageResolution >>> 0.012 22 >>> Metacello.TestsMC.MetacelloMCCachingLoaderTestCase.testBaselineLoad >>> 0.957 22 >>> Metacello.TestsMC.MetacelloMCSpecLoaderTest.testLatestPackage What do we do?

1 2

[Pharo-project] Hudson build script for Pharo-1.2 image
by Dale Henrichs Feb. 26, 2011

Feb. 26, 2011

Marcus, When you get a chance could you give me a pointer to the build script that you use to build the Pharo-1.2 image? Thanks, Dale

1 0

[Pharo-project] Pharo 1.2 broken on Hudson due to XMLSupport changes
by Torsten Bergmann Feb. 26, 2011

Feb. 26, 2011

Still I do not understand: Evaluate this in an updated Pharo core 1.2: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Gofer new squeaksource: 'MetacelloRepository'; package: 'ConfigurationOfXMLSupport'; load. (Smalltalk at: #ConfigurationOfXMLSupport) project latestVersion ------------------------------------------------------------------------ returns 1.1.8 [ConfigurationOfXMLSupport] This is now broken by Otto. OK, he broke it, he has to repair it ;) But independent from that, the method in: ConfigurationOfPharo>>version12beta2: includes the following: project: 'XMLSupport' with: '1.1.6'. So I would have expected that for Pharo "1.2-beta2" the 1.1.6 (and not the 1.1.8) of XMLSupport gets loaded and Hudson should have been green. Why does Metacello load the 1.1.8 when a previous project version (1.1.6) is referenced? Dale, any comments? Bye T. -- Empfehlen Sie GMX DSL Ihren Freunden und Bekannten und wir belohnen Sie mit bis zu 50,- Euro! https://freundschaftswerbung.gmx.de

2 1

[Pharo-project] Metacello feature: Can Metacello do this?
by Igor Stasenko Feb. 26, 2011

Feb. 26, 2011

Can i test the configuration (with all dependencies), that every version of packages it going to load are specified explicitly, i.e. there is not 'load latest version from that branch'. This is to ensure that given configuration will continue to work and load same packages no matter of what new future updates there is. -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig.

3 4

[Pharo-project] [COTDC] 18 - SMxMorphicAlarm
by laurent laffont Feb. 25, 2011

Feb. 25, 2011

Today: SMxMorphicAlarm Comment Of The Day Contest - One Day One Comment Rules: #1: Each day a not commented class is elected. Each day the best comment will be integrated with name of the author(s). #2: If you cannot comment it, deprecate it. Results: http://code.google.com/p/pharo/wiki/CommentOfTheDayContest Laurent

4 5

Re: [Pharo-project] Finder?
by Marcus Denker Feb. 25, 2011

Feb. 25, 2011

On Feb 25, 2011, at 10:09 AM, StÃ©phane Ducasse wrote: > this is strange since 1234 numberOfDigitsInBase: 10 -> 4 > but the finder does not report it for > 1234 . 10 . 4 > Only methods that are added to the class MethodFinder by hand are tested. If you add #numberOfDigitsInBase: to #initialize3, it works. Marcus -- Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD.

2 1

Feb. 25, 2011

Hi guys does anybody know how we can fix that? Stef

3 3

[Pharo-project] Issue 3652 in pharo: [Failing Test] MocketryTests.Actions.MockActionAcceptanceTests.testWillProcessBlocking
by pharo＠googlecode.com Feb. 25, 2011

Feb. 25, 2011

Status: Accepted Owner: marcus.d...(a)gmail.com Labels: Milestone-1.2-DevImage New issue 3652 by marcus.d...(a)gmail.com: [Failing Test] MocketryTests.Actions.MockActionAcceptanceTests.testWillProcessBlocking http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=3652 MocketryTests.Actions.MockActionAcceptanceTests.testWillProcessBlocking Why oh why are we getting always more failing tests?

1 6

[Pharo-project] Issue 3760 in pharo: Build 1.2 Fails due to Mock package
by pharo＠googlecode.com Feb. 25, 2011

Feb. 25, 2011

Status: Accepted Owner: marcus.d...(a)gmail.com Labels: Milestone-1.2-DevImage Importance-High New issue 3760 by marcus.d...(a)gmail.com: Build 1.2 Fails due to Mock package http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=3760 Solution: Remove the package that is the problem. THERE_BE_DRAGONS_HERE MessageNotUnderstood: receiver of "evaluateMessageSend:" is nil 25 February 2011 5:41:49 pm VM: unix - i686 - linux - Squeak4.1 of 17 April 2010 [latest update: #9957] Image: Pharo1.2rc2 [Latest update: #12338] SecurityManager state: Restricted: false FileAccess: true SocketAccess: true Working Dir /builds/workspace/Pharo 1.2/Pharo-1.2-AfterRunningTests Trusted Dir /builds/workspace/Pharo 1.2/Pharo-1.2-AfterRunningTests/secure Untrusted Dir /builds/workspace/Pharo 1.2/Pharo-1.2-AfterRunningTests/My Squeak UndefinedObject(Object)>>doesNotUnderstand: #evaluateMessageSend: Receiver: nil Arguments and temporary variables: <<error during printing> Receiver's instance variables: nil MockObject>>evaluateMessage: Receiver: <<error during printing>> Arguments and temporary variables: aMessage: someMessage Receiver's instance variables: <<error during printing>> MockObject(MocketryProxy)>>doesNotUnderstand: #someMessage Receiver: <<error during printing>> Arguments and temporary variables: aMessage: someMessage Receiver's instance variables: <<error during printing>> [mock1 someMessage] in [[mock1 someMessage] fork. Processor yield] in MessageContextSpecAcceptanceTests>>testShouldBeAsynchronousIfMessageInOtherProcess Receiver: MessageContextSpecAcceptanceTests>>#testShouldBeAsynchronousIfMessageInOtherProcess Arguments and temporary variables: Receiver's instance variables: testSelector: #testShouldBeAsynchronousIfMessageInOtherProcess mock1: nil mock2: nil [self value. Processor terminateActive] in BlockClosure>>newProcess Receiver: [mock1 someMessage] Arguments and temporary variables: Receiver's instance variables: outerContext: [[mock1 someMessage] fork. Processor yield] in MessageContextSpe...etc... startpc: 55 numArgs: 0 --- The full stack --- UndefinedObject(Object)>>doesNotUnderstand: #evaluateMessageSend: MockObject>>evaluateMessage: MockObject(MocketryProxy)>>doesNotUnderstand: #someMessage [mock1 someMessage] in [[mock1 someMessage] fork. Processor yield] in MessageContextSpecAcceptanceTests>>testShouldBeAsynchronousIfMessageInOtherProcess [self value. Processor terminateActive] in BlockClosure>>newProcess

1 2