Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

CI failing because of async-std 1.6 #1588

Closed
tomaka opened this issue May 25, 2020 · 5 comments
Closed

CI failing because of async-std 1.6 #1588

tomaka opened this issue May 25, 2020 · 5 comments

Comments

@tomaka
Copy link
Member

tomaka commented May 25, 2020

It seems that the upgrade to async-std v1.6 broke our tests.

I'm opening this issue mostly to track down whether the problem has been figured out.

@tomaka
Copy link
Member Author

tomaka commented May 25, 2020

One should revert #1589 before this issue is closed.

@dignifiedquire
Copy link
Member

please let me know if there is anything that needs fixing on the async-std side, 1.6 was a big change but trying hard not to break codes

@romanb
Copy link
Contributor

romanb commented May 25, 2020

@dignifiedquire We didn't look into it yet, but if you're curious or want to lend a hand, it is the libp2p-noise integration tests that stall with 1.6 as if there is a missing task wakeup. It is maybe not a minimal test case but the tests are nevertheless relatively small and only use libp2p-core. Just running cargo test in protocols/noise with async-std 1.6 should be sufficient to reproduce.

@tomaka
Copy link
Member Author

tomaka commented May 25, 2020

We're maybe a bit too much on the cautious side here, but I would also like to run libp2p-with-async-std-1.6 with a production load and see if any issue arises.

@romanb
Copy link
Contributor

romanb commented Jul 1, 2020

Closed by #1618. See also #1612.

@romanb romanb closed this as completed Jul 1, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants