3
edits
Changes
m
'''Project Facts:'''
# Bonsai is a tool that can produce a list of differences between versions of a source file. (Bonsai's functionality has not been examined closely yet but will have to as it may be a key component to the framework)
'''Possible Vision of the Delta Debugging Framework''':
(subject to change based on stakeholder consultation/feedback, feasibility study)
# Since the last time a developer executed a test case that passed, the developer modified some source files. The source files may be of the same type or mixed type, same directory or different directory. It shouldn't matter. The framework should be source type and location agnostic. Upon executing the test case again, the result is now a failure. The developer panics. It's only days before the deadline to submit bug patches before the source tree is supposed to be closed for release and the bug is a blocker. The developer doesn't want to be shamed for delaying the release, and the source code is too complex to find the bug in time, so what should they do? Use the delta debugging framework! that's what. How? you may ask. Well keep reading to find out. <small>* scenario may vary.</small>
# The delta debugging framework may require the developer to input one piece of information. The test case/function that used to pass but now fails. It will be used to determine whether the source files with progressive changes passes/fails the test.
# Once the developer has inputted this piece of information, it will use Bonsai to query the source tree and compile a list of all the changes to the source files since a certain amount of time.
# (If there was a method of determining change dependencies so as to eliminate the possibility of inconsistencies, it would be done in this step. One possible way of reducing the possibility of inconsistencies is to logically group changes by location or check in time.)
# This step would be where the delta debugging algorithm would come into play. The algorithm should basically:
## Recursively, incrementally remove changes from the source code with the regression.
## Recompile the source tree.
## Execute the test case. There may be 3 outcomes:
### The test case passes. We know that the failure-inducing change(s) are in the change(s) that were removed.
### The test case fails. We know that the failure-inducing change(s) are not exclusively in the change(s) that were removed. I say not exclusively because of the concept of Interference (described above).
### The test case is indeterminate. There were some inconsistencies.
[[Image:Dd_flowchart''' Updated Delta Debugging Flowchart.PNG]]'''
Assuming you have [http://subversionMost of the classes in blue exist in the source repository.tigris.org/ SVN], the projectThe classes in pale yellow are classes that won's source can t be obtained via SVN using completed in the following command:first release.
svn checkout svn[[Image://cdotDd_partialclassdiagram2.senecac.on.ca/deltadbgPNG]]
<table style''This is where your regular updates will go. In these you should discuss the status or your work, your interactions with other members of the community (e.g., Seneca and Mozilla), problems you have encountered, etc. Put detailed technical information into the Project Details page (i.e., update it as you go), and save this section for news about participation in the project.'' === Dec. 22, 2006 ="width: 100%;" class="standard-table" border=" I haven't posted an update in a while. So what's been done? I finally had some time to do a second round of testing & debugging of the delta debugging framework. And guess what? It ''seems'' to work now. The problem? Combination of logical errors when applying and unapplying changes in the framework and a bad test case. Go figure. However, before I get ahead of myself and officially tag and release the delta debugging framework as version 0.1, I would like to test it out on another test program. Hopefully, this can be done this weekend. And if all goes well, version 0.1" cellpaddingwill be officially released before the end of the year. === Dec. 13, 2006 =="1" cellspacing="1"> <tr> Created [[Delta_debugging_testcases|Delta Debugging Testcases]] page to discuss the nature of the test cases created to test the algorithm. Included in the page are 2 testcases created so far, the '''HelloWorld''' binary test and the '''Sudoku''' test. Both tests can be found in the '''deltatest''' svn repository. The repository can be checked out using this command:<thpre>Tasksvn checkout svn://cdot.senecac.on.ca/deltatest </thpre> <th>Description<Exactly 12 days before Christmas, the delta debugging framework has been released under the [http://www.opensource.org/licenses/gpl-license.php GPL Version 2] License. Unfortunately, we haven't had the time to test the delta debugger much since Dec. 09, 2006 because of exams, other school work; Planning to spend some time this weekend to test the delta debugger and figure out why it currently seems to not be able find the minimal set of failure inducing directories/files (whether its because of unreliable test case