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
games-action/minetest: Add prometheus client support #16840
Conversation
Pull Request assignmentSubmitter: @vilhelmgray dev-cpp/benchmark: @gentoo/proxy-maint (new package) Linked bugsIn order to force reassignment and/or bug reference scan, please append Docs: Code of Conduct ● Copyright policy (expl.) ● Devmanual ● GitHub PRs ● Proxy-maint guide |
b9e7e95
to
defc959
Compare
Pull request CI reportReport generated at: 2020-07-26 20:56 UTC There are existing issues already. Please look into the report to make sure none of them affect the packages in question: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Could you also rebase and drop the civetweb commit?
LICENSE="MIT" | ||
SLOT="0" | ||
KEYWORDS="~amd64 ~x86" | ||
IUSE="+pull +push test zlib" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
These aren't very descriptive... What do they actually do? Should they be enabled unconditionally instead?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
pull
will build the libprometheus-cpp-pull.so.0.9.0
library, while push
will build the libprometheus-cpp-push.so.0.9.0
library; these respectively enable clients to pull and push data from/to a prometheus server. These two libraries seem to be relatively small (36K and 76K respectively) so I don't think it'll be that bad to just build them unconditionally. I'll remove these flags then.
defc959
to
ab86d6c
Compare
Pull request CI reportReport generated at: 2020-08-08 15:47 UTC There are existing issues already. Please look into the report to make sure none of them affect the packages in question: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
46/61 Test #60: run_state_assembly_test_CHECK ..............***Failed 0.01 sec
98% tests passed, 1 tests failed out of 61
Total Test time (real) = 3.04 sec
The following tests FAILED:
60 - run_state_assembly_test_CHECK (Failed)
Errors while running CTest
* ERROR: dev-cpp/benchmark-1.5.1::testworld failed (test phase):
* Tests failed. When you file a bug, please attach the following file:
* /var/tmp/portage/dev-cpp/benchmark-1.5.1/work/benchmark-1.5.1_build/Testing/Temporary/LastTest.log
You will most likely receive a bug report about it soon.
>>> Test phase: dev-cpp/prometheus-cpp-0.9.0
* Working in BUILD_DIR: "/var/tmp/portage/dev-cpp/prometheus-cpp-0.9.0/work/prometheus-cpp-0.9.0_build"
ctest -j 16 --test-load 16
Test project /var/tmp/portage/dev-cpp/prometheus-cpp-0.9.0/work/prometheus-cpp-0.9.0_build
Start 1: prometheus_test
Start 2: benchmarks
1/2 Test #1: prometheus_test ..................***Failed 1.79 sec
2/2 Test #2: benchmarks ....................... Passed 129.71 sec
50% tests passed, 1 tests failed out of 2
Label Time Summary:
Benchmark = 129.71 sec*proc (1 test)
Total Test time (real) = 129.71 sec
The following tests FAILED:
1 - prometheus_test (Failed)
Errors while running CTest
* ERROR: dev-cpp/prometheus-cpp-0.9.0::testworld failed (test phase):
* Tests failed. When you file a bug, please attach the following file:
* /var/tmp/portage/dev-cpp/prometheus-cpp-0.9.0/work/prometheus-cpp-0.9.0_build/Testing/Temporary/LastTest.log
* Messages for package dev-cpp/prometheus-cpp-0.9.0:
* One or more CMake variables were not used by the project:
* THIRDPARTY_CIVETWEB_WITH_SSL
I can't test minetest due to a bug in dependency,
https://bugs.gentoo.org/736342 but please do check the cmake variable being correct (is there a typo?) while we wait for this to be fixed.
ab86d6c
to
af5fbb0
Compare
Looks like this is testing the assembly code produced by the compiler. This might be an upstream problem so I'll open a issue page about this with them.
I'm unable to reproduce this failure. I get the following:
How are you executing this test? Maybe we have some difference in USE flags?
This CMake variable is only used if we are compiling with thirdparty libraries (we're not) so I've removed it in my latest force-push. |
Pull request CI reportReport generated at: 2020-08-16 13:56 UTC There are existing issues already. Please look into the report to make sure none of them affect the packages in question: |
Upstream benchmark Github issue for reference: google/benchmark#1020 |
Can we fix irrlicht dependency / irrlicht package here to get this moving forward? You probably have a patch for either case? |
Here's a PR to resolve the Irrlicht issue: #17426 Regarding the benchmark issues, upstream believes those assembly tests are not valid and suggests disabling them for now with |
Signed-off-by: William Breathitt Gray <vilhelm.gray@gmail.com>
Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/733984 Signed-off-by: William Breathitt Gray <vilhelm.gray@gmail.com>
Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/733984 Signed-off-by: William Breathitt Gray <vilhelm.gray@gmail.com>
af5fbb0
to
6a5a1c3
Compare
Pull request CI reportReport generated at: 2020-09-05 14:55 UTC There are existing issues already. Please look into the report to make sure none of them affect the packages in question: |
No description provided.