Re: Build failed in Jenkins: flex-sdk_asdoc #75

2013-07-11 Thread OmPrakash Muppirala
same time? > > > -Mark > > -Original Message- > From: Kessler CTR Mark J [mailto:mark.kessler@usmc.mil] > Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2013 11:42 AM > To: dev@flex.apache.org > Subject: RE: Build failed in Jenkins: flex-sdk_asdoc #75 > > Well Java is the one

RE: Build failed in Jenkins: flex-sdk_asdoc #75

2013-07-10 Thread Kessler CTR Mark J
Are they running multiple Jobs in Jenkins at the same time? -Mark -Original Message- From: Kessler CTR Mark J [mailto:mark.kessler@usmc.mil] Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2013 11:42 AM To: dev@flex.apache.org Subject: RE: Build failed in Jenkins: flex-sdk_asdoc #75 Well Java is the

RE: Build failed in Jenkins: flex-sdk_asdoc #75

2013-07-10 Thread Kessler CTR Mark J
Well Java is the one being impacted... but something still has too much memory allocated. -Original Message- From: Erik de Bruin [mailto:e...@ixsoftware.nl] Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2013 11:34 AM To: dev@flex.apache.org Subject: Re: Build failed in Jenkins: flex-sdk_asdoc #75 That

Re: Build failed in Jenkins: flex-sdk_asdoc #75

2013-07-10 Thread Erik de Bruin
uns? > > Exception in thread "main" java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: GC overhead limit > exceeded > > -Mark > > -Original Message- > From: Erik de Bruin [mailto:e...@ixsoftware.nl] > Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2013 11:29 AM > To: dev@flex.apache.org > Subject: R

RE: Build failed in Jenkins: flex-sdk_asdoc #75

2013-07-10 Thread Kessler CTR Mark J
AM To: dev@flex.apache.org Subject: Re: Build failed in Jenkins: flex-sdk_asdoc #75 What is it about the 'asdoc' target that might cause the build machine to barf once in a while - but more often recently? EdB > [asdoc] Loading configuration file > F:\hudson\hudson-slave\workspace\flex

Re: Build failed in Jenkins: flex-sdk_asdoc #75

2013-07-10 Thread Erik de Bruin
What is it about the 'asdoc' target that might cause the build machine to barf once in a while - but more often recently? EdB On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 5:12 PM, Apache Jenkins Server wrote: > See > > -- >