openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Damjan Jovanovic <dam...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Buildbots are working again
Date Wed, 04 Jan 2017 13:47:15 GMT
Hi Peter

If trunk is stable and I develop in branches, then buildbots will either be
equally broken as they will break on the branches, or they will build trunk
and be stable but useless to me.

I think your biggest problem is building on Arch Linux, and I am
downloading it now to try it myself. Which bitness are you using?

Damjan

On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 3:00 PM, Peter Kovacs <leginee@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I am a bit unhappy with this approach. It basicly blocks all other efforts
> on the code.
>
> Ok. I am still struggeling with the build, but since I started to change
> code itself I actually making progress. I currently do not know where to
> commit those changes, so I can check on different machines (And see if my
> changes are still compatible with all other machines).
>
> I personally like to open up a branch.
>
> I also would like to see that trunc is the most stable branch we have,
> since this is the one we advertise people to start with. It is pretty hard
> to get familiar with the code if you work on something unstable.
>
> I do not mean to offend Damjan, who is doing a fine Job! - It is just I
> have the feeling our current organization is only working for a view, and
> not for all activities we are on.
>
>
> All the best
>
> Peter
>
>
> On 04.01.2017 13:27, Damjan Jovanovic wrote:
>
>> Yes, the last problem was that main/curl needed adding to
>> RepositoryExternal.mk. I've committed a fix and am testing it on the
>> FreeBSD bot now.
>>
>> The bots will be quite unstable going forward, as I am actively porting
>> modules to gbuild. They help me a lot to test different platforms quickly,
>> with different build settings - my PC mostly uses system libraries, the
>> bots internal ones. If you don't see commits to SVN for a while, and the
>> bots are still broken, then there's a problem ;-).
>>
>> Damjan
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 2:16 PM, Matthias Seidel <
>> matthias.seidel@hamburg.de>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Damjan,
>>>
>>> Last night the linux64-41x buildbot (and maybe others)  failed. Last
>>> successful build was 31.12.2016.
>>>
>>> Do you have any idea?
>>>
>>> Regards, Matthias
>>>
>>>
>>> Am 26.12.2016 um 19:45 schrieb Damjan Jovanovic:
>>>
>>>> Hi
>>>>
>>>> All the buildbots are successfully building now.
>>>>
>>>> The FreeBSD bot was fixed by changing the buildbot script to use Clang
>>>> instead of GCC. From what I've seen, on FreeBSD, loading a mixture of
>>>> C++
>>>> libraries built with GCC and C++ libraries built with Clang into the
>>>> same
>>>> process, and using more advanced C++ features like exception handling,
>>>> causes memory corruption and crashes due to incompatible C++ ABIs;
>>>> either
>>>> every library has to be built with GCC or every library has to be built
>>>> with Clang. In practice, the former requires a rebuild of the entire
>>>> base
>>>> system and building all ports from source, which is why the latter is
>>>> better.
>>>>
>>>> The Linux bots were much harder to fix. The build was breaking because
>>>>
>>> libc
>>>
>>>> isn't linked to in some gbuild modules, something that was fixed by
>>>> explicitly always linking to libc on Linux, and because Google Test
>>>>
>>> wasn't
>>>
>>>> linking to libpthread, somehow resulting in missing symbols in at least
>>>> main/binaryurp when built without --enable-dbgutil, which was fixed by
>>>> explicitly linking it to libpthread. I don't like these linker
>>>> mysteries,
>>>> which never happen on FreeBSD, and some of which can be worked around
>>>>
>>> with
>>>
>>>> the "gold" linker...
>>>>
>>>> Damjan
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message