Server Migration: buildbot

Ryan Schmidt ryandesign at macports.org
Mon Sep 17 14:32:36 PDT 2012


On Sep 17, 2012, at 16:24, Clemens Lang wrote:

> On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 04:08:21PM -0500, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>> And *that* would probably put too much strain on the buildbots. It
>> already sometimes takes them hours to build a certain set of ports.
>> (Whenever I update the php port, for example.)
> 
> I see no other way to have the buildbot auto-detect broken packages to
> rebuild them (which would free us from having to revbump manually, which
> is something we want, right?)

I don't think we ever want to stop revbumping ports. Not everyone has rev-upgrade turned on, so increasing the revision is the only way to ensure people rebuild. Having an automated way to revbump all affected ports would be good however, and rev-upgrade could play a part of that.


> The process could probably be optimized to activate sets of
> non-conflicting packages at the same time (I'm thinking graph coloring).
> 
> The time-consuming part would probably be activating and deactivating,
> since updating the binary database would not be necessary (the
> information is already in the registry on the buildbot) and scanning
> should be rather quick, since only these packages and their dependencies
> are installed. So in conclusion, the whole process would probably be
> I/O-bound.
> 
> The case that rev-upgrade actually finds problems and triggers rebuilds
> would probably be rather uncommon (how many of the changes you commited
> required revbumps?)

It happens occasionally. libpng 1.5 recently. Every time libffi's version increases. I've been putting off updating libgsasl because it'll need revbumps on other ports.



More information about the macports-dev mailing list