Op een zonnige zomerdag (Thursday 07 August 2003 00:51), schreef Alan 
Burlison:

> 1.  Once I start a smoke running, is it safe to overwrite files in the
> source directory? (cdir in the config file).

Sure, that is probably the only way to keep your local copy of the source-tree 
up to date. You only need to take care that you don't start a smoke while 
doing that.

> 2.  How do I set flags that I would normally pass to Configure, e.g.
> compiler flags.

Configure options are set in the build-configuration files (the defaults are 
perlcurrent.cfg [5.9 and 5.8] and perl562.cfg). Merijn has documented them 
pretty well and there is some more on that in the FAQ file.

> I have four Solaris boxes running 2.6, 2.7, 2.8 & 2.9, all patched up and
> ready to go.  I also have a local 'p4 sync'd copy of the 5.6.x, 5.8.x and
> 5.10.x branches from the perl repository and I'm in the process of writing
> a script to drive all four machines.  I'm intending that the script will
> sync with the repository a couple of times a day, and automatically kick
> off smokes on machines as they become idle.

F<configsmoke.pl> creates a little shellscript that starts the smokes, you 
could put an endless-loop around the 

        /usr/bin/perl smokeperl.pl -c "$CFGNAME" $continue $* > smokecurrent.log 2>&1

line. (But I'm no shell programmer)

>                                              Hopefully once it is running I
> won't have to touch it.

You might need to keep your eye on it for a bit, I've had trouble with 
Solaris-8 running out of processes (although I'm not sure if that is smoke 
related). And if we see test failures, you might need to investigate.

I'll see if I can manage some sort of archive mechanism that archives the 
report and the smokeperl logfile so one can go back to them whilst in 
continous smoke-mode.

Good luck,

Abe
-- 
I think this requires more thought, therefore
I'm excising the "promise" from perldelta and replacing it with more
non-committal mumbling.
                                   -- Jarkko Hietaniemi on p5p @ 2002-05-27

Reply via email to