On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 05:48:54PM +0100, Christian Lohmaier wrote: > On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 10:58 AM, lio...@mamane.lu <lio...@mamane.lu> wrote:
>> There seems to be a failure in sfx2/sdi/sfxitems.sdi >> (see attachment and >> http://tinderbox.libreoffice.org/cgi-bin/gunzip.cgi?tree=MASTER&full-log=1323593401.28011#err677 > Any reason why you are using the huge full-log instead of the brief log? > http://tinderbox.libreoffice.org/cgi-bin/gunzip.cgi?tree=MASTER&brief-log=1323593401.28011#err677 I thought the brief log was the same as the contents of the "email to committers" and I couldn't make sense of that. That's why I went to http://tinderbox.l.o in the first place. >> BTW, it took about 20 minutes for the full log to arrive at >> http://tinderbox.libreoffice.org/MASTER/status.html; any reason for >> such a significant delay? > The cronjob that regenerates the page Ah, it is a cronjob, I see. > is only run every 15 minutes or so. I don't consider it a > "significant delay" when a build takes 2½-3 hours... >From the POV of a committer that gets the "you broke the build" mail and would like to investigate it, it can feel long (it did for me). Besides, a build takes 2.5-3 hours is not true: Linux-Gentoo-x86_64_2-no-moz_no-binfilter had several successful builds in 17-18 minutes. MacOSX-Intel_1-built_no-moz_on_10.6.8: several at 18-19 minutes, but then an outlier at 105 minutes. In general *failed* builds can be _much_ shorter than successful builds if the error is early... And failed builds is the logs you want to see :) The tinderbox I was interested in (Linux-x86-64_8-SLED11) has a rather high variability in build time: 25, 33, 145, 41, 32, 37, 26, 154, 183, 96, 88, 100, 45, 102, 22, 137, ... -- Lionel _______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
