[00:00] * veebers reboots [00:15] thomi: we may have an issue with AP 1.5 & filemanager (http://q-jenkins.ubuntu-ci:8080/job/autopilot-release-gatekeeper/128/) I'm re-re-re-running with the ppa enabled this time in case there was a recent fix or something [00:15] thomi: to clarify, the linked job was without the ppa 100% passing [00:16] trying now with the ppa to get (more) resutls [00:16] results* [00:16] hmm, interesting [00:16] I'll start flashing my device [00:17] thomi: now that mine is actually charged I'll do the same [02:16] thomi: I see that you fired off another gatekeeper for filemanager, but it seems to have had troubles [02:16] ugh, what happened? [02:16] * veebers looks futher [02:16] I probably messed it up somehow [02:17] veebers: BTW, you need to manually install python3-autopilot for now [02:17] thomi: hmm, yeah "filemanager_app.phablet-test-run" [02:17] it should be just filemanager [02:17] (no -app) [02:17] ugh [02:17] can you re-kick off please/ [02:17] ? [02:17] thomi: oh? how come? (re: manually installing) [02:17] yeah sure [02:18] veebers: because otherwise it doesn't install 1.5 [02:18] fyi: http://q-jenkins.ubuntu-ci:8080/job/autopilot-release-gatekeeper/131/ [02:18] because autopilot-touch is already in the seed [02:19] so the current installed python3-autopilot satisfies the dependency [02:19] thomi: ugh, click. damn, you meant in the params for the job [02:20] this is the actual one: http://q-jenkins.ubuntu-ci:8080/job/autopilot-release-gatekeeper/132/ [02:20] hmm? yeah [02:20] sorry :) [02:24] nw, killed and restarted that job. Luckily I clicked now and not after the run :-) [02:38] ugh, thomi this is the 2nd time I've seen this failure (but I had a successful run after the first time I saw it): http://q-jenkins.ubuntu-ci:8080/job/autopilot-release-gatekeeper/132/label=daily-mako/console [02:38] namely the error; I: Unlock failed, script output: 'initctl: unable to determine sessions [02:38] veebers: kick it off again I guess, and maybe file a bug with the infrastructure people [02:38] (I pinged the CI guys about this earlier but haven't heard back, I fear they're all EOD) [02:38] thomi: aye, that's teh plan :-) [02:38] the* [02:40] hmm, perhaps I borked it. I forgot to add the ppa (after all that ruse to add python3-autopilot to it) [02:40] veebers: may as well change the job defaults for the python3-autopilot thing [02:40] no need to install python-autopilot any more, so just change it [02:41] thomi: ok, that shouldn't effect other people that may use that job? (namely Saviq which I understand does sometimes) [02:41] shouldn't [02:41] if it does, they can get their own :P [02:42] heh, aight, changing now [04:08] veebers: any luck with the latest run? [04:08] thomi: good question, I'll check now [04:08] thomi: no, now there are 3 failures: http://q-jenkins.ubuntu-ci:8080/job/autopilot-release-gatekeeper/133/testReport/ [04:09] veebers: can you investigate please? [04:10] thomi: I'll just purge the ap testing ppa I added and add the silo. I'll bother you and pick your brain if it appears to be something with the new xpathselect stuff :-) [04:10] what new xpathselect stuff? [04:10] oh [04:10] you mean in autopilot [04:10] thomi: sorry, yes [04:11] hang on, I think I can see the roblem already [04:11] look at the error in: http://q-jenkins.ubuntu-ci:8080/job/autopilot-release-gatekeeper/133/label=daily-mako/testReport/filemanager.tests.test_filemanager/TestFolderListPage/test_cancel_rename_file_with_touch_/ [04:11] veebers: ^ [04:11] * veebers looks [04:12] thomi: you'll have to elaborate [04:12] see anything odd there? [04:12] read the error message [04:13] this? name '' [04:13] right [04:13] WTF [04:13] that's not a class name [04:13] no, it's not [04:14] but I can't seem to reproduce that in ipython [04:14] I know python 3 does something with fully qualified names [04:15] odd, I'll see if I can step through and see better what's happening. [04:15] veebers: but I'd say that's what the issue is [04:15] It's really odd that there are now 3 failing but 2 befpre [04:15] before* [04:17] odd that the ActionSelectionPopover selection doesn't appear int he log [04:17] veebers: maybe run it with -vv, so we can see the debug log [04:17] but yeah, the class isn't being stringified properly I'll bet [04:17] thomi: hmm, i don't think I can do that with the gatekeeper job, but I'll try on my locally flashed device [04:18] veebers: right, I meant locally [04:18] coolio, on it [04:18] I'm happy to look at this with you, if you want to share your screen in a G+ hangout [04:18] thomi: let me get the device ready and see if I can reproduce it, otherwise sounds good [04:57] thomi: fyi running the filemanager tests locally on my desktop (on Trusty) all tests pass, still running on the device [04:57] you're running v1.5 & py3 on the desktop? [04:58] thomi: yes, just trying to get a 'reproducable' quicker [04:58] sure [04:58] hmmm [04:59] thomi: phone just finished, I get the failure, seeing if I can narrow it down to running just one test [05:00] veebers: crap, I just realised that my instinct was wrong [05:01] veebers: the fully qualified name is a red herring I'm afraid [05:01] thomi: hmm, ok :-\ I'll keep poking [05:02] but I'll fix that log message anyway [05:02] coolio [05:07] veebers: for your consideration, when you get the time: https://code.launchpad.net/~thomir/autopilot/temp-dev-fix-class-name/+merge/219286 [05:08] Personally, I think it should go in the release - happy to leave that decision to you though [05:08] thomi: cool,I should be able to look at that tonight [05:09] thomi: that code looks familiar, didn't I propose a MP that did this the other day? [05:10] * veebers is confused [05:10] veebers: that was for a different case [05:10] veebers: that was for a log message - this is for SNFE [05:10] veebers: but year, same thinko [05:10] I'm surprised we didn't catch this case when you filed your original MP, but oh well [05:10] thomi: ah ok, no longer confused [05:11] glad to hear it :) [05:11] well, perhaps 'less confused' is a more accurate statement [05:13] thomi: hmm, just running the failing test now passes for me on the device >:-| I'll poke around and see if I can narrow it down to a single failing or at least a combination that fails [05:13] hmmm [05:13] are you running with -vv? [05:13] thomi: I am now, I modified phablet-test-run to use -vv [05:14] would be really interesting to see the queries that are being run [05:14] in both cases [05:14] thomi: yeah, I'm running this 1.5 now, then I'll purge and run again with 1.4 + -vv and compare against the failing etc. [05:19] thomi: ugh awesome, this time around I get 1 test fail with SNFE 1 x ValueError error & 1 x AssertionError failure :-\ [05:19] so it's inconsistent [05:20] veebers: pastebin? [05:21] thomi: http://paste.ubuntu.com/7455887/ [05:21] ugh - we *really* need to fix that logging bug [05:22] heh. Gotta love the "Key pressed!" log message :-) [05:24] heh, and the "Can't do this properly on desktop or phablet" [05:24] heh :-P [05:25] thomi: how come I only see one instance of "'GetState Query(b'/comubuntufilemanager/QQuickView/MainView[id=2]//ActionSelectionPopover[objectName="fileActionsPopover"]')" before exception raised? [05:25] I would have assumed 10 lines in the log then eht exception [05:25] veebers: can you 'bzr blame' the source and see who's been touching the source? [05:25] veebers: PB line #? [05:26] veebers: it's just a select_single not a wait_select_single [05:26] oh wait [05:26] yeah [05:26] what I said [05:27] thomi: sorry I must be being slow, bzr blame which source? [05:27] the test source [05:27] ah good point [05:27] can do [05:27] You could try making it a wait_select_single and see if that improves things [05:28] thomi: hmm, I wonder if this version of AP is faster which is why 1.4 works currently [05:28] could be, although if it is, it won't be by much. [05:28] I haven't done any explicit optimisations [05:29] thomi: hmm ok. Hey, is there a nice why to 'blame' a whole directory? [05:29] don't think so - that doesn't really make sense [05:30] what would it show? [05:30] mode changes to the directory maybe, but I suspect that's not what you want :) [05:30] *shrug* split-pane with a tree of files and clicking them shows the diff/blame for that file [05:30] ahh, gotchya [05:31] bzr log does that then :) [05:31] even better - it does it with the author as the first index :) [05:31] bzr qlog tests/autopilot/ [05:31] or whatever [05:31] thomi: ah, that's what I'm doing at the moment :-) [05:34] thomi: so might be of interest, looking at the logs balloons recently made changes to the tests, one being this http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/7455926/ (changing wait_select_single -> get_action_selection_popover) [05:35] where get_action_selection_popover is in the ubuntu ui toolkit ap and uses select_single [05:35] hmmm [05:36] what does that method use? [05:36] I'll try patching that to use wait_select_single and see [05:36] thomi: you mean get_action_selection_popover? [05:37] yeah [05:37] thomi: [17:35:12] where get_action_selection_popover is in the ubuntu ui toolkit ap and uses select_single [05:38] I'm just about to re-run the test on the device with the uuitk patched to use wait_select_single [05:48] thomi: hmm, Without seeing the logs (still running) it seems that I saw a failure run past where the devices screen was blank white. It would be interesting to see the phones state (cpu usage etc.) during the test [05:53] veebers: I'm going to EOD now [05:54] veebers: can you please email whoever looks after that app with a link to the failures, our investigation, and ask them to look into it as a matter of urgency please? [05:54] thomi: ack. sure, can do [05:54] we *really* need to release AP tomorrow, which means whoever owns these tests needs to either allow us to release, or get them fixed :) [05:54] feel free to CC me [05:54] thanks man [05:54] talk to you later maybe. [05:54] thomi: If I can't find the dev for filemanager I may have to email the phone list [05:55] thomi: aye, night o./ [05:55] veebers: why didn't bzr blame work? [05:55] I thought you identified balloons? [05:55] thomi: right, but should it be on his shoulders? I don't know. I can start with him and he can hopefully fwd if needed [05:56] veebers: right, but you can get a complete list of authors with bzr blame, right? [05:56] I don't understand why you'd need to use the ML [05:56] thomi: I'll also add Chrs/robotfuel as it looks like both of them have looked at the flakiness of tests latetly [05:56] awesome [05:56] thomi: leave it to me I'll sort it out [05:56] schweet [05:56] going to have a beer and dinner [05:57] laters!@ [05:57] veebers: what's flaky? [05:57] robotfuel: isn't is super late for you? Perhaps you're clock is flaky ;-) [05:58] robotfuel: thomi and I are investigating some failures in the filemanager autopilot tests when using the to-be-released autopilot 1.5 [06:00] yes, I have some ideas. I was too busy with other stuff to fix it today, I am going to sleep so I can fix it in the morning. [06:00] veebers: can you email me instructions for using ap 1.5? [06:00] like which ppa I use? [06:00] robotfuel: awesome, ppa is: ci-train-ppa-service/landing-003 [06:00] robotfuel: should I email you and balloons re: pretty much what we've discussed here? [06:01] sure [06:01] robotfuel: I'll link to the gatekeeper job that we've been using to run it too [06:02] veebers: thanks again, good night === tsdgeos_ is now known as tsdgeos [14:24] Hi, is there are reason, why the qt and gtk modules in autopilot/introspection have no api doc pages? [14:24] See: http://unity.ubuntu.com/autopilot/_modules/autopilot/introspection/ [14:25] When you use the Quick search of the online help, you can't find any info on signals. [14:27] Hm. There is another online help without qt and gtk modules at: http://developer.ubuntu.com/api/devel/ubuntu-14.04/autopilot/_modules/autopilot/introspection/ [14:27] Strange. [14:27] Shall I file a bug? [14:45] tscheck, those are strange links [14:46] I don't believe the pages you found are meant to be published atm.. meaning, http://unity.ubuntu.com/autopilot/_modules/autopilot/introspection/gtk.html for instance [14:46] looks quite old [15:12] balloons: I see. But the first link are the official api docs, right? Any info about why the qt and gtk modules are not created? [15:14] tscheck, not offhand. some devs will be around in about 5 hours and they should have an answer for you === DanChapman_ is now known as DanChapman [15:26] elopio, did you ever make an optionselector emulator? [15:38] balloons: robotfuel did. It's already published. [15:39] elopio, I remember it, I just don't see it [15:39] and I need it now :-) [15:40] balloons: http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-sdk-team/ubuntu-ui-toolkit/trunk/view/head:/tests/autopilot/ubuntuuitoolkit/_custom_proxy_objects/_optionselector.py [15:40] ubuntuuitoolkit.OptionSelector, that's the new namespace. [15:47] elopio, is trusty missing this? [15:47] balloons: I don't know. [15:47] that's a question for bzoltan. [15:47] seems to be the case.. [15:48] ok, I finally found what you are talking about and I'll give it a try now. Looks nice [15:48] but yea, the package in trusty doesn't have it afaict [16:14] balloons: we should probably backport it. [16:15] it's not going to be hard to have the autopilot package of the toolkit working on trusty and on utopic [16:21] elopio, turns out, problem solved. zoltan said sdk team pushes updates to there ppa. ppa:ubuntu-sdk-team/ppa. I've asked francis to add that ppa to the jenkins builders so we should be covered [16:22] oh, well, maybe a little hard because they add features like the new header [16:22] balloons: nice, thanks. [20:19] barry: did you get a chance to look at my packaging stuff? [20:20] thomi: not yet. will soon [20:20] cool - thanks :) [20:21] morning [22:17] nuclearbob: cgoldberg: quick thing: [22:18] we said in a meeting that you guys were going to attend the qa/ci meeting and talk about something, was it the subunit integration work? [22:18] thomi, yea [22:18] in any case, we need to talk about that between ourselves first, so you have all the facts :) [22:18] thomi, can you bring it up tomorrow in the call? im about to EOD [22:18] Do you think we can do that in the TnT standup tomorrow, or should we make a separate call? [22:19] that answers that question :) [22:19] :) night