> -----Original Message-----
> From: Daniel Shahaf [mailto:d.s_at_daniel.shahaf.name]
> Sent: woensdag 14 juli 2010 23:58
> To: dev_at_subversion.apache.org
> Cc: Daniel Shahaf
> Subject: Re: splitted buildbot logs
>
> Hyrum K. Wright wrote on Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 15:28:57 +0100:
> > On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 2:55 PM, Daniel Shahaf <d.s_at_daniel.shahaf.name>
> wrote:
> > > Currently, the buildbot "testlog" outputs are quite large (12MB).
> > >
> > > When a test fails, it could be more convenient for the developer
> inspecting the
> > > buildbot log if the output was in smaller files (so we don't have to
grep for
> > > the /^FAIL/ inside a 12MB file *in the browser*).
> > >
> > > Thus: http://pastebin.ca/1900435
> > >
> > > What do you think about doing something like this in our buildbot
> instance?
Shouldn't this be handled by our python test runner instead?
If that would just create an extra logfile next to the normal logfile with
only the failing test as output, we would only have to reconfigure the
master config to upload two instead of one file. Additional benefits are
that it would help in local testing and that it would also work on
non-posix platforms.
(Should we add the XFail output to the failure log?)
Bert
> >
> > Would this need to be deployed to each buildslave, or would it live on
> > the server?
> >
>
> The former, per gmcdonald:
>
> 21:50 < gmcdonald> ok, so have the script run on the slave (becuase thats
> where the logs are) then create an extra step on
> the master to upload the results
> 21:52 < gmcdonald> (the subversion.conf can add steps to run the script on
> the slave (same as the cleanup step) then upload
> the results to master)
> 21:54 < gmcdonald> see also:
> http://buildbot.net/buildbot/docs/0.8.1/full.html#BuildStep-LogFiles
> 21:54 < gmcdonald> Using LogFiles in custom BuildSteps
> 21:54 < gmcdonald> but whatever, you choose
Received on 2010-07-15 00:33:24 CEST