Mailing List Archive

Current httpd24threading branch problems?
Hi Fred,

could you please sum up what's the current state of httpd24threading
branch? I think you're the only one currently who knows what has to be
done before we can release it somehow.

I've tried to read the mailing list to refresh my memory, but I'm not
sure what has been fixed/done already during these 3 months.

Thanks,
Jan Kaluza

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org
Re: Current httpd24threading branch problems? [ In reply to ]
On 17 April 2014 07:46, Jan Kaluža <jkaluza@redhat.com> wrote:
> Hi Fred,
>
> could you please sum up what's the current state of httpd24threading branch?
> I think you're the only one currently who knows what has to be done before
> we can release it somehow.
>
> I've tried to read the mailing list to refresh my memory, but I'm not sure
> what has been fixed/done already during these 3 months.
>

I think it's mostly been me and you working on it, actually!

I've said before that I need to fix some Windows test failures and
then (assuming *nix doesn't have any outstanding of its own) I'll be
happy to merge this branch into trunk and we can get a release going.

My current list of failures is:

Test Summary Report
-------------------
t\compat\conn_rec.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 0)
[new failure for 2.4.x]
Parse errors: Bad plan. You planned 4 tests but ran 2.
t\modperl\local_env.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
Failed test: 6
t\modperl\merge.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 10 Failed: 3)
Failed tests: 3, 6, 9
t\modperl\merge2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 10 Failed: 3)
Failed tests: 3, 6, 9
t\modperl\merge3.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 10 Failed: 3)
Failed tests: 3, 6, 9
t\modules\cgi.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 5)
Failed tests: 1-5
t\modules\cgi2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 5)
Failed tests: 1-5
t\modules\cgipost.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 5)
Failed tests: 2-6
t\modules\cgipost2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 5)
Failed tests: 2-6
t\modules\cgiupload.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 2)
[with LWP only]
Failed tests: 1-2
t\modules\cgiupload2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 2)
[with LWP only]
Failed tests: 1-2
t\protocol\echo_block.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 3 Failed: 2)
[new failure for 2.4.x]
Failed tests: 2-3
t\protocol\echo_nonblock.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 3 Failed: 1)
[new failure for 2.4.x]
Failed test: 2
t\protocol\echo_timeout.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 4)
[new failure for 2.4.x]
Failed tests: 2-5
t\protocol\pseudo_http.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 13 Failed: 9)
[new failure for 2.4.x]
Failed tests: 3-8, 11-13
Files=252, Tests=2938, 848 wallclock secs ( 2.26 usr + 0.36 sys = 2.62 CPU)

The ones marked 'new failure for 2.4.x' fail with 2.4.x but not with
2.2.x so they are particularly worrying for 2.4.x support, but note
also that *none* of the above tests fail with 2.2.x when using trunk
(or mod_perl-2.08), which is also quite worrying.

What is the current state of play on *nix? Which tests, if any, fail using:

(1) httpd24threading + httpd-2.4.x
(2) httpd24threading + httpd-2.2.x
(3) trunk (or mod_perl-2.08) + httpd 2.2.x

?

If you have failures in (1) that aren't in (2), or failures in either
that aren't in (3) then we need eyes on them to try to get them fixed.
Perhaps *nix people could focus on failures that are common between
*nix and Windows, and I'll focus on Windows failures that aren't seen
on *nix?

If we can't fix things any time soon then perhaps we should take a
vote on whether to release as-is, with documentation updated to note
the currently known problems?

I am keen to see a mod_perl-2.09 with httpd-2.4.x support, but not if
it's in a buggy state (especially on *nix) that will just generate a
ton of bug reports and disappointed users.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org
Re: Current httpd24threading branch problems? [ In reply to ]
On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 12:15 AM, Steve Hay <steve.m.hay@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On 17 April 2014 07:46, Jan Kaluža <jkaluza@redhat.com> wrote:

> I've said before that I need to fix some Windows test failures and
> then (assuming *nix doesn't have any outstanding of its own) I'll be
> happy to merge this branch into trunk and we can get a release going.

>
> What is the current state of play on *nix? Which tests, if any, fail using:
>
> (1) httpd24threading + httpd-2.4.x
> (2) httpd24threading + httpd-2.2.x
> (3) trunk (or mod_perl-2.08) + httpd 2.2.x
>
> ?

I haven't been able to get a build on *nix since the MPM parameter is
no longer available in 2.4 apxs. I looked at getting that from the
httpd executable - I recall Steve saying that works for windows as
well.

Probably a few hours of hacking - just need to find the tuits.

>
> If you have failures in (1) that aren't in (2), or failures in either
> that aren't in (3) then we need eyes on them to try to get them fixed.
> Perhaps *nix people could focus on failures that are common between
> *nix and Windows, and I'll focus on Windows failures that aren't seen
> on *nix?
>
> If we can't fix things any time soon then perhaps we should take a
> vote on whether to release as-is, with documentation updated to note
> the currently known problems?
>
> I am keen to see a mod_perl-2.09 with httpd-2.4.x support, but not if
> it's in a buggy state (especially on *nix) that will just generate a
> ton of bug reports and disappointed users.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org
Re: Current httpd24threading branch problems? [ In reply to ]
On 04/17/2014 09:15 AM, Steve Hay wrote:
> On 17 April 2014 07:46, Jan Kaluža <jkaluza@redhat.com> wrote:
>> Hi Fred,
>>
>> could you please sum up what's the current state of httpd24threading branch?
>> I think you're the only one currently who knows what has to be done before
>> we can release it somehow.
>>
>> I've tried to read the mailing list to refresh my memory, but I'm not sure
>> what has been fixed/done already during these 3 months.
>>
>
> I think it's mostly been me and you working on it, actually!

Oops, sorry! :)

> I've said before that I need to fix some Windows test failures and
> then (assuming *nix doesn't have any outstanding of its own) I'll be
> happy to merge this branch into trunk and we can get a release going.

Ok, I will re-run the tests with latest httpd24threading next week on
Fedora and write my findings here.

> My current list of failures is:
>
> Test Summary Report
> -------------------
> t\compat\conn_rec.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 0)
> [new failure for 2.4.x]
> Parse errors: Bad plan. You planned 4 tests but ran 2.
> t\modperl\local_env.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
> Failed test: 6
> t\modperl\merge.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 10 Failed: 3)
> Failed tests: 3, 6, 9
> t\modperl\merge2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 10 Failed: 3)
> Failed tests: 3, 6, 9
> t\modperl\merge3.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 10 Failed: 3)
> Failed tests: 3, 6, 9
> t\modules\cgi.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 5)
> Failed tests: 1-5
> t\modules\cgi2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 5)
> Failed tests: 1-5
> t\modules\cgipost.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 5)
> Failed tests: 2-6
> t\modules\cgipost2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 5)
> Failed tests: 2-6
> t\modules\cgiupload.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 2)
> [with LWP only]
> Failed tests: 1-2
> t\modules\cgiupload2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 2)
> [with LWP only]
> Failed tests: 1-2
> t\protocol\echo_block.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 3 Failed: 2)
> [new failure for 2.4.x]
> Failed tests: 2-3
> t\protocol\echo_nonblock.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 3 Failed: 1)
> [new failure for 2.4.x]
> Failed test: 2
> t\protocol\echo_timeout.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 4)
> [new failure for 2.4.x]
> Failed tests: 2-5
> t\protocol\pseudo_http.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 13 Failed: 9)
> [new failure for 2.4.x]
> Failed tests: 3-8, 11-13
> Files=252, Tests=2938, 848 wallclock secs ( 2.26 usr + 0.36 sys = 2.62 CPU)
>
> The ones marked 'new failure for 2.4.x' fail with 2.4.x but not with
> 2.2.x so they are particularly worrying for 2.4.x support, but note
> also that *none* of the above tests fail with 2.2.x when using trunk
> (or mod_perl-2.08), which is also quite worrying.
>
> What is the current state of play on *nix? Which tests, if any, fail using:
>
> (1) httpd24threading + httpd-2.4.x
> (2) httpd24threading + httpd-2.2.x
> (3) trunk (or mod_perl-2.08) + httpd 2.2.x
>
> ?

As said above, I will answer these questions next week, it will take
some time to try all combinations.

> If you have failures in (1) that aren't in (2), or failures in either
> that aren't in (3) then we need eyes on them to try to get them fixed.
> Perhaps *nix people could focus on failures that are common between
> *nix and Windows, and I'll focus on Windows failures that aren't seen
> on *nix?

That sounds like a plan. I definitely won't fix any Windows-only
failures (no machine, no knowledge), but I'm happy to fix *nix specific
problems. Unfortunately, I *think* that most of the broken tests are
Windows specific, but lets see once I will try latest httpd24threading
branch.

> If we can't fix things any time soon then perhaps we should take a
> vote on whether to release as-is, with documentation updated to note
> the currently known problems?

That's mostly question of whether we want to fully support Windows. Last
time I've checked there were no failing tests on Linux and if I remember
well, mod_perl in Linux with httpd-2.4 was not in bad shape.

I have no idea how hard will it be to fix Windows-specific errors, but
if it won't be possible to fix them in some sensible time, I would vote
for releasing some rc without windows support or say that 2.0.9 is not
going to work with httpd-2.4 on Windows (while keeping 2.0.9 and
httpd-2.2 still supported on Windows).

> I am keen to see a mod_perl-2.09 with httpd-2.4.x support, but not if
> it's in a buggy state (especially on *nix) that will just generate a
> ton of bug reports and disappointed users.

Lets see what's the current state of it next week, but I think there
won't be any big show-stoppers on Linux. At least it works reasonably
well in Fedora.

Regards,
Jan Kaluza



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org
Re: Current httpd24threading branch problems? [ In reply to ]
On 04/17/2014 09:15 AM, Steve Hay wrote:
> On 17 April 2014 07:46, Jan Kaluža <jkaluza@redhat.com> wrote:
>> Hi Fred,
>>
>> could you please sum up what's the current state of httpd24threading branch?
>> I think you're the only one currently who knows what has to be done before
>> we can release it somehow.
>>
>> I've tried to read the mailing list to refresh my memory, but I'm not sure
>> what has been fixed/done already during these 3 months.
>>
>
> I think it's mostly been me and you working on it, actually!
>
> I've said before that I need to fix some Windows test failures and
> then (assuming *nix doesn't have any outstanding of its own) I'll be
> happy to merge this branch into trunk and we can get a release going.
>
> My current list of failures is:
>
> Test Summary Report
> -------------------
> t\compat\conn_rec.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 0)
> [new failure for 2.4.x]
> Parse errors: Bad plan. You planned 4 tests but ran 2.
> t\modperl\local_env.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
> Failed test: 6
> t\modperl\merge.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 10 Failed: 3)
> Failed tests: 3, 6, 9
> t\modperl\merge2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 10 Failed: 3)
> Failed tests: 3, 6, 9
> t\modperl\merge3.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 10 Failed: 3)
> Failed tests: 3, 6, 9
> t\modules\cgi.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 5)
> Failed tests: 1-5
> t\modules\cgi2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 5)
> Failed tests: 1-5
> t\modules\cgipost.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 5)
> Failed tests: 2-6
> t\modules\cgipost2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 5)
> Failed tests: 2-6
> t\modules\cgiupload.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 2)
> [with LWP only]
> Failed tests: 1-2
> t\modules\cgiupload2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 2)
> [with LWP only]
> Failed tests: 1-2
> t\protocol\echo_block.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 3 Failed: 2)
> [new failure for 2.4.x]
> Failed tests: 2-3
> t\protocol\echo_nonblock.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 3 Failed: 1)
> [new failure for 2.4.x]
> Failed test: 2
> t\protocol\echo_timeout.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 4)
> [new failure for 2.4.x]
> Failed tests: 2-5
> t\protocol\pseudo_http.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 13 Failed: 9)
> [new failure for 2.4.x]
> Failed tests: 3-8, 11-13
> Files=252, Tests=2938, 848 wallclock secs ( 2.26 usr + 0.36 sys = 2.62 CPU)
>
> The ones marked 'new failure for 2.4.x' fail with 2.4.x but not with
> 2.2.x so they are particularly worrying for 2.4.x support, but note
> also that *none* of the above tests fail with 2.2.x when using trunk
> (or mod_perl-2.08), which is also quite worrying.
>
> What is the current state of play on *nix? Which tests, if any, fail using:

Hi,

I've had finally some time to do the tests. It's run on Fedora 20,
httpd-2.4.9 and httpd-2.2.23. See below.

> (1) httpd24threading + httpd-2.4.x

t/compat/conn_rec.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 0)
Parse errors: Bad plan. You planned 4 tests but ran 2.

^ This is expected problem for now. It's caused by renamed "remote_ip"
and "remote_addr" in httpd-2.4. I was not able to put proper version
check in this test (probably my lack of Perl knowledge).

t/modules/cgi.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 2)
Failed tests: 2, 5
t/modules/cgi2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 1)
Failed test: 3
t/modules/cgipost.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
Failed test: 4
t/modules/cgipost2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
Failed test: 4
t/modules/cgiupload.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
Failed test: 1
t/modules/cgiupload2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
Failed test: 2

^ All these are caused by r1491887 -
/perl/modperl/trunk/t/modperl/local_env.t. Should we revert this commit?

> (2) httpd24threading + httpd-2.2.x

t/api/server_const.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 2)
Failed tests: 5-6
t/modperl/setupenv2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 23 Failed: 7)
Failed tests: 17-23
t/modules/cgi.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 2)
Failed tests: 2, 5
t/modules/cgi2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 1)
Failed test: 3
t/modules/cgipost.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
Failed test: 4
t/modules/cgipost2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
Failed test: 4
t/modules/cgiupload.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
Failed test: 1
t/modules/cgiupload2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
Failed test: 2

CGI tests fails for the same reason as in the previous case. Other tests
fail *also* for trunk + httpd-2.2.x (see below).

> (3) trunk (or mod_perl-2.08) + httpd 2.2.x

trunk + httpd-2.2.23:

t/api/server_const.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 2)
Failed tests: 5-6
t/modperl/setupenv2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 23 Failed: 7)
Failed tests: 17-23
t/modules/cgi.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 2)
Failed tests: 2, 5
t/modules/cgi2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 1)
Failed test: 3
t/modules/cgipost.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
Failed test: 4
t/modules/cgipost2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
Failed test: 4
t/modules/cgiupload.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
Failed test: 1
t/modules/cgiupload2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
Failed test: 2

Same as httpd-2.2.23 + httpd24threading branch.

> ?
>
> If you have failures in (1) that aren't in (2), or failures in either
> that aren't in (3) then we need eyes on them to try to get them fixed.
> Perhaps *nix people could focus on failures that are common between
> *nix and Windows, and I'll focus on Windows failures that aren't seen
> on *nix?

From the tests above it looks to me that tests failing for
httpd24threading branch are not httpd-2.4.x related on Linux. The same
tests failing with httpd-2.2.x and trunk fail also with httpd-2.4.x and
httpd24therading branch.

I think from my point of view on Linux, it should be possible to merge
httpd24threading branch with trunk without introducing any regression
which would be visible on our test-suite.

> If we can't fix things any time soon then perhaps we should take a
> vote on whether to release as-is, with documentation updated to note
> the currently known problems?

I'm not able to help with Windows specific bugs because of lack of
knowledge and time for that. But if we fix the bugs mentioned above,
maybe we could release some alpha mod_perl with initial httpd-2.4
support and see what happens.

I have no knowledge to evaluate how hard it will be to fix mod_perl with
httpd-2.4 on Windows. If I remember well, even httpd-2.4.x itself had
few 2.4.x releases with some Windows related bugs...

> I am keen to see a mod_perl-2.09 with httpd-2.4.x support, but not if
> it's in a buggy state (especially on *nix) that will just generate a
> ton of bug reports and disappointed users.

If the tests are passing and we don't have more people testing trunk, we
will have to consider releasing something to get more testers and more
attention.

We have httpd24threading branch in current Fedora for some time and
there are no bug reports yet. Some people within Red Hat are using
mod_perl with httpd-2.4 too.

> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org
>

Regards,
Jan Kaluza


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org
Re: Current httpd24threading branch problems? [ In reply to ]
On 29 April 2014 11:40, Jan Kaluža <jkaluza@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 04/17/2014 09:15 AM, Steve Hay wrote:
>>
>> On 17 April 2014 07:46, Jan Kaluža <jkaluza@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Fred,
>>>
>>> could you please sum up what's the current state of httpd24threading
>>> branch?
>>> I think you're the only one currently who knows what has to be done
>>> before
>>> we can release it somehow.
>>>
>>> I've tried to read the mailing list to refresh my memory, but I'm not
>>> sure
>>> what has been fixed/done already during these 3 months.
>>>
>>
>> I think it's mostly been me and you working on it, actually!
>>
>> I've said before that I need to fix some Windows test failures and
>> then (assuming *nix doesn't have any outstanding of its own) I'll be
>> happy to merge this branch into trunk and we can get a release going.
>>
>> My current list of failures is:
>>
>> Test Summary Report
>> -------------------
>> t\compat\conn_rec.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 0)
>> [new failure for 2.4.x]
>> Parse errors: Bad plan. You planned 4 tests but ran 2.
>> t\modperl\local_env.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
>> Failed test: 6
>> t\modperl\merge.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 10 Failed: 3)
>> Failed tests: 3, 6, 9
>> t\modperl\merge2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 10 Failed: 3)
>> Failed tests: 3, 6, 9
>> t\modperl\merge3.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 10 Failed: 3)
>> Failed tests: 3, 6, 9
>> t\modules\cgi.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 5)
>> Failed tests: 1-5
>> t\modules\cgi2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 5)
>> Failed tests: 1-5
>> t\modules\cgipost.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 5)
>> Failed tests: 2-6
>> t\modules\cgipost2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 5)
>> Failed tests: 2-6
>> t\modules\cgiupload.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 2)
>> [with LWP only]
>> Failed tests: 1-2
>> t\modules\cgiupload2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 2)
>> [with LWP only]
>> Failed tests: 1-2
>> t\protocol\echo_block.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 3 Failed: 2)
>> [new failure for 2.4.x]
>> Failed tests: 2-3
>> t\protocol\echo_nonblock.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 3 Failed: 1)
>> [new failure for 2.4.x]
>> Failed test: 2
>> t\protocol\echo_timeout.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 4)
>> [new failure for 2.4.x]
>> Failed tests: 2-5
>> t\protocol\pseudo_http.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 13 Failed: 9)
>> [new failure for 2.4.x]
>> Failed tests: 3-8, 11-13
>> Files=252, Tests=2938, 848 wallclock secs ( 2.26 usr + 0.36 sys = 2.62
>> CPU)
>>
>> The ones marked 'new failure for 2.4.x' fail with 2.4.x but not with
>> 2.2.x so they are particularly worrying for 2.4.x support, but note
>> also that *none* of the above tests fail with 2.2.x when using trunk
>> (or mod_perl-2.08), which is also quite worrying.
>>
>> What is the current state of play on *nix? Which tests, if any, fail
>> using:
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I've had finally some time to do the tests. It's run on Fedora 20,
> httpd-2.4.9 and httpd-2.2.23. See below.
>
>> (1) httpd24threading + httpd-2.4.x
>
>
> t/compat/conn_rec.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 0)
>
> Parse errors: Bad plan. You planned 4 tests but ran 2.
>
> ^ This is expected problem for now. It's caused by renamed "remote_ip" and
> "remote_addr" in httpd-2.4. I was not able to put proper version check in
> this test (probably my lack of Perl knowledge).
>
> t/modules/cgi.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 2)
> Failed tests: 2, 5
> t/modules/cgi2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 1)
> Failed test: 3
> t/modules/cgipost.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
> Failed test: 4
> t/modules/cgipost2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
> Failed test: 4
> t/modules/cgiupload.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
> Failed test: 1
> t/modules/cgiupload2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
> Failed test: 2
>
> ^ All these are caused by r1491887 -
> /perl/modperl/trunk/t/modperl/local_env.t. Should we revert this commit?
>
>> (2) httpd24threading + httpd-2.2.x
>
>
> t/api/server_const.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 2)
> Failed tests: 5-6
> t/modperl/setupenv2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 23 Failed: 7)
> Failed tests: 17-23
> t/modules/cgi.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 2)
> Failed tests: 2, 5
> t/modules/cgi2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 1)
> Failed test: 3
> t/modules/cgipost.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
> Failed test: 4
> t/modules/cgipost2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
> Failed test: 4
> t/modules/cgiupload.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
> Failed test: 1
> t/modules/cgiupload2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
> Failed test: 2
>
> CGI tests fails for the same reason as in the previous case. Other tests
> fail *also* for trunk + httpd-2.2.x (see below).
>
>
>> (3) trunk (or mod_perl-2.08) + httpd 2.2.x
>
>
> trunk + httpd-2.2.23:
>
> t/api/server_const.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 2)
> Failed tests: 5-6
> t/modperl/setupenv2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 23 Failed: 7)
> Failed tests: 17-23
> t/modules/cgi.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 2)
> Failed tests: 2, 5
> t/modules/cgi2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 1)
> Failed test: 3
> t/modules/cgipost.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
> Failed test: 4
> t/modules/cgipost2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
> Failed test: 4
> t/modules/cgiupload.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
> Failed test: 1
> t/modules/cgiupload2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
> Failed test: 2
>
> Same as httpd-2.2.23 + httpd24threading branch.
>
>
>> ?
>>
>> If you have failures in (1) that aren't in (2), or failures in either
>> that aren't in (3) then we need eyes on them to try to get them fixed.
>> Perhaps *nix people could focus on failures that are common between
>> *nix and Windows, and I'll focus on Windows failures that aren't seen
>> on *nix?
>
>
> From the tests above it looks to me that tests failing for httpd24threading
> branch are not httpd-2.4.x related on Linux. The same tests failing with
> httpd-2.2.x and trunk fail also with httpd-2.4.x and httpd24therading
> branch.
>
> I think from my point of view on Linux, it should be possible to merge
> httpd24threading branch with trunk without introducing any regression which
> would be visible on our test-suite.
>
>
>> If we can't fix things any time soon then perhaps we should take a
>> vote on whether to release as-is, with documentation updated to note
>> the currently known problems?
>
>
> I'm not able to help with Windows specific bugs because of lack of knowledge
> and time for that. But if we fix the bugs mentioned above, maybe we could
> release some alpha mod_perl with initial httpd-2.4 support and see what
> happens.
>
> I have no knowledge to evaluate how hard it will be to fix mod_perl with
> httpd-2.4 on Windows. If I remember well, even httpd-2.4.x itself had few
> 2.4.x releases with some Windows related bugs...
>
>
>> I am keen to see a mod_perl-2.09 with httpd-2.4.x support, but not if
>> it's in a buggy state (especially on *nix) that will just generate a
>> ton of bug reports and disappointed users.
>
>
> If the tests are passing and we don't have more people testing trunk, we
> will have to consider releasing something to get more testers and more
> attention.
>
> We have httpd24threading branch in current Fedora for some time and there
> are no bug reports yet. Some people within Red Hat are using mod_perl with
> httpd-2.4 too.
>

Thanks for testing, and sorry I've taken so long to get back.

So it looks like you're happy on Linux, except for one known failure
(compat/conn_rec.t) and a bunch of failures caused by r1491887.

I will try testing with that change reverted and see what results I
get. Presumably it will fix the same things that it fixes for you; I'm
curious to see whether it also fixes anything else.

Aside from that, we have two sets of failures on Windows only:

- modperl/local_env.t & merge*.t failing with either httpd-2.2 or 2.4,
but they work with trunk (on httpd-2.2, obviously)

- protocol/echo_block.t, echo_nonblock.t, echo_timeout.t &
pseudo_httpd.t failing with httpd-2.4 only

I've looked at all of these before and made little headway. I will
look again while I play with reverting r1491887, but otherwise I fear
we're going to have to release 2.0.9 with these known Windows failures
so that it doesn't hold up an otherwise good Linux release any longer.

So I will probably start merging httpd24threading back to trunk soon
if there are no objections...

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org
Re: Current httpd24threading branch problems? [ In reply to ]
On 05/13/2014 07:29 PM, Steve Hay wrote:
> On 29 April 2014 11:40, Jan Kaluža <jkaluza@redhat.com> wrote:
>> On 04/17/2014 09:15 AM, Steve Hay wrote:
>>>
>>> On 17 April 2014 07:46, Jan Kaluža <jkaluza@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Fred,
>>>>
>>>> could you please sum up what's the current state of httpd24threading
>>>> branch?
>>>> I think you're the only one currently who knows what has to be done
>>>> before
>>>> we can release it somehow.
>>>>
>>>> I've tried to read the mailing list to refresh my memory, but I'm not
>>>> sure
>>>> what has been fixed/done already during these 3 months.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I think it's mostly been me and you working on it, actually!
>>>
>>> I've said before that I need to fix some Windows test failures and
>>> then (assuming *nix doesn't have any outstanding of its own) I'll be
>>> happy to merge this branch into trunk and we can get a release going.
>>>
>>> My current list of failures is:
>>>
>>> Test Summary Report
>>> -------------------
>>> t\compat\conn_rec.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 0)
>>> [new failure for 2.4.x]
>>> Parse errors: Bad plan. You planned 4 tests but ran 2.
>>> t\modperl\local_env.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
>>> Failed test: 6
>>> t\modperl\merge.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 10 Failed: 3)
>>> Failed tests: 3, 6, 9
>>> t\modperl\merge2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 10 Failed: 3)
>>> Failed tests: 3, 6, 9
>>> t\modperl\merge3.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 10 Failed: 3)
>>> Failed tests: 3, 6, 9
>>> t\modules\cgi.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 5)
>>> Failed tests: 1-5
>>> t\modules\cgi2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 5)
>>> Failed tests: 1-5
>>> t\modules\cgipost.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 5)
>>> Failed tests: 2-6
>>> t\modules\cgipost2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 5)
>>> Failed tests: 2-6
>>> t\modules\cgiupload.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 2)
>>> [with LWP only]
>>> Failed tests: 1-2
>>> t\modules\cgiupload2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 2)
>>> [with LWP only]
>>> Failed tests: 1-2
>>> t\protocol\echo_block.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 3 Failed: 2)
>>> [new failure for 2.4.x]
>>> Failed tests: 2-3
>>> t\protocol\echo_nonblock.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 3 Failed: 1)
>>> [new failure for 2.4.x]
>>> Failed test: 2
>>> t\protocol\echo_timeout.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 4)
>>> [new failure for 2.4.x]
>>> Failed tests: 2-5
>>> t\protocol\pseudo_http.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 13 Failed: 9)
>>> [new failure for 2.4.x]
>>> Failed tests: 3-8, 11-13
>>> Files=252, Tests=2938, 848 wallclock secs ( 2.26 usr + 0.36 sys = 2.62
>>> CPU)
>>>
>>> The ones marked 'new failure for 2.4.x' fail with 2.4.x but not with
>>> 2.2.x so they are particularly worrying for 2.4.x support, but note
>>> also that *none* of the above tests fail with 2.2.x when using trunk
>>> (or mod_perl-2.08), which is also quite worrying.
>>>
>>> What is the current state of play on *nix? Which tests, if any, fail
>>> using:
>>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I've had finally some time to do the tests. It's run on Fedora 20,
>> httpd-2.4.9 and httpd-2.2.23. See below.
>>
>>> (1) httpd24threading + httpd-2.4.x
>>
>>
>> t/compat/conn_rec.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 0)
>>
>> Parse errors: Bad plan. You planned 4 tests but ran 2.
>>
>> ^ This is expected problem for now. It's caused by renamed "remote_ip" and
>> "remote_addr" in httpd-2.4. I was not able to put proper version check in
>> this test (probably my lack of Perl knowledge).
>>
>> t/modules/cgi.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 2)
>> Failed tests: 2, 5
>> t/modules/cgi2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 1)
>> Failed test: 3
>> t/modules/cgipost.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
>> Failed test: 4
>> t/modules/cgipost2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
>> Failed test: 4
>> t/modules/cgiupload.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
>> Failed test: 1
>> t/modules/cgiupload2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
>> Failed test: 2
>>
>> ^ All these are caused by r1491887 -
>> /perl/modperl/trunk/t/modperl/local_env.t. Should we revert this commit?
>>
>>> (2) httpd24threading + httpd-2.2.x
>>
>>
>> t/api/server_const.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 2)
>> Failed tests: 5-6
>> t/modperl/setupenv2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 23 Failed: 7)
>> Failed tests: 17-23
>> t/modules/cgi.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 2)
>> Failed tests: 2, 5
>> t/modules/cgi2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 1)
>> Failed test: 3
>> t/modules/cgipost.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
>> Failed test: 4
>> t/modules/cgipost2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
>> Failed test: 4
>> t/modules/cgiupload.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
>> Failed test: 1
>> t/modules/cgiupload2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
>> Failed test: 2
>>
>> CGI tests fails for the same reason as in the previous case. Other tests
>> fail *also* for trunk + httpd-2.2.x (see below).
>>
>>
>>> (3) trunk (or mod_perl-2.08) + httpd 2.2.x
>>
>>
>> trunk + httpd-2.2.23:
>>
>> t/api/server_const.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 2)
>> Failed tests: 5-6
>> t/modperl/setupenv2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 23 Failed: 7)
>> Failed tests: 17-23
>> t/modules/cgi.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 2)
>> Failed tests: 2, 5
>> t/modules/cgi2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 1)
>> Failed test: 3
>> t/modules/cgipost.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
>> Failed test: 4
>> t/modules/cgipost2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
>> Failed test: 4
>> t/modules/cgiupload.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
>> Failed test: 1
>> t/modules/cgiupload2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
>> Failed test: 2
>>
>> Same as httpd-2.2.23 + httpd24threading branch.
>>
>>
>>> ?
>>>
>>> If you have failures in (1) that aren't in (2), or failures in either
>>> that aren't in (3) then we need eyes on them to try to get them fixed.
>>> Perhaps *nix people could focus on failures that are common between
>>> *nix and Windows, and I'll focus on Windows failures that aren't seen
>>> on *nix?
>>
>>
>> From the tests above it looks to me that tests failing for httpd24threading
>> branch are not httpd-2.4.x related on Linux. The same tests failing with
>> httpd-2.2.x and trunk fail also with httpd-2.4.x and httpd24therading
>> branch.
>>
>> I think from my point of view on Linux, it should be possible to merge
>> httpd24threading branch with trunk without introducing any regression which
>> would be visible on our test-suite.
>>
>>
>>> If we can't fix things any time soon then perhaps we should take a
>>> vote on whether to release as-is, with documentation updated to note
>>> the currently known problems?
>>
>>
>> I'm not able to help with Windows specific bugs because of lack of knowledge
>> and time for that. But if we fix the bugs mentioned above, maybe we could
>> release some alpha mod_perl with initial httpd-2.4 support and see what
>> happens.
>>
>> I have no knowledge to evaluate how hard it will be to fix mod_perl with
>> httpd-2.4 on Windows. If I remember well, even httpd-2.4.x itself had few
>> 2.4.x releases with some Windows related bugs...
>>
>>
>>> I am keen to see a mod_perl-2.09 with httpd-2.4.x support, but not if
>>> it's in a buggy state (especially on *nix) that will just generate a
>>> ton of bug reports and disappointed users.
>>
>>
>> If the tests are passing and we don't have more people testing trunk, we
>> will have to consider releasing something to get more testers and more
>> attention.
>>
>> We have httpd24threading branch in current Fedora for some time and there
>> are no bug reports yet. Some people within Red Hat are using mod_perl with
>> httpd-2.4 too.
>>
>
> Thanks for testing, and sorry I've taken so long to get back.
>
> So it looks like you're happy on Linux, except for one known failure
> (compat/conn_rec.t) and a bunch of failures caused by r1491887.
>
> I will try testing with that change reverted and see what results I
> get. Presumably it will fix the same things that it fixes for you; I'm
> curious to see whether it also fixes anything else.
>
> Aside from that, we have two sets of failures on Windows only:
>
> - modperl/local_env.t & merge*.t failing with either httpd-2.2 or 2.4,
> but they work with trunk (on httpd-2.2, obviously)
>
> - protocol/echo_block.t, echo_nonblock.t, echo_timeout.t &
> pseudo_httpd.t failing with httpd-2.4 only
>
> I've looked at all of these before and made little headway. I will
> look again while I play with reverting r1491887, but otherwise I fear
> we're going to have to release 2.0.9 with these known Windows failures
> so that it doesn't hold up an otherwise good Linux release any longer.
>
> So I will probably start merging httpd24threading back to trunk soon
> if there are no objections...

That sounds great :). From my point of view it's good plan. I would vote
for releasing some alpha version so we could get some more testing like
the one provided by Alexander earlier this week.

For me the Linux version is working properly on Fedora, but on different
distributions and systems we could find out more bugs like that one, but
without anyone else testing httpd24threading branch it will be quite
hard to move with httpd-2.4 support.

