-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 148
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
Latest CITGM results #997
Comments
tape failed on rhel8-ppc64le due to a timeout; i suspect with a longer timeout it'd pass. |
I just had a nice chat with @RafaelGSS. Will look into it :) |
Regarding this test fail.
Command run: |
All the issues regarding macOS are not reproducible for me locally. I'm using the correct Node version and the correct package version, the tests are not failing on my machine. @nodejs/build |
Let's wait |
The failures on three platforms for EDIT: Oh, I see @RafaelGSS already linked to it in the description. I'd love to see someone get to the bottom of that one. |
The macOS failures have a PR that might be worth landing just to bypass things for straightforward JavaScript modules. |
@ljharb Is it possible to pass a longer timeout value via the command line? Something along the lines of Line 483 in cd1b288
|
Is really interesting to notice that in the last run on main there are no issues over macOS even without the skip applied, but on v18.18 there are 6 errors. I managed to reproduce the issue over [email protected] and also the multer issue. The multer one is flaky on my machine, here is the PR to fix it |
Please keep the max timeout to a reasonable amount. We don't want to end up with a citgm run that takes forever to timeout when something got stuck in the test. |
While that's a good short-term solution to the problem, an actual fix should hopefully land in either multer or node so that it stop failing on macos. In these cases please open an issue pinging the maintainer - you can find it by browsing Lines 337 to 341 in cd1b288
Here's an example of an issue pinging the maintainer of a package for help: #988. Keep in mind you might be able to post more info, since you're able to reproduce in your machine you might be able to add some helpful logs or maybe test which combinations of package version + node version it fails vs succeeds, etc. Thanks for the help @alfonsograziano it's really appreciated! 🙏 |
Here are a few issues/PRs open now to fix these issues: |
After merging both PRs: |
After the latest run on v18.18, we have 14 issues.
|
After the latest run on v21.0.0, we have 14 issues.
|
For the install failing, I think we should just drop these packages if we confirm these failures aren't machine-related.
Usually, we open an issue on nodejs/build. |
For the install failing: They are always failing on v18.18 but I cannot reproduce the failure on my local machine.
Done here: |
Next run: https://ci.nodejs.org/view/Node.js-citgm/job/citgm-smoker/3316/ - long queue - we should wait a bit |
@RafaelGSS I'm not sure if this run is correct, there are still errors from |
The CI job runs by default on published versions of CITGM -- there hasn't been a release with the changes to the lookup. |
Should I use UPDATE: Running https://ci.nodejs.org/view/Node.js-citgm/job/citgm-smoker/3318 |
The current status after this run is: 15 failures on these packages:
|
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment was marked as resolved.
It seems we got a green CI for LTS release lines. I'm opening #1033 for v21 failures. |
Let's use this issue to list failing modules and take action such as removing offending modules, skip specific arches and so on
@nodejs/citgm
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: