What is needed to get more sites with a winetest executable
Paul.Vriens at xs4all.nl
Tue Jun 13 08:14:52 CDT 2006
On Tue, 2006-06-13 at 06:57 -0600, Andrew Ziem wrote:
> Paul Vriens wrote:
> >> Am Montag, 12. Juni 2006 20:22 schrieb Paul Vriens:
> >>> Hi,
> >>> in the last months we've experienced several times that there was no
> > winetest.exe available at the usual location
> >>> (http://www.astro.gla.ac.uk/users/paulm/WRT/CrossBuilt/) for several
> > days/weeks. The reasons are sometimes known but in any case it's a
> > Single Point Of Failure.
> >>> What will it take to have multiple sites generating and hosting the
> > winetest executable? Or do we already have this?
> >>> Cheers,
> >>> Paul.
> >> Hi,
> >> not the answer to your question, but some thoughts about the topic.
> >> As long as the automatic build of Paul Millar works, there is not reason to
> >> have a second winetest binary for nearly the same git/cvs source of the
> > tests. One binary a day is enough. If you check
> >> http://test.winehq.org/data/
> >> you will see that we miss often tests results for some windows platforms.
> >> If building the winetest binary fails. Someone needs to look into the
> > reason
> >> anyway. In almost all cases its a missing import in a library the test
> > ist linked against. So first "our mingw environment" needs to be fixed.
> > Just running another automatic build will fail with the same error as
> > the build of
> >> Paul.
> >> Its not hard for me to do the manual build. I just need some webspace to
> > put
> >> the stuff on. And i need to know what needs to be modified in the source
> > before the build (somehow the build date need to be patched into the
> > source).
> >> Also the question is how the new build is announce to the public (hope that
> >> it si not the case that it appears on astro.gla.ac.uk).
> > exactly my point. I know Paul Millar fixes stuff all the time by patches
> > of you I think and Hans Leidekker (and others). But he is only one person,
> > with of course a limited amount of time.
> > Maybe we should have a few sites generating the winebuild and using a
> > different path to publish stuff at test.winehq.org/data/[site]. We don't
> > want to mix the output of different executables in one view (apples and
> > pears).
> There are a limited number of winetest reports, but it's nice to be able
> to see how a single test operates on a variety of systems. However,
> having separate sites would fragment the reports.
> How about integrating all of winetest into winehq.org where there is a
> primary maintainer and one or more backup maintainers?
I wasn't talking about splitting the output. It was more like having a
separate branch for every winetest-origin.
More information about the wine-devel