Thanks for the feedback, Kevin.

It *is *my intent to run the same steps on each cell in the matrix (sans 
things which evaluate to false using the combination filter).  The last 
step of each applicable configuration should be "get the logs from the 
target this the set of tests was run against", which is also a test step in 
its own write due to how the logs are generated.

If you consider a matrix like the following crude mockup:

                               | CompilerPool | ArchATargetPool | 
ArchBTargetPool |
touchstone-build       | O                  | O                    | 
O                    |             
touchstone-unit_test  | O                  | O                    | 
O                    |
functionalTests         | O                   | O                    | 
O                    |
logRetrievalTests      | O                  | O                    | 
O                    |

I can execute the touchstone builds (compile, unit-test) and prevent 
functional tests/etc from being run, so I understand the sanity check.  The 
touchstone builds go to build slaves which compiles the code, runs unit 
tests,etc.  The functional tests and log retrieval are then run against the 
build created in the touchstone step.  The log retrieval needs to happen 
after the functional tests run, for every combination of axes which return 
true.

The only part of this setup that isn't working is getting the logs 
retrieval to occur directly after each functional test is run, and to still 
be considered an axis in the matrix.

Thanks,

Adam

On Tuesday, April 16, 2013 3:46:12 PM UTC-6, Kevin Fleming wrote:
>
> Why not just run this last job as a child job of the matrix build? The 
> matrix build is really designed for running the *same* steps for each cell 
> in the matrix; if you find yourself trying to coerce it into handling an 
> entire flow of builds, you're probably heading the wrong direction.
>
> The purpose of 'touchstone' builds in matrix jobs is not to perform 
> preparatory work for the other builds, it's to run a build that acts as a 
> sanity check on the code in question before launching into dozens (or 
> hundreds) of other builds that would just fail anyway.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: jenkins...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>
> To: jenkins...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>
> At: Apr 16 2013 15:42:54
>
>
> Thanks for the quick reply, Sami. 
>
> I'm interested in forcing the particular configuration to run last because 
> I have lots of tests which generate quite a bit of useful debugging info on 
> the back-end of the target that I am running the exhaustive tests against. 
> Once the testing is complete, I retrieve logs from that target system in 
> such a way that the retrieval itself becomes a sort of code coverage test. 
>
> The thing I am looking for is something like how one can execute a 
> touchstone build first by specifying some identifying character in, but 
> more like a 'tombstone' configuration which would be guaranteed to run 
> last, and be included in the matrix. 
>
> Adam 
>
> On Thursday, April 4, 2013 3:57:11 PM UTC-6, sti wrote:
>>
>> You cannot control the order in which matrix job builds its 
>> configurations. 
>>
>> You need to remove the configuration you want to run last and make a new 
>> non-matrix job. Then make the matrix job trigger a build of the non-matrix 
>> job. 
>>
>> If this is not good for you, please explain what you are trying to do and 
>> maybe we can suggest a better way to do it. 
>>
>> -- Sami 
>>
>> Adam Daughterson <adam.dau...@gmail.com <http://javascript:>> kirjoitti 
>> 3.4.2013 kello 17.22: 
>>
>> > I have a matrix build with touchstone builds, multiple configurations, 
>> etc.  I have a step which should be the last step in the matrix (not a 
>> triggered parameterized build, etc) and can't find a way to force the job 
>> to run that last step last. 
>> > I've tried using the "Run each configuration sequentially" option, but 
>> it appears to only force the jobs to run serially. 
>> > 
>> > Anyone have any suggestions on what I can do to get this desired 
>> functionality? 
>> > 
>> > Thanks in advance, 
>> > 
>> > Adam 
>> > 
>> > -- 
>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
>> Groups "Jenkins Users" group. 
>> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send 
>> an email to jenkinsci-use...@googlegroups.com <http://javascript:>. 
>> > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. 
>> >   
>> >   
>>
>>  -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Jenkins Users" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to jenkinsci-use...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>  
>  
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Jenkins Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to jenkinsci-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


Reply via email to