or logical error in the program). A roadmap of our vision of the direction of the project will be heading in the future will be created and posted soon. === Dec. 11, 2006 === Uploaded testcase for '''HelloWorld''' binary at '''deltatest svn'''. The test simulates the error that may occur when compilation fails due to syntax error. The exalted HelloWorld program is located on the HelloWorld directory, while the test definition is at HelloTestCase1.pm. The algorithm detects failed test and reverts the affected file to the version where the test passes. Note for the future: improve user feedback functions! === Dec. 10, 2006 === Where is the CVS/th>Bonsai work heading? Here is a breakdown of the past 3-4 weeks:* Initially was going for a straight wrapper around CVS ala the style Richard used for SVN.* Tried to find some functionality within Bonsai that could make it easier.* Talked to Reed Loden, he set up a repository for us to try with. Thanks Reed! <th>Assigned * Thought that there may be some additional (read: unpublished) tools that could be worked with. Got in contact with some of the "Project Participants" listed on [http://www.mozilla.org/projects/bonsai/]. Was told the person in particular wasn't a contributor (just submitted a bug report). They in turn pointed me to<[irc://irc.mozilla.org/th>#mozwebtools #mozwebtools]. <th>Completion date goal* Lurked on [irc:</th>/irc.mozilla.org/#mozwebtools #mozwebtools] for a few weeks. Talked to 'justdave' about Bonsai. Reed Loden chimed up and informed me that Bonsai can output to XML using ?xml=1 on the query (score! thanks again).* Researched some PERL parsing utilities. Trying out XML::LibXML for DOM-style parsing.* Hopefully wrap something up by Wednesday. Failing that, might just go with simple CVS wrapper of some sort. === Dec. 09, 2006 === What has been done since last week? <th>Status<* Got a test program and uploaded it to svn://cdot.senecac.on.ca/th>deltatest. The pristine working version is revision 4. The latest committed copy is revision 8. The regressive code was committed somewhere in between. * Started testing the delta debugging framework. The results of the testing? <'''Finding the minimal revision set/tr>last known good revision''' Works. The delta debugger correctly reverts to a previous revision, builds the source code, and runs the test case. The test case returns the proper results on whether or not it passes or fails. The delta debugger correctly stops at revision 4 - the last known good version. '''Finding the minimal failure-inducing set of directories''' Indeterminate. There is only 1 directory in the source repository so that directory should be returned as the minimal failure inducing set of directories. Does it return it? yes and no. The delta debugger correctly applies all of the changes within that directory. And I think it correctly builds the source tree and runs the test case. However, the return code of the test case is not as expected. I expect the test case to report that the test fails, however, it reports that it passes. Thus, the delta debugger returns no directories as failure inducing. However, if I force the test case to return the expected result, then the delta debugger correctly returns the directory as the failure-inducing one. I suspect (or at least hope) that the indeterminate results of finding the failure inducing set of directories is because of a possibly unreliable or inconsistent test case. However, I can not be sure until I rule out the test case as the problem. '''Finding the minimal failure-inducing set of files''' Indeterminate. There are multiple source files in the repository. Does it return the correct failure-inducing source file? I don't know. I have the same suspicions for this as for the directory changeset. Based on the testing, it seems to be able to cycle through every combination of changes in the changeset, apply the combination of changes, build the source code, and run the test case. The test case just seems to not report the correct test results. === Dec. 03, 2006 === Committed some updated to the SVN repository.* The test framework. There are a couple of files to the framework: Test.pl, TestCase.pl, TestSuite.pl, TestResult.pl, TestRunner.pl. It is loosely based off of the design of the JUnit framework. Why such an elaborate design just for the need of users to define the test case that can determine whether or not a piece of functionality works or not to be run? For a few reasons that I may be adamant about:# To use the delta debugging framework, the user should not have to touch the DeltaDebugger.pl file to define the tests and how to run them. Using the testing framework, this can be done by subclassing the TestCase.pl class and overriding the run() subroutine.# For the delta debugger to work, it needs to know whether the test case passes or fails. Using the test framework, I hope to control the possible return codes of the tests to either pass or fail only.* testtest.pl that tests the functionality of the test framework.* updates to DeltaDebugger.pl to make use of the test framework.
<tr>
<td colspan="5"><strong>Subversion (SVN) Repository</strong> ([http://subversion.tigris.org/ http://subversion.tigris.org/], [http://svnbook.red-bean.com/nightly/en/index.html http://svnbook.red-bean.com/nightly/en/index.html])
</td>
</tr>
<tr>Crunch time. One week left. The high priority tasks that still need to be done: <td>Query SVN repository for revision history</td> <td>Everytime # Acquisition of a user commits with svn, the revision number is incremented. Your mission is program we could use to find the relevant commands that will return all of test the changes that were committed between 2 different revision numbersdelta debugging framework. See [[#How_to_Get_Involved|How is this data stored? formatted? what meta-data is available? How can we parse this data into usable format? </td> <td>TBDTo Get Involved]] for more info.</td> <td>TBD.</td> <td>Incomplete# Test, debug the delta debugging framework.</td> </tr>
<tr>
<td>Query SVN repository for differences between revisions</td>
<td>Your mission is to find out the relevant commands that can return the differences between two revisions, the meta-data that is kept with each revision, how differences between two revisions are stored and formatted, and how this data can be parsed into a usable form for our project (wrapper?).</td>
<td>TBD.</td>
<td>TBD.</td>
<td>Incomplete.</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td>SVN revert between revisions</td> <td>Your mission is to find out the relevant commands that can revert changes in the local sandbox to earlier revisions so that the changeset in the revision can be tested=== Nov.</td> <td>TBD.</td> <td>TBD.</td> <td>Incomplete.</td> </tr>26, 2006 ===
<tr>'''Milestone:''' <td colspan="5"><strong>CVS/Mozilla Bonsai</strong> ([http://www.mozilla.org/bonsai.html http://www.mozilla.org/bonsai.html])<br />You * Even though the test framework is incomplete, I think we can do these tasks by trying to interpret go ahead and begin the Bonsai source code yourselfinitial testing of the delta debugger on a real regressive program as I think we are ready. Coincidentally, or preferably by finding a person who has intimate knowledge of exactly 2 months after the Bonsai source code and asking themfirst project news posting on Sept. 26, 2006. </td> </tr>
<tr> <td>Query CVS via Bonsai for checkins</td> <td>You can use Bonsai to search for the checkins made within a certain time frame, within a certain directory, made by a certain developer, etc=== Nov. Your mission is to find the relevant source files, functions, variables, etc. that drive this functionality. </td> <td>[[User:RichardChu|Richard Chu]]</td> <td>October 2025, 2006</td> <td>Incomplete.</td> </tr>===
<tr> <td>Results of querying CVS via Bonsai for checkins</td> <td>Bonsai obviously returns results from the query. The question is how? Your mission is to find the relevant source files, functions, variables, etc. that is used to return and store resultsI haven't posted an update in a while so here goes. What you need to find out is what type of data is returned and how are the results formatted's been done since then?</td> <td>[[User:RichardChu|Richard Chu]]</td> <td>October 20, 2006</td> <td>Incomplete.</td> </tr>
<tr bgcolor="#F0F0F0"> <td>Query CVS via Bonsai for version history</td> <td>For each file in Committed some updates to the CVS SVN repository, Bonsai has .* Modified the ability to list Changeset hierarchy of classes. Added a history of versionsgetChange() subroutine that takes an index and retrieves the change from the changeset. From Also modified the first getChangeset() subroutine to optionally take an array of directories/files to limit the latest. Your mission is search scope to find out within the relevant source directories/files, functions, variables, etcpassed in. that These changes are used to obtain possibly dangerously untested.* Committed the version history for a certain source DeltaDebugger.pl file. This filehouses the actual delta debugging algorithm.</td> <td>[[UserIt requires three user-defined pieces of information:dwwoodsi|Dean Woodside]]</td> <td>October 20a Build object, an RCS object, and the automated test cases. Currently, it can theoretically find the failure inducing revision, 2006</td>and the minimal failure inducing set of directories. <td>Incomplete* Committed a DeltaDebuggerTest.pl file. It just tests the correctivity of the theoretical.</td> </tr>
<tr bgcolor="#F0F0F0">
<td>Results of querying CVS via Bonsai for version history</td>
<td>Your mission is to find out the relevant source files, functions, variables, etc. that are used to return and store the results of searching for a file's version history. What data is returned and how is the data stored/formatted?</td>
<td>[[User:dwwoodsi|Dean Woodside]]</td>
<td>October 20, 2006</td>
<td>Incomplete.</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td>Query CVS via Bonsai for differences between versions</td>In the works: <td>Using Bonsai, a user can see * Continue working on the differences between two different versions of a source filedelta debugging algorithm. Your mission is Need to be able to find out the relevant source minimal failure inducing set of files, functions, variables, etc. that are used * Test framework. Allow users to find plug in test cases/suites without touching the differences between two different versions of a source fileDeltaDebugger.</td> <td>[[User:Ankuswan|Aditya Nanda Kuswanto]]</td> <td>October 20, 2006</td> <td>Incompletepl module.</td> </tr>
<tr>
<td>Results of querying CVS via Bonsai for differences between versions</td>
<td>Using Bonsai, a user can see the differences between two different versions of a source file. How are the results returned? How is it formatted? Your mission is to find out the relevant source files, functions, variables, etc. that are used to return the results of the query. You are to find out how the data is returned and how it is formatted.</td>
<td>[[User:Ankuswan|Aditya Nanda Kuswanto]]</td>
<td>October 20, 2006</td>
<td>Incomplete.</td>
</tr>
</table>The deadline for a version 0.01 release is looming. 1-2 weeks left to get this done. What needs to be done to accomplish this?* Finish everything that is in the works real soon.* Need a test program that we could use and upload to our test SVN repository to test the delta debugging framework. Ideally, the test program will meet the following requirements:# Has source files that span multiple directories wide and deep yet be small enough that the delta debugging can be done in a short amount of time so that all aspects of the delta debugger can be tested.# Has a regression. Or can easily be modified so that some functionality will stop working.# Has an automated test case that tests the regressive functionality.* Put theory into practice. So far the delta debugging algorithm has not been tested on a real program. The correctness of the algorithm has only been confirmed in theory. We need to test the algorithm in a production environment real soon.
== Project References ==
[http://programming.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=05/06/30/1549248&from=rss NewsForge: An Introduction to Delta Debugging]
Delta debugging simplifies debugging process in a program by automating the process and continually splitting the program to smaller chunks called deltas. This technique is useful in three circumstances:
*Error occurs due to user inputs (e.g. keypress, file I/O). Delta debugging is used to eliminate user actions irrelevant to the nature of the error and pinpoint the cause of the error.
*Error occurs due to recent changes to the code. In this situation, deltas are retrieved from the net differences from both codes.
*Multithreading environment. Delta debugging can track down the exact order of operations originating from multiple threads that caused the error.
We need to focus on one of these circumstances. Judging from the project description, we should work on the first case, while perhaps opening the door to future expansion.
(The quest to build a suitable "wrapper" for the build system is not doing well. So far I have only observed various build logs posted on [[#top|↑ top]http://tinderbox.mozilla.org Tinderbox])for the SeaMonkey build. Here are some observations I come up with.* Successful builds - green or yellow on Tinderbox
# [[Bonsai issue]] <pre>seamonkey-bin exists, is nonzero, and executable.seamonkey- '''unresolved'''bin exists, is nonzero, and executable.seamonkey-bin binary exists, build successful.</pre>
== Project News ==* Broken builds - red on Tinderbox
(<pre>gmake[6]: *** [#top|↑ topnsAttrValue.o]Error 1...gmake: *** [alldep])Error 2</pre>
'''=== Oct. 15, 2006'''===
Except for the first type (revision), changeset may stagger between more than one revision.
