Hi all,
The health of our buildbot fleet is frankly a bit depressing at the
moment. Of the 44 buildslaves [1], 25 (!) are currently down.
Several of the ones that are up are routinely failing some step, which
may or may not be the fault of the slave itself.
I just wanted to touch base with everybody and ask that you give your
slaves a quick once-over to make sure they're working properly, or
give an update on why they may be down and when (or if) they can be
expected to be back up. In cases where a slave is down for an
extended period of time, I'd like to clean up the waterfall view by
temporarily removing those builders (and in cases where a slave is
down for good, I'd like to clean up the list of slaves as well).
If there's anything that can be done to help on the master side, let me know!
Thanks,
--
Zach
[1]http://buildbot.python.org/all/buildslaves
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 2:08 AM, Francisco de Borja Lopez Rio
<borja(a)codigo23.net> wrote:
> I'm maintaining the i386 OpenBSD buildbot:
>
> http://buildbot.python.org/all/buildslaves/borja-openbsd-x86
>
> It has been down for the past few weeks because Mercurial is not able to
> clone the cpython repository anymore on that box. I keep that system running
> a latest snapshot of the system, so the tests could be run on the latest
> changes to things like libressl, and it seems at one point something got
> broken with Mercurial. More info in this thread in the ports@openbsd mailing
> list:
>
> http://marc.info/?t=143204993200003&r=1&w=2
>
> I'm still trying to find out what happens there, as soon as I can fix that,
> the buildslave will be back online.
This may be a red herring, but when did your problems start in
relation to http://hg.python.org automatically redirecting to
https://hg.python.org? And though it probably makes no difference, I
did just update the master last week to us https://h.p.o instead of
making hg handle the redirect.
> Very nice idea. IIRC I've mentioned on #python-devel in freenode why this one
> was down, but maybe that is not the best place for such notifications.
Hence this list :)
> One last question, will we use this list to discuss stuff regarding the
> buildbots/slaves?
Yes, that should be fine. If things get too high traffic (and of no
use to anybody but the slave owner and whoever is adjusting the
master), things can always be taken off-list.
> i.e., in this openbsd slave I still see builders called "openbsd 5.5 3.x" and
> such, while that is not exactly true, my system does not run a fixed version of
> openbsd, but the latest version available every few weeks. Dunno if this would
> be the place to mention that kind of stuff or not (or if they matter really).
I'll try to fix that name. What would be the most accurate (succinct)
name for it? Just "x86 OpenBSD 3.x" (for example), or "x86 Latest
OpenBSD"?
--
Zach
