[Buildbot-devel] BuildBot & Visual Studios....

Philippe McLean philippe.mclean at gmail.com
Wed Sep 21 00:14:23 UTC 2011

the buildbot master doesn't know about the paths set by the vstudio build

The master only knows to create an instance of a certain class for each
build step, and pass it the 'factory arguments' such as the install dir
(Dustin, Amber, correct me on this part?).

To query the registry, you would have to run a step on the build slave, that
did the registry query, and either passed it on to the compile step, or used
that information directly.

You might consider extending the existing classes in vstudio.py, or just use
the installdir argument directly which is constant.

Another option is to install a vanilla windows build slave and use the
visual studio defaults which should work without further customization.

On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 9:23 AM, BRM <bm_witness at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Just wanted to bring up a bug for discussion. I'm not familiar enough with
> Buildbot's protocols/etc to tackle it myself at present, and any support for
> InstallShield will likely need to follow the same kind of route.
> http://trac.buildbot.net/ticket/2108
> I finally got to the point of testing a build, and it failed because
> Buildbot had the incorrect path for VisualStudios, namely because the path
> was hard coded. Microsoft provides the required paths in some nice registry
> keys that we can access via Python - via either the _winreg/winreg built-in
> modules, or via PyWin32's win32api module. I reported the paths I know about
> in the bug.
> What I am curious about is how this would play out in build-master/slave
> architecture since the VisualStudios may not be installed at all on the
> build master, and/or different from the build slaves (even the build slaves
> could potentially be different from each other). For example, I am thinking
> of potentially moving my build master to a Linux computer at some point, and
> if I added another Windows computer for doing builds on it won't likely have
> the same installation path as the one I currently am using.
> For now, I can probably work around it using the "installdir" parameter.
> However, it would be very helpful for me (and likely others) to use the
> registry method in the bug report.
> What I want to focus the discussion on here is how this would need to work
> via the master-slave functionality. Is it possible to manage this given the
> current design/architecture/protocol? Or is there something that would need
> to be modified? If so, how big a change would it require?
> FWIW, the only real reason I am very aware of this method of detecting the
> installation is because I had to do it for some scripts I wrote - that I
> both use in my own build scripts and that are used by some of my builds for
> building their dependencies.
> Ben
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a
> definitive record of customers, application performance, security
> threats, fraudulent activity and more. Splunk takes this data and makes
> sense of it. Business sense. IT sense. Common sense.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2dcopy1
> _______________________________________________
> Buildbot-devel mailing list
> Buildbot-devel at lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/buildbot-devel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://buildbot.net/pipermail/devel/attachments/20110920/aeb04aef/attachment.html>

More information about the devel mailing list