'''=== Oct. 10, 2006'''===
'''=== Oct. 09, 2006'''===
'''=== Oct. 03, 2006'''===
'''=== Sept. 26, 2006'''===
([[#top|↑ top]])
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delta_Debugging Delta debugging] is an automated approach to debugging that isolates failures systematically. Given a failing test that can be mechanically verified (including a browser crash), [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delta_Debugging delta debugging] is a way of automatically isolating the change that introduced the failure. Having For developers, the occurrence of a scenario similar to this happens all too often: a developer codes a piece of functionality that works. Then, over a period of time, multiple changes to the program source files are made and that piece of functionality stops working. The cause of the regression could be any of the changes that were made since the time the functionality was last known to work. To isolate the cause of the regression, the developer begins the debugging process. Generally, debugging is a manual process where the developer must walk through the code while trying to keep track of variables and function calls. Sure, there are debuggers that can help you keep track of variables, the call stack, watch certain blocks of code, and execute the code step by step, however debugging is still mainly a manual process. Written in perl, given# that the source code is located in an SVN repository (support for CVS in the future)# a test case that can automatically verify whether or not a piece of functionality of a program works or not# a way to automatically build the program from the source code (if needed)the delta debugging framework aims to automatically isolate the failure-inducing changes to the source code that caused a regression. == Project License == Written in place perl, given a test case that can automatically verify whether or<br />not a piece of functionality of a program works or not, the delta debugging<br />framework aims to pull builds from CVSautomatically isolate the failure-inducing changes to the<br />source code that caused a regression.<br /><br />Copyright (C) 2006 Richard Chu, Aditya Nanda Kuswanto, bisect Dean William Woodside<br /><br />This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it under<br />the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by date and change set the Free Software<br />Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (using at your option) any later<br />version.<br /><br />This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but WITHOUT<br />ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS<br />FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the GNU General Public License for more details.<br /><br />You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License along with<br />this program; if not, write to the Free Software Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple<br />Place, Suite 330, Boston, MA 02111-1307 USA<br /><br />[http://enwww.wikipediaopensource.org/wikilicenses/Bonsai_CVS_code_management_system bonsai ] data gpl-- remember, CVS doesn't have changesets!license.php The GNU General Public License (GPL)Version 2, and report results would let computers make developers more productiveJune 1991]<br /><br />Contact Information about the authors of the delta debugging framework can be found<br />on our individual profile pages.
== Project Leader(s) ==
''Name(s) of people casually working on the project, or who have contributed significant help. Include links to personal pages within wiki. <br />NOTE: only Project Leader(s) should add names here. You '''can’t''' add your own name to the Contributor list.''
[[User:Reed|Reed Loden]] - Setup the CVS repository for us with the web front-end. Provided direction in querying Bonsai (a means to extract the output in XML).<br>
[[User:Elichak|Liz Chak]] - Documentation of the subroutines in the svn.pl and makewrapper.pl source files.
== Project Source Repository ==
([[#top|↑ top]])
Assuming you have [http://subversion.tigris.org/ SVN], the project's source can be obtained via SVN using the following command:
svn checkout svn://cdot.senecac.on.ca/deltadbg
The source can also be obtained at the following links:
* [http://matrix.senecac.on.ca/~rchu2/ddf/ddf.zip Delta Debugging Framework.zip]
* [http://matrix.senecac.on.ca/~rchu2/ddf/ddf.tar.bz2 Delta Debugging Framework.tar.bz2]
The test cases can be obtained via SVN using the following command
svn checkout svn://cdot.senecac.on.ca/deltatest
The source can also be obtained at the following links:
* [http://matrix.senecac.on.ca/~rchu2/ddf/deltatest.zip DeltaTest.zip]
* [http://matrix.senecac.on.ca/~rchu2/ddf/deltatest.tar.bz2 DeltaTest.tar.bz2]
== Project Details ==
Now that we are aware of the different concepts that we must take into account with regards to delta debugging, the next section will outline some facts and assumptions that are being made, and attempt to define the vision and process of the delta debugging framework.
== Project Facts and Assumptions Principles ==
([[#top|↑ top]])
# The source tree for the Mozilla project is HUGE. With many different source file types (C++, JS, XUL, etc.) in many different directories.
# The developer has a test case that can be used indicate whether the test passes/fails/is indeterminate.
# The developer will NOT know the date/version of the last known good version.
== Project Flowchart ==
[[Image:Dd_flowchart1.PNG]]
Here are some thoughts regarding the flowchart:# The whole process revolves around a certain '''Test''', which must be passed to complete the process. It is assumed that the source code passed this test before, but not anymore due to recent changes to the tree. The framework will locate these changes.# The '''Test''' is a versatile module and can be adapted to accept any tests the user may use.# When the initial test fails, the framework first attempts to locate which changeset causes this failure. This is done by "going back through time", retrieving the trees from previous revisions, and running each tree through the same test. The idea is to locate the latest revision where the test passes successfully.# Once this revision is identified, the framework will extract the '''diff''', the difference between the two revisions.# The framework will then use this '''diff''' to break down the difference possibilities (e.g. directory, file, etc) and isolate the cause of the failure.# Once this is done, the framework will deliver the cause of the failure in a report for the user and the operation is finished. == Project Source Repository Test Cases == The test cases used in this project are located in the [[Delta_debugging_testcases|Delta Debugging Testcases page]]. == Project Roadmap == ([[#top|↑ top]]) [[Delta Debugging Framework Roadmap|Delta Debugging Framework Roadmap]] The page outlines our current vision of the delta debugging framework and a roadmap of the work that needs to be completed to accomplish our vision. This roadmap may be subject to change and/or expanded as our vision expands through feedback and requests from others, our own ideas, etc. == Partial Class Diagram ==
([[#top|↑ top]])
== Project Task List News ==
([[#top|↑ top]])
Committed some updates to the SVN repository.
* Updated the delta debugging algorithm module. I didn't realize this yesterday but the algorithm to find the minimal set of failure inducing files (and code block and line of code changes if those changeset types ever gets dones) is the same (with minor modifications) as the algorithm that can find the minimal set of failure inducing directories. Thus I generalized that algorithm to remove the directory changeset specific code so that it will work with all other types of changesets.
* Removed the debugging/test related code from the source files.
CVS Repository Setup (thanks to [[user:reed|Reed Loden!]]): '''hera.senecac.on.ca/deltatest'''
*[http://hera.senecac.on.ca:43080/viewvc.cgi/?root=deltatest ViewVC Web Repository Browser]
*If you want commit access for whatever reason, email one of the project members
=== Nov. 19, 2006 === The earlier crash case we had (see the update directly below) was a non-regressive bug--there was no former build that worked with it. Going to use [https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=325377 Bug #325377] instead. Having difficulty identifying when it was first introduced--the information in the bug report doesn't seem to be quite accurate. Using the nightly builds as archived at [http://archive.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla/nightly/ http://archive.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla/nightly/] to narrow it down. Fortunately this crash is easily automated and does not require user interaction. === Nov. 18, 2006 === *<strike>Found a suitable crash case thanks to the people of [irc://irc.mozilla.org#qa #qa] (in particular, asqueella and Aleksej). For full details on the bug, see [https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=354300 Bug #top|↑ top354300].</strike> *Talked to Reed Loden on IRC. He will be setting up a CVS repository for us something this coming week (Tuesday at earliest). === Nov. 17, 2006 === Committed some updates to the SVN repository.* Changed applyChanges subroutine to take array of indices instead of scalar of an index. * Added unapplyChanges subroutine to Changeset classes.* [http://www.cpan.org/modules/by-module/Math/Math-Combinatorics-0.08.readme Math::Combinatorics], shamelessly stolen from [http://www.cpan.org/modules/by-module/Math/Math-Combinatorics-0.08.tar.gz here]. This module is used in the Delta Debugging Algorithm module to help find the minimal failure-inducing changeset. In the pipeline:* Delta Debugging Algorithm partially complete. Unthoroughly tested though can theoretically find the directories that contain the failure inducing changes.* Test cases and samples we may be able to use to test the algorithm. Uploaded files into '''scen1''' directory, containing test module for '''binaryTest'''. The test is ready to be used in the algorithm. The directory contains:* '''binaryTest.pl''' - test to detect the existence of a file.* '''helloWorld.pl''' - enough said!* '''binaryTestCaller.pl''' - runs '''helloWorld.pl''', pipe the result to '''hello.log''', and have '''binaryTest.pl''' attempt to detect it.This is the working version of the code, labeled '''revision 12'''. Now I have to find a way to wreck it........ === Nov. 14, 2006 === The development of testing system for the framework is in the works. The first scenario revolves around a test called '''BinaryExist''', which has been shamelessly ripped from the Tinderbox script. All this test does is check whether a given file exists in the system. While this test can aspire for great things, right now it's doing simple thing, like checking whether its client Hello World program is doing what it's supposed to. Initial testing reveals that this test has potential. Will be uploaded to the SVN soon. === Nov. 05, 2006 === I didn't know where else to put this so I'm putting this here. While searching around for the elusive Mozilla tests that are run in Tinderbox, I found [http://wiki.mozilla.org/SoftwareTesting:Scratchpad this gem]. All of the tests are apparently located in the ''mozilla/testing'' directory and can be checked out using this command while at the ''mozilla'' directory: cvs update -d testing The tests we would most likely be interested in are located in the ''tinderbox-standalone-tests'' subdirectory. Based on a quick scan of the perl files there, the ''test-mozilla.pl'' file in that directory seems to drive the tests located in the ''Tests'' subdirectory which seem to contain a lot of performance tests. The arguments that the test subroutines receive (such as build directory and binary name) seem to come from the ''Settings.pm'' file located in the ''Util'' directory. Attempts to run the tests have so far been unsuccessful. If someone (hint hint) could figure out how to run these tests and how these tests work that would be great. === Oct. 31/Nov. 01, 2006 === Committed some updates to the SVN repository.* Added file DirectoryChangeset.pl. This file gets a list of directories changed since the revision number passed in.* Added file DirectoryChange.pl. This file encapsulates the idea of a changed directory, sort of. Basically holds revision number and path of directory. UPDATE:* I didn't feel tired so I added an applyChange() subroutine to the Changeset classes and ChangesetFactory class. This allows the user to apply a change (specified by the index passed in to the subroutine) in a changeset. Up Next:* Based on how much time I predict I will have left to work on this, I don't think I will have enough time to do the Change/Changeset classes for Codeblock or Line. Therefore, it's time to skip ahead and work on the application of changes. Should the user be able to pass in an array of indices of changes to apply in a changeset? Or is just allowing the user to give one index good enough? We may find that out soon enough when we try to implement the delta debugging algorithm. === Oct. 26, 2006 === Committed some updates to the SVN repository.* Fixed a small bug with the regular expression in FileChangeset.pl's getChangeset() subroutine.* Changed the data that is returned in the getChangeset() subroutines. Used to return the Change set. Now returns the number of changes in the change set. This should decrease memory requirements.* Merged some functions in FileChangeset.pl that was created based on an erroneous logical assumption. Up Next:* Continue working on the Changeset/Change subclasses. Need to do Directory, Code block, and Line. === Oct. 24/25, 2006 === Committed some updates to the SVN repository. Updates:* Updated the package names for all files.* Updated the svn.pl file - fixed a small bug.* Updated makewrapper.pl - removed debug statements. I should probably rename the file to something better. Additions:* Created ChangesetFactory.pl - Returns a change set based on the type of change set (revision, directory, file, code block, line).* Created RevisionChangeset.pl - Gets and returns all of the changes made in a specified revision.* Created FileChangeset.pl - Gets and returns a list of the paths to the files that were changed since a specified revision. * Created FileChange.pl - Encapsulates the idea of a Change to a file. Basically stores revision number and file path.* Created ChangesetTest.pl - Tests the subroutines in the classes and the interactions between the classes. Up Next:* Continue working on the Changeset/Change subclasses. Need to do Directory, Code block, and Line.
== Project Bottlenecks = Oct. 17, 2006 ===
Analyzing build logs may be the "lazy" solution to building a wrapper to detect build failures, but that's the best thing we'This is where your regular updates will gove got so far. In these you should discuss Searches for any of the strings listed above in LXR did not yield valuable result, which means the status or your workbuild system remains a mystery to us. Thoughts:* Tinderbox builds rely on report logs to capture build data. If we can figure out how to get tap into this process, we can better plan our prototype.* Tinderbox performs a build operation first, your interactions with other members and then automatically starts a bunch of the community tests (e.g.MozillaAliveTest, Seneca and Mozillaregxpcom test). These tests do not exist within LXR, problems you have encounteredeither, etcwhich means they reside outside the tree. Put detailed technical information into If we can find the Project Details page (i.e.script that fires these tests, update it we can probably create our first prototype as you go), a test and save this section for news about participation in hook it into the projectbuild system.So many questions... Perhaps I should start hanging out at [irc://irc.mozilla.org/build #build].''
Updated the file ''svn.pl''. Added the ''diff'' subroutine. It's a wrapper around the ''svn diff'' command. Updated the ''update'' subroutine. Added another argument and made them both optional. Subroutine can now accept a directory/file argument in addition to revision number.
* Line. A line in a file is the lowest change denominator.
