On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 5:45 AM, Emil Velikov <emil.l.veli...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 13/01/14 18:47, Tom Stellard wrote: >> On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 03:53:58PM +0000, Emil Velikov wrote: >>> Hello list, >>> >>> While going though mesa's build systems I was wondering what it would >>> take to improve the overall experience of build testing. >>> >>> The only thing I can think of is a more centralised solution similar to >>> the one used by wine [1]. Having buildbots test every patch what is send >>> to the ML [2] :) >>> >>> I'm sure that some companies/organisations may have similar >>> infrastructure but I was thinking what is the possibility of having a >>> more open/shared experience, thus one does not need to test the same >>> environment/setup across multiple bots. >>> >>> Here are a couple of nice words for each build system that mesa has: >>> >>> * automake - tons of many build variations, most of which handled by >>> debian/ubuntu, fedora and suse build systems. >>> >>> * scons - less build variations, mainly used for non-public >>> state-trackers and/or drivers >>> >>> * android - possibly the most painful one out there (IMHO), 10GiB code >>> cloned a ton of libraries build and alot more that fair rather randomly :\ >>> >>> Kind of wondering what it would take to have such a feature and if >>> people will see benefits from it. >> >> Hi Emil, >> >> I've been playing around with buildbot, and I even had a local one doing >> Mesa builds a few weeks ago. I just need to find a dedicated machine so >> I can have it running full-time. >> >> For me, I'm mostly interested in using buildbot for piglit testing, >> but I think it would also be useful to catch build breakages for the >> various configurations people care about. >> > Indeed piglit testing would be great as well, considering it does not > lockup the machine :\ > My idea was "get it compiling first and then piglit test it", as the > former can be done virtually any type of machine unlike the latter. > >> I still don't understand the whole master/slave relationship of buildbot, >> so I'm not sure what kind of centralized resources would be needed, but >> maybe if someone would volunteer to maintain it we could use some of the fdo >> resources for hosting buildbot. >> >> You also may want to take a look at tinderbox.x.org, which already does >> some build testing. I prefer buildbot mainly because I was unable to find >> very much documentation for tinderbox, but it might be worth looking at. >> > To be honest I did not find much documentation about tinderbox either. > What I've noticed is that openSUSE Build Service offers a "drop the > distro specific build script here" approach while handling all major > distributions. Scons and Android builds are still a bit of a mist though. > > Thanks for the input Tom, I'll need to take a look at > tinderbox/buildbot/obs more closely.
mesa master gets built in the X.org tinderbox as well, Dave. _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
