On 13.04.16 14:40, Victor Stinner wrote: > Last months, most 3.x buildbots failed randomly. Some of them were > always failing. I spent some time to fix almost all Windows and Linux > buildbots. There were a lot of different issues. Excelent! Many thanks for doing this. And new features of regrtest look nice. > So please try to not break buildbots again and remind to watch them sometimes: > > http://buildbot.python.org/all/waterfall?category=3.x.stable&category=3.x.unstable A desirable but nonexistent feature is to write emails to authors of commits that broke buildbots. How hard to implement this? > Next weeks, I will try to backport some fixes to Python 3.5 (if > needed) to make these buildbots more stable too. > > Python 2.7 buildbots are also in a sad state (ex: test_marshal > segfaults on