TDE
/
tdepim
6
0
Fork 1
Code Issues 24 Pull Requests 4 Releases Wiki Activity
Labels Milestones

Fixed libkcal tests (new version) - bug 2719 #18

Merged
SlavekB merged 1 commits from bug/2719/libkcaltests-new into master 5 years ago
Conversation 8 Commits 1 Files Changed 1
MicheleC commented 5 years ago
Owner

Replaces #17.

Under Debian/Ubuntu, to be built with TDE/tde-packaging#15

Replaces #17. Under Debian/Ubuntu, to be built with TDE/tde-packaging#15
MicheleC added this to the R14.0.7 release milestone 5 years ago
MicheleC changed title from Fixed building of libkcal tests (new version) - bug 2719 to WIP: Fixed building of libkcal tests (new version) - bug 2719 5 years ago
MicheleC commented 5 years ago
Poster
Owner

Marked as WIP until tests are fixed, otherwise building tdepim would fail.

Marked as WIP until tests are fixed, otherwise building tdepim would fail.
MicheleC changed title from WIP: Fixed building of libkcal tests (new version) - bug 2719 to Fixed libkcal tests (new version) - bug 2719 5 years ago
MicheleC commented 5 years ago
Poster
Owner

PR is now completed and works fine in Debian Buster.

100% tests passed, 0 tests failed out of 455

@SlavekB: can you run a test on all distros and see if all tests pass?

PR is now completed and works fine in Debian Buster. 100% tests passed, 0 tests failed out of 455 @SlavekB: can you run a test on all distros and see if all tests pass?
SlavekB commented 5 years ago
Owner

Score of builds is not good:

     18 FAILED
      8 SUCCESS

I think it's related to commit 8996740084. maybe redundant is_utc is still needed to use for libical < 3 because it is used internally in libical? Or something wrong with function icaltime_from_timet_with_zone?

Successful builds are for distributions that contain libical >= 3 (Buster, Bionic, Cosmic, Disco), failing are all that contain libical < 3. 19 tests fail on older distributions (Squeeze, Wheezy, Lucid, Precise), 13 on newer distributions (same starting from test 443):

The following tests FAILED:
         61 - testrecurrence__next__data/RecurrenceRule/LibICal/LibICal_TestCase55.ics__ (Failed)
         62 - testrecurrence__next__data/RecurrenceRule/LibICal/LibICal_TestCase54.ics__ (Failed)
         97 - testrecurrence__next__data/RecurrenceRule/LibICal/LibICal_TestCase15.ics__ (Failed)
        204 - testrecurprevious__prev__data/RecurrenceRule/LibICal/LibICal_TestCase55.ics__ (Failed)
        205 - testrecurprevious__prev__data/RecurrenceRule/LibICal/LibICal_TestCase54.ics__ (Failed)
        240 - testrecurprevious__prev__data/RecurrenceRule/LibICal/LibICal_TestCase15.ics__ (Failed)
        443 - readandwrite__ical__data/vCalendar/KOrganizer_vCalTestCase13.vcs__ (Failed)
        444 - readandwrite__ical__data/vCalendar/KOrganizer_vCalTestCase12.vcs__ (Failed)
        445 - readandwrite__ical__data/vCalendar/KOrganizer_vCalTestCase11.vcs__ (Failed)
        446 - readandwrite__ical__data/vCalendar/KOrganizer_vCalTestCase10.vcs__ (Failed)
        447 - readandwrite__ical__data/vCalendar/KOrganizer_vCalTestCase09.vcs__ (Failed)
        448 - readandwrite__ical__data/vCalendar/KOrganizer_vCalTestCase08.vcs__ (Failed)
        449 - readandwrite__ical__data/vCalendar/KOrganizer_vCalTestCase07.vcs__ (Failed)
        450 - readandwrite__ical__data/vCalendar/KOrganizer_vCalTestCase06.vcs__ (Failed)
        451 - readandwrite__ical__data/vCalendar/KOrganizer_vCalTestCase05.vcs__ (Failed)
        452 - readandwrite__ical__data/vCalendar/KOrganizer_vCalTestCase04.vcs__ (Failed)
        453 - readandwrite__ical__data/vCalendar/KOrganizer_vCalTestCase03.vcs__ (Failed)
        454 - readandwrite__ical__data/vCalendar/KOrganizer_vCalTestCase02.vcs__ (Failed)
        455 - readandwrite__ical__data/vCalendar/KOrganizer_vCalTestCase01.vcs__ (Failed)
Score of builds is not good: ``` 18 FAILED 8 SUCCESS ``` I think it's related to commit 8996740084. maybe redundant `is_utc` is still needed to use for libical < 3 because it is used internally in libical? Or something wrong with function icaltime_from_timet_with_zone? Successful builds are for distributions that contain libical >= 3 (Buster, Bionic, Cosmic, Disco), failing are all that contain libical < 3. 19 tests fail on older distributions (Squeeze, Wheezy, Lucid, Precise), 13 on newer distributions (same starting from test 443): ``` The following tests FAILED: 61 - testrecurrence__next__data/RecurrenceRule/LibICal/LibICal_TestCase55.ics__ (Failed) 62 - testrecurrence__next__data/RecurrenceRule/LibICal/LibICal_TestCase54.ics__ (Failed) 97 - testrecurrence__next__data/RecurrenceRule/LibICal/LibICal_TestCase15.ics__ (Failed) 204 - testrecurprevious__prev__data/RecurrenceRule/LibICal/LibICal_TestCase55.ics__ (Failed) 205 - testrecurprevious__prev__data/RecurrenceRule/LibICal/LibICal_TestCase54.ics__ (Failed) 240 - testrecurprevious__prev__data/RecurrenceRule/LibICal/LibICal_TestCase15.ics__ (Failed) 443 - readandwrite__ical__data/vCalendar/KOrganizer_vCalTestCase13.vcs__ (Failed) 444 - readandwrite__ical__data/vCalendar/KOrganizer_vCalTestCase12.vcs__ (Failed) 445 - readandwrite__ical__data/vCalendar/KOrganizer_vCalTestCase11.vcs__ (Failed) 446 - readandwrite__ical__data/vCalendar/KOrganizer_vCalTestCase10.vcs__ (Failed) 447 - readandwrite__ical__data/vCalendar/KOrganizer_vCalTestCase09.vcs__ (Failed) 448 - readandwrite__ical__data/vCalendar/KOrganizer_vCalTestCase08.vcs__ (Failed) 449 - readandwrite__ical__data/vCalendar/KOrganizer_vCalTestCase07.vcs__ (Failed) 450 - readandwrite__ical__data/vCalendar/KOrganizer_vCalTestCase06.vcs__ (Failed) 451 - readandwrite__ical__data/vCalendar/KOrganizer_vCalTestCase05.vcs__ (Failed) 452 - readandwrite__ical__data/vCalendar/KOrganizer_vCalTestCase04.vcs__ (Failed) 453 - readandwrite__ical__data/vCalendar/KOrganizer_vCalTestCase03.vcs__ (Failed) 454 - readandwrite__ical__data/vCalendar/KOrganizer_vCalTestCase02.vcs__ (Failed) 455 - readandwrite__ical__data/vCalendar/KOrganizer_vCalTestCase01.vcs__ (Failed) ```
MicheleC commented 5 years ago
Poster
Owner

