Dear Maintainers,

In order to regression test OpenJDK 20 onwards JTREG 7.1 is required
[1]. It is already used by the Eclipse Adoptium project [2] to test
OpenJDK 20. We still need jtreg6 and jtreg packages for older
versions of OpenJDK. I was wondering if it would be acceptable for me
to file an intent to package proposal for JTREG7 and package it?

Best Regards,
Vladimir.

[1] https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/jdk-dev/2022-December/007229.html
[2] https://github.com/adoptium/aqa-tests/issues/4190

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thu, 2 Mar 2023, Vladimir Petko wrote:

OpenJDK 20. We still need jtreg6 and jtreg packages for older
versions of OpenJDK.

openjdk-8 was switched to jtreg6 recently. See if doko will
follow for 11.

I was wondering if it would be acceptable for me
to file an intent to package proposal for JTREG7 and package it?

Sure, why not (unless someone else is already working on it).

Is a new package needed anyway? Can’t this just be an upgrade
to jtreg6 (sure that will then look weird as jtreg6 version 7.1-1
but we have lots of such situations)? Is it incompatible somehow?

bye,
//mirabilos
--
Infrastrukturexperte • tarent solutions GmbH
Am Dickobskreuz 10, D-53121 Bonn • http://www.tarent.de/
Telephon +49 228 54881-393 • Fax: +49 228 54881-235
HRB AG Bonn 5168 • USt-ID (VAT): DE122264941
Geschäftsführer: Dr. Stefan Barth, Kai Ebenrett, Boris Esser, Alexander Steeg

**************************************************** /⁀\ The UTF-8 Ribbon
╲ ╱ Campaign against Mit dem tarent-Newsletter nichts mehr verpassen:  ╳  HTML eMail! Also, https://www.tarent.de/newsletter
╱ ╲ header encryption!
****************************************************

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thu, 2 Mar 2023, Vladimir Petko wrote:

Unfortunately jtreg6 is required. 6.1 is used by OpenJDK 17 and 6.1.1

I only see an “is used by” there, not a “requires this but cannot work with a newer version”.

Upper bounds are often much more flexible, see openjdk-8 using jtreg6
now for example ☻

That’s why I ask to investigate this.

bye,
//mirabilos
--
Infrastrukturexperte • tarent solutions GmbH
Am Dickobskreuz 10, D-53121 Bonn • http://www.tarent.de/
Telephon +49 228 54881-393 • Fax: +49 228 54881-235
HRB AG Bonn 5168 • USt-ID (VAT): DE122264941
Geschäftsführer: Dr. Stefan Barth, Kai Ebenrett, Boris Esser, Alexander Steeg

**************************************************** /⁀\ The UTF-8 Ribbon
╲ ╱ Campaign against Mit dem tarent-Newsletter nichts mehr verpassen:  ╳  HTML eMail! Also, https://www.tarent.de/newsletter
╱ ╲ header encryption!
****************************************************

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Hi,

Unfortunately jtreg6 is required. 6.1 is used by OpenJDK 17 and 6.1.1
is used by OpenJDK 18 and 19. Java 17 is going to be supported until
2030[1] and Java 21 is going to be supported until 2028 [2], so both
packages are warranted.

Best Regards,
Vladimir.
[1] https://javaalmanac.io/jdk/17/
[2] https://javaalmanac.io/jdk/21/

On Thu, Mar 2, 2023 at 1:31 PM Thorsten Glaser <[email protected]> wrote:

On Thu, 2 Mar 2023, Vladimir Petko wrote:

OpenJDK 20. We still need jtreg6 and jtreg packages for older
versions of OpenJDK.

openjdk-8 was switched to jtreg6 recently. See if doko will
follow for 11.

I was wondering if it would be acceptable for me
to file an intent to package proposal for JTREG7 and package it?

Sure, why not (unless someone else is already working on it).

Is a new package needed anyway? Can’t this just be an upgrade
to jtreg6 (sure that will then look weird as jtreg6 version 7.1-1
but we have lots of such situations)? Is it incompatible somehow?

bye,
//mirabilos
--
Infrastrukturexperte • tarent solutions GmbH
Am Dickobskreuz 10, D-53121 Bonn • http://www.tarent.de/
Telephon +49 228 54881-393 • Fax: +49 228 54881-235
HRB AG Bonn 5168 • USt-ID (VAT): DE122264941
Geschäftsführer: Dr. Stefan Barth, Kai Ebenrett, Boris Esser, Alexander Steeg

**************************************************** /⁀\ The UTF-8 Ribbon
╲ ╱ Campaign against Mit dem tarent-Newsletter nichts mehr verpassen:
╳ HTML eMail! Also, https://www.tarent.de/newsletter
╱ ╲ header encryption!
****************************************************

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Hi,

I've run tier1 and tier2 tests of OpenJDK 17 with jtreg 7.1.1.
For tier1 there are 4 failures in javac and 6 failures in javadoc.
Tier 2 fails jaxp testsuite with 418 failures due to permission error,
hotspot fails class data sharing test and jdk fails with 'can`t find
junit`, since jtreg now uses junit-platform rather than junit.jar.
It is definitely an option to chase those errors and failures down and
ensure that basic tests pass with jtreg 7.1.1, but keeping around
jtreg6 for JDK 17 and jtreg7 for JDK 20 is probably an easier option
that will not require a lot of maintenance overhead.

Best Regards,
Vladimir.

On Thu, Mar 2, 2023 at 2:00 PM Thorsten Glaser <[email protected]> wrote:

On Thu, 2 Mar 2023, Vladimir Petko wrote:

Unfortunately jtreg6 is required. 6.1 is used by OpenJDK 17 and 6.1.1

I only see an “is used by” there, not a “requires this but cannot work with a newer version”.

Upper bounds are often much more flexible, see openjdk-8 using jtreg6
now for example ☻

That’s why I ask to investigate this.

bye,
//mirabilos
--
Infrastrukturexperte • tarent solutions GmbH
Am Dickobskreuz 10, D-53121 Bonn • http://www.tarent.de/
Telephon +49 228 54881-393 • Fax: +49 228 54881-235
HRB AG Bonn 5168 • USt-ID (VAT): DE122264941
Geschäftsführer: Dr. Stefan Barth, Kai Ebenrett, Boris Esser, Alexander Steeg

**************************************************** /⁀\ The UTF-8 Ribbon
╲ ╱ Campaign against Mit dem tarent-Newsletter nichts mehr verpassen:
╳ HTML eMail! Also, https://www.tarent.de/newsletter
╱ ╲ header encryption!
****************************************************

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Fri, 3 Mar 2023, Vladimir Petko wrote:

It is definitely an option to chase those errors and failures down and
ensure that basic tests pass with jtreg 7.1.1, but keeping around
jtreg6 for JDK 17 and jtreg7 for JDK 20 is probably an easier option
that will not require a lot of maintenance overhead.

Thanks for investigating. Yes, you’ve got convincing arguments, as it’s
not a drop-in compatible replacement ☺

bye,
//mirabilos
--
Infrastrukturexperte • tarent solutions GmbH
Am Dickobskreuz 10, D-53121 Bonn • http://www.tarent.de/
Telephon +49 228 54881-393 • Fax: +49 228 54881-235
HRB AG Bonn 5168 • USt-ID (VAT): DE122264941
Geschäftsführer: Dr. Stefan Barth, Kai Ebenrett, Boris Esser, Alexander Steeg

**************************************************** /⁀\ The UTF-8 Ribbon
╲ ╱ Campaign against Mit dem tarent-Newsletter nichts mehr verpassen:  ╳  HTML eMail! Also, https://www.tarent.de/newsletter
╱ ╲ header encryption!
****************************************************

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Hi,

I have uploaded a draft [1] to salsa. I have kept changelog from
jtreg6 (in line with jtreg6 packaging which kept jtreg changelog). Was
it a correct thing to do, or should it be truncated?
I could not find an ITP bug for jtreg6, does it mean that there is
some other process that I need to follow?

Best Regards,
Vladimir.

[1] https://salsa.debian.org/vpa1977/jtreg7
[2] https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/jtreg6
[3] https://salsa.debian.org/java-team/jtreg

On Fri, Mar 3, 2023 at 3:53 PM Thorsten Glaser <[email protected]> wrote:

On Fri, 3 Mar 2023, Vladimir Petko wrote:

It is definitely an option to chase those errors and failures down and >ensure that basic tests pass with jtreg 7.1.1, but keeping around
jtreg6 for JDK 17 and jtreg7 for JDK 20 is probably an easier option
that will not require a lot of maintenance overhead.

Thanks for investigating. Yes, you’ve got convincing arguments, as it’s not a drop-in compatible replacement ☺

bye,
//mirabilos
--
Infrastrukturexperte • tarent solutions GmbH
Am Dickobskreuz 10, D-53121 Bonn • http://www.tarent.de/
Telephon +49 228 54881-393 • Fax: +49 228 54881-235
HRB AG Bonn 5168 • USt-ID (VAT): DE122264941
Geschäftsführer: Dr. Stefan Barth, Kai Ebenrett, Boris Esser, Alexander Steeg

**************************************************** /⁀\ The UTF-8 Ribbon
╲ ╱ Campaign against Mit dem tarent-Newsletter nichts mehr verpassen:
╳ HTML eMail! Also, https://www.tarent.de/newsletter
╱ ╲ header encryption!
****************************************************

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Tue, 14 Mar 2023, Vladimir Petko wrote:

jtreg6 (in line with jtreg6 packaging which kept jtreg changelog). Was
it a correct thing to do, or should it be truncated?

You can keep it; debhelper can now truncate it.

I could not find an ITP bug for jtreg6, does it mean that there is
some other process that I need to follow?

ITPs are not necessary, only “nice” (e.g. to avoid duplicate work).
If you consider it uploadable, upload it ignoring the lack of ITP.

bye,
//mirabilos
--
Infrastrukturexperte • tarent solutions GmbH
Am Dickobskreuz 10, D-53121 Bonn • http://www.tarent.de/
Telephon +49 228 54881-393 • Fax: +49 228 54881-235
HRB AG Bonn 5168 • USt-ID (VAT): DE122264941
Geschäftsführer: Dr. Stefan Barth, Kai Ebenrett, Boris Esser, Alexander Steeg

**************************************************** /⁀\ The UTF-8 Ribbon
╲ ╱ Campaign against Mit dem tarent-Newsletter nichts mehr verpassen:  ╳  HTML eMail! Also, https://www.tarent.de/newsletter
╱ ╲ header encryption!
****************************************************

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Hi,

Thank you very much!!!!!

Since I can not upload I will file the ITP then. Would it be ok to
keep ownership with the Debian Java Team in line with jtreg6?

Best Regards,
Vladimir.

On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 10:29 PM Thorsten Glaser <[email protected]> wrote:

On Tue, 14 Mar 2023, Vladimir Petko wrote:

jtreg6 (in line with jtreg6 packaging which kept jtreg changelog). Was
it a correct thing to do, or should it be truncated?

You can keep it; debhelper can now truncate it.

I could not find an ITP bug for jtreg6, does it mean that there is
some other process that I need to follow?

ITPs are not necessary, only “nice” (e.g. to avoid duplicate work).
If you consider it uploadable, upload it ignoring the lack of ITP.

bye,
//mirabilos
--
Infrastrukturexperte • tarent solutions GmbH
Am Dickobskreuz 10, D-53121 Bonn • http://www.tarent.de/
Telephon +49 228 54881-393 • Fax: +49 228 54881-235
HRB AG Bonn 5168 • USt-ID (VAT): DE122264941
Geschäftsführer: Dr. Stefan Barth, Kai Ebenrett, Boris Esser, Alexander Steeg

**************************************************** /⁀\ The UTF-8 Ribbon
╲ ╱ Campaign against Mit dem tarent-Newsletter nichts mehr verpassen:
╳ HTML eMail! Also, https://www.tarent.de/newsletter
╱ ╲ header encryption!
****************************************************

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wed, 15 Mar 2023, Vladimir Petko wrote:

Since I can not upload I will file the ITP then.

