[LLVMdev] 1 Week Before 2.0 Branch Creation
sabre at nondot.org
Sat May 5 14:42:06 PDT 2007
On Sat, 5 May 2007, David Greene wrote:
> There's the llvm-testresults list, but I find it less than fully useful
> because it's not immediately obvious from scanning message subjects if
> there's been a test failure. It's a lot of messages to wade through and
> read to get this information.
> What about a Tinderbox-like setup where we could consult a web page to
> see the current status of the repository? Boost has a nice setup:
> It's probably more complex than what we need. Maybe we just need a
> page grouping each test under it's suite and marking the result on
> each architecture. Something like this:
I think that this is a great idea. However, instead of picking up yet
another setting of testing infrastructure, I think we should make what we
have already (the nightly testers) better. In particular, the main page
of the tester:
Already captures a lot of this: it tells you the number of unexpected
failures, whether or not the build succeeded etc. You can even drill down
to a specific machine, e.g.:
I see several problems with this, all of which are solvable:
1. The tester script doesn't update and rebuild the CFE, so often you get
failures due to an out-of-date CFE.
2. There is no way to group by architecture, target-triple, etc.
3. Minor stupid stuff: on the per-machine page, you can click on the test
failures number and go to the list of unexpected failures, but you
can't do that on the main page.
More information about the llvm-dev