From owner-freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jun 12 22:40:01 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports-bugs@smarthost.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FD84ADD for ; Wed, 12 Jun 2013 22:40:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206c::16:87]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20D9A18AB for ; Wed, 12 Jun 2013 22:40:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id r5CMe0rZ021044 for ; Wed, 12 Jun 2013 22:40:00 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.7/8.14.7/Submit) id r5CMe0R1021043; Wed, 12 Jun 2013 22:40:00 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2013 22:40:00 GMT Message-Id: <201306122240.r5CMe0R1021043@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Cc: From: William Grzybowski Subject: Re: ports/179233: [MAINTAINER] devel/ice: update to 3.5.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list Reply-To: William Grzybowski List-Id: Ports bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2013 22:40:01 -0000 The following reply was made to PR ports/179233; it has been noted by GNATS. From: William Grzybowski To: Michael Gmelin Cc: bug-followup@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports/179233: [MAINTAINER] devel/ice: update to 3.5.0 Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2013 19:38:37 -0300 On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 6:53 PM, Michael Gmelin wrote: > On Wed, 12 Jun 2013 18:23:43 -0300 > William Grzybowski wrote: > >> Tests are failing for me: >> >> *** running tests 9/85 in >> /usr/ports/devel/ice/work/Ice-3.5.0/cpp/test/Slice/keyword >> *** configuration: Default >> *** test started: 06/12/13 18:20:13 >> starting client... ok >> Testing operation name... ok >> terminate called after throwing an instance of >> 'IceUtil::ThreadSyscallException' >> what(): ../../include/IceUtil/Mutex.h:303: >> IceUtil::ThreadSyscallException: syscall exception: Invalid argument >> unexpected exit status: expected: 0, got -6 Traceback (most recent >> call last): File >> "/usr/ports/devel/ice/work/Ice-3.5.0/cpp/test/Slice/keyword/run.py", >> line 24, in TestUtil.simpleTest(client) >> File "/usr/ports/devel/ice/work/Ice-3.5.0/scripts/TestUtil.py", line >> 1424, in simpleTest >> client.waitTestSuccess() >> File "/usr/ports/devel/ice/work/Ice-3.5.0/scripts/Expect.py", line >> 564, in waitTestSuccess >> test(self.exitstatus, exitstatus) >> File "/usr/ports/devel/ice/work/Ice-3.5.0/scripts/Expect.py", line >> 549, in test >> assert False >> AssertionError >> ('test in /usr/ports/devel/ice/work/Ice-3.5.0/cpp/test/Slice/keyword >> failed with exit status', 256) >> >> FreeBSD venon 10.0-CURRENT FreeBSD 10.0-CURRENT #0 r249253M: Mon Apr >> 8 11:48:10 BRT 2013 william@venon:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/VENON >> amd64 >> >> -- >> William Grzybowski >> ------------------------------------------ >> Curitiba/PR - Brasil > > Hi William, > > The port has been tested on the current release version of FreeBSD > (9.1-RELEASE) using a world built with system gcc (4.2.1) and system > clang (3.1), libstdc++ and libc++, c++98 an c++11, it also builds fine > on the current legacy release version (8.3-RELEASE at the time I opened > the PR, haven't tested on 8.4 yet). > > I can't really test the port on or optimize it for 10-CURRENT, which is > dramatically different and ships with a more recent version of the > clang compiler and libc++. > > By the way, the error you're getting is caused by a call to > pthread_mutex_lock failing, which in turn could be related to changes > in the OS, default compiler flags etc. > > Please test on a current release version of FreeBSD. If it's still > failing on 9.1-RELEASE please send me a complete build output and a > list of packages installed on the system you're testing on as well as > the content of /etc/make.conf. I've been testing this port for weeks, so > seeing it fail on 9.1-RELEASE would be quite a surprise. > > If you still feel that the port should work on 10-CURRENT (with no > official release date for 10.0 announced yet), please let me know, so > I can discuss on ports@. Well, I think it should, as most of the ports do. I was going to commit this port but I'll leave it to someone then because I don't feel comfortable otherwise. Thanks for your work. -- William Grzybowski ------------------------------------------ Curitiba/PR - Brasil