Re: [SyncEvolution] Concurrent sync sessions update - Almost done
2012/3/15 Chris Kühl <blixtra(a)gmail.com>:
On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 11:28 AM, Patrick Ohly
<patrick.ohly(a)intel.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-03-08 at 17:18 +0100, Chris Kühl wrote:
>> It's been rebased and we've squashed the changes into about a dozen
>> commits. The tests seem to give us the same results as before the
>> rebase.
>
> And those are? In other words, which tests are known to fail, and why?
>
I've pushed a branch called css-without-known-test-failures[1] whose
most recent commit comments out all the tests in test/test-dbus.py
that fail. However, there as a bug I introduced during the last
rebase. The fix for that can be found here[2].
All but one of the failures is due to the incomplete AutoSync and
Connection functionality. The restart test has never worked for us on
any branch.
That test should work without problems if you run test-dbus.py while
being in the same directory as syncevo-dbus-server binary. That is
because execve's first parameter should be a path (relative or
absolute) to binary and in case of test-dbus.py only
'syncevo-dbus-server' is passed here. It is not absolute path and thus
execlv looks for binary in current running directory only. Seems like
execve does not look for binary in PATH environment variable.
Cheers,
Chris
[1]
https://meego.gitorious.org/meego-middleware/syncevolution/commit/d880525...
[2]
https://meego.gitorious.org/~krnowak/meego-middleware/krnowaks-syncevolut...
_______________________________________________
SyncEvolution mailing list
SyncEvolution(a)syncevolution.org
http://lists.syncevolution.org/listinfo/syncevolution