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] some instrumentation to hopefully track down weird appveyor failures #120

Closed

Conversation

njsmith
Copy link
Member

@njsmith njsmith commented Apr 11, 2017

don't merge this

@codecov-io
Copy link

codecov-io commented Apr 11, 2017

Codecov Report

Merging #120 into master will decrease coverage by 0.29%.
The diff coverage is 69.23%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##           master     #120     +/-   ##
=========================================
- Coverage   94.91%   94.62%   -0.3%     
=========================================
  Files          51       51             
  Lines        5903     5915     +12     
  Branches      463      463             
=========================================
- Hits         5603     5597      -6     
- Misses        279      288      +9     
- Partials       21       30      +9
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
trio/_core/_io_windows.py 0% <0%> (ø) ⬆️
trio/_core/tests/test_ki.py 100% <100%> (ø) ⬆️
trio/_core/_wakeup_socketpair.py 100% <100%> (ø) ⬆️
trio/_core/_ki.py 100% <100%> (ø) ⬆️
trio/_core/_multierror.py 96.31% <0%> (-3.69%) ⬇️
trio/socket.py 93.36% <0%> (-1.77%) ⬇️
trio/tests/test_socket.py 97.07% <0%> (-0.84%) ⬇️
trio/_core/_exceptions.py 100% <0%> (ø) ⬆️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 61cbe1d...ea2652c. Read the comment docs.

njsmith added 4 commits April 11, 2017 02:17
this now fails pretty reliably for me on my local Windows
VM. Something like:

pytest trio --count=10 -x -v -k ki_wakes --run-slow
@njsmith
Copy link
Member Author

njsmith commented Apr 12, 2017

ok, I think this served it's purpose

@njsmith njsmith closed this Apr 12, 2017
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 this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants