David
> -----Original Message-----
> From: lilypond-devel <lilypond-devel-bounces+pkx166h=runbox....@gnu.org>
> On Behalf Of David Kastrup
> Sent: 19 June 2018 11:51
> To: pat...@gnu.org
> Cc: lilypond-devel@gnu.org
> Subject: Re: Patchy email
>
> pat...@gnu.org writes:
>
> > 10:01:55 (UTC) Begin LilyPond compile, previous commit at
> f3279a829a6eb5c009440f39de15c0104b038b7c
> > 10:02:00 Merged staging, now at:
> f3279a829a6eb5c009440f39de15c0104b038b7c
> > 10:02:01 Success: ./autogen.sh --noconfigure
> > 10:02:15 Success: /tmp/lilypond-autobuild/configure --
> enable-checking
> > 10:02:18 Success: nice make clean
> > 10:08:14 Success: nice make -j5 CPU_COUNT=5
> > 10:13:11 Success: nice make test -j5 CPU_COUNT=5
> > 10:19:52 *** FAILED BUILD ***
> > nice make doc -j5 CPU_COUNT=5
> > Previous good commit:
> aec018d7d4ed58e6d67e4621019a6cf2936b212f
> > Current broken commit:
> f3279a829a6eb5c009440f39de15c0104b038b7c
> > 10:19:52 *** FAILED STEP ***
> > merge from staging
> > Failed runner: nice make doc -j5 CPU_COUNT=5 See the log file
> > log-staging-nice-make-doc--j5-CPU_COUNT=5.txt
> > 10:19:52 Traceback (most recent call last):
> > File "/usr/local/tmp/lilypond-
> extra/patches/compile_lilypond_test/__init__.py", line 528, in
handle_staging
> > self.build (issue_id=issue_id)
> > File "/usr/local/tmp/lilypond-
> extra/patches/compile_lilypond_test/__init__.py", line 333, in build
> > issue_id)
> > File "/usr/local/tmp/lilypond-
> extra/patches/compile_lilypond_test/__init__.py", line 266, in runner
> > raise FailedCommand ("Failed runner: %s\nSee the log file %s" %
> > (command, this_logfilename))
> > FailedCommand: Failed runner: nice make doc -j5 CPU_COUNT=5 See the
> > log file log-staging-nice-make-doc--j5-CPU_COUNT=5.txt
>
> Thats the musicxml2ly thing again. I now locally did make & make install
now
> and restarted to see whether this still breaks.
>
> We probably need to make sure to use the right versions of musicxml2ly
(the
> ones in the build tree rather than the installed ones) in all respects.
This failed
> build appears to be because of some module being taken from the installed
> version rather than the build tree. I expect the next run to go through,
but this
> makes tests non-representative.
>
> --
[James:] I don't understand. I don't have this problem. Are you saying that
your patchy is not building LP from the same 'tree' as you are testing the
patch from?
I am always a bit confused when I don't get the same problem as others that
run the scripts I do.
Thanks for your time.
James
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
