-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 148
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
add nodereport to lookup.json #226
Conversation
It's mostly passing (see nodejs/node-report#24 and nodejs/node-report#26). |
CITGM on master https://ci.nodejs.org/view/Node.js-citgm/job/citgm-smoker/449/ |
Weird, was passing for me on OSX |
Looks like the compilation is not finding |
Yes, looks like a node-gyp bug. Have raised nodejs/node-gyp#1055. |
Build failures should have been addressed in nodereport's master by nodejs/node-report#30. |
if this CI run is green then LGTM https://ci.nodejs.org/view/Node.js-citgm/job/citgm-smoker/472/ |
This won't have been fixed because you need to cut a new release of nodereport first.... @richardlau |
@GeorgeAdams95: nodereport v1.0.7 was released today. |
(Investigating the flaky issues in the earlier CIs) CI 3: https://ci.nodejs.org/view/Node.js-citgm/job/citgm-smoker/477/ |
@gibfahn did that last ci run work? Job is no longer archived |
@thealphanerd As I recall, there was an issue with CI that @richardlau was looking into, I'm not sure where it ended up. |
@gibfahn it ended up with you 😛. IIRC we were seeing intermittent makefile errors (no rule to make target) on the CI that I was unable to reproduce locally. I had a test fix in my fork of nodereport which you were going to test on the CI machines. |
The various CI runs have expired -- Would it be possible to rerun so we can capture the failure output in this pull request? (I'm still expecting it to fail as we haven't made changes since we've been unable to reproduce locally). |
https://ci.nodejs.org/job/gibfahn-citgm-smoker-more-platforms/MACHINE=ppcbe-ubuntu1404/79/console
|
@gdams ran https://ci.nodejs.org/view/Node.js-citgm/job/gibfahn-citgm-smoker-more-platforms/80/console with Node 6 which replicates what we were seeing before:
The failure (e.g. https://ci.nodejs.org/job/gibfahn-citgm-smoker-more-platforms/MACHINE=fedora22/80/console):
When we looked at the end of last year, this failure was not consistent across Linux distributions (it would fail on different distributions from run to run). |
171c836
to
eedccea
Compare
@gdams ran my test fork in https://ci.nodejs.org/view/Node.js-citgm/job/gibfahn-citgm-smoker-more-platforms/82/console and everything passed (!) so I'll submit a PR to nodereport. |
Move the include from src/node.h to src/node_internals.h. trace_event.h is not shipped in binary-only and headers-only tarballs, making it currently impossible to build add-ons against them. PR-URL: nodejs#10959 Refs: nodejs/citgm#226 (comment) Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Matthew Loring <mattloring@google.com> Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <riclau@uk.ibm.com> Reviewed-By: Stephen Belanger <admin@stephenbelanger.com>
okay so node-report is now landed and is fully fixed: https://ci.nodejs.org/view/Node.js-citgm/job/gibfahn-citgm-smoker-more-platforms/ |
Move the include from src/node.h to src/node_internals.h. trace_event.h is not shipped in binary-only and headers-only tarballs, making it currently impossible to build add-ons against them. PR-URL: nodejs#10959 Refs: nodejs/citgm#226 (comment) Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Matthew Loring <mattloring@google.com> Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <riclau@uk.ibm.com> Reviewed-By: Stephen Belanger <admin@stephenbelanger.com>
Move the include from src/node.h to src/node_internals.h. trace_event.h is not shipped in binary-only and headers-only tarballs, making it currently impossible to build add-ons against them. PR-URL: nodejs#10959 Refs: nodejs/citgm#226 (comment) Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Matthew Loring <mattloring@google.com> Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <riclau@uk.ibm.com> Reviewed-By: Stephen Belanger <admin@stephenbelanger.com>
nodereport is a foundation module that we should be testing. It seems to be passing on our IBM machines so looks like it should be okay