Regards,
Jan Kaluza


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org
Re: Current httpd24threading branch problems? [ In reply to ]
On 14 May 2014 09:27, Jan Kaluža <jkaluza@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 05/13/2014 07:29 PM, Steve Hay wrote:
>>
>> On 29 April 2014 11:40, Jan Kaluža <jkaluza@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 04/17/2014 09:15 AM, Steve Hay wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 17 April 2014 07:46, Jan Kaluža <jkaluza@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Fred,
>>>>>
>>>>> could you please sum up what's the current state of httpd24threading
>>>>> branch?
>>>>> I think you're the only one currently who knows what has to be done
>>>>> before
>>>>> we can release it somehow.
>>>>>
>>>>> I've tried to read the mailing list to refresh my memory, but I'm not
>>>>> sure
>>>>> what has been fixed/done already during these 3 months.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I think it's mostly been me and you working on it, actually!
>>>>
>>>> I've said before that I need to fix some Windows test failures and
>>>> then (assuming *nix doesn't have any outstanding of its own) I'll be
>>>> happy to merge this branch into trunk and we can get a release going.
>>>>
>>>> My current list of failures is:
>>>>
>>>> Test Summary Report
>>>> -------------------
>>>> t\compat\conn_rec.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 0)
>>>> [new failure for 2.4.x]
>>>> Parse errors: Bad plan. You planned 4 tests but ran 2.
>>>> t\modperl\local_env.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
>>>> Failed test: 6
>>>> t\modperl\merge.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 10 Failed: 3)
>>>> Failed tests: 3, 6, 9
>>>> t\modperl\merge2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 10 Failed: 3)
>>>> Failed tests: 3, 6, 9
>>>> t\modperl\merge3.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 10 Failed: 3)
>>>> Failed tests: 3, 6, 9
>>>> t\modules\cgi.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 5)
>>>> Failed tests: 1-5
>>>> t\modules\cgi2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 5)
>>>> Failed tests: 1-5
>>>> t\modules\cgipost.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 5)
>>>> Failed tests: 2-6
>>>> t\modules\cgipost2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 5)
>>>> Failed tests: 2-6
>>>> t\modules\cgiupload.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 2)
>>>> [with LWP only]
>>>> Failed tests: 1-2
>>>> t\modules\cgiupload2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 2)
>>>> [with LWP only]
>>>> Failed tests: 1-2
>>>> t\protocol\echo_block.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 3 Failed: 2)
>>>> [new failure for 2.4.x]
>>>> Failed tests: 2-3
>>>> t\protocol\echo_nonblock.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 3 Failed: 1)
>>>> [new failure for 2.4.x]
>>>> Failed test: 2
>>>> t\protocol\echo_timeout.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 4)
>>>> [new failure for 2.4.x]
>>>> Failed tests: 2-5
>>>> t\protocol\pseudo_http.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 13 Failed: 9)
>>>> [new failure for 2.4.x]
>>>> Failed tests: 3-8, 11-13
>>>> Files=252, Tests=2938, 848 wallclock secs ( 2.26 usr + 0.36 sys = 2.62
>>>> CPU)
>>>>
>>>> The ones marked 'new failure for 2.4.x' fail with 2.4.x but not with
>>>> 2.2.x so they are particularly worrying for 2.4.x support, but note
>>>> also that *none* of the above tests fail with 2.2.x when using trunk
>>>> (or mod_perl-2.08), which is also quite worrying.
>>>>
>>>> What is the current state of play on *nix? Which tests, if any, fail
>>>> using:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I've had finally some time to do the tests. It's run on Fedora 20,
>>> httpd-2.4.9 and httpd-2.2.23. See below.
>>>
>>>> (1) httpd24threading + httpd-2.4.x
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> t/compat/conn_rec.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 0)
>>>
>>> Parse errors: Bad plan. You planned 4 tests but ran 2.
>>>
>>> ^ This is expected problem for now. It's caused by renamed "remote_ip"
>>> and
>>> "remote_addr" in httpd-2.4. I was not able to put proper version check in
>>> this test (probably my lack of Perl knowledge).
>>>
>>> t/modules/cgi.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 2)
>>> Failed tests: 2, 5
>>> t/modules/cgi2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 1)
>>> Failed test: 3
>>> t/modules/cgipost.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
>>> Failed test: 4
>>> t/modules/cgipost2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
>>> Failed test: 4
>>> t/modules/cgiupload.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
>>> Failed test: 1
>>> t/modules/cgiupload2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
>>> Failed test: 2
>>>
>>> ^ All these are caused by r1491887 -
>>> /perl/modperl/trunk/t/modperl/local_env.t. Should we revert this commit?
>>>
>>>> (2) httpd24threading + httpd-2.2.x
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> t/api/server_const.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 2)
>>> Failed tests: 5-6
>>> t/modperl/setupenv2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 23 Failed: 7)
>>> Failed tests: 17-23
>>> t/modules/cgi.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 2)
>>> Failed tests: 2, 5
>>> t/modules/cgi2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 1)
>>> Failed test: 3
>>> t/modules/cgipost.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
>>> Failed test: 4
>>> t/modules/cgipost2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
>>> Failed test: 4
>>> t/modules/cgiupload.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
>>> Failed test: 1
>>> t/modules/cgiupload2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
>>> Failed test: 2
>>>
>>> CGI tests fails for the same reason as in the previous case. Other tests
>>> fail *also* for trunk + httpd-2.2.x (see below).
>>>
>>>
>>>> (3) trunk (or mod_perl-2.08) + httpd 2.2.x
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> trunk + httpd-2.2.23:
>>>
>>> t/api/server_const.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 2)
>>> Failed tests: 5-6
>>> t/modperl/setupenv2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 23 Failed: 7)
>>> Failed tests: 17-23
>>> t/modules/cgi.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 2)
>>> Failed tests: 2, 5
>>> t/modules/cgi2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 1)
>>> Failed test: 3
>>> t/modules/cgipost.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
>>> Failed test: 4
>>> t/modules/cgipost2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
>>> Failed test: 4
>>> t/modules/cgiupload.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
>>> Failed test: 1
>>> t/modules/cgiupload2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
>>> Failed test: 2
>>>
>>> Same as httpd-2.2.23 + httpd24threading branch.
>>>
>>>
>>>> ?
>>>>
>>>> If you have failures in (1) that aren't in (2), or failures in either
>>>> that aren't in (3) then we need eyes on them to try to get them fixed.
>>>> Perhaps *nix people could focus on failures that are common between
>>>> *nix and Windows, and I'll focus on Windows failures that aren't seen
>>>> on *nix?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From the tests above it looks to me that tests failing for
>>> httpd24threading
>>> branch are not httpd-2.4.x related on Linux. The same tests failing with
>>> httpd-2.2.x and trunk fail also with httpd-2.4.x and httpd24therading
>>> branch.
>>>
>>> I think from my point of view on Linux, it should be possible to merge
>>> httpd24threading branch with trunk without introducing any regression
>>> which
>>> would be visible on our test-suite.
>>>
>>>
>>>> If we can't fix things any time soon then perhaps we should take a
>>>> vote on whether to release as-is, with documentation updated to note
>>>> the currently known problems?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm not able to help with Windows specific bugs because of lack of
>>> knowledge
>>> and time for that. But if we fix the bugs mentioned above, maybe we could
>>> release some alpha mod_perl with initial httpd-2.4 support and see what
>>> happens.
>>>
>>> I have no knowledge to evaluate how hard it will be to fix mod_perl with
>>> httpd-2.4 on Windows. If I remember well, even httpd-2.4.x itself had few
>>> 2.4.x releases with some Windows related bugs...
>>>
>>>
>>>> I am keen to see a mod_perl-2.09 with httpd-2.4.x support, but not if
>>>> it's in a buggy state (especially on *nix) that will just generate a
>>>> ton of bug reports and disappointed users.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> If the tests are passing and we don't have more people testing trunk, we
>>> will have to consider releasing something to get more testers and more
>>> attention.
>>>
>>> We have httpd24threading branch in current Fedora for some time and there
>>> are no bug reports yet. Some people within Red Hat are using mod_perl
>>> with
>>> httpd-2.4 too.
>>>
>>
>> Thanks for testing, and sorry I've taken so long to get back.
>>
>> So it looks like you're happy on Linux, except for one known failure
>> (compat/conn_rec.t) and a bunch of failures caused by r1491887.
>>
>> I will try testing with that change reverted and see what results I
>> get. Presumably it will fix the same things that it fixes for you; I'm
>> curious to see whether it also fixes anything else.
>>
>> Aside from that, we have two sets of failures on Windows only:
>>
>> - modperl/local_env.t & merge*.t failing with either httpd-2.2 or 2.4,
>> but they work with trunk (on httpd-2.2, obviously)
>>
>> - protocol/echo_block.t, echo_nonblock.t, echo_timeout.t &
>> pseudo_httpd.t failing with httpd-2.4 only
>>
>> I've looked at all of these before and made little headway. I will
>> look again while I play with reverting r1491887, but otherwise I fear
>> we're going to have to release 2.0.9 with these known Windows failures
>> so that it doesn't hold up an otherwise good Linux release any longer.
>>
>> So I will probably start merging httpd24threading back to trunk soon
>> if there are no objections...
>
>
> That sounds great :). From my point of view it's good plan. I would vote for
> releasing some alpha version so we could get some more testing like the one
> provided by Alexander earlier this week.
>
> For me the Linux version is working properly on Fedora, but on different
> distributions and systems we could find out more bugs like that one, but
> without anyone else testing httpd24threading branch it will be quite hard to
> move with httpd-2.4 support.
>
> Regards,
> Jan Kaluza
>

With r1491887 reverted I now have all tests passing when using
httpd-2.2 (yay! that makes me much happier), and with httpd-2.4 I only
have the expected failure plus one of the sets of Windows-specific
failures (protocol/echo_block.t, echo_nonblock.t, echo_timeout.t &
pseudo_httpd.t).

That would be acceptable for release (I really wasn't happy with a new
release breaking 2.2 support...) so I think we'll have to revert
r1491887 for now, and then I'll get merging stuff back to trunk after
looking at that remaining group of failures again.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org
Re: Current httpd24threading branch problems? [ In reply to ]
On 05/14/2014 02:07 PM, Steve Hay wrote:
> On 14 May 2014 09:27, Jan Kaluža <jkaluza@redhat.com> wrote:
>> On 05/13/2014 07:29 PM, Steve Hay wrote:
>>>
>>> On 29 April 2014 11:40, Jan Kaluža <jkaluza@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 04/17/2014 09:15 AM, Steve Hay wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 17 April 2014 07:46, Jan Kaluža <jkaluza@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Fred,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> could you please sum up what's the current state of httpd24threading
>>>>>> branch?
>>>>>> I think you're the only one currently who knows what has to be done
>>>>>> before
>>>>>> we can release it somehow.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've tried to read the mailing list to refresh my memory, but I'm not
>>>>>> sure
>>>>>> what has been fixed/done already during these 3 months.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I think it's mostly been me and you working on it, actually!
>>>>>
>>>>> I've said before that I need to fix some Windows test failures and
>>>>> then (assuming *nix doesn't have any outstanding of its own) I'll be
>>>>> happy to merge this branch into trunk and we can get a release going.
>>>>>
>>>>> My current list of failures is:
>>>>>
>>>>> Test Summary Report
>>>>> -------------------
>>>>> t\compat\conn_rec.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 0)
>>>>> [new failure for 2.4.x]
>>>>> Parse errors: Bad plan. You planned 4 tests but ran 2.
>>>>> t\modperl\local_env.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
>>>>> Failed test: 6
>>>>> t\modperl\merge.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 10 Failed: 3)
>>>>> Failed tests: 3, 6, 9
>>>>> t\modperl\merge2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 10 Failed: 3)
>>>>> Failed tests: 3, 6, 9
>>>>> t\modperl\merge3.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 10 Failed: 3)
>>>>> Failed tests: 3, 6, 9
>>>>> t\modules\cgi.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 5)
>>>>> Failed tests: 1-5
>>>>> t\modules\cgi2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 5)
>>>>> Failed tests: 1-5
>>>>> t\modules\cgipost.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 5)
>>>>> Failed tests: 2-6
>>>>> t\modules\cgipost2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 5)
>>>>> Failed tests: 2-6
>>>>> t\modules\cgiupload.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 2)
>>>>> [with LWP only]
>>>>> Failed tests: 1-2
>>>>> t\modules\cgiupload2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 2)
>>>>> [with LWP only]
>>>>> Failed tests: 1-2
>>>>> t\protocol\echo_block.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 3 Failed: 2)
>>>>> [new failure for 2.4.x]
>>>>> Failed tests: 2-3
>>>>> t\protocol\echo_nonblock.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 3 Failed: 1)
>>>>> [new failure for 2.4.x]
>>>>> Failed test: 2
>>>>> t\protocol\echo_timeout.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 4)
>>>>> [new failure for 2.4.x]
>>>>> Failed tests: 2-5
>>>>> t\protocol\pseudo_http.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 13 Failed: 9)
>>>>> [new failure for 2.4.x]
>>>>> Failed tests: 3-8, 11-13
>>>>> Files=252, Tests=2938, 848 wallclock secs ( 2.26 usr + 0.36 sys = 2.62
>>>>> CPU)
>>>>>
>>>>> The ones marked 'new failure for 2.4.x' fail with 2.4.x but not with
>>>>> 2.2.x so they are particularly worrying for 2.4.x support, but note
>>>>> also that *none* of the above tests fail with 2.2.x when using trunk
>>>>> (or mod_perl-2.08), which is also quite worrying.
>>>>>
>>>>> What is the current state of play on *nix? Which tests, if any, fail
>>>>> using:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I've had finally some time to do the tests. It's run on Fedora 20,
>>>> httpd-2.4.9 and httpd-2.2.23. See below.
>>>>
>>>>> (1) httpd24threading + httpd-2.4.x
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> t/compat/conn_rec.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 0)
>>>>
>>>> Parse errors: Bad plan. You planned 4 tests but ran 2.
>>>>
>>>> ^ This is expected problem for now. It's caused by renamed "remote_ip"
>>>> and
>>>> "remote_addr" in httpd-2.4. I was not able to put proper version check in
>>>> this test (probably my lack of Perl knowledge).
>>>>
>>>> t/modules/cgi.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 2)
>>>> Failed tests: 2, 5
>>>> t/modules/cgi2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 1)
>>>> Failed test: 3
>>>> t/modules/cgipost.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
>>>> Failed test: 4
>>>> t/modules/cgipost2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
>>>> Failed test: 4
>>>> t/modules/cgiupload.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
>>>> Failed test: 1
>>>> t/modules/cgiupload2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
>>>> Failed test: 2
>>>>
>>>> ^ All these are caused by r1491887 -
>>>> /perl/modperl/trunk/t/modperl/local_env.t. Should we revert this commit?
>>>>
>>>>> (2) httpd24threading + httpd-2.2.x
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> t/api/server_const.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 2)
>>>> Failed tests: 5-6
>>>> t/modperl/setupenv2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 23 Failed: 7)
>>>> Failed tests: 17-23
>>>> t/modules/cgi.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 2)
>>>> Failed tests: 2, 5
>>>> t/modules/cgi2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 1)
>>>> Failed test: 3
>>>> t/modules/cgipost.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
>>>> Failed test: 4
>>>> t/modules/cgipost2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
>>>> Failed test: 4
>>>> t/modules/cgiupload.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
>>>> Failed test: 1
>>>> t/modules/cgiupload2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
>>>> Failed test: 2
>>>>
>>>> CGI tests fails for the same reason as in the previous case. Other tests
>>>> fail *also* for trunk + httpd-2.2.x (see below).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> (3) trunk (or mod_perl-2.08) + httpd 2.2.x
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> trunk + httpd-2.2.23:
>>>>
>>>> t/api/server_const.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 2)
>>>> Failed tests: 5-6
>>>> t/modperl/setupenv2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 23 Failed: 7)
>>>> Failed tests: 17-23
>>>> t/modules/cgi.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 2)
>>>> Failed tests: 2, 5
>>>> t/modules/cgi2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 1)
>>>> Failed test: 3
>>>> t/modules/cgipost.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
>>>> Failed test: 4
>>>> t/modules/cgipost2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
>>>> Failed test: 4
>>>> t/modules/cgiupload.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
>>>> Failed test: 1
>>>> t/modules/cgiupload2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
>>>> Failed test: 2
>>>>
>>>> Same as httpd-2.2.23 + httpd24threading branch.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> ?
>>>>>
>>>>> If you have failures in (1) that aren't in (2), or failures in either
>>>>> that aren't in (3) then we need eyes on them to try to get them fixed.
>>>>> Perhaps *nix people could focus on failures that are common between
>>>>> *nix and Windows, and I'll focus on Windows failures that aren't seen
>>>>> on *nix?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> From the tests above it looks to me that tests failing for
>>>> httpd24threading
>>>> branch are not httpd-2.4.x related on Linux. The same tests failing with
>>>> httpd-2.2.x and trunk fail also with httpd-2.4.x and httpd24therading
>>>> branch.
>>>>
>>>> I think from my point of view on Linux, it should be possible to merge
>>>> httpd24threading branch with trunk without introducing any regression
>>>> which
>>>> would be visible on our test-suite.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> If we can't fix things any time soon then perhaps we should take a
>>>>> vote on whether to release as-is, with documentation updated to note
>>>>> the currently known problems?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm not able to help with Windows specific bugs because of lack of
>>>> knowledge
>>>> and time for that. But if we fix the bugs mentioned above, maybe we could
>>>> release some alpha mod_perl with initial httpd-2.4 support and see what
>>>> happens.
>>>>
>>>> I have no knowledge to evaluate how hard it will be to fix mod_perl with
>>>> httpd-2.4 on Windows. If I remember well, even httpd-2.4.x itself had few
>>>> 2.4.x releases with some Windows related bugs...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I am keen to see a mod_perl-2.09 with httpd-2.4.x support, but not if
>>>>> it's in a buggy state (especially on *nix) that will just generate a
>>>>> ton of bug reports and disappointed users.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If the tests are passing and we don't have more people testing trunk, we
>>>> will have to consider releasing something to get more testers and more
>>>> attention.
>>>>
>>>> We have httpd24threading branch in current Fedora for some time and there
>>>> are no bug reports yet. Some people within Red Hat are using mod_perl
>>>> with
>>>> httpd-2.4 too.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks for testing, and sorry I've taken so long to get back.
>>>
>>> So it looks like you're happy on Linux, except for one known failure
>>> (compat/conn_rec.t) and a bunch of failures caused by r1491887.
>>>
>>> I will try testing with that change reverted and see what results I
>>> get. Presumably it will fix the same things that it fixes for you; I'm
>>> curious to see whether it also fixes anything else.
>>>
>>> Aside from that, we have two sets of failures on Windows only:
>>>
>>> - modperl/local_env.t & merge*.t failing with either httpd-2.2 or 2.4,
>>> but they work with trunk (on httpd-2.2, obviously)
>>>
>>> - protocol/echo_block.t, echo_nonblock.t, echo_timeout.t &
>>> pseudo_httpd.t failing with httpd-2.4 only
>>>
>>> I've looked at all of these before and made little headway. I will
>>> look again while I play with reverting r1491887, but otherwise I fear
>>> we're going to have to release 2.0.9 with these known Windows failures
>>> so that it doesn't hold up an otherwise good Linux release any longer.
>>>
>>> So I will probably start merging httpd24threading back to trunk soon
>>> if there are no objections...
>>
>>
>> That sounds great :). From my point of view it's good plan. I would vote for
>> releasing some alpha version so we could get some more testing like the one
>> provided by Alexander earlier this week.
>>
>> For me the Linux version is working properly on Fedora, but on different
>> distributions and systems we could find out more bugs like that one, but
>> without anyone else testing httpd24threading branch it will be quite hard to
>> move with httpd-2.4 support.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Jan Kaluza
>>
>
> With r1491887 reverted I now have all tests passing when using
> httpd-2.2 (yay! that makes me much happier), and with httpd-2.4 I only
> have the expected failure plus one of the sets of Windows-specific
> failures (protocol/echo_block.t, echo_nonblock.t, echo_timeout.t &
> pseudo_httpd.t).
>
> That would be acceptable for release (I really wasn't happy with a new
> release breaking 2.2 support...) so I think we'll have to revert
> r1491887 for now, and then I'll get merging stuff back to trunk after
> looking at that remaining group of failures again.
>

Great, will you do the reverting part too?

Jan Kaluza


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org
Re: Current httpd24threading branch problems? [ In reply to ]
On 14 May 2014 13:10, Jan Kaluža <jkaluza@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 05/14/2014 02:07 PM, Steve Hay wrote:
>>
>> On 14 May 2014 09:27, Jan Kaluža <jkaluza@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 05/13/2014 07:29 PM, Steve Hay wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 29 April 2014 11:40, Jan Kaluža <jkaluza@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 04/17/2014 09:15 AM, Steve Hay wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 17 April 2014 07:46, Jan Kaluža <jkaluza@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Fred,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> could you please sum up what's the current state of httpd24threading
>>>>>>> branch?
>>>>>>> I think you're the only one currently who knows what has to be done
>>>>>>> before
>>>>>>> we can release it somehow.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I've tried to read the mailing list to refresh my memory, but I'm not
>>>>>>> sure
>>>>>>> what has been fixed/done already during these 3 months.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think it's mostly been me and you working on it, actually!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've said before that I need to fix some Windows test failures and
>>>>>> then (assuming *nix doesn't have any outstanding of its own) I'll be
>>>>>> happy to merge this branch into trunk and we can get a release going.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My current list of failures is:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Test Summary Report
>>>>>> -------------------
>>>>>> t\compat\conn_rec.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 0)
>>>>>> [new failure for 2.4.x]
>>>>>> Parse errors: Bad plan. You planned 4 tests but ran 2.
>>>>>> t\modperl\local_env.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
>>>>>> Failed test: 6
>>>>>> t\modperl\merge.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 10 Failed: 3)
>>>>>> Failed tests: 3, 6, 9
>>>>>> t\modperl\merge2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 10 Failed: 3)
>>>>>> Failed tests: 3, 6, 9
>>>>>> t\modperl\merge3.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 10 Failed: 3)
>>>>>> Failed tests: 3, 6, 9
>>>>>> t\modules\cgi.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 5)
>>>>>> Failed tests: 1-5
>>>>>> t\modules\cgi2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 5)
>>>>>> Failed tests: 1-5
>>>>>> t\modules\cgipost.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 5)
>>>>>> Failed tests: 2-6
>>>>>> t\modules\cgipost2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 5)
>>>>>> Failed tests: 2-6
>>>>>> t\modules\cgiupload.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 2)
>>>>>> [with LWP only]
>>>>>> Failed tests: 1-2
>>>>>> t\modules\cgiupload2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 2)
>>>>>> [with LWP only]
>>>>>> Failed tests: 1-2
>>>>>> t\protocol\echo_block.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 3 Failed: 2)
>>>>>> [new failure for 2.4.x]
>>>>>> Failed tests: 2-3
>>>>>> t\protocol\echo_nonblock.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 3 Failed: 1)
>>>>>> [new failure for 2.4.x]
>>>>>> Failed test: 2
>>>>>> t\protocol\echo_timeout.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 4)
>>>>>> [new failure for 2.4.x]
>>>>>> Failed tests: 2-5
>>>>>> t\protocol\pseudo_http.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 13 Failed: 9)
>>>>>> [new failure for 2.4.x]
>>>>>> Failed tests: 3-8, 11-13
>>>>>> Files=252, Tests=2938, 848 wallclock secs ( 2.26 usr + 0.36 sys =
>>>>>> 2.62
>>>>>> CPU)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The ones marked 'new failure for 2.4.x' fail with 2.4.x but not with
>>>>>> 2.2.x so they are particularly worrying for 2.4.x support, but note
>>>>>> also that *none* of the above tests fail with 2.2.x when using trunk
>>>>>> (or mod_perl-2.08), which is also quite worrying.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What is the current state of play on *nix? Which tests, if any, fail
>>>>>> using:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> I've had finally some time to do the tests. It's run on Fedora 20,
>>>>> httpd-2.4.9 and httpd-2.2.23. See below.
>>>>>
>>>>>> (1) httpd24threading + httpd-2.4.x
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> t/compat/conn_rec.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 0)
>>>>>
>>>>> Parse errors: Bad plan. You planned 4 tests but ran 2.
>>>>>
>>>>> ^ This is expected problem for now. It's caused by renamed "remote_ip"
>>>>> and
>>>>> "remote_addr" in httpd-2.4. I was not able to put proper version check
>>>>> in
>>>>> this test (probably my lack of Perl knowledge).
>>>>>
>>>>> t/modules/cgi.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 2)
>>>>> Failed tests: 2, 5
>>>>> t/modules/cgi2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 1)
>>>>> Failed test: 3
>>>>> t/modules/cgipost.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
>>>>> Failed test: 4
>>>>> t/modules/cgipost2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
>>>>> Failed test: 4
>>>>> t/modules/cgiupload.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
>>>>> Failed test: 1
>>>>> t/modules/cgiupload2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
>>>>> Failed test: 2
>>>>>
>>>>> ^ All these are caused by r1491887 -
>>>>> /perl/modperl/trunk/t/modperl/local_env.t. Should we revert this
>>>>> commit?
>>>>>
>>>>>> (2) httpd24threading + httpd-2.2.x
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> t/api/server_const.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 2)
>>>>> Failed tests: 5-6
>>>>> t/modperl/setupenv2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 23 Failed: 7)
>>>>> Failed tests: 17-23
>>>>> t/modules/cgi.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 2)
>>>>> Failed tests: 2, 5
>>>>> t/modules/cgi2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 1)
>>>>> Failed test: 3
>>>>> t/modules/cgipost.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
>>>>> Failed test: 4
>>>>> t/modules/cgipost2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
>>>>> Failed test: 4
>>>>> t/modules/cgiupload.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
>>>>> Failed test: 1
>>>>> t/modules/cgiupload2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
>>>>> Failed test: 2
>>>>>
>>>>> CGI tests fails for the same reason as in the previous case. Other
>>>>> tests
>>>>> fail *also* for trunk + httpd-2.2.x (see below).
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> (3) trunk (or mod_perl-2.08) + httpd 2.2.x
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> trunk + httpd-2.2.23:
>>>>>
>>>>> t/api/server_const.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 2)
>>>>> Failed tests: 5-6
>>>>> t/modperl/setupenv2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 23 Failed: 7)
>>>>> Failed tests: 17-23
>>>>> t/modules/cgi.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 2)
>>>>> Failed tests: 2, 5
>>>>> t/modules/cgi2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 1)
>>>>> Failed test: 3
>>>>> t/modules/cgipost.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
>>>>> Failed test: 4
>>>>> t/modules/cgipost2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
>>>>> Failed test: 4
>>>>> t/modules/cgiupload.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
>>>>> Failed test: 1
>>>>> t/modules/cgiupload2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
>>>>> Failed test: 2
>>>>>
>>>>> Same as httpd-2.2.23 + httpd24threading branch.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you have failures in (1) that aren't in (2), or failures in either
>>>>>> that aren't in (3) then we need eyes on them to try to get them fixed.
>>>>>> Perhaps *nix people could focus on failures that are common between
>>>>>> *nix and Windows, and I'll focus on Windows failures that aren't seen
>>>>>> on *nix?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> From the tests above it looks to me that tests failing for
>>>>> httpd24threading
>>>>> branch are not httpd-2.4.x related on Linux. The same tests failing
>>>>> with
>>>>> httpd-2.2.x and trunk fail also with httpd-2.4.x and httpd24therading
>>>>> branch.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think from my point of view on Linux, it should be possible to merge
>>>>> httpd24threading branch with trunk without introducing any regression
>>>>> which
>>>>> would be visible on our test-suite.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> If we can't fix things any time soon then perhaps we should take a
>>>>>> vote on whether to release as-is, with documentation updated to note
>>>>>> the currently known problems?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not able to help with Windows specific bugs because of lack of
>>>>> knowledge
>>>>> and time for that. But if we fix the bugs mentioned above, maybe we
>>>>> could
>>>>> release some alpha mod_perl with initial httpd-2.4 support and see what
>>>>> happens.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have no knowledge to evaluate how hard it will be to fix mod_perl
>>>>> with
>>>>> httpd-2.4 on Windows. If I remember well, even httpd-2.4.x itself had
>>>>> few
>>>>> 2.4.x releases with some Windows related bugs...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> I am keen to see a mod_perl-2.09 with httpd-2.4.x support, but not if
>>>>>> it's in a buggy state (especially on *nix) that will just generate a
>>>>>> ton of bug reports and disappointed users.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> If the tests are passing and we don't have more people testing trunk,
>>>>> we
>>>>> will have to consider releasing something to get more testers and more
>>>>> attention.
>>>>>
>>>>> We have httpd24threading branch in current Fedora for some time and
>>>>> there
>>>>> are no bug reports yet. Some people within Red Hat are using mod_perl
>>>>> with
>>>>> httpd-2.4 too.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for testing, and sorry I've taken so long to get back.
>>>>
>>>> So it looks like you're happy on Linux, except for one known failure
>>>> (compat/conn_rec.t) and a bunch of failures caused by r1491887.
>>>>
>>>> I will try testing with that change reverted and see what results I
>>>> get. Presumably it will fix the same things that it fixes for you; I'm
>>>> curious to see whether it also fixes anything else.
>>>>
>>>> Aside from that, we have two sets of failures on Windows only:
>>>>
>>>> - modperl/local_env.t & merge*.t failing with either httpd-2.2 or 2.4,
>>>> but they work with trunk (on httpd-2.2, obviously)
>>>>
>>>> - protocol/echo_block.t, echo_nonblock.t, echo_timeout.t &
>>>> pseudo_httpd.t failing with httpd-2.4 only
>>>>
>>>> I've looked at all of these before and made little headway. I will
>>>> look again while I play with reverting r1491887, but otherwise I fear
>>>> we're going to have to release 2.0.9 with these known Windows failures
>>>> so that it doesn't hold up an otherwise good Linux release any longer.
>>>>
>>>> So I will probably start merging httpd24threading back to trunk soon
>>>> if there are no objections...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> That sounds great :). From my point of view it's good plan. I would vote
>>> for
>>> releasing some alpha version so we could get some more testing like the
>>> one
>>> provided by Alexander earlier this week.
>>>
>>> For me the Linux version is working properly on Fedora, but on different
>>> distributions and systems we could find out more bugs like that one, but
>>> without anyone else testing httpd24threading branch it will be quite hard
>>> to
>>> move with httpd-2.4 support.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Jan Kaluza
>>>
>>
>> With r1491887 reverted I now have all tests passing when using
>> httpd-2.2 (yay! that makes me much happier), and with httpd-2.4 I only
>> have the expected failure plus one of the sets of Windows-specific
>> failures (protocol/echo_block.t, echo_nonblock.t, echo_timeout.t &
>> pseudo_httpd.t).
>>
>> That would be acceptable for release (I really wasn't happy with a new
>> release breaking 2.2 support...) so I think we'll have to revert
>> r1491887 for now, and then I'll get merging stuff back to trunk after
>> looking at that remaining group of failures again.
>>
>
> Great, will you do the reverting part too?
>

Yes, I've just done it (on the branch), including both of our test
results to document why it has been necessary. This will get merged
into trunk soon when I merge the rest of the branch back too.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org
Re: Current httpd24threading branch problems? [ In reply to ]
On 05/14/2014 07:01 PM, Steve Hay wrote:
> On 14 May 2014 13:10, Jan Kaluža <jkaluza@redhat.com> wrote:
>> On 05/14/2014 02:07 PM, Steve Hay wrote:
>>>
>>> On 14 May 2014 09:27, Jan Kaluža <jkaluza@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 05/13/2014 07:29 PM, Steve Hay wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 29 April 2014 11:40, Jan Kaluža <jkaluza@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 04/17/2014 09:15 AM, Steve Hay wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 17 April 2014 07:46, Jan Kaluža <jkaluza@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi Fred,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> could you please sum up what's the current state of httpd24threading
>>>>>>>> branch?
>>>>>>>> I think you're the only one currently who knows what has to be done
>>>>>>>> before
>>>>>>>> we can release it somehow.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I've tried to read the mailing list to refresh my memory, but I'm not
>>>>>>>> sure
>>>>>>>> what has been fixed/done already during these 3 months.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think it's mostly been me and you working on it, actually!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I've said before that I need to fix some Windows test failures and
>>>>>>> then (assuming *nix doesn't have any outstanding of its own) I'll be
>>>>>>> happy to merge this branch into trunk and we can get a release going.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> My current list of failures is:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Test Summary Report
>>>>>>> -------------------
>>>>>>> t\compat\conn_rec.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 0)
>>>>>>> [new failure for 2.4.x]
>>>>>>> Parse errors: Bad plan. You planned 4 tests but ran 2.
>>>>>>> t\modperl\local_env.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
>>>>>>> Failed test: 6
>>>>>>> t\modperl\merge.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 10 Failed: 3)
>>>>>>> Failed tests: 3, 6, 9
>>>>>>> t\modperl\merge2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 10 Failed: 3)
>>>>>>> Failed tests: 3, 6, 9
>>>>>>> t\modperl\merge3.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 10 Failed: 3)
>>>>>>> Failed tests: 3, 6, 9
>>>>>>> t\modules\cgi.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 5)
>>>>>>> Failed tests: 1-5
>>>>>>> t\modules\cgi2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 5)
>>>>>>> Failed tests: 1-5
>>>>>>> t\modules\cgipost.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 5)
>>>>>>> Failed tests: 2-6
>>>>>>> t\modules\cgipost2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 5)
>>>>>>> Failed tests: 2-6
>>>>>>> t\modules\cgiupload.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 2)
>>>>>>> [with LWP only]
>>>>>>> Failed tests: 1-2
>>>>>>> t\modules\cgiupload2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 2)
>>>>>>> [with LWP only]
>>>>>>> Failed tests: 1-2
>>>>>>> t\protocol\echo_block.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 3 Failed: 2)
>>>>>>> [new failure for 2.4.x]
>>>>>>> Failed tests: 2-3
>>>>>>> t\protocol\echo_nonblock.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 3 Failed: 1)
>>>>>>> [new failure for 2.4.x]
>>>>>>> Failed test: 2
>>>>>>> t\protocol\echo_timeout.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 4)
>>>>>>> [new failure for 2.4.x]
>>>>>>> Failed tests: 2-5
>>>>>>> t\protocol\pseudo_http.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 13 Failed: 9)
>>>>>>> [new failure for 2.4.x]
>>>>>>> Failed tests: 3-8, 11-13
>>>>>>> Files=252, Tests=2938, 848 wallclock secs ( 2.26 usr + 0.36 sys =
>>>>>>> 2.62
>>>>>>> CPU)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The ones marked 'new failure for 2.4.x' fail with 2.4.x but not with
>>>>>>> 2.2.x so they are particularly worrying for 2.4.x support, but note
>>>>>>> also that *none* of the above tests fail with 2.2.x when using trunk
>>>>>>> (or mod_perl-2.08), which is also quite worrying.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What is the current state of play on *nix? Which tests, if any, fail
>>>>>>> using:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've had finally some time to do the tests. It's run on Fedora 20,
>>>>>> httpd-2.4.9 and httpd-2.2.23. See below.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (1) httpd24threading + httpd-2.4.x
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> t/compat/conn_rec.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 0)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Parse errors: Bad plan. You planned 4 tests but ran 2.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ^ This is expected problem for now. It's caused by renamed "remote_ip"
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> "remote_addr" in httpd-2.4. I was not able to put proper version check
>>>>>> in
>>>>>> this test (probably my lack of Perl knowledge).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> t/modules/cgi.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 2)
>>>>>> Failed tests: 2, 5
>>>>>> t/modules/cgi2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 1)
>>>>>> Failed test: 3
>>>>>> t/modules/cgipost.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
>>>>>> Failed test: 4
>>>>>> t/modules/cgipost2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
>>>>>> Failed test: 4
>>>>>> t/modules/cgiupload.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
>>>>>> Failed test: 1
>>>>>> t/modules/cgiupload2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
>>>>>> Failed test: 2
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ^ All these are caused by r1491887 -
>>>>>> /perl/modperl/trunk/t/modperl/local_env.t. Should we revert this
>>>>>> commit?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (2) httpd24threading + httpd-2.2.x
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> t/api/server_const.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 2)
>>>>>> Failed tests: 5-6
>>>>>> t/modperl/setupenv2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 23 Failed: 7)
>>>>>> Failed tests: 17-23
>>>>>> t/modules/cgi.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 2)
>>>>>> Failed tests: 2, 5
>>>>>> t/modules/cgi2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 1)
>>>>>> Failed test: 3
>>>>>> t/modules/cgipost.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
>>>>>> Failed test: 4
>>>>>> t/modules/cgipost2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
>>>>>> Failed test: 4
>>>>>> t/modules/cgiupload.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
>>>>>> Failed test: 1
>>>>>> t/modules/cgiupload2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
>>>>>> Failed test: 2
>>>>>>
>>>>>> CGI tests fails for the same reason as in the previous case. Other
>>>>>> tests
>>>>>> fail *also* for trunk + httpd-2.2.x (see below).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (3) trunk (or mod_perl-2.08) + httpd 2.2.x
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> trunk + httpd-2.2.23:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> t/api/server_const.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 2)
>>>>>> Failed tests: 5-6
>>>>>> t/modperl/setupenv2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 23 Failed: 7)
>>>>>> Failed tests: 17-23
>>>>>> t/modules/cgi.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 2)
>>>>>> Failed tests: 2, 5
>>>>>> t/modules/cgi2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 1)
>>>>>> Failed test: 3
>>>>>> t/modules/cgipost.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
>>>>>> Failed test: 4
>>>>>> t/modules/cgipost2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
>>>>>> Failed test: 4
>>>>>> t/modules/cgiupload.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
>>>>>> Failed test: 1
>>>>>> t/modules/cgiupload2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
>>>>>> Failed test: 2
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Same as httpd-2.2.23 + httpd24threading branch.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you have failures in (1) that aren't in (2), or failures in either
>>>>>>> that aren't in (3) then we need eyes on them to try to get them fixed.
>>>>>>> Perhaps *nix people could focus on failures that are common between
>>>>>>> *nix and Windows, and I'll focus on Windows failures that aren't seen
>>>>>>> on *nix?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> From the tests above it looks to me that tests failing for
>>>>>> httpd24threading
>>>>>> branch are not httpd-2.4.x related on Linux. The same tests failing
>>>>>> with
>>>>>> httpd-2.2.x and trunk fail also with httpd-2.4.x and httpd24therading
>>>>>> branch.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think from my point of view on Linux, it should be possible to merge
>>>>>> httpd24threading branch with trunk without introducing any regression
>>>>>> which
>>>>>> would be visible on our test-suite.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If we can't fix things any time soon then perhaps we should take a
>>>>>>> vote on whether to release as-is, with documentation updated to note
>>>>>>> the currently known problems?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm not able to help with Windows specific bugs because of lack of
>>>>>> knowledge
>>>>>> and time for that. But if we fix the bugs mentioned above, maybe we
>>>>>> could
>>>>>> release some alpha mod_perl with initial httpd-2.4 support and see what
>>>>>> happens.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have no knowledge to evaluate how hard it will be to fix mod_perl
>>>>>> with
>>>>>> httpd-2.4 on Windows. If I remember well, even httpd-2.4.x itself had
>>>>>> few
>>>>>> 2.4.x releases with some Windows related bugs...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am keen to see a mod_perl-2.09 with httpd-2.4.x support, but not if
>>>>>>> it's in a buggy state (especially on *nix) that will just generate a
>>>>>>> ton of bug reports and disappointed users.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If the tests are passing and we don't have more people testing trunk,
>>>>>> we
>>>>>> will have to consider releasing something to get more testers and more
>>>>>> attention.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We have httpd24threading branch in current Fedora for some time and
>>>>>> there
>>>>>> are no bug reports yet. Some people within Red Hat are using mod_perl
>>>>>> with
>>>>>> httpd-2.4 too.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for testing, and sorry I've taken so long to get back.
>>>>>
>>>>> So it looks like you're happy on Linux, except for one known failure
>>>>> (compat/conn_rec.t) and a bunch of failures caused by r1491887.
>>>>>
>>>>> I will try testing with that change reverted and see what results I
>>>>> get. Presumably it will fix the same things that it fixes for you; I'm
>>>>> curious to see whether it also fixes anything else.
>>>>>
>>>>> Aside from that, we have two sets of failures on Windows only:
>>>>>
>>>>> - modperl/local_env.t & merge*.t failing with either httpd-2.2 or 2.4,
>>>>> but they work with trunk (on httpd-2.2, obviously)
>>>>>
>>>>> - protocol/echo_block.t, echo_nonblock.t, echo_timeout.t &
>>>>> pseudo_httpd.t failing with httpd-2.4 only
>>>>>
>>>>> I've looked at all of these before and made little headway. I will
>>>>> look again while I play with reverting r1491887, but otherwise I fear
>>>>> we're going to have to release 2.0.9 with these known Windows failures
>>>>> so that it doesn't hold up an otherwise good Linux release any longer.
>>>>>
>>>>> So I will probably start merging httpd24threading back to trunk soon
>>>>> if there are no objections...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That sounds great :). From my point of view it's good plan. I would vote
>>>> for
>>>> releasing some alpha version so we could get some more testing like the
>>>> one
>>>> provided by Alexander earlier this week.
>>>>
>>>> For me the Linux version is working properly on Fedora, but on different
>>>> distributions and systems we could find out more bugs like that one, but
>>>> without anyone else testing httpd24threading branch it will be quite hard
>>>> to
>>>> move with httpd-2.4 support.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Jan Kaluza
>>>>
>>>
>>> With r1491887 reverted I now have all tests passing when using
>>> httpd-2.2 (yay! that makes me much happier), and with httpd-2.4 I only
>>> have the expected failure plus one of the sets of Windows-specific
>>> failures (protocol/echo_block.t, echo_nonblock.t, echo_timeout.t &
>>> pseudo_httpd.t).
>>>
>>> That would be acceptable for release (I really wasn't happy with a new
>>> release breaking 2.2 support...) so I think we'll have to revert
>>> r1491887 for now, and then I'll get merging stuff back to trunk after
>>> looking at that remaining group of failures again.
>>>
>>
>> Great, will you do the reverting part too?
>>
>
> Yes, I've just done it (on the branch), including both of our test
> results to document why it has been necessary. This will get merged
> into trunk soon when I merge the rest of the branch back too.
>

Hi,

how does it look like with that merge? :) I could try to do it myself if
you are brave enough to allow me to do that :).

Regards,
Jan Kaluza


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org
Re: Current httpd24threading branch problems? [ In reply to ]
On 10 June 2014 12:43, Jan Kaluža <jkaluza@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 05/14/2014 07:01 PM, Steve Hay wrote:
>>
>> On 14 May 2014 13:10, Jan Kaluža <jkaluza@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 05/14/2014 02:07 PM, Steve Hay wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 14 May 2014 09:27, Jan Kaluža <jkaluza@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 05/13/2014 07:29 PM, Steve Hay wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 29 April 2014 11:40, Jan Kaluža <jkaluza@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 04/17/2014 09:15 AM, Steve Hay wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 17 April 2014 07:46, Jan Kaluža <jkaluza@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi Fred,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> could you please sum up what's the current state of
>>>>>>>>> httpd24threading
>>>>>>>>> branch?
>>>>>>>>> I think you're the only one currently who knows what has to be done
>>>>>>>>> before
>>>>>>>>> we can release it somehow.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I've tried to read the mailing list to refresh my memory, but I'm
>>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>>> sure
>>>>>>>>> what has been fixed/done already during these 3 months.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think it's mostly been me and you working on it, actually!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I've said before that I need to fix some Windows test failures and
>>>>>>>> then (assuming *nix doesn't have any outstanding of its own) I'll be
>>>>>>>> happy to merge this branch into trunk and we can get a release
>>>>>>>> going.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> My current list of failures is:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Test Summary Report
>>>>>>>> -------------------
>>>>>>>> t\compat\conn_rec.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 0)
>>>>>>>> [new failure for 2.4.x]
>>>>>>>> Parse errors: Bad plan. You planned 4 tests but ran 2.
>>>>>>>> t\modperl\local_env.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
>>>>>>>> Failed test: 6
>>>>>>>> t\modperl\merge.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 10 Failed: 3)
>>>>>>>> Failed tests: 3, 6, 9
>>>>>>>> t\modperl\merge2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 10 Failed: 3)
>>>>>>>> Failed tests: 3, 6, 9
>>>>>>>> t\modperl\merge3.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 10 Failed: 3)
>>>>>>>> Failed tests: 3, 6, 9
>>>>>>>> t\modules\cgi.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 5)
>>>>>>>> Failed tests: 1-5
>>>>>>>> t\modules\cgi2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 5)
>>>>>>>> Failed tests: 1-5
>>>>>>>> t\modules\cgipost.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 5)
>>>>>>>> Failed tests: 2-6
>>>>>>>> t\modules\cgipost2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 5)
>>>>>>>> Failed tests: 2-6
>>>>>>>> t\modules\cgiupload.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 2)
>>>>>>>> [with LWP only]
>>>>>>>> Failed tests: 1-2
>>>>>>>> t\modules\cgiupload2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 2)
>>>>>>>> [with LWP only]
>>>>>>>> Failed tests: 1-2
>>>>>>>> t\protocol\echo_block.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 3 Failed: 2)
>>>>>>>> [new failure for 2.4.x]
>>>>>>>> Failed tests: 2-3
>>>>>>>> t\protocol\echo_nonblock.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 3 Failed: 1)
>>>>>>>> [new failure for 2.4.x]
>>>>>>>> Failed test: 2
>>>>>>>> t\protocol\echo_timeout.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 4)
>>>>>>>> [new failure for 2.4.x]
>>>>>>>> Failed tests: 2-5
>>>>>>>> t\protocol\pseudo_http.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 13 Failed: 9)
>>>>>>>> [new failure for 2.4.x]
>>>>>>>> Failed tests: 3-8, 11-13
>>>>>>>> Files=252, Tests=2938, 848 wallclock secs ( 2.26 usr + 0.36 sys =
>>>>>>>> 2.62
>>>>>>>> CPU)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The ones marked 'new failure for 2.4.x' fail with 2.4.x but not with
>>>>>>>> 2.2.x so they are particularly worrying for 2.4.x support, but note
>>>>>>>> also that *none* of the above tests fail with 2.2.x when using trunk
>>>>>>>> (or mod_perl-2.08), which is also quite worrying.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What is the current state of play on *nix? Which tests, if any, fail
>>>>>>>> using:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I've had finally some time to do the tests. It's run on Fedora 20,
>>>>>>> httpd-2.4.9 and httpd-2.2.23. See below.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> (1) httpd24threading + httpd-2.4.x
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> t/compat/conn_rec.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 0)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Parse errors: Bad plan. You planned 4 tests but ran 2.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ^ This is expected problem for now. It's caused by renamed
>>>>>>> "remote_ip"
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> "remote_addr" in httpd-2.4. I was not able to put proper version
>>>>>>> check
>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>> this test (probably my lack of Perl knowledge).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> t/modules/cgi.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 2)
>>>>>>> Failed tests: 2, 5
>>>>>>> t/modules/cgi2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 1)
>>>>>>> Failed test: 3
>>>>>>> t/modules/cgipost.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
>>>>>>> Failed test: 4
>>>>>>> t/modules/cgipost2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
>>>>>>> Failed test: 4
>>>>>>> t/modules/cgiupload.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
>>>>>>> Failed test: 1
>>>>>>> t/modules/cgiupload2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
>>>>>>> Failed test: 2
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ^ All these are caused by r1491887 -
>>>>>>> /perl/modperl/trunk/t/modperl/local_env.t. Should we revert this
>>>>>>> commit?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> (2) httpd24threading + httpd-2.2.x
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> t/api/server_const.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 2)
>>>>>>> Failed tests: 5-6
>>>>>>> t/modperl/setupenv2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 23 Failed: 7)
>>>>>>> Failed tests: 17-23
>>>>>>> t/modules/cgi.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 2)
>>>>>>> Failed tests: 2, 5
>>>>>>> t/modules/cgi2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 1)
>>>>>>> Failed test: 3
>>>>>>> t/modules/cgipost.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
>>>>>>> Failed test: 4
>>>>>>> t/modules/cgipost2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
>>>>>>> Failed test: 4
>>>>>>> t/modules/cgiupload.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
>>>>>>> Failed test: 1
>>>>>>> t/modules/cgiupload2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
>>>>>>> Failed test: 2
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> CGI tests fails for the same reason as in the previous case. Other
>>>>>>> tests
>>>>>>> fail *also* for trunk + httpd-2.2.x (see below).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> (3) trunk (or mod_perl-2.08) + httpd 2.2.x
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> trunk + httpd-2.2.23:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> t/api/server_const.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 2)
>>>>>>> Failed tests: 5-6
>>>>>>> t/modperl/setupenv2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 23 Failed: 7)
>>>>>>> Failed tests: 17-23
>>>>>>> t/modules/cgi.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 2)
>>>>>>> Failed tests: 2, 5
>>>>>>> t/modules/cgi2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 5 Failed: 1)
>>>>>>> Failed test: 3
>>>>>>> t/modules/cgipost.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
>>>>>>> Failed test: 4
>>>>>>> t/modules/cgipost2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 1)
>>>>>>> Failed test: 4
>>>>>>> t/modules/cgiupload.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
>>>>>>> Failed test: 1
>>>>>>> t/modules/cgiupload2.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
>>>>>>> Failed test: 2
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Same as httpd-2.2.23 + httpd24threading branch.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If you have failures in (1) that aren't in (2), or failures in
>>>>>>>> either
>>>>>>>> that aren't in (3) then we need eyes on them to try to get them
>>>>>>>> fixed.
>>>>>>>> Perhaps *nix people could focus on failures that are common between
>>>>>>>> *nix and Windows, and I'll focus on Windows failures that aren't
>>>>>>>> seen
>>>>>>>> on *nix?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> From the tests above it looks to me that tests failing for
>>>>>>> httpd24threading
>>>>>>> branch are not httpd-2.4.x related on Linux. The same tests failing
>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>> httpd-2.2.x and trunk fail also with httpd-2.4.x and httpd24therading
>>>>>>> branch.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think from my point of view on Linux, it should be possible to
>>>>>>> merge
>>>>>>> httpd24threading branch with trunk without introducing any regression
>>>>>>> which
>>>>>>> would be visible on our test-suite.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If we can't fix things any time soon then perhaps we should take a
>>>>>>>> vote on whether to release as-is, with documentation updated to note
>>>>>>>> the currently known problems?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm not able to help with Windows specific bugs because of lack of
>>>>>>> knowledge
>>>>>>> and time for that. But if we fix the bugs mentioned above, maybe we
>>>>>>> could
>>>>>>> release some alpha mod_perl with initial httpd-2.4 support and see
>>>>>>> what
>>>>>>> happens.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have no knowledge to evaluate how hard it will be to fix mod_perl
>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>> httpd-2.4 on Windows. If I remember well, even httpd-2.4.x itself had
>>>>>>> few
>>>>>>> 2.4.x releases with some Windows related bugs...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I am keen to see a mod_perl-2.09 with httpd-2.4.x support, but not
>>>>>>>> if
>>>>>>>> it's in a buggy state (especially on *nix) that will just generate a
>>>>>>>> ton of bug reports and disappointed users.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If the tests are passing and we don't have more people testing trunk,
>>>>>>> we
>>>>>>> will have to consider releasing something to get more testers and
>>>>>>> more
>>>>>>> attention.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We have httpd24threading branch in current Fedora for some time and
>>>>>>> there
>>>>>>> are no bug reports yet. Some people within Red Hat are using mod_perl
>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>> httpd-2.4 too.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks for testing, and sorry I've taken so long to get back.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So it looks like you're happy on Linux, except for one known failure
>>>>>> (compat/conn_rec.t) and a bunch of failures caused by r1491887.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I will try testing with that change reverted and see what results I
>>>>>> get. Presumably it will fix the same things that it fixes for you; I'm
>>>>>> curious to see whether it also fixes anything else.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Aside from that, we have two sets of failures on Windows only:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - modperl/local_env.t & merge*.t failing with either httpd-2.2 or 2.4,
>>>>>> but they work with trunk (on httpd-2.2, obviously)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - protocol/echo_block.t, echo_nonblock.t, echo_timeout.t &
>>>>>> pseudo_httpd.t failing with httpd-2.4 only
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've looked at all of these before and made little headway. I will
>>>>>> look again while I play with reverting r1491887, but otherwise I fear
>>>>>> we're going to have to release 2.0.9 with these known Windows failures
>>>>>> so that it doesn't hold up an otherwise good Linux release any longer.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So I will probably start merging httpd24threading back to trunk soon
>>>>>> if there are no objections...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> That sounds great :). From my point of view it's good plan. I would
>>>>> vote
>>>>> for
>>>>> releasing some alpha version so we could get some more testing like the
>>>>> one
>>>>> provided by Alexander earlier this week.
>>>>>
>>>>> For me the Linux version is working properly on Fedora, but on
>>>>> different
>>>>> distributions and systems we could find out more bugs like that one,
>>>>> but
>>>>> without anyone else testing httpd24threading branch it will be quite
>>>>> hard
>>>>> to
>>>>> move with httpd-2.4 support.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Jan Kaluza
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> With r1491887 reverted I now have all tests passing when using
>>>> httpd-2.2 (yay! that makes me much happier), and with httpd-2.4 I only
>>>> have the expected failure plus one of the sets of Windows-specific
>>>> failures (protocol/echo_block.t, echo_nonblock.t, echo_timeout.t &
>>>> pseudo_httpd.t).
>>>>
>>>> That would be acceptable for release (I really wasn't happy with a new
>>>> release breaking 2.2 support...) so I think we'll have to revert
>>>> r1491887 for now, and then I'll get merging stuff back to trunk after
>>>> looking at that remaining group of failures again.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Great, will you do the reverting part too?
>>>
>>
>> Yes, I've just done it (on the branch), including both of our test
>> results to document why it has been necessary. This will get merged
>> into trunk soon when I merge the rest of the branch back too.
>>
>
> Hi,
>
> how does it look like with that merge? :) I could try to do it myself if you
> are brave enough to allow me to do that :).
>

Sorry, I still haven't done it yet. I keep trying (and failing) to fix
those remaining tests. I guess I should call time on it, and get on
with the merge. I will try to do that this week or weekend.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org