Depends on your sponsor, whether they insist on one. But, go ahead.

Would it be ok to
keep ownership with the Debian Java Team in line with jtreg6?

Usual procedure is that for team-maintained packages, the
Maintainer field is the team and the Uploaders field has
at least one human who ideally is the primary maintainer
for that package; this can be a nōn-Debian member.

bye,
//mirabilos
--
Infrastrukturexperte • tarent solutions GmbH
Am Dickobskreuz 10, D-53121 Bonn • http://www.tarent.de/
Telephon +49 228 54881-393 • Fax: +49 228 54881-235
HRB AG Bonn 5168 • USt-ID (VAT): DE122264941
Geschäftsführer: Dr. Stefan Barth, Kai Ebenrett, Boris Esser, Alexander Steeg

**************************************************** /⁀\ The UTF-8 Ribbon
╲ ╱ Campaign against Mit dem tarent-Newsletter nichts mehr verpassen:  ╳  HTML eMail! Also, https://www.tarent.de/newsletter
╱ ╲ header encryption!
****************************************************

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Hi,

Thank you very much for your help!!!
I have filed ITP here [1].

Best Regards,
Vladimir.

[1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1032981

On Wed, Mar 15, 2023 at 8:53 AM Thorsten Glaser <[email protected]> wrote:

On Wed, 15 Mar 2023, Vladimir Petko wrote:

Since I can not upload I will file the ITP then.

Depends on your sponsor, whether they insist on one. But, go ahead.

Would it be ok to
keep ownership with the Debian Java Team in line with jtreg6?

Usual procedure is that for team-maintained packages, the
Maintainer field is the team and the Uploaders field has
at least one human who ideally is the primary maintainer
for that package; this can be a nōn-Debian member.

bye,
//mirabilos
--
Infrastrukturexperte • tarent solutions GmbH
Am Dickobskreuz 10, D-53121 Bonn • http://www.tarent.de/
Telephon +49 228 54881-393 • Fax: +49 228 54881-235
HRB AG Bonn 5168 • USt-ID (VAT): DE122264941
Geschäftsführer: Dr. Stefan Barth, Kai Ebenrett, Boris Esser, Alexander Steeg

**************************************************** /⁀\ The UTF-8 Ribbon
╲ ╱ Campaign against Mit dem tarent-Newsletter nichts mehr verpassen:
╳ HTML eMail! Also, https://www.tarent.de/newsletter
╱ ╲ header encryption!
****************************************************

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Hi,

Thank you for the package Vladimir, I'll take care of it. I think I'll
rebase it on top of the previous jtreg package to keep the continuity.

Emmanuel Bourg


Le 2023-03-15 08:23, Vladimir Petko a écrit :

Hi,

Thank you very much for your help!!!
I have filed ITP here [1].

Best Regards,
Vladimir.

[1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1032981

On Wed, Mar 15, 2023 at 8:53 AM Thorsten Glaser <[email protected]>
wrote:

On Wed, 15 Mar 2023, Vladimir Petko wrote:

Since I can not upload I will file the ITP then.

Depends on your sponsor, whether they insist on one. But, go ahead.

Would it be ok to
keep ownership with the Debian Java Team in line with jtreg6?

Usual procedure is that for team-maintained packages, the
Maintainer field is the team and the Uploaders field has
at least one human who ideally is the primary maintainer
for that package; this can be a nōn-Debian member.

bye,
//mirabilos
--
Infrastrukturexperte • tarent solutions GmbH
Am Dickobskreuz 10, D-53121 Bonn • http://www.tarent.de/
Telephon +49 228 54881-393 • Fax: +49 228 54881-235
HRB AG Bonn 5168 • USt-ID (VAT): DE122264941
Geschäftsführer: Dr. Stefan Barth, Kai Ebenrett, Boris Esser,
Alexander Steeg


****************************************************
/⁀\ The UTF-8 Ribbon
╲ ╱ Campaign against Mit dem tarent-Newsletter nichts mehr
verpassen:
╳ HTML eMail! Also, https://www.tarent.de/newsletter
╱ ╲ header encryption!

