search for: gcc20

...NT instead... > That's the latent bugs that David mentioned. I agree we should have LNT and LNT+LTO and possibly other configurations in the future. Regarding your buildbots, gcc12 is easy to replace by LNT, because the default, AFAICT, is to run only clang tests (check-all I presume), but gcc20 is running the nightly tests, and I'm not sure I should change them to "simple" or keep as "nightly" but do it via LNT. When I added Livermore, I presumed I was running LNT with the nightly variant (nt): ./sandbox/bin/python sandbox/bin/lnt runtest \ --submit ~/deve...

...far as I can tell, buildbot/osuosl/master/config/builders.py is the script that has to be changed, using LNTBuilder rather than ClangBuilder. I can see that there are only a few LNTBuilder's in use, and I don't want to break all buildbots, so I'm planning in just changing the gcc12 and gcc20 (with Duncan's permission) to make it stop failing the Livermore loops. Is there some PyDoc / Doxygen documentation on the Zorg classes? I'll be digging it manually in the interim and will send you guys a patch to convert those two buildbots to LNT. Question: Is there any way of changing...

...ll" in LLVM/clang, and reserve the "test suite" term to reply to the test-suite repository containing a grab bag of application source code, AKA the "nightly tests". I don't know whether this is consistent/useful terminology & I'm open to other ideas) >, but gcc20 > is running the nightly tests, and I'm not sure I should change them to > "simple" or keep as "nightly" but do it via LNT. I don't think LNT is able to run the "nightly" version. I believe it only runs the "simple" version. > When I added...

On 3 January 2013 21:29, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > Fair enough - you could write up a patch for the zorg repository to do > this. > Wouldn't requiring every buildbot to use LNT achieve the same thing? --renato -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 1:52 PM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote: > On 3 January 2013 21:29, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Fair enough - you could write up a patch for the zorg repository to do >> this. > > > Wouldn't requiring every buildbot to use LNT achieve the same thing? That's how you achieve this goal.

Another issue is that the "fast nightly test" builders aren't working properly: they report success even though they failed (this started happening about one month ago, I don't know what the reason is). While this should be investigated, I'm tempted to just move everything over to LNT instead... Ciao, Duncan.

...buildbot/osuosl/master/config/builders.py is the script > that has to be changed, using LNTBuilder rather than ClangBuilder. > > I can see that there are only a few LNTBuilder's in use, and I don't want to > break all buildbots, so I'm planning in just changing the gcc12 and gcc20 (with > Duncan's permission) to make it stop failing the Livermore loops. sorry, what change do you plan to make? Did you work out what the bug is? My basic worry is that it sounds like you are trying to hide the underlying issue rather than fixing it, please correct me if I'm wrong....

...> The Buildbot has detected a new failure on builder clang-x86_64-debian-fnt while building llvm. > Full details are available at: >  http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-x86_64-debian-fnt/builds/4877 > > Buildbot URL: http://lab.llvm.org:8011/ > > Buildslave for this Build: gcc20 > > Build Reason: scheduler > Build Source Stamp: [branch trunk] 151050 > Blamelist: chandlerc,foad > > BUILD FAILED: failed make.test-suite > > sincerely, >  -The Buildbot

...w failure on builder > clang-x86_64-debian-fnt while building llvm. > > Full details are available at: > > http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-x86_64-debian-fnt/builds/4877 > > > > Buildbot URL: http://lab.llvm.org:8011/ > > > > Buildslave for this Build: gcc20 > > > > Build Reason: scheduler > > Build Source Stamp: [branch trunk] 151050 > > Blamelist: chandlerc,foad > > > > BUILD FAILED: failed make.test-suite > > > > sincerely, > > -The Buildbot > > ____________________________________________...

To weigh in here... On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 8:15 AM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > +Daniel & Michael who work on the LNT infrastructure & might have some > thoughts on the differences & their merits & motivations. > > On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 4:05 AM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> > wrote: > > David, > > > >