harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nathan Beyer <nbe...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [build] Hudson based build
Date Fri, 06 Feb 2009 02:08:42 GMT
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 4:47 AM, Tim Ellison <t.p.ellison@gmail.com> wrote:
> Egor Pasko wrote:
>> On the 0x54C day of Apache Harmony Tim Ellison wrote:
>>> Egor Pasko wrote:
>>>> On the 0x547 day of Apache Harmony Tim Ellison wrote:
>>>>> I now have an account [1] on the ASF Hudson machine, so can host some
>>>>> more visible build and test projects there.
>>>>> To get things started, I created a simple build job which will send mail
>>>>> to the alerts@ list if the compile fails.
>>>>> http://hudson.zones.apache.org/hudson/view/Harmony/
>>>> Awesome! Now I do not have to ask people out there to check my patches
>>>> on x86_64 :) Thanks, Tim!
>>>>> Next step is to pass the results of that build into a short integrity
>>>>> testing cycle.
>>>> I am seeing results of short integrity testing runs on Hudson. Does it
>>>> mean this is done already?
>>> It's still work in progress, but yes, just about done.
>>> I enhanced the 'build' job to include a very basic test (at this point
>>> it just runs the pack200 Junit tests.  This is to ensure that not only
>>> the build completes successfully, but that it also runs a very simple
>>> set of 'sniff' tests.
>>> I'm open to suggestions about what the sniff tests should be, but they
>>> should take next to no time at all to run after the build completes.
>> 'sniff' testing in basic build is a good idea. And I guess pack200
>> unit tests should be just the right amount to be next to no time.
>>> Once the short integration testing is working I'll redirect failures to
>>> the alerts list too, and schedule that to run frequently (being mindful
>>> that we are on a shared machine resource).  Then I'll move on to running
>>> longer tests, etc. etc.
>> cool, ehwa running is already very useful
> I'm still struggling with the BTI, trying to adapt it to do the right thing.

OMG! I've been trying off and on to get the BTI running on my servers
to recreate the continuous integrity tests and I'd given up as I
thought it was just me and I was crazy. I feel a little better now
that someone else is having trouble with the BTI.


>>>> Is there a plan to set up an x86 build on Hudson? How much more
>>>> platforms/configurations is reasonable to run without making others
>>>> feel that we are wasting machine resources?
>>> AFAIK there is not a wide range of machine architectures available as
>>> Hudson build machines.  I will discuss with the infra team what we can
>>> get available.
>> we could build and run a 32 bit binary on an x86_64 machine, but that
>> is likely a pain to set up our BTI for this. Is there support for
>> virtual machines? :)
> I believe they are hosting them as virtual hosts already, so it is a
> case of asking for other architectures to be made available.  I wanted
> to get a basic build / test going on one machine first.
>>> I think we can use more resources on the current machine if you can
>>> think of other configurations you want to run.
>> It might be helpful to build release configuration so that users are
>> able to pick new binary snapshots anytime. (this would sound very
>> cool: "We don't have fresh 32 bit binaries, try our x86_64 builds).
> The builds are in release mode by default anyway.
> The latest good build is available at...
> http://hudson.zones.apache.org/hudson/view/Harmony/job/Harmony-1.5-head-linux-x86_64/lastSuccessfulBuild/
>> Since DRLVM is not in a very active development we may save resources
>> and take DRLVM binary from the latest binary release.
> Rebuilding it is no problem.
>> I'll be glad to also find 2 runtime configurations in testing (client
>> and server). But .. not very critical.
> I'll bear it in mind once I am running tests.
> Regards,
> Tim

View raw message