Re: [buildd-tools-devel] the state of daily-builds
On Saturday 15 May 2010, Frans Pop wrote: On Sunday 09 May 2010, Andreas Barth wrote: I also fixed hppa today Great, but seems to have a similar problem as ppc had: not built since initial run. Ping. hppa is still not being built automatically. TIA -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201005210800.55841.elen...@planet.nl
Re: [buildd-tools-devel] the state of daily-builds
On Friday 21 May 2010, Frans Pop wrote: On Saturday 15 May 2010, Frans Pop wrote: On Sunday 09 May 2010, Andreas Barth wrote: I also fixed hppa today Great, but seems to have a similar problem as ppc had: not built since initial run. Ping. hppa is still not being built automatically. Sorry, forget that. It's only been failing the last three days. Would be nice to know why though. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201005210802.41408.elen...@planet.nl
Re: [buildd-tools-devel] the state of daily-builds
* Frans Pop (elen...@planet.nl) [100521 08:01]: On Saturday 15 May 2010, Frans Pop wrote: On Sunday 09 May 2010, Andreas Barth wrote: I also fixed hppa today Great, but seems to have a similar problem as ppc had: not built since initial run. Ping. hppa is still not being built automatically. hppa is having funny downtimes. Other than that, there is a cronjob (at least last I looked). Andi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100521074823.gl2...@mails.so.argh.org
Re: [buildd-tools-devel] the state of daily-builds
On Sunday 09 May 2010, Andreas Barth wrote: I also fixed hppa today Great, but seems to have a similar problem as ppc had: not built since initial run. TIA, FJP -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201005150521.27634.elen...@planet.nl
Re: [buildd-tools-devel] the state of daily-builds
On Saturday 03 April 2010, Andreas Barth wrote: I just reenabled powerpc btw Does not seem to have been built since 3 Apr. Forgot to enable in crontab? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201005091844.05172.elen...@planet.nl
Re: [buildd-tools-devel] the state of daily-builds
* Frans Pop (elen...@planet.nl) [100509 18:44]: On Saturday 03 April 2010, Andreas Barth wrote: I just reenabled powerpc btw Does not seem to have been built since 3 Apr. Forgot to enable in crontab? should be ok now. I also fixed hppa today, and will fix ppc soon. Andi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100509193013.gj2...@mails.so.argh.org
Re: [buildd-tools-devel] the state of daily-builds
On Sat, Apr 03, 2010 at 10:36:15AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote: one further thing: As it is now, the helper script will abort in case the build-script doesn't return true. I think it makes sense to transfer the log anyways. Does it make sense as well to change the symlink (or: should we have two symlinks, one for successful, one for always)? I'm not sure if I understand this correctly. But i think it would be very helpfull to debug problems if the build log of failed builds is available somewhere and linked from the daily builds webpage. I recently wanted to look into the issue with the missing powerpc daily builds because I needed a build with a fix for the internal usb keyboard issue but gave up when i couldn't find any traces of the failing builds at all. Gaudenz -- Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better. ~ Samuel Beckett ~ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100406164502.gt17...@soziologie.ch
Re: [buildd-tools-devel] the state of daily-builds
On Tuesday 06 April 2010, Gaudenz Steinlin wrote: I'm not sure if I understand this correctly. But i think it would be very helpfull to debug problems if the build log of failed builds is available somewhere and linked from the daily builds webpage. Please read the daily-build script: if the D-I build itself was failing then the logs *would* be copied and available. So, if there are no powerpc builds now, then something at a higher level (i.e. the scripts that prepare the build environment and run the builds) is failing and the logs that are currently being copied and linked from the daily builds page would not help at all. I agree that info about what is failing would be helpful, but that would be a *new* feature. My suggestion was only to concentrate first on providing *existing* functionality for all architectures and only then look at extending the functionality. Probably the meta logs should be copied separately from the existing logs and to a slightly different location, but of course both should be linked from the daily builds page. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201004062001.47646.elen...@planet.nl
Re: [buildd-tools-devel] the state of daily-builds
On Tuesday 06 April 2010, Gaudenz Steinlin wrote: I'm not sure if I understand this correctly. But i think it would be very helpfull to debug problems if the build log of failed builds is available somewhere and linked from the daily builds webpage. As an aside, because IIUC the build environment is created from scratch for each build, the new system is more vulnerable to broken build dependencies in unstable. In the past we would just not update the build environment in that situation, but now it will cause the whole build to fail early and the build will effectively be skipped. I expect that because of this we will more frequently have missing builds, though hopefully only for short periods. But that makes it extra important not to invalidate the last successful build when making the meta logs available. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201004062012.29098.elen...@planet.nl
Re: [buildd-tools-devel] the state of daily-builds
* Frans Pop (elen...@planet.nl) [100403 20:36]: On Saturday 03 April 2010, Andreas Barth wrote: one further thing: As it is now, the helper script will abort in case the build-script doesn't return true. I think that's fine. If individual build targets fail then the build as a whole should still succeed. AFAICT what you do now is consistent with what non-centralized buildds do. ok then. If we need to change that, we can always do it later (we should also consider to send the full log by mail to buildd.d.o). Andi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100405043947.gw27...@mails.so.argh.org
Re: [buildd-tools-devel] the state of daily-builds
* Frans Pop (elen...@planet.nl) [100401 21:41]: Thanks for getting amd64 going again so fast. On Thursday 01 April 2010, Andreas Barth wrote: As of now, we can't move the armel builds yet (as we are waiting for the new debian machines to be setup). I hope to not forget to mention it once we have the new machines running. For i386, I don't mind either way. OK. In that case let's do all the arches we can now and add armel later. That means the new to set up daily D-I builds on arch buildds are: - i386 - sparc - s390 For these we really will need to know when they are set up as we'll need to switch a few things over and inform their current buildd admins. I just reenabled powerpc btw Ok. one further thing: As it is now, the helper script will abort in case the build-script doesn't return true. I think it makes sense to transfer the log anyways. Does it make sense as well to change the symlink (or: should we have two symlinks, one for successful, one for always)? Andi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100403083615.gk19...@mails.so.argh.org
Re: [buildd-tools-devel] the state of daily-builds
On Saturday 03 April 2010, Andreas Barth wrote: one further thing: As it is now, the helper script will abort in case the build-script doesn't return true. I think that's fine. If individual build targets fail then the build as a whole should still succeed. AFAICT what you do now is consistent with what non-centralized buildds do. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201004032036.17131.elen...@planet.nl
Re: [buildd-tools-devel] the state of daily-builds
* Joey Hess (jo...@debian.org) [100401 19:55]: Frans Pop wrote: OK. I guess we'll get back to you on that. I'd like to hear what Joey thinks of that as he currently runs two arches, including i386. I would like to get rid of the dedicated machine I have running for the armel builds. Don't really care about the i386 build overhead, but also have no need to continue running them. As of now, we can't move the armel builds yet (as we are waiting for the new debian machines to be setup). I hope to not forget to mention it once we have the new machines running. For i386, I don't mind either way. Andi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100401190920.gc19...@mails.so.argh.org
Re: [buildd-tools-devel] the state of daily-builds
Thanks for getting amd64 going again so fast. On Thursday 01 April 2010, Andreas Barth wrote: As of now, we can't move the armel builds yet (as we are waiting for the new debian machines to be setup). I hope to not forget to mention it once we have the new machines running. For i386, I don't mind either way. OK. In that case let's do all the arches we can now and add armel later. That means the new to set up daily D-I builds on arch buildds are: - i386 - sparc - s390 For these we really will need to know when they are set up as we'll need to switch a few things over and inform their current buildd admins. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201004012140.47700.elen...@planet.nl
