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

Backport #13205 on branch v3.0.x (Add xvfb service to travis) #13216

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jan 19, 2019

Conversation

NelleV
Copy link
Member

@NelleV NelleV commented Jan 18, 2019

PR Summary

Attempt to fix some of our Travis failures on v3.0.x. Supersedes #13206
MarkInfo objects were removed in pytest 4.0. The other solution would be to backport the PR that fixes this from our master branch.

PR Checklist

  • Has Pytest style unit tests
  • Code is Flake 8 compliant
  • New features are documented, with examples if plot related
  • Documentation is sphinx and numpydoc compliant
  • Added an entry to doc/users/next_whats_new/ if major new feature (follow instructions in README.rst there)
  • Documented in doc/api/api_changes.rst if API changed in a backward-incompatible way

@NelleV NelleV changed the title FIX Starting xvfb as a service to avoid travis failures Backport #13205 on branch v3.0.x (Add xvfb service to travis) Jan 18, 2019
@tacaswell
Copy link
Member

Restarted 3.5 which was the only one that failed and it failed on the Qt tests. I wonder if there is some roll-over going on where we are getting a mixed population of workers, some the new way works and some the oldway works?

@dstansby
Copy link
Member

Yeah, the 3.5 build is getting a xvfb: unrecognized service (https://travis-ci.org/matplotlib/matplotlib/jobs/481215980#L1323)

@tacaswell
Copy link
Member

It is because we force the dist back to trusty, lets see what happens if we drop that....

This is to make sure we have the xvfb as a service
@NelleV
Copy link
Member Author

NelleV commented Jan 19, 2019

fui! Great! Thanks a lot for fixing that last problem.

@timhoffm timhoffm merged commit 4a63ccb into matplotlib:v3.0.x Jan 19, 2019
timhoffm added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 19, 2019
@timhoffm
Copy link
Member

Hm, maybe I should not have squashed the commits. Should I revert and merge without squashing?

@NelleV
Copy link
Member Author

NelleV commented Jan 19, 2019 via email

@NelleV
Copy link
Member Author

NelleV commented Jan 19, 2019 via email

@QuLogic
Copy link
Member

QuLogic commented Jan 19, 2019

Most of our backports are squashed anyway (all automated ones are.)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants