-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 17.7k
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
x/build/cmd/release: darwin-amd64 release tests aren't passing, cmd/go's TestScript/cgo_stale_precompiled fails #50892
Comments
The failure just reproduced a third time in a row for a complete run. I think this is now blocking the beta. |
Reproduced this locally just by setting Update: #50893 (comment) suggests it may not be the same problem as what |
Change https://golang.org/cl/381834 mentions this issue: |
Change https://golang.org/cl/381835 mentions this issue: |
Change https://golang.org/cl/381836 mentions this issue: |
This is another failure due to the same root cause as #46347. I'll rewrite the test to use the same approach as in https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/322629/5/src/cmd/go/testdata/script/cgo_stale.txt, and follow up with one or more issues to align either the default behavior of |
Change https://golang.org/cl/381854 mentions this issue: |
Change https://golang.org/cl/382055 mentions this issue: |
Bryan and I discussed that it might be a good idea to move the logic that sets -mmacosx-version-min=nnn via CGO_CFLAGS on GOOS=darwin from x/build/cmd/release to the cmd/go command. That way, if a problem happens, it's reported not only during tests that the release script runs, but also during normal pre/post-submit builders, thus sooner. Until that happens (and in case it doesn't), set this environment variable on at least one of our darwin/amd64 builders to improve our test coverage for this edge case. This is inexpensive to do compared to adding an entire new builder, and can be done quickly. This is one of minor differences in environment between the tests that run during by builders and during the release, and the long term plan to catch all of them is still via nightly releases. For golang/go#50892. Updates golang/go#29205. Change-Id: I5dd9a2f1dd457f54db6590d4ee181f81df8f7c38 Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/build/+/382055 Run-TryBot: Dmitri Shuralyov <[email protected]> Trust: Dmitri Shuralyov <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Carlos Amedee <[email protected]> TryBot-Result: Gopher Robot <[email protected]>
For #50892 Change-Id: I14ff1c43b39687a0ba5e668ee962cecfb49e4beb Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/381836 Trust: Bryan Mills <[email protected]> Run-TryBot: Bryan Mills <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Dmitri Shuralyov <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Michael Matloob <[email protected]> TryBot-Result: Gopher Robot <[email protected]>
GoTool was added in CL 20967, and revised in CL 21292, for #14901. I don't fully understand what problem the GoTool function was added to solve: the discussion on that issue was pretty sparse, but it seems like when we run tests of GOROOT packages they always know their own location relative to GOROOT (and thus always know where to find the 'go' tool). Lacking that understanding, I don't want to change its behavior, but I do at least want to verify that it resolves to the real 'go' tool in the common case (running 'go test' on a package in GOROOT/src). For #50892 For #50893 Updates #14901 Change-Id: I06d831e6765be631dfc4854d7fddc3d27fc1de34 Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/381834 Reviewed-by: Dmitri Shuralyov <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: David Chase <[email protected]> Auto-Submit: Bryan Mills <[email protected]> Run-TryBot: Bryan Mills <[email protected]> TryBot-Result: Gopher Robot <[email protected]>
When working on the
go1.18beta2
release via releasebot (releasebot -mode=prepare go1.18beta2
) I discovered two consecutive failures of the form:I tried to get a third failure, but instead the buildlet hung along with others as per #50890. That issue also has the complete output of both failures produced by releasebot.
This issue seems potentially related to #48319 which included a fix that included a whole bunch of the same keywords that appear in the failure (https://golang.org/cl/380915).
CC @dmitshur @toothrot @bcmills
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: