similar to: [LLVMdev] 2.6 Code freeze TOMORROW!

I set up a buildbot for llvm at http://google1.osuosl.org:8011/waterfall It builds every single revision of llvm, runs the testsuite, and reports the results. It takes about 3 minutes per build+test right now (it's an 8 core machine). Currently i have it building x86_64-linux. Setting up a builder/slave for any platform would be trivial. I simply don't have machines running anything but

On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 2:43 AM, Duncan Sands <duncan.sands at math.u-psud.fr> wrote: > Hi Daniel, > >> I set up a buildbot for llvm at http://google1.osuosl.org:8011/waterfall >> It builds every single revision of llvm, runs the testsuite, and >> reports the results. It takes about 3 minutes per build+test right >> now (it's an 8 core machine). > >

On Monday 10 November 2008 15:28, Bill Wendling wrote: > Hi Daniel, > > I see that you're doing a Debug build. Could you do a "Release" or > "Release-Asserts" build instead? This will catch errors which > developers won't normally see. I never knew about buildbot until just now. This could really help with the validation proposal I just posted. Can

Hi Daniel, > I set up a buildbot for llvm at http://google1.osuosl.org:8011/waterfall > It builds every single revision of llvm, runs the testsuite, and > reports the results. It takes about 3 minutes per build+test right > now (it's an 8 core machine). how does it report the results? Can it email the mailing list if the build fails for example? Ciao, Duncan.

On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 1:02 PM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: > I set up a buildbot for llvm at http://google1.osuosl.org:8011/waterfall > It builds every single revision of llvm, runs the testsuite, and > reports the results. It takes about 3 minutes per build+test right > now (it's an 8 core machine). > > Currently i have it building x86_64-linux.

Thanks. But please send the build notifications to llvm-testresults at cs.uiuc.edu instead. Evan On Nov 3, 2008, at 10:32 AM, Daniel Berlin wrote: > On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 2:43 AM, Duncan Sands > <duncan.sands at math.u-psud.fr> wrote: >> Hi Daniel, >> >>> I set up a buildbot for llvm at http://google1.osuosl.org:8011/waterfall >>> It builds every

Hi Renato, > I was recently investigating the build bot infrastructure and noticed > that the arm-linux target is failing for quite a long time. I believe > that it means ARM code is not executed all that often in LLVM tests, > is that correct? > > We were wondering what kind of support we could give to make sure ARM > code is correct and don't regress, specially before

Hi all, I was recently investigating the build bot infrastructure and noticed that the arm-linux target is failing for quite a long time. I believe that it means ARM code is not executed all that often in LLVM tests, is that correct? We were wondering what kind of support we could give to make sure ARM code is correct and don't regress, specially before releases (I know it's a bit late

These URLs don't work for me. How do I know what is broken? It builds fine on my x86 linux box. -----Original Message----- From: buildbot at google1.osuosl.org [mailto:buildbot at google1.osuosl.org] Sent: Friday, August 07, 2009 5:12 PM To: Sanjiv Kumar Gupta - I00171 Cc: llvm-testresults at cs.uiuc.edu Subject: buildbot failure in llvm on llvm-i686-linux The Buildbot has detected a new

Hi Daniel, I see that you're doing a Debug build. Could you do a "Release" or "Release-Asserts" build instead? This will catch errors which developers won't normally see. -bw On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 1:02 PM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: > I set up a buildbot for llvm at http://google1.osuosl.org:8011/waterfall > It builds every single

Daniel, Thanks! Is this doing a build of Ada and Fortran? :-) -bw On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 1:02 PM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: > I set up a buildbot for llvm at http://google1.osuosl.org:8011/waterfall > It builds every single revision of llvm, runs the testsuite, and > reports the results. It takes about 3 minutes per build+test right > now (it's an 8

On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 9:18 AM, <Sanjiv.Gupta at microchip.com> wrote: > These URLs don't work for me. How do I know what is broken? > It builds fine on my x86 linux box. Why don't the URLs work for you? In this case the problem was just because llvm.org went down. When an "svn" step fails; i.e., the line after "BUILD FAILED:", the problem is usually

Just received this: The Buildbot has detected a new failure of llvm-ppc-linux on llvm. Full details are available at: http://google1.osuosl.org:8011/builders/llvm-ppc-linux/builds/3229 Buildbot URL: http://google1.osuosl.org:8011/ Buildslave for this Build: nick1 Build Reason: Build Source Stamp: 84759 Blamelist: ofv BUILD FAILED: failed compile Apparently the problem was a warning at

Hello Daniel, osuosl build master (google1) is moved to another place or just down? Thanks Galina

Yes. On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 4:45 PM, David Greene <dag at cray.com> wrote: > On Monday 10 November 2008 15:28, Bill Wendling wrote: >> Hi Daniel, >> >> I see that you're doing a Debug build. Could you do a "Release" or >> "Release-Asserts" build instead? This will catch errors which >> developers won't normally see. > > I

I am unable to connect to build master at:google1.osuosl.org:9990 from my buildslave. See attached twisted9.0.0 log. 2010-02-12 09:50:03-0800 [-] Log opened. 2010-02-12 09:50:03-0800 [-] twistd 9.0.0 (C:\Python26\python.exe 2.6.2) starting up. 2010-02-12 09:50:03-0800 [-] reactor class: twisted.internet.win32eventreactor.Win32Reactor. 2010-02-12 09:50:03-0800 [-] Starting factory

Thanks to Daniel, we have a new home for the validator buildbot. Thanks, Daniel! Go to http://google1.osuosl.org:8080 and have a look. -Dave

On Aug 7, 2009, at 10:13 AM, Daniel Dunbar wrote: > On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 9:18 AM, <Sanjiv.Gupta at microchip.com> wrote: >> These URLs don't work for me. How do I know what is broken? >> It builds fine on my x86 linux box. > > Why don't the URLs work for you? > I suspect the corporate firewall is blocking outgoing connections on port 8011. -jim > In

No :) I'm trying to start by having something that keeps people from breaking the build and tests (by letting them submit patches and being whiny 3 minutes after something breaks). Once that is done, we can move to something that keeps all the languages in good shape. I think if i simply made it do everything at once, people would just ignore it. At least, that's my experience :)

On Wednesday 15 July 2009 15:43, Török Edwin wrote: > How about starting simple, and just auto-tagging builds that work? > Could be done per OS/arch, and one global tag when all buildbots pass. We've talked about this before and I've been working on setting up such a system. Unfortunately, I can't figure out why my buildbots fail to configure llvm-gcc. Is there a link to the