Closed
Bug 1084962
Opened 10 years ago
Closed 9 years ago
mozregression stopped when there were still inbound builds
Categories
(Testing :: mozregression, defect)
Testing
mozregression
Tracking
(Not tracked)
RESOLVED
WORKSFORME
People
(Reporter: glandium, Unassigned)
References
Details
(Keywords: regression)
I was bisecting with this: mozregression --bad=2014-10-17 --good=2014-08-30 And got down to: No more inbounds to bisect Last good revision: 78a4540b0a9c First bad revision: d5c1c2837d53 Pushlog: https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/pushloghtml?fromchange=78a4540b0a9c&tochange=d5c1c2837d53 As the pushlog shows, there are more to bisect in this range. In fact, restarting with mozregression --bad-rev=d5c1c2837d53 --good-rev=78a4540b0a9c --inbound allows to go further.
Comment 1•10 years ago
|
||
Were you using the latest version of mozregression (0.24)? There were some fixes related to getting a sufficiently large inbound range in that release. If you're still seeing the problem with that release, could you give the exact set of Y/N's to get down to that level?
Flags: needinfo?(mh+mozilla)
Reporter | ||
Comment 2•10 years ago
|
||
$ mozregression --version 0.24 $ mozregression --bad=2014-10-17 --good=2014-08-30 afc933adf723 -> good 4b3d816c21fd -> good f74ad36bb97b -> good 54217864bae9 -> good 62f0b771583c -> good a280a03c9f3c -> bad e1e2f5a56066 -> good at this point we're out of nightlies and go to inbound a280a03c9f3c -> bad (note this one was already tested, yet wanted again, but reading the log, it appears it wanted to test 91b1a62d1012d68d3e583b71b755b2a193c36d7a but actually used the previously downloaded file instead of downloading a new one ; it may have been confused by the version change) bd068c8342fc -> good ec600d4ffe61 -> good 3e08f81eed80 -> good 073e83cef238 -> good beae97bde5ca -> good 47ac4791adf3 -> good ... and this time I'm not stopping at the same range: No more inbounds to bisect Last good revision: 47ac4791adf3 First bad revision: a280a03c9f3c Pushlog: https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/pushloghtml?fromchange=47ac4791adf3&tochange=a280a03c9f3c Note how the boundary is the one that was tested twice.
Flags: needinfo?(mh+mozilla)
Comment 3•10 years ago
|
||
That definitely sounds like a bug. I'll look into it.
Flags: needinfo?(wlachance)
(In reply to Mike Hommey [:glandium] from comment #2) > at this point we're out of nightlies and go to inbound > a280a03c9f3c -> bad (note this one was already tested, yet wanted again, but > reading the log, it appears it wanted to test > 91b1a62d1012d68d3e583b71b755b2a193c36d7a but actually used the previously > downloaded file instead of downloading a new one ; it may have been confused > by the version change) > bd068c8342fc -> good > ec600d4ffe61 -> good > 3e08f81eed80 -> good > 073e83cef238 -> good > beae97bde5ca -> good > 47ac4791adf3 -> good > ... and this time I'm not stopping at the same range: > No more inbounds to bisect > Last good revision: 47ac4791adf3 > First bad revision: a280a03c9f3c > Pushlog: > https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/ > pushloghtml?fromchange=47ac4791adf3&tochange=a280a03c9f3c > > Note how the boundary is the one that was tested twice. Sounds like a symptom of bug 1014140
Updated•10 years ago
|
Keywords: regression
(In reply to Julien Pagès from comment #6) > May be resolved with bug 1109731. It's already fixed in trunk, so no. If I had to guess, it's probably the rewritten nightly-logic that fixed this. In 0.30, the nightly-archive was still around when switching to inbound, and mozregression used it as the first inbound if the filenames matched (i.e. same version number). In trunk, the archive seems to be deleted immediately once it's extracted, so when mozregression switches from Nightly to Inbound, there's no archive with the same filename, and mozreg is downloading the correct first Inbound-build.
Comment 8•9 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Elbart from comment #7) > If I had to guess, it's probably the rewritten nightly-logic that fixed this. I think you are right Elbart. Maybe William want to look at it more in details, but I'm pretty sure also it is fixed now. We should close this bug as RESOLVED.
Comment 9•9 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Elbart from comment #7) > (In reply to Julien Pagès from comment #6) > > May be resolved with bug 1109731. > It's already fixed in trunk, so no. I think we can close this one. It must works well with the most recent release 0.33. Will, I'm erasing your NI. :) If anybody can reproduce the bug, please reopen it.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 9 years ago
Flags: needinfo?(wlachance)
Resolution: --- → WORKSFORME
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•