[Python-Dev] Buildbot health (was Re: February bug day outcome)

Barry Warsaw barry at python.org
Tue Feb 26 14:56:09 CET 2008

Hash: SHA1

On Feb 26, 2008, at 12:04 AM, Neal Norwitz wrote:
> It's been pretty bad the last month or so.  Although it's getting
> better now.  I would recommend these are the golden bots based on what
> have traditionally been fairly stable help expose errors:
>  sparc solaris10
>  amd64 gentoo (this is really an ubuntu 6.10 box)
>  x86 gentoo (*)
>  g4 os x (this one has svn problems from time to time which is odd
> given that it is the only box colocated with the svn server)
>  some win xp box (#4 wfm, i think that has been the most stable  
> recently)
>  ia64 ubuntu
>  ppc debian (this may be ubuntu also)
>  ppc64 debian (ditto)

Cool, thanks for this list.

> The biggest challenge will be having svn work on all the machines.
> The tests are getting more stable.  I worked on many of them.  There
> are still issues from time to time, but at this point I think more are
> caused by bad checkins.  Sometimes these machines go away, if they are
> unavailable at time of release, so be it.
> If we can get more people watching the buildbots and ping those
> responsible for a failure, we can keep the red to a minimum.  If we
> can fix the ~5 flaky tests, we will be in good shape.  If we can fix
> the svn problems, we'll be in great shape.  Nearly all of the flaky
> tests are due to networking problems.  Sometimes transient conditions
> like the host is unavailable, others due to races.
> (*) x86 gentoo should not be used for 3.0.  There is a problem with
> signal 32 that causes it to rarely work.  I don't know the cause or
> how to fix this.

All of the 3.0 buildbots are currently red.  Both test_cProfile and  
test_profile fail consistently for me on x86 Ubuntu Gutsy and Intel OS  
X 10.5.2.  It looks like the buildbots are failing here too -- does  
anybody have time to fix these two tests?

- -Barry

Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin)


More information about the Python-Dev mailing list