[m-dev.] Continious integration testing

Paul Bone paul at bone.id.au
Tue Jun 30 16:52:50 AEST 2015

On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 03:09:11PM +1000, Julien Fischer wrote:
> Hi,
> On Tue, 30 Jun 2015, Paul Bone wrote:
> >On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 08:57:26PM +0000, Charles Shuller wrote:
> >>Hello All,
> >>
> >>I've received the following error on the 3 most recent ROTDs when trying to
> >>build them.
> >>
> >>There is no mmc on my path at configure time.
> >>
> >>mmc --compile-to-c --grade asm_fast.gc     --mercury-linkage shared --flags
> >>-R/home/charles/local/stow/mercury-rotd-2015-06-04/lib/mercury/lib/asm_fast.gc
> >>-R/home/charles/local/stow/mercury-rotd-2015-06-04/lib/mercury/lib
> >>--no-warn-insts-without-matching-type   array > array.err 2>&1
> >>/tmp/mmake.MuuPTs:67610: recipe for target 'array.c_date' failed
> >>
> >
> >I think we need to bring something like the old nightly test scripts back.
> That would require having the hardware (or equivalent) to run them on.
> >How did we mis this issue for three months?
> We didn't, IIRC it was reported some time ago, but nobody got around to
> investigating it until the other day.  The old nightly test scripts
> wouldn't have caught it in any case since they didn't test the source
> distribution they generated.  (Indeed, even if they had tested it, they
> might not have caught it, since the problem only occurs when you install
> a 32-bit source distribution on to a 64-bit machine.)

What do you mean a 32-bit source distribution?  The only bit-ness in the
source distributions should be how many tag bits are used (two).

> >I have been installing the Mercury I need and only installing a new
> >one if I need it for some reason (eg: to build the git version).  Have
> >we all been doing this and therefore none of the developers have been
> >regularly testing the ROTD builds?
> The ROTD builds are tested in the same way they always have been,
> bootcheck, install from stage 2, run tests etc.

Yes, but I guess this isn't on multiple systems with varing configurations.

> >It would be good to bring back some kind of testing rigor.  I would also
> >like to use something more like continuous integration (CI) rather than the
> >nightly build scripts.  CI will also give us more granular feedback (one
> >test run per change) and will not run if nothing changed.  I started to
> >investigate this in 2013 but stopped as I (then) lacked the disk space
> >required for so many builds.
> >
> >Thoughts?
> Do you have the resources (incl. time) to do that?  If so, great!

Time is what I don't have, I have a couple of computers that I could have do
this as required.

If I had time & energy this is one of many things that I'd like to work
on.  It's probably about half way down my "Mercury things" list.

Paul Bone

More information about the developers mailing list