Is anyone using windows server 2008 for ruby / ironruby? I am trying to run rake rspec and get an error when it gets to the summary: Q:\ironruby>rake rspec (in Q:/ironruby) ./chdir_spec.rb:19: warning: conflicting chdir during another chdir block ./chdir_spec.rb:10: warning: conflicting chdir during another chdir block ./chdir_spec.rb:24: warning: conflicting chdir during another chdir block ./chdir_spec.rb:10: warning: conflicting chdir during another chdir block ./chdir_spec.rb:10: warning: conflicting chdir during another chdir block ./chdir_spec.rb:10: warning: conflicting chdir during another chdir block ./chdir_spec.rb:10: warning: conflicting chdir during another chdir block ./shared/glob.rb:6: warning: conflicting chdir during another chdir block ./shared/glob.rb:119: warning: conflicting chdir during another chdir block ./shared/glob.rb:6: warning: conflicting chdir during another chdir block ./shared/glob.rb:119: warning: conflicting chdir during another chdir block ./glob_spec.rb:10: warning: conflicting chdir during another chdir block ./glob_spec.rb:52: warning: conflicting chdir during another chdir block 499 examples, 99 failures rake aborted! Command failed with status (99): ["ruby.exe" spec_runner.rb - - summary...] Q:/ironruby/rakefile:234:in `invoke_spec' (See full trace by running task with --trace) Q:\ironruby> Thanks
on 08.05.2008 17:53
on 08.05.2008 18:42
Chris Ortman: > Q:\ironruby>rake rspec > (in Q:/ironruby) > ./chdir_spec.rb:19: warning: conflicting chdir during another chdir > block > ... > 499 examples, 99 failures > rake aborted! > Command failed with status (99): ["ruby.exe" spec_runner.rb - - > summary...] Q:/ironruby/rakefile:234:in `invoke_spec' Using my psychic debugging skills, this might have something to do with the drive letter vs. it being a Win2K8 issue. We still have to spend some time thinking about how to deal with paths correctly in IronRuby. Thanks, -John
on 09.05.2008 07:30
I do get the same results if I run this from c:\ironruby. On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 11:20 AM, John Lam (IRONRUBY)
on 09.05.2008 07:38
Sorry, didn't mean to send yet.... I am having the same behavior running from c:\ironruby I think that calling ruby.exe spec_runner.rb is returning the number of failures as the return code and that is causing the problem....that's the only thing I can think of the 99 coming from anyway. On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 11:20 AM, John Lam (IRONRUBY)
on 09.05.2008 09:10
I get the same result on my XP Pro machine. I think it is just the way that it works. Pete
on 09.05.2008 15:16
Chris Ortman: > Sorry, didn't mean to send yet.... > I am having the same behavior running from c:\ironruby > > I think that calling ruby.exe spec_runner.rb is returning the number of > failures as the return code and that is causing the problem....that's > the only thing I can think of the 99 coming from anyway. Yes - that's what it's supposed to do. This is how we detect failure in our automated test suites. I was more worried about the chdir_spec warnings that you showed. In any event, we have the new spec suite up and running here. I hope we can ship those new bits out by the end of today so folks can hack on some new stuff over the weekend. Thanks, -John
on 11.05.2008 15:25
The chdir_spec warnings are to do with block-less calls to chdir within
a
block attached to another call to chdir.
The following code does not raise a warning...
irb(main):001:0> Dir.chdir("c:\\Windows") do
irb(main):002:1* puts Dir.pwd
irb(main):003:1> Dir.chdir("System32") do
irb(main):004:2* puts Dir.pwd
irb(main):005:2> end
irb(main):006:1> puts Dir.pwd
irb(main):007:1> end
c:/Windows
c:/Windows/System32
c:/Windows
=> nil
But this code does...
irb(main):008:0> Dir.chdir("c:\\Windows") do
irb(main):009:1* puts Dir.pwd
irb(main):010:1> Dir.chdir("System32")
irb(main):011:1> puts Dir.pwd
irb(main):012:1> end
c:/Windows
(irb):10: warning: conflicting chdir during another chdir block
c:/Windows/System32
=> nil
It appears that the spec_runner is setting up a chdir block and that the
chdir_spec is changing the directory explicitly (as you would expect)
and
Ruby gives a warning since, once the block exits, this new directory
will be
changed back to the one before the block began.
Nothing to worry about, I think.
Pete
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
John Lam wrote:
> Yes - that's what it's supposed to do. This is how we detect failure in
our automated test