Re: libglade build failure at 2004-12-03 17:24:21.337

[Luis Villa <luis villa gmail com>]

On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 23:43:10 +0000, Andy Balaam
<andybalaam artificialworlds net> wrote:
> Even better, get it to retry a few times, since this normally works
> after a few goes.

In our situation, that's not actually true, given that we're drawing
from the main cvs servers, and the build server is in a pretty high
availability colo. In the two months I've been running the tinderbox,
the only cvs failures I've seen occurred when the cvs server was down
for the count. (In the case today, because the gnome cvs box got a new
kernel.)

Still not a bad idea, of course, assuming you limit the retries- can't
hurt even in the server failure case, and if there is a legit network
burp, does help.

> (And then suppress the message, of course.)

Alternately it has been suggested that I keep the previous successful
build around, and if a build fails for whatever reason, just copy the
old tree in for that build cycle. I want to keep the last successful
build around for other reasons, so I'll probably just look into that.

Luis

> Luis Villa wrote:
> 
> >Yeah, so, first order of business is to make it not send error
> >messages when a cvs server fails.
> >Luis
> >
> >
> >On Fri,  3 Dec 2004 17:24:14 -0500 (EST), Build Bot
> ><luis villa gmail com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>libglade 'could not update module' in the tinderbox run which ended at 2004-12-03 17:24:21.337
> >>
> >>log: http://gnome-build.ximian.com/tinderbox/200412031700/libglade.html
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>gnome-build-status mailing list
> >>gnome-build-status gnome org
> >>http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-build-status
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >_______________________________________________
> >gnome-build-status mailing list
> >gnome-build-status gnome org
> >http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-build-status
> >
> >
> >
>