* [Buildroot] Issue with the autobuilders: removing 1379 builds from the history?
@ 2013-05-28 7:10 Thomas Petazzoni
2013-05-28 7:25 ` Yann E. MORIN
2013-05-28 19:45 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Petazzoni @ 2013-05-28 7:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: buildroot
Hello,
While trying to reproduce the flex recent issue that triggered in the
autobuilders, I found out that I couldn't reproduce it. After
investigating, I discovered that the Git commit id being reported by my
autobuilder machine was incorrect. This is due to a change I made in
the autobuilder on May, 13th, where I'm now using a separate Git tree
for each build instead of a common one, but the script was still taking
the Git commit id of some other Buildroot tree. So the build was
actually taking place with the latest Buildroot version, but reported
to use Git commit id 9947ee9fbb94af800b8b054262734e0f81f32250.
This means that when you try to reproduce the build, if you take the
Git commit id given by the autobuilder website, then you won't be
testing with the Git commit id with which the build was made, which is
quite annoying. This is what happened to me when trying to reproduce
the flex problem: I have a script that, given a build SHA1, downloads
the configuration and Git commit ID, and restarts the build with the
exact same commit and the exact same configuration. But for those
builds who reported an invalid Git commit ID... it cannot work, and
therefore I wasn't reproducing the flex problem.
Therefore, I am considering removing those completely bogus build
results from the history. We are talking about removing 1379 build
results, i.e all builds done my autobuilder between May, 14th and today.
Even though it is quite annoying to lose so many results, I believe
this is the best action we can take now.
What do you think?
Thomas
--
Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons
Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux
development, consulting, training and support.
http://free-electrons.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Buildroot] Issue with the autobuilders: removing 1379 builds from the history?
2013-05-28 7:10 [Buildroot] Issue with the autobuilders: removing 1379 builds from the history? Thomas Petazzoni
@ 2013-05-28 7:25 ` Yann E. MORIN
2013-05-28 7:57 ` Peter Korsgaard
2013-05-28 19:45 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Yann E. MORIN @ 2013-05-28 7:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: buildroot
On 2013-05-28 09:10 +0200, Thomas Petazzoni spake thusly:
> While trying to reproduce the flex recent issue that triggered in the
> autobuilders, I found out that I couldn't reproduce it. After
> investigating, I discovered that the Git commit id being reported by my
> autobuilder machine was incorrect. This is due to a change I made in
> the autobuilder on May, 13th, where I'm now using a separate Git tree
> for each build instead of a common one, but the script was still taking
> the Git commit id of some other Buildroot tree. So the build was
> actually taking place with the latest Buildroot version, but reported
> to use Git commit id 9947ee9fbb94af800b8b054262734e0f81f32250.
[--SNIP--]
> Therefore, I am considering removing those completely bogus build
> results from the history. We are talking about removing 1379 build
> results, i.e all builds done my autobuilder between May, 14th and today.
>
> Even though it is quite annoying to lose so many results, I believe
> this is the best action we can take now.
No point in keeping those since we can't reproduce them, I'd say.
Regards,
Yann E. MORIN.
--
.-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------.
| Yann E. MORIN | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: |
| +33 662 376 056 | Software Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN | ___ |
| +33 223 225 172 `------------.-------: X AGAINST | \e/ There is no |
| http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | _/*\_ | / \ HTML MAIL | v conspiracy. |
'------------------------------^-------^------------------^--------------------'
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Buildroot] Issue with the autobuilders: removing 1379 builds from the history?
2013-05-28 7:25 ` Yann E. MORIN
@ 2013-05-28 7:57 ` Peter Korsgaard
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Peter Korsgaard @ 2013-05-28 7:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: buildroot
>>>>> "Yann" == Yann E MORIN <yann.morin.1998@free.fr> writes:
Hi,
>> Therefore, I am considering removing those completely bogus build
>> results from the history. We are talking about removing 1379 build
>> results, i.e all builds done my autobuilder between May, 14th and today.
>>
>> Even though it is quite annoying to lose so many results, I believe
>> this is the best action we can take now.
Yann> No point in keeping those since we can't reproduce them, I'd say.
Agreed.
--
Bye, Peter Korsgaard
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Buildroot] Issue with the autobuilders: removing 1379 builds from the history?
2013-05-28 7:10 [Buildroot] Issue with the autobuilders: removing 1379 builds from the history? Thomas Petazzoni
2013-05-28 7:25 ` Yann E. MORIN
@ 2013-05-28 19:45 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
2013-05-28 19:47 ` Thomas Petazzoni
1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Arnout Vandecappelle @ 2013-05-28 19:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: buildroot
On 28/05/13 09:10, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> This means that when you try to reproduce the build, if you take the
> Git commit id given by the autobuilder website, then you won't be
> testing with the Git commit id with which the build was made, which is
> quite annoying. This is what happened to me when trying to reproduce
> the flex problem: I have a script that, given a build SHA1, downloads
> the configuration and Git commit ID, and restarts the build with the
> exact same commit and the exact same configuration. But for those
> builds who reported an invalid Git commit ID... it cannot work, and
> therefore I wasn't reproducing the flex problem.
>
> Therefore, I am considering removing those completely bogus build
> results from the history. We are talking about removing 1379 build
> results, i.e all builds done my autobuilder between May, 14th and today.
>
> Even though it is quite annoying to lose so many results, I believe
> this is the best action we can take now.
I would wait a couple of days before removing them. At least for the
most recent ones, current HEAD probably still exposes the same problem,
so in that sense the build result is still usable.
Would it be possible to direct the URLs to a placeholder page
explaining that the build result was removed, so existing links in commit
messages don't die?
Regards,
Arnout
--
Arnout Vandecappelle arnout at mind be
Senior Embedded Software Architect +32-16-286500
Essensium/Mind http://www.mind.be
G.Geenslaan 9, 3001 Leuven, Belgium BE 872 984 063 RPR Leuven
LinkedIn profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/arnoutvandecappelle
GPG fingerprint: 7CB5 E4CC 6C2E EFD4 6E3D A754 F963 ECAB 2450 2F1F
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Buildroot] Issue with the autobuilders: removing 1379 builds from the history?
2013-05-28 19:45 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
@ 2013-05-28 19:47 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-05-28 19:49 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Petazzoni @ 2013-05-28 19:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: buildroot
Dear Arnout Vandecappelle,
On Tue, 28 May 2013 21:45:40 +0200, Arnout Vandecappelle wrote:
> I would wait a couple of days before removing them. At least for the
> most recent ones, current HEAD probably still exposes the same problem,
> so in that sense the build result is still usable.
Ok. I'm not sure they are really usable, but ok.
> Would it be possible to direct the URLs to a placeholder page
> explaining that the build result was removed, so existing links in commit
> messages don't die?
Yes, I can keep the output directories around, wipe-out their contents,
and replace it with just a README.txt file that says it has been
removed and why. Would this be ok for you?
Best regards,
Thomas
--
Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons
Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux
development, consulting, training and support.
http://free-electrons.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Buildroot] Issue with the autobuilders: removing 1379 builds from the history?
2013-05-28 19:47 ` Thomas Petazzoni
@ 2013-05-28 19:49 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Arnout Vandecappelle @ 2013-05-28 19:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: buildroot
On 28/05/13 21:47, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> Dear Arnout Vandecappelle,
>
> On Tue, 28 May 2013 21:45:40 +0200, Arnout Vandecappelle wrote:
>
>> I would wait a couple of days before removing them. At least for the
>> most recent ones, current HEAD probably still exposes the same problem,
>> so in that sense the build result is still usable.
>
> Ok. I'm not sure they are really usable, but ok.
I usually don't look at the commit ID when reproducing an autobuilder
failure. If I haven't seen a related patch on the list, I'm pretty sure
it will still fail.
>> Would it be possible to direct the URLs to a placeholder page
>> explaining that the build result was removed, so existing links in commit
>> messages don't die?
>
> Yes, I can keep the output directories around, wipe-out their contents,
> and replace it with just a README.txt file that says it has been
> removed and why. Would this be ok for you?
Perfect!
Regards,
Arnout
--
Arnout Vandecappelle arnout at mind be
Senior Embedded Software Architect +32-16-286500
Essensium/Mind http://www.mind.be
G.Geenslaan 9, 3001 Leuven, Belgium BE 872 984 063 RPR Leuven
LinkedIn profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/arnoutvandecappelle
GPG fingerprint: 7CB5 E4CC 6C2E EFD4 6E3D A754 F963 ECAB 2450 2F1F
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-05-28 19:49 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2013-05-28 7:10 [Buildroot] Issue with the autobuilders: removing 1379 builds from the history? Thomas Petazzoni
2013-05-28 7:25 ` Yann E. MORIN
2013-05-28 7:57 ` Peter Korsgaard
2013-05-28 19:45 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
2013-05-28 19:47 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-05-28 19:49 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox