search for: gteste

I'm seeing some test failures for unit tests for msan (check-msan) happening in googletest, which I find weird. I'm on Arch Linux, with r342711. Below is one type of error that I see. The full log is 416MB (!) big. My guess is that those errors are related, but if anyone needs the full log, I'll provide it. Here is a reduced log from the end:

Current revision 285840 fails to build on FreeBSD. I used the command: cmake -G "Unix Makefiles" ../llvm -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX:PATH=/opt/llvm/current && gmake (I am aware of FreeBSD llvm/clang ports, but the source build should always succeed as well.) Yuri ---errors--- Scanning dependencies of target gtest [ 91%] Building CXX object

Please don't be alarmed by the failed compiles on llvm-ppc-darwin. They are likely not your fault. I'm trying to get a PPC build bot setup (arxan_bellini), and so far it's dying here: Linking CXX shared library ../../lib/libgtest.dylib Undefined symbols: "vtable for llvm::raw_ostream", referenced from: __ZTVN4llvm11raw_ostreamE$non_lazy_ptr in gtest.cc.o

Hi, I'm hitting that issue since Mesa 20.0.6 and it is present still in latest version 20.1.7 ``` [tkloczko at barrel SPECS]$ coredumpctl gdb 3926866 PID: 3926866 (test_va_api) UID: 1000 (tkloczko) GID: 1000 (tkloczko) Signal: 11 (SEGV) Timestamp: Sun 2020-09-13 18:57:06 BST (32s ago) Command Line: ./test_va_api Executable:

On Dec 27, 2008, at 7:41 PM, Misha Brukman wrote: > 2008/12/27 Mark Kromis <greybird at mac.com> > Just a curiosity question, why push for gtest vs Boost Test or a > different test suite? > I normally use Boost, and their test suite, so I'm more familiar > with that. So I was wondering is one better then the other, or is it > just that someone makes a patch for

2008/12/27 Mark Kromis <greybird at mac.com> > Just a curiosity question, why push for gtest vs Boost Test or > a different test suite? > I normally use Boost, and their test suite, so I'm more familiar with that. > So I was wondering is one better then the other, or is it just that someone > makes a patch for it? > I looked more into Boost.Test to see what's in

2008/12/27 Mark Kromis <greybird at mac.com> > So are you planning on maintaining whatever test system, or just have them > as a pre-requisite. For example are you going to have the gtest > incorporated, or have them install it separately first? I was under the > impression that the user would have to install gtest first. > The current plan is to check in the unittest

Mark Kromis wrote: > On Dec 27, 2008, at 7:41 PM, Misha Brukman wrote: >> 2008/12/27 Mark Kromis <greybird at mac.com> >> Just a curiosity question, why push for gtest vs Boost Test or a >> different test suite? >> I normally use Boost, and their test suite, so I'm more familiar with >> that. So I was wondering is one better then the other, or is it

Is no one else seeing this? (I've been seeing it for a few days) In file included from /usr/local/google/home/blaikie/dev/llvm/src/utils/unittest/googletest/gtest-all.cc:39: In file included from /usr/local/google/home/blaikie/dev/llvm/src/utils/unittest/googletest/include/gtest/gtest.h:57: In file included from

On Dec 27, 2008, at 8:54 PM, Talin wrote: > Although I haven't actually tried Boost.Test, I kind of figured that > this would be the case - that you pretty much have to drink the "Boost > Kool-Aid" in order to use it. I agree, boost.test seems like a non-starter from many reasons. >> So are you planning on maintaining whatever test system, or just have >> them

+eugenis I see this while running 'check-msan'. On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 9:10 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > Is no one else seeing this? (I've been seeing it for a few days) > > In file included from > > /usr/local/google/home/blaikie/dev/llvm/src/utils/unittest/googletest/gtest-all.cc:39: > In file included from > >

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 12:45 PM, Hans Wennborg <hans at chromium.org> wrote: > Chris Bieneman is probably your best bet, and maybe also Dan Liew. > Hans, My current, and hopefully final, revision of the proposed patch is simplified and reworked to solve the problem entirely from cmake without touching the the llvm-build python scripts. Basically, the new fix for avoiding the

I'm working on an update to the patch. The only thing holding me up is trying to come to a final decision as to where all the various pieces should live. Specifically, the Google Test library, and the actual unit tests themselves. On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 9:17 AM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > On Dec 27, 2008, at 8:54 PM, Talin wrote: > > Although I haven't

Hans, I have posted a complete patch for solving the linkage issues with LLVM_LINK_LLVM_DYLIB on Phabricator at http://reviews.llvm.org/D16945. The bulk of the fix the simple changes of... Index: cmake/modules/AddLLVM.cmake =================================================================== --- cmake/modules/AddLLVM.cmake (revision 259743) +++ cmake/modules/AddLLVM.cmake (working copy) @@

Hi folks, I'm using gcc 4.8.1 and I'm getting these warnings on every googletest file: src/llvm/utils/unittest/googletest/include/gtest/gtest-typed-test.h:239:47: warning: anonymous variadic macros were introduced in C99 [-Wvariadic-macros] # define REGISTER_TYPED_TEST_CASE_P(CaseName, ...) \ ^ It seems a gtest infrastructure file, so maybe

$(llvm-config --libs | tr " " "\n" | grep gtest) returns: -lgtest_main -lgtest instead of non-valid: -lLLVMgtest_main -lLLVMgtest It also fixes: $(ld): cannot find -lLLVMgtest $(ld): cannot find -lLLVMgtest_main --- unittests/Makefile.unittest | 2 +- utils/llvm-build/llvmbuild/componentinfo.py | 4 ++-- utils/llvm-build/llvmbuild/main.py |

On Sat, Dec 27, 2008 at 6:56 PM, Mark Kromis <greybird at mac.com> wrote: > > On Dec 27, 2008, at 7:41 PM, Misha Brukman wrote: > > 2008/12/27 Mark Kromis <greybird at mac.com> > >> Just a curiosity question, why push for gtest vs Boost Test or >> a different test suite? >> I normally use Boost, and their test suite, so I'm more familiar with

Hello, I am trying to configure a volume using DHT, however after I mount it, the mount point looks rather strange and when I try to do 'ls' on it I get: ls: /mnt/gtest: Stale NFS file handle I can create files and dirs in the mount point, I can list them but I cant list the mount point itself. Example: the folume is mounted on /mnt/gtest [root at storage2]# ls -l /mnt/ ?---------

On 30 June 2014 16:16, Shankar Easwaran <shankare at codeaurora.org> wrote: > I think you are hitting a bug, the Observer pattern was added a few weeks > back, and may be there is some sort of uninitialized variable ? This is my back-trace at "-O2 -g" (since -O1 pass): operator() (file=<optimized out>, __closure=0x7fffffffde40) at

On Sun, Oct 12, 2008 at 11:13 AM, Keir Mierle <mierle at gmail.com> wrote: > Justs to chime in: I'm one of the gtest devs. I'd like to add that gtest is > very portable, more so than llvm; it even works on WinCE and blackberry. If > there are specific features needed by LLVM, depending on what it is I may be > able to get it into gtest. I noticed that gtest uses fork to