Okay, a buildbot then doesn't sound quite that scary. Any info somewhere on how to set one up on a windows box?
I Also wasn't suggesting that we change the PCBuild directory, since I think we definitely want to keep the old support. But I agree that getting regular builds running would be a good thing. An x64 box would be ideal to build both the x86 and x64 versions on. A single bot can manage many platforms, right? I would also need to get the _msi and _sqlite3 modules building (which I haven't yet, since I didn't get their sources.) Kristján > -----Original Message----- > From: "Martin v. Löwis" [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 16. október 2006 19:38 > To: Kristján V. Jónsson > Cc: Anthony Baxter; python-dev@python.org > Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] Promoting PCbuild8 (Was: Python 2.5 > performance) > > Kristján V. Jónsson schrieb: > > I must confess that I am not familiar with the buildbots. > > The challenge and work-load is primarily initially in setting > it up; in this case (for PCbuild8), there is work for both > the master and the slave sides (probably, new scripts in > Tools/buildbot will have to be created). > > > I could > > imagine that it would be difficult to set up internally due to > > security concerns, but I can voice the issue here. > > It's not mandatory, of course: neither that there is a > PCbuild8 buildbot at all, or that it is hosted at ccpgames. > It just would reduce the chance that breakage of PCbuild8 > goes unnoticed for long. > > As for the security concerns: the buildbot slave actively > opens a networking connection to the master; you don't have > to open any additional ports on your firewalls. Of course, > the master can send the slave arbitrary commands to execute, > so if the master is taken over by some attacker, that > attacker could easily get control over all slaves also > (except that you want to run the slave in a restricted > account, so that the attacker would have to find a hole in > the slave's operating system, also, before taking the machine > over completely). > > As for making VS 2005 "more official": you also might have > meant that the PCbuild directory should be converted to VS 2005. > That would have a number of implications (on the buildbots, > on changes to Tools/msi, and on potential usage of VS 2007 > for Python 2.6), which need to be discussed when somebody > actually proposes such a change. > > Regards, > Martin > _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