****************************************************

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Le 2023-03-02 01:30, Thorsten Glaser a écrit :

openjdk-8 was switched to jtreg6 recently. See if doko will
follow for 11.

openjdk-11/11.0.18+10-1 in unstable now uses jtreg6

Is a new package needed anyway?

I agree with Thorsten, a new package is probably not needed. All
openjdk-*
packages in unstable now use jtreg6. So I suggest upgrading the unused
jtreg package to the version 7 instead of creating a new package.

Emmanuel Bourg

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Hi,

Thank you very much!!!!

Best Regards,
Vladimir.

On Wed, Mar 15, 2023 at 10:43 PM Emmanuel Bourg <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi,

Thank you for the package Vladimir, I'll take care of it. I think I'll
rebase it on top of the previous jtreg package to keep the continuity.

Emmanuel Bourg

Le 2023-03-15 08:23, Vladimir Petko a écrit :

Hi,

Thank you very much for your help!!!
I have filed ITP here [1].

Best Regards,
Vladimir.

[1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1032981

On Wed, Mar 15, 2023 at 8:53 AM Thorsten Glaser <[email protected]> wrote:

On Wed, 15 Mar 2023, Vladimir Petko wrote:

Since I can not upload I will file the ITP then.

Depends on your sponsor, whether they insist on one. But, go ahead.

Would it be ok to
keep ownership with the Debian Java Team in line with jtreg6?

Usual procedure is that for team-maintained packages, the
Maintainer field is the team and the Uploaders field has
at least one human who ideally is the primary maintainer
for that package; this can be a nōn-Debian member.

bye,
//mirabilos
--
Infrastrukturexperte • tarent solutions GmbH
Am Dickobskreuz 10, D-53121 Bonn • http://www.tarent.de/
Telephon +49 228 54881-393 • Fax: +49 228 54881-235
HRB AG Bonn 5168 • USt-ID (VAT): DE122264941
Geschäftsführer: Dr. Stefan Barth, Kai Ebenrett, Boris Esser,
Alexander Steeg


****************************************************
/⁀\ The UTF-8 Ribbon
╲ ╱ Campaign against Mit dem tarent-Newsletter nichts mehr
verpassen:
╳ HTML eMail! Also, https://www.tarent.de/newsletter
╱ ╲ header encryption!

****************************************************

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Hi,

Regarding using jtreg6 for tests of openjdk-8 it should be noted that
some tier1[1] tests fail with jtreg6.

For instance jtreg 6 fails:
FAILED: java/util/stream/boottest/java/util/stream/DoubleNodeTest.java
FAILED: java/util/stream/boottest/java/util/stream/FlagOpTest.java
FAILED: java/util/stream/boottest/java/util/stream/IntNodeTest.java
FAILED: java/util/stream/boottest/java/util/stream/LongNodeTest.java
FAILED: java/util/stream/boottest/java/util/stream/NodeBuilderTest.java
FAILED: java/util/stream/boottest/java/util/stream/NodeTest.java
FAILED: java/util/stream/boottest/java/util/stream/SliceSpliteratorTest.java FAILED: java/util/stream/boottest/java/util/stream/SpinedBufferTest.java FAILED: java/util/stream/boottest/java/util/stream/StreamFlagsTest.java
FAILED: java/util/stream/boottest/java/util/stream/StreamOpFlagsTest.java FAILED: java/util/stream/boottest/java/util/stream/StreamReuseTest.java

and with jreg 5 those tests pass: java/util/stream/boottest/java/util/stream/DoubleNodeTest.java
Passed. Execution successful java/util/stream/boottest/java/util/stream/FlagOpTest.java
Passed. Execution successful java/util/stream/boottest/java/util/stream/IntNodeTest.java
Passed. Execution successful java/util/stream/boottest/java/util/stream/LongNodeTest.java
Passed. Execution successful java/util/stream/boottest/java/util/stream/NodeBuilderTest.java
Passed. Execution successful java/util/stream/boottest/java/util/stream/NodeTest.java
Passed. Execution successful java/util/stream/boottest/java/util/stream/SliceSpliteratorTest.java
Passed. Execution successful java/util/stream/boottest/java/util/stream/SpinedBufferTest.java
Passed. Execution successful java/util/stream/boottest/java/util/stream/StreamFlagsTest.java
Passed. Execution successful java/util/stream/boottest/java/util/stream/StreamOpFlagsTest.java
Passed. Execution successful java/util/stream/boottest/java/util/stream/StreamReuseTest.java
Passed. Execution successful

There are more instances like this and if it is of interest I can
provide a full comparison.

Would it be possible to consider keeping jtreg 5 version around in
order to be able to perform regression tests in line with the upstream testsuite?

Best Regards,
Vladimir.

[1] https://openjdk.org/jtreg/faq.html#what-is-tiered-testing

On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 4:22 AM Emmanuel Bourg <[email protected]> wrote:

Le 2023-03-02 01:30, Thorsten Glaser a écrit :

openjdk-8 was switched to jtreg6 recently. See if doko will
follow for 11.

openjdk-11/11.0.18+10-1 in unstable now uses jtreg6

Is a new package needed anyway?

I agree with Thorsten, a new package is probably not needed. All
openjdk-*
packages in unstable now use jtreg6. So I suggest upgrading the unused
jtreg package to the version 7 instead of creating a new package.

Emmanuel Bourg

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Hi,

I see. I will look into those failures to see if it is something that
I can submit upstream, so that jtreg 5 could be phased out.

Thanks a lot for the help again !!!!!!!

Best Regards,
Valdimir.

On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 11:11 AM Thorsten Glaser <[email protected]> wrote:

On Thu, 16 Mar 2023, Vladimir Petko wrote:

Regarding using jtreg6 for tests of openjdk-8 it should be noted that
some tier1[1] tests fail with jtreg6.

Lots of tests fail there anyway, also due to lack of asmtools.

For instance jtreg 6 fails:

[…]

and with jreg 5 those tests pass:

[…]

There are more instances like this and if it is of interest I can
provide a full comparison.

Might be useful to pass that on to the 8u developers.
I won’t be doing anything with it and the ELTS people
are mostly interested in comparing test results against
the previous upload’s, to see that nothing broke too badly.
If upstream makes their tests jtreg6 compatible all the better.

Would it be possible to consider keeping jtreg 5 version around in

No, we’re targetting jessie and stretch with openjdk-8 mostly,
which lacks jtreg 5 and where the backported jtreg6 really
helps, without, we had to disable the tests entirely.

bye,
//mirabilos
--
Infrastrukturexperte • tarent solutions GmbH
Am Dickobskreuz 10, D-53121 Bonn • http://www.tarent.de/
Telephon +49 228 54881-393 • Fax: +49 228 54881-235
HRB AG Bonn 5168 • USt-ID (VAT): DE122264941
Geschäftsführer: Dr. Stefan Barth, Kai Ebenrett, Boris Esser, Alexander Steeg

**************************************************** /⁀\ The UTF-8 Ribbon
╲ ╱ Campaign against Mit dem tarent-Newsletter nichts mehr verpassen:
╳ HTML eMail! Also, https://www.tarent.de/newsletter
╱ ╲ header encryption!
****************************************************

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thu, 16 Mar 2023, Vladimir Petko wrote:

Regarding using jtreg6 for tests of openjdk-8 it should be noted that
some tier1[1] tests fail with jtreg6.

Lots of tests fail there anyway, also due to lack of asmtools.

For instance jtreg 6 fails:

[…]

and with jreg 5 those tests pass:

[…]

There are more instances like this and if it is of interest I can
provide a full comparison.

Might be useful to pass that on to the 8u developers.
I won’t be doing anything with it and the ELTS people
are mostly interested in comparing test results against
the previous upload’s, to see that nothing broke too badly.
If upstream makes their tests jtreg6 compatible all the better.

