[Buildbot-devel] SourceBaseCommand.sourcedatafile location

[Jorge Gonzalez]

On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Jorge Gonzalez <gjorge at google.com> wrote:

>
> On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 6:31 AM, Marc-Antoine Ruel <maruel at chromium.org>wrote:
>
>> Note that Jorge is using the chromium's version of buildbot, which is at
>> 0.8.4p1.
>>
> Thanks, forgot mentioning what version I'm running. Actually, in this
> particular case, I ran into this using 0.8.6
>
>>
>> I'm glad that sourcedata is going away. While an interesting
>> optimization, it's much safer to gather actual status from the slave.
>>
>> M-A
>>
>> Le 20 avril 2012 22:44, Tom Prince <tom.prince at ualberta.net> a écrit :
>>
>>>  So, the sourcedata file was originally stored in the workdir. but this
>>> was changed because various combinations of vcs+mode clobbered unknown
>>> files in the workdir, and also to avoid poluting the build directory, in
>>> case build scripts care about this.
>>>
>> I see. That's actually a reasonable rationale.
> In fact, now that I took a closer look, the file name itself is being
> suffixed a hash of the srcdir, effectively creating a sourcedatafile per
> workdir.
> My case is special and therefore probably doesn't merit a general change.
>
> The reason that is still being a problem in my case is that I'm using
> canonical directories for every repository, and all builders running on a
> given slave use these exclusively. So every time I add a new builder (rare)
> the first time around it won't have sourcedatafiles for any of the common
> directories it will need to work on. This will clobber the workidr the
> first time around, but after that, things should be good.
>
> Not optimal, but it's a one-time inefficiency for a unusual use case which
> would happen rarely, unless one's adding new builders all the time.
>


> I just found a way to copy this file over to where it needs to be.
>
Spoke too soon. It's really a PITA trying to circumvent this. I was trying
to copy the sourcedatafile back and forth between the builder's basedir and
the actual workdir to avoid the constant clobbering, but it's turning out
to require a lot of extra intricate build steps.
Is there any objection to putting the file back into the workdir, or maybe
even better, make the behavior optional?

>
>>> Looking at the master-side steps, it looks like none them store
>>> sourcedata, instead extracting enough data from the repository.
>>> Although it looks like cvs is currently broken in this respect (#2287).
>>>
>>> I'm not sure what the proper resolution to this should be.
>>>
>>>  Tom
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> For Developers, A Lot Can Happen In A Second.
>>> Boundary is the first to Know...and Tell You.
>>> Monitor Your Applications in Ultra-Fine Resolution. Try it FREE!
>>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/Boundary-d2dvs2
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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/20120423/750609c7/attachment.html>