Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from June 2021
Re: status of smoke-me testing
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next
From:
Andrew Hewus Fresh
Date:
June 6, 2021 02:13
Subject:
Re: status of smoke-me testing
Message ID:
YLwvUe9voRWZqsoX@us.holligan.net
On Sat, Jun 05, 2021 at 03:54:55PM -0400, James E Keenan wrote:
> On 6/5/21 3:18 PM, Andrew Hewus Fresh wrote:
> > On Sat, May 29, 2021 at 08:05:56PM -0400, Ricardo Signes wrote:
> > > I was looking at https://perl5.test-smoke.org/ earlier today, and
> > > looking at some of our branches, and just sort of generally looking
> > > around earlier, and I came to wonder: Is anybody still smoking the
> > > smoke-me branches?
> >
> > When I set up my sparc64 smoker with Test::Smoke I couldn't figure out
> > how to make it do smoke-me branches.
>
> The first entry in smokecurrent.gitbranch is what get's smoked. Personally,
> I start all smoke-test runs manually, so I simply manually set the first
> line to the branch I want to smoke. Others may be able to tell you about
> setting up cron jobs to smoke all branches upon their first appearance.
If my other PRs had at gotten some traction (even just rejected) I might
already have submitted one to support multiple branches in that
gitbranch file, with a syntax for matching branches with a regex that
would loop over all the remote branches and smoke any new commits on
matching branches.
https://github.com/abeltje/Test-Smoke/pulls
Is there a better place to send Test::Smoke patches or do we need a
new Test::Smoke::Simple?
> I did ask in #perl-qa for
> > direction but still wasn't able to figure out how to make it do that.
> >
>
> There is also #smoke
TIL (Today I Learned)
> > > They were useful. Can someone who has been paying attention the whole
> > > time fill me (and us) in as to their status?
> >
> > If someone tells me how, I can make my smoker do it.
> >
> > My smoker has lots of fairly slow processors, so if it was possible, I
> > would love to be able to do a smoke where I do all the different builds
> > there in parallel, but (I can't recall the details at the moment) there
> > was some collision with a file in /tmp or someplace that meant parallel
> > perl tests didn't work.
> >
>
> I have never attempted parallel runs but, yes, that would be a nice feature.
> The Test-Smoke codebase is large. I have never been able to hold it in my
> head enough to figure out the complete workflow or to attempt more than
> modest refactorings. I suspect a lot of it is superfluous or outdated, but
> I can't be sure which parts.
What Test::Smoke does is figure out sets of flags to build perl with,
then build perl with each of them and then for each build runs tests
with several different "perlio" layers. I didn't look too hard at how
it decided which layers to test, but I had a preliminary patch that ran
all those tests in parallel, but unfortunately as I said, running perl
tests in parallel fails due to some sort of conflict.
The next step would have been to build perl in parallel in separate
working directories and have even more parallelization, but since the
first step didn't work, I never made it this far.
I may have been able to solve the failures by setting $ENV{TMPDIR} or
something (I don't recall the failure like I said) but with no
likelihood of getting it merged upstream, I gave up.
l8rZ,
--
andrew - http://afresh1.com
Unix is very simple,
but it takes a genius to understand the simplicity.
-- Dennis Ritchie
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next