Skip to content
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

deps: update libuv to 1.2.0 #237

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 5, 2015
Merged

Conversation

bnoordhuis
Copy link
Member

@piscisaureus
Copy link
Contributor

Probably unrelated but:

=== release test-process-active-wraps ===
Path: parallel/test-process-active-wraps
assert.js:100
  throw new assert.AssertionError({
        ^
AssertionError: 1 == 0
    at Immediate._onImmediate (D:\iojs\test\parallel\test-process-active-wraps.js:69:16)
    at processImmediate [as _immediateCallback] (timers.js:342:17)

@piscisaureus
Copy link
Contributor

lgtm

PR-URL: nodejs#237
Reviewed-By: Bert Belder <bertbelder@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Saúl Ibarra Corretgé <saghul@gmail.com>
@saghul
Copy link
Member

saghul commented Jan 5, 2015

LGTM. (and tests pass here on OSX, FWIW)

@bnoordhuis bnoordhuis merged commit eaed2a1 into nodejs:v1.x Jan 5, 2015
@bnoordhuis bnoordhuis deleted the upgrade-libuv branch January 5, 2015 22:54
@bnoordhuis
Copy link
Member Author

@piscisaureus Curiously enough, the same test is failing on the CI. I've been going over the changes in libuv but I don't see an obvious culprit.

@bnoordhuis
Copy link
Member Author

@piscisaureus I let the CI do some ad hoc bisecting and it looks like the regression was introduced in commit 94e1475, the joyent/v0.12 merge. Maybe you can run a git bisect locally to track down the offending commit?

@cjihrig
Copy link
Contributor

cjihrig commented Jan 6, 2015

I'll look into this too. I recently changed that test in b636ba8. It works fine on OS X, but fails on Windows.

@bnoordhuis
Copy link
Member Author

@cjihrig It's probably unrelated but there was a merge conflict around line 840 in lib/net.js when I did the merge. It's possible I screwed up conflict resolution although it doesn't look like it (and like you say, the test passes on other platforms.)

@cjihrig
Copy link
Contributor

cjihrig commented Jan 6, 2015

The problem seems to be the removal of this logic.

@piscisaureus any clue why that would leave an extra handle around on Windows? It was removed to try to eliminate hard coded IPv4 addresses.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants