Author loewis
Recipients flox, loewis, orsenthil, pitrou, rhettinger
Date 2010-08-09.20:57:23
SpamBayes Score 6.09457e-13
Marked as misclassified No
Message-id <4C606AC6.7010404@v.loewis.de>
In-reply-to <1281386632.3.0.199969553901.issue9546@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
Content
Am 09.08.2010 22:43, schrieb Antoine Pitrou:
> 
> Antoine Pitrou <pitrou@free.fr> added the comment:
> 
>> I think "cannot be copied" is an exaggeration
> 
> It seems that the purpose is to allow local modifications to
> Modules/Setup. Otherwise, I don't know why the Makefile would print
> an elaborate message when the file exists. If this possibility is
> never used then, true, we can remove the elaborate message and
> overwrite the existing file instead.

It's certainly the case that this is used. However, "cannot be copied"
sounds like a permission problem, which there is not.

>> Not sure why this had high priority - if anybody wants to fix it, 
>> please go ahead.
> 
> How do we fix it? I don't think we have access to the sequence of
> operations executed by buildbots.

Just ask for it, and you'll be granted access.

> It is high priority because this caused a mess on the buildbots and
> forced us to revert some perfectly good checkins. I hesitated between
> high and critical, because infrastructure bugs like this are actively
> detrimental to development activites.

I still fail to see the bug - it's by design that later build steps are
not executed if earlier build steps failed. It would be possible to let
the slaves start over with an entirely new checkout on every build, but
that would significantly increase bandwidth consumption, and delay
builds.

In any case, I won't have time to look into this in the near future.
History
Date User Action Args
2010-08-09 20:57:31loewissetrecipients: + loewis, rhettinger, orsenthil, pitrou, flox
2010-08-09 20:57:28loewislinkissue9546 messages
2010-08-09 20:57:23loewiscreate