Would it be possible to consider keeping jtreg 5 version around in

No, we’re targetting jessie and stretch with openjdk-8 mostly,
which lacks jtreg 5 and where the backported jtreg6 really
helps, without, we had to disable the tests entirely.

bye,
//mirabilos
--
Infrastrukturexperte • tarent solutions GmbH
Am Dickobskreuz 10, D-53121 Bonn • http://www.tarent.de/
Telephon +49 228 54881-393 • Fax: +49 228 54881-235
HRB AG Bonn 5168 • USt-ID (VAT): DE122264941
Geschäftsführer: Dr. Stefan Barth, Kai Ebenrett, Boris Esser, Alexander Steeg

**************************************************** /⁀\ The UTF-8 Ribbon
╲ ╱ Campaign against Mit dem tarent-Newsletter nichts mehr verpassen:  ╳  HTML eMail! Also, https://www.tarent.de/newsletter
╱ ╲ header encryption!
****************************************************

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Hi,

Sorry for the late reply, but I have realized that there might be an
issue with adopting jtreg6 for Java 8 testing.

Jtreg 6 requires testng 7.3[1] and Jtreg 5 uses 6.9.5[2]. The current
jtreg6 package uses 6.9.5 making it suitable for Java 8 testing but
not so much for 11 and up. If testng is upgraded to 7.5 it will be
still binary compatible, but there will be new regressions due to API
breaks. If testng is updated to 7.7.1 (latest), then it will not be
binary compatible with Java 8.
Using 7.5 will allow tier1 and tier2 tests with minimal exceptions to
pass for OpenJDK 20[3] except some memory allocation failures on armhf
which need to be investigated[4]. Same applies to 17 from my local
testing.
Upgrading to 7.3 is a bit complicated due to additional test
dependencies present in this version of the package, so 7.5 or 7.7.1
seem like a better option.

Best Regards,
Vladimir.

[1] https://github.com/openjdk/jtreg/blob/jtreg-6.1%2B1/make/build-support/version-numbers
[2] https://github.com/openjdk/jtreg/blob/jtreg5.1-b01/make/build-all.sh
[3] https://launchpadlibrarian.net/658179660/buildlog_ubuntu-lunar-amd64.openjdk-20_20+36~us1-0ubuntu1~ppa20_BUILDING.txt.gz
[4] https://launchpadlibrarian.net/658107824/buildlog_ubuntu-lunar-armhf.openjdk-20_20+36~us1-0ubuntu1~ppa12_BUILDING.txt.gz

On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 11:14 AM Vladimir Petko <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi,

I see. I will look into those failures to see if it is something that
I can submit upstream, so that jtreg 5 could be phased out.

Thanks a lot for the help again !!!!!!!

Best Regards,
Valdimir.

On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 11:11 AM Thorsten Glaser <[email protected]> wrote:

On Thu, 16 Mar 2023, Vladimir Petko wrote:

Regarding using jtreg6 for tests of openjdk-8 it should be noted that >some tier1[1] tests fail with jtreg6.

Lots of tests fail there anyway, also due to lack of asmtools.

For instance jtreg 6 fails:

[…]

and with jreg 5 those tests pass:

[…]

There are more instances like this and if it is of interest I can
provide a full comparison.

Might be useful to pass that on to the 8u developers.
I won’t be doing anything with it and the ELTS people
are mostly interested in comparing test results against
the previous upload’s, to see that nothing broke too badly.
If upstream makes their tests jtreg6 compatible all the better.

Would it be possible to consider keeping jtreg 5 version around in

No, we’re targetting jessie and stretch with openjdk-8 mostly,
which lacks jtreg 5 and where the backported jtreg6 really
helps, without, we had to disable the tests entirely.

bye,
//mirabilos
--
Infrastrukturexperte • tarent solutions GmbH
Am Dickobskreuz 10, D-53121 Bonn • http://www.tarent.de/
Telephon +49 228 54881-393 • Fax: +49 228 54881-235
HRB AG Bonn 5168 • USt-ID (VAT): DE122264941
Geschäftsführer: Dr. Stefan Barth, Kai Ebenrett, Boris Esser, Alexander Steeg

****************************************************
/⁀\ The UTF-8 Ribbon
╲ ╱ Campaign against Mit dem tarent-Newsletter nichts mehr verpassen:
╳ HTML eMail! Also, https://www.tarent.de/newsletter
╱ ╲ header encryption!
****************************************************

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)