The lower down the list you go, the higher the possibility of inconsistencies (inability to successfully compile source tree).
Added two files to the SVN repository: ''makewrapper.pl'' and ''maketest.pl''. I have no idea if the files will be useful or if I just wasted my time.
Added two files to the SVN repository: ''svn.pl'' and ''svntest.pl''. I have no idea if the files will be useful or if I just wasted my time.
Discussed the project with dave humphrey. The gist of the discussion is:
I read through your documentation here, and it is looking good. I also spoke to Shaver by phone this morning, and we chatted briefly about this project. He suggests that you start your work by looking for a suitable '''Crash Case''', one that happens reliably. Then you need at what would be necessary in order to bisect the change set (e.g., [http://www.mozilla.org/bonsai.html bonsai] data) in order to get closer to the change that introduced the bug. Shaver suggested that robc (Rob Campbell) might be a good person to help you brainstorm on this.
== How to Get Involved ==
We need a test program that we could use and upload to our test SVN repository to test the delta debugging framework. Ideally, the test program will meet the following requirements:
# Has source files that span multiple directories wide and deep yet be small enough that the delta debugging can be done in a short amount of time so that all aspects of the delta debugger can be tested.
# Has a regression. Or can easily be modified so that some functionality will stop working.
# Has an automated test case that tests the regressive functionality.
If you don't have a program that meets the first requirement, we could also use test programs that have multiple source files. The key being that the program has more than one source file. Programs that are contained in only one source files are useless to us.
If you have a program that meets these requirements, and you want to contribute to this project, then holla.
<hr />
If you are looking for an easy way in which to contribute to this project, you can jump in by writing one or more tests for the test suite. This does not require that you learn about the delta debugging inner-workings or structure.
Basic Advice:
* You '''must''' be able to automate the test--no human intervention is allowed.
* Possible test types include:
*: '''Crashing'''
*:: Can you crash the program with a minimal collection of circumstances (steps) that are easily reproducable? (In other words, can you write a script so that this happens in a controlled manner.)
*: '''Performance-related'''
*:: Is there a threshold for unacceptable consumption of time and/or space that is reason for concern?
*: '''Program hanging'''
*:: Does the program hang? Will it occur in a certain functionality of the software that is possible to isolate (reproduce) through scripted means?
*: '''Unexpected return codes'''
*:: What is a normal return code for the program? What is considered unexpected? Script a series of actions and pass the return code up to the test framework.
* Each test will fit into the test framework (which, at this point, still has to be designed). The tests must follow a few rules (again, undecided at this point).
Please check back in a few days. Expect some templates and samples up shortly to help get you going. <u>The currently listed test types are subject to change.</u>
==Future of the Project==
Here are some of the ideas related to the continuation of this project. Included are some personal ideas of the team members, tasks to reach the overall objective (a working, robust, Delta Debugging Framework for Mozilla), and additional features/functionality that would enhance the framework. This is subject to change, and a project roadmap will be written in the near future.
===CVS Support via Bonsai===
For the exploration into Bonsai and to see where it is/was heading, please view the [[delta debugging framework bonsai direction|Bonsai Direction]]. It is likely that a workable solution could be produced utilizing some of the details found in the link. This functionality would be particularly useful to Mozilla as this [Bonsai] is the technology they currently use.
===Enhancement of the Algorithm===
Richard's great algorithm can be further enhanced using a binary search-like approach that splits the revision from the current, all the way back to when the regression was first noticed (or, alternatively, when the crash case last known to have worked). Currently it works in a sequential manner, testing all previous revisions in order.
:'''More Granularity'''
:For this course, Richard's algorithm supported down to the file-level of change. In the future, it could go as far as evaluating changes in lines of code.
===Fleshed Out Test Suite Design===
The test suite test types should be further fleshed out and individual tests gathered (no participation from the class was possible due to time constraints; the test suite design wasn't fully explored and documented). Test suites could be put together for each major Mozilla.org project (Firefox, Thunderbird, Sunbird, Bugzilla, etc.).
===More Crash Cases===
More crash cases need to be found for the success in testing the project.
===Unit Tests===
A debugging framework, more so than other projects, should have its code quality tested and scrutinized heavily.
===Code Review===
Perhaps some manual audits could be performed by hand from outside contributors in the future.