<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes" ?>
<!DOCTYPE bugzilla SYSTEM "https://bugs.webkit.org/page.cgi?id=bugzilla.dtd">

<bugzilla version="5.0.4.1"
          urlbase="https://bugs.webkit.org/"
          
          maintainer="admin@webkit.org"
>

    <bug>
          <bug_id>58588</bug_id>
          
          <creation_ts>2011-04-14 15:46:08 -0700</creation_ts>
          <short_desc>only show expected failure type for ports that use an expectations file</short_desc>
          <delta_ts>2011-04-14 16:31:08 -0700</delta_ts>
          <reporter_accessible>1</reporter_accessible>
          <cclist_accessible>1</cclist_accessible>
          <classification_id>1</classification_id>
          <classification>Unclassified</classification>
          <product>WebKit</product>
          <component>New Bugs</component>
          <version>528+ (Nightly build)</version>
          <rep_platform>Other</rep_platform>
          <op_sys>OS X 10.5</op_sys>
          <bug_status>RESOLVED</bug_status>
          <resolution>FIXED</resolution>
          
          
          <bug_file_loc></bug_file_loc>
          <status_whiteboard></status_whiteboard>
          <keywords></keywords>
          <priority>P2</priority>
          <bug_severity>Normal</bug_severity>
          <target_milestone>---</target_milestone>
          
          
          <everconfirmed>1</everconfirmed>
          <reporter name="Ojan Vafai">ojan</reporter>
          <assigned_to name="Ojan Vafai">ojan</assigned_to>
          <cc>dpranke</cc>
    
    <cc>eric</cc>
    
    <cc>tony</cc>
          

      

      

      

          <comment_sort_order>oldest_to_newest</comment_sort_order>  
          <long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>386122</commentid>
    <comment_count>0</comment_count>
    <who name="Ojan Vafai">ojan</who>
    <bug_when>2011-04-14 15:46:08 -0700</bug_when>
    <thetext>only show expected failure type for ports that use an expectations file</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>386126</commentid>
    <comment_count>1</comment_count>
      <attachid>89673</attachid>
    <who name="Ojan Vafai">ojan</who>
    <bug_when>2011-04-14 15:49:21 -0700</bug_when>
    <thetext>Created attachment 89673
Patch</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>386132</commentid>
    <comment_count>2</comment_count>
      <attachid>89673</attachid>
    <who name="Eric Seidel (no email)">eric</who>
    <bug_when>2011-04-14 15:51:43 -0700</bug_when>
    <thetext>Comment on attachment 89673
Patch

View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=89673&amp;action=review

&gt; Tools/Scripts/webkitpy/layout_tests/layout_package/test_runner.py:159
&gt; +    # FIXME: If non-chromium ports start using an expectations file,
&gt; +    # we should make this check more robust.
&gt; +    results[&apos;uses_expectations_file&apos;] = port_obj.name().find(&apos;chromium&apos;) != -1

If... They&apos;re about to.  Sounds like dirk is working on the NRWT switch... and abarth and I are about to bring up a NRWT-using commit-queue. :)</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>386138</commentid>
    <comment_count>3</comment_count>
    <who name="Ojan Vafai">ojan</who>
    <bug_when>2011-04-14 15:57:49 -0700</bug_when>
    <thetext>(In reply to comment #2)
&gt; (From update of attachment 89673 [details])
&gt; View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=89673&amp;action=review
&gt; 
&gt; &gt; Tools/Scripts/webkitpy/layout_tests/layout_package/test_runner.py:159
&gt; &gt; +    # FIXME: If non-chromium ports start using an expectations file,
&gt; &gt; +    # we should make this check more robust.
&gt; &gt; +    results[&apos;uses_expectations_file&apos;] = port_obj.name().find(&apos;chromium&apos;) != -1
&gt; 
&gt; If... They&apos;re about to.  Sounds like dirk is working on the NRWT switch... and abarth and I are about to bring up a NRWT-using commit-queue. :)

Using new-run-webkit-tests does not necessarily imply using expectations files. For now, new-run-webkit-tests uses Skipped files just fine. The discussion of whether to use expectations files is (and should be) totally orthogonal. In either case, if that changes, we can easily revert this patch.</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>386144</commentid>
    <comment_count>4</comment_count>
      <attachid>89673</attachid>
    <who name="Eric Seidel (no email)">eric</who>
    <bug_when>2011-04-14 16:01:53 -0700</bug_when>
    <thetext>Comment on attachment 89673
Patch

View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=89673&amp;action=review

&gt;&gt;&gt; Tools/Scripts/webkitpy/layout_tests/layout_package/test_runner.py:159
&gt;&gt;&gt; +    results[&apos;uses_expectations_file&apos;] = port_obj.name().find(&apos;chromium&apos;) != -1
&gt;&gt; 
&gt;&gt; If... They&apos;re about to.  Sounds like dirk is working on the NRWT switch... and abarth and I are about to bring up a NRWT-using commit-queue. :)
&gt; 
&gt; Using new-run-webkit-tests does not necessarily imply using expectations files. For now, new-run-webkit-tests uses Skipped files just fine. The discussion of whether to use expectations files is (and should be) totally orthogonal. In either case, if that changes, we can easily revert this patch.

I see.  OK, I misunderstood what that was doing/and-or just didn&apos;t read carefullly. :p</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>386150</commentid>
    <comment_count>5</comment_count>
    <who name="Dirk Pranke">dpranke</who>
    <bug_when>2011-04-14 16:09:28 -0700</bug_when>
    <thetext>I think the logic might be better/more robust if instead of guess as to whether this is a chromium/non-chromium port, or a port that does use an expectations file, you look at the actual data and see if any of the rows contain an &quot;expected&quot; field (or one with a value != &apos;PASS&apos;)?

At any rate, the apple mac NRWT port uses Skipped files plus an expectations file currently.

The patch looks fine to me otherwise.</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>386156</commentid>
    <comment_count>6</comment_count>
    <who name="Ojan Vafai">ojan</who>
    <bug_when>2011-04-14 16:21:13 -0700</bug_when>
    <thetext>(In reply to comment #5)
&gt; I think the logic might be better/more robust if instead of guess as to whether this is a chromium/non-chromium port, or a port that does use an expectations file, you look at the actual data and see if any of the rows contain an &quot;expected&quot; field (or one with a value != &apos;PASS&apos;)?
&gt; 
&gt; At any rate, the apple mac NRWT port uses Skipped files plus an expectations file currently.
&gt; 
&gt; The patch looks fine to me otherwise.

Whoops. Already committed r83908: &lt;http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/83908&gt;. Will fix in a separate patch.</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>386162</commentid>
    <comment_count>7</comment_count>
    <who name="Ojan Vafai">ojan</who>
    <bug_when>2011-04-14 16:29:16 -0700</bug_when>
    <thetext>&gt; At any rate, the apple mac NRWT port uses Skipped files plus an expectations file currently.

Actually, looking at this more, I&apos;m not convinced it makes sense. While technically the Apple mac port uses expectations files, I&apos;m not convinced that they will want expectations files once they actually transition to using NRWT. I have certainly heard opposition to the idea of expectations files.

I&apos;ll leave this FIXME in for now.</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>386165</commentid>
    <comment_count>8</comment_count>
    <who name="Dirk Pranke">dpranke</who>
    <bug_when>2011-04-14 16:31:08 -0700</bug_when>
    <thetext>(In reply to comment #7)
&gt; &gt; At any rate, the apple mac NRWT port uses Skipped files plus an expectations file currently.
&gt; 
&gt; Actually, looking at this more, I&apos;m not convinced it makes sense. While technically the Apple mac port uses expectations files, I&apos;m not convinced that they will want expectations files once they actually transition to using NRWT. I have certainly heard opposition to the idea of expectations files.
&gt; 
&gt; I&apos;ll leave this FIXME in for now.

Well, I still think it might be more robust to decide what to display based on what is in the actual data rather than what you expect to be in the data (based on the port or bot name).</thetext>
  </long_desc>
      
          <attachment
              isobsolete="0"
              ispatch="1"
              isprivate="0"
          >
            <attachid>89673</attachid>
            <date>2011-04-14 15:49:21 -0700</date>
            <delta_ts>2011-04-14 16:02:04 -0700</delta_ts>
            <desc>Patch</desc>
            <filename>bug-58588-20110414154920.patch</filename>
            <type>text/plain</type>
            <size>3363</size>
            <attacher name="Ojan Vafai">ojan</attacher>
            
              <data encoding="base64">U3VidmVyc2lvbiBSZXZpc2lvbjogODM5MDIKZGlmZiAtLWdpdCBhL1Rvb2xzL0NoYW5nZUxvZyBi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</data>
<flag name="review"
          id="82399"
          type_id="1"
          status="+"
          setter="eric"
    />
          </attachment>
      

    </bug>

</bugzilla>