1 |
Finn Thain wrote: |
2 |
>> When everything goes fine, no email notification is being sent out. A |
3 |
>> convenient log structure would, however, make it possible to see which |
4 |
>> packages and USE-flag combinations successfully passed through. |
5 |
>> Providing this log via a web-page would be a useful thing. |
6 |
> |
7 |
> Would tinderbox help? |
8 |
|
9 |
As far as I know about tinderbox, it is more than just a building |
10 |
system. It is a complete procedure where the tree is being closed |
11 |
during compilation time, then only reopened when everything compiles. |
12 |
|
13 |
> |
14 |
>> - Comments are welcome, as well as expressions of worry on my mental state. |
15 |
> |
16 |
> Good thinking! |
17 |
> |
18 |
> The chroot idea is a good one because the process lends itself to |
19 |
> parallelism. That is, you might have one test box/chroot for, (maybe in |
20 |
> order of importance) |
21 |
> |
22 |
> - unstable empty tree (all deps every time) |
23 |
> - stable empty tree builds (same) |
24 |
> - unstable cumulative tree builds |
25 |
> - stable cumulative tree builds |
26 |
|
27 |
This is indeed a good plan, as this allows some more responsive and |
28 |
thorough testing to occur next to each other. |
29 |
|
30 |
> I see the last ones as being fairly important, because the cumulative |
31 |
> (emerge -Du) trees will have the best throughput, for quicky finding any |
32 |
> glaring, slap-forehead kind of bugs/bad keywords (i.e. low fruit). |
33 |
> |
34 |
> The cumulative tree machines would also be an efficient choice for your |
35 |
> reverse-dependency idea (perhaps to only one level of indirection). |
36 |
|
37 |
Good points, thanks! |
38 |
|
39 |
-- |
40 |
Fabian Groffen |
41 |
eBuild && Porting |
42 |
Gentoo for Mac OS X |
43 |
-- |
44 |
gentoo-osx@g.o mailing list |