@SlavekB: thanks for testing. Will work on a fix. Most likely the update to libical 3 is resposnsible, as you pointed out. Good thing that the tests have spotted this 😄

@SlavekB: thanks for testing. Will work on a fix. Most likely the update to libical 3 is resposnsible, as you pointed out. Good thing that the tests have spotted this :smile:
MicheleC changed title from Fixed libkcal tests (new version) - bug 2719 to WIP - Fixed libkcal tests (new version) - bug 2719 5 years ago
MicheleC changed title from WIP - Fixed libkcal tests (new version) - bug 2719 to WIP: Fixed libkcal tests (new version) - bug 2719 5 years ago
SlavekB commented 5 years ago
Owner

Results on Debian 6.0 (Squeeze) and 7.0 (Wheezy):

The following tests FAILED:
         61 - testrecurrence__next__data/RecurrenceRule/LibICal/LibICal_TestCase55.ics__ (Failed)
         62 - testrecurrence__next__data/RecurrenceRule/LibICal/LibICal_TestCase54.ics__ (Failed)
         97 - testrecurrence__next__data/RecurrenceRule/LibICal/LibICal_TestCase15.ics__ (Failed)
        204 - testrecurprevious__prev__data/RecurrenceRule/LibICal/LibICal_TestCase55.ics__ (Failed)
        205 - testrecurprevious__prev__data/RecurrenceRule/LibICal/LibICal_TestCase54.ics__ (Failed)
        240 - testrecurprevious__prev__data/RecurrenceRule/LibICal/LibICal_TestCase15.ics__ (Failed)

Debian 8.0 (Jessie) and newer are fine – the 4XX tests are now resolved. I expect similar results for Ubuntu.

Results on Debian 6.0 (Squeeze) and 7.0 (Wheezy): ``` The following tests FAILED: 61 - testrecurrence__next__data/RecurrenceRule/LibICal/LibICal_TestCase55.ics__ (Failed) 62 - testrecurrence__next__data/RecurrenceRule/LibICal/LibICal_TestCase54.ics__ (Failed) 97 - testrecurrence__next__data/RecurrenceRule/LibICal/LibICal_TestCase15.ics__ (Failed) 204 - testrecurprevious__prev__data/RecurrenceRule/LibICal/LibICal_TestCase55.ics__ (Failed) 205 - testrecurprevious__prev__data/RecurrenceRule/LibICal/LibICal_TestCase54.ics__ (Failed) 240 - testrecurprevious__prev__data/RecurrenceRule/LibICal/LibICal_TestCase15.ics__ (Failed) ``` Debian 8.0 (Jessie) and newer are fine – the 4XX tests are now resolved. I expect similar results for Ubuntu.
MicheleC commented 5 years ago
Poster
Owner

tests seems to be caused by bug in old versions of libical (0.4x) where the DST zone of Los Angeles is inaccurate.

The failing tests refer to a time on April 2, 2002. In 2002 DST was applied on April 7, meaning till that date the time difference between UTC and Los Angeles was 8 hours and not 7. In Squeeze it seems libical thinks it was 7 hours instead of 8.

tests seems to be caused by bug in old versions of libical (0.4x) where the DST zone of Los Angeles is inaccurate. The failing tests refer to a time on April 2, 2002. In 2002 DST was applied on April 7, meaning till that date the time difference between UTC and Los Angeles was 8 hours and not 7. In Squeeze it seems libical thinks it was 7 hours instead of 8.
MicheleC changed title from WIP: Fixed libkcal tests (new version) - bug 2719 to Fixed libkcal tests (new version) - bug 2719 5 years ago
MicheleC commented 5 years ago
Poster
Owner

New commit tested on Squeeze. Looks good.

New commit tested on Squeeze. Looks good.
SlavekB commented 5 years ago
Owner

Building on all currently supported Debian / Ubuntu distributions – only amd64 and i386 for test purposes:

     26 SUCCESS
Building on all currently supported Debian / Ubuntu distributions – only amd64 and i386 for test purposes: ``` 26 SUCCESS ```
SlavekB reviewed 5 years ago
SlavekB left a comment
Owner

Tests work fine – good work! However, there is one suggestion for adjustment.

Tests work fine – good work! However, there is one suggestion for adjustment.
libkcal/tests/CMakeLists.txt Outdated
endforeach( )
set_target_properties( testfields
PROPERTIES COMPILE_FLAGS -DINPUT='\"${CMAKE_CURRENT_SOURCE_DIR}/data/test_pilot.ics\"'
SlavekB commented 5 years ago
Owner

To avoid potential problems with escaping quotes, it is better to use:

set_property( TARGET testfields APPEND PROPERTY
  COMPILE_DEFINITIONS INPUT="${CMAKE_CURRENT_SOURCE_DIR}/data/test_pilot.ics"
To avoid potential problems with escaping quotes, it is better to use: ``` set_property( TARGET testfields APPEND PROPERTY COMPILE_DEFINITIONS INPUT="${CMAKE_CURRENT_SOURCE_DIR}/data/test_pilot.ics" ```
MicheleC commented 5 years ago
Poster
Owner

ok thanks. will incorporate and recommit

ok thanks. will incorporate and recommit
SlavekB closed this pull request 5 years ago
SlavekB deleted branch bug/2719/libkcaltests-new 5 years ago
The pull request has been merged as 309e91d9d6.
Sign in to join this conversation.
Reviewers
Request review
No reviewers
Labels
Apply labels
Clear labels
GE/need-info
General - need additional info from contributor PR/keep-branch
Pull request - do not delete branch after merging PR/not-ok
Pull request - need fixing PR/rfc
Pull request - request for comments PR/update-trans
Pull request - update to translation files needed PR/wip
Pull request - work in progress RS/R14.0.x
Related to R14.0.x series RS/R14.1.x
Related to R14.1.x series SL/critical
Severity level - critical SL/major
Severity level - major SL/minor
Severity level - minor SL/normal
Severity level - normal SL/regression
Severity level - regression from previous version SL/trivial
Severity level - trivial SL/wishlist
Severity level - wishlist request ST/duplicate
Status - duplicate of another issue ST/invalid
Status - invalid report ST/notourproblem
Status - not our problem ST/rejected
Status - rejected ST/wontfix
Status - won't fix ST/worksforme
Status - works for me, unable to reproduce
No Label GE/need-info PR/keep-branch PR/not-ok PR/rfc PR/update-trans PR/wip RS/R14.0.x RS/R14.1.x SL/critical SL/major SL/minor SL/normal SL/regression SL/trivial SL/wishlist ST/duplicate ST/invalid ST/notourproblem ST/rejected ST/wontfix ST/worksforme
Milestone
Set milestone
Clear milestone
No items
No Milestone
R14.0.7 release
Assignees
Assign users
Clear assignees
No Assignees
2 Participants
Notifications
Due Date

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: TDE/tdepim#18
Write Preview
Loading…
Cancel
Save
There is no content yet.
Delete Branch 'bug/2719/libkcaltests-new'

Deleting a branch is permanent. It CANNOT be undone. Continue?

No
Yes