On Sun, 09 Apr 2017 04:32:34 -0400, Bill Auger wrote: > > On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 12:58 AM, Luke Shumaker <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I do think that borrowing/building on the work that has been done for > > the tests.R-B.org/archlinux server is a good idea. I'm not sure > > Jenkins itself is entirely necessary though; it seems a little > > heavyweight for what is a pretty simple task. > > i think there is still a mis-conception implied in that - there is > nothing useful to "leverage" regarding the jenkins server at r-b.o - > it is not a build farm
No, the server/hardware itself is not useful, but code has been written for job dispatch. > debian specifies the environment in a .BUILDINFO metadata file for > example that accompanies the sources but again, each distro can handle > that as it chooses - this declares in a functional way such constants > as the exact versions of the compiler and dependencies - (i.e. > compiler ^ dependencies ^ sources ^ env-vars -> deterministic-result) > - jenkins re-builds each package several times randomizing some > unspecified factors to verify that the build is reproducible given > only the source and the prescribed build environment expectations - it > then discards the artifacts and displays the test results on the web - > there is nothing more to it Yes, this was actually mostly implemented in pacman/makepkg 5. There are some timestamps that cause problems, but pacman 5 took a big cue from other R-B efforts. -- Happy hacking, ~ Luke Shumaker PS: your message didn't have the 'In-Reply-To' or 'References' headers set; screwing up threading. _______________________________________________ Dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.parabola.nu/mailman/listinfo/dev
