| 1 |
On 13-02-2019 12:32:08 +0100, Michael Haubenwallner wrote: |
| 2 |
> > So, with this in mind, I've started experimenting, here's my "progress": |
| 3 |
> > |
| 4 |
> > http://bootstrap.prefix.bitzolder.nl/results/ |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> Nice! |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
1990-ish nice HTML, but yeah :) |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
> > The idea is to rsync the result after the bootstrap-prefix.sh call to the |
| 11 |
> > server. I can have setup to be in an "upload" sense. The current call |
| 12 |
> > (which assumes direct access) can be found in the dobootstrap script I |
| 13 |
> > currently use to fire off a bootstrap on a platform: |
| 14 |
> > |
| 15 |
> > http://bootstrap.prefix.bitzolder.nl/dobootstrap (see DOPUBLISH) |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> So I'm wondering how to enable myself to provide logs for some more CHOSTs. |
| 18 |
> What about rsync + ssh via pecker? |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Yeah, indeed, it will be rsync push to a module (I think I already |
| 21 |
enabled that). Not to pecker, but bootstrap.prefix.b.n directly. |
| 22 |
Some script-foo processes through cron and then does the analysis, etc. |
| 23 |
I think for remote targets (you) we can consider skipping the distfiles. |
| 24 |
The original idea I had behind shipping them is to make them available |
| 25 |
for the case where distfiles are no longer found. I usually pull them |
| 26 |
through my own mirror, but obviously this has the downside of not |
| 27 |
checking availability. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
(drop me a private mail, we can discuss the posibilities here to get |
| 30 |
your target's results pushed.) |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
> > None of these targets are RAP by the way. I think the current CI is |
| 33 |
> > very good at that. |
| 34 |
> |
| 35 |
> Absolutely. However, it would be nice if we could integrate the Linux/RAP |
| 36 |
> results into this overwiew as well - besides the Linux/Guest ones, even |
| 37 |
> if they share the same CHOST... |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
Yeah, perhaps just putting them aside. I already ran into |
| 40 |
LATEST_TREE_YES builds that are not the same as just bootstrapping of |
| 41 |
course. However, I think regarding the push I'd like some secrecy here |
| 42 |
regarding the access, so that's a slight problem. |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
> Also, just've found https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Prefix/tested where the |
| 45 |
> 'Last tried' column values seem outdated - maybe CI builds can provide |
| 46 |
> more recent dates there as well. |
| 47 |
> |
| 48 |
> > By the way, no bootstraps succeeded recently, so that's the goal to get |
| 49 |
> > that triggered so we can focus on fixing it. Just being able to pull in |
| 50 |
> > the CI success/fail for that would already be a start. |
| 51 |
> |
| 52 |
> FWIW, I've created a gentoo-prefix project with Azure pipelines, but their |
| 53 |
> 6 hours limit is too small for Prefix on Cygwin. So I've added my own |
| 54 |
> Windows VM there: https://dev.azure.com/gentoo-prefix/ci-builds/_build |
| 55 |
> However, I'm not sure if I should keep that for security concerns... |
| 56 |
> |
| 57 |
> BTW, Cygwin 3.0.0-0.8 does have the fork() that works for Gentoo Prefix! |
| 58 |
|
| 59 |
Hahaha, that is great news!!! |
| 60 |
|
| 61 |
Thanks, |
| 62 |
Fabian |
| 63 |
|
| 64 |
-- |
| 65 |
Fabian Groffen |
| 66 |
Gentoo on a different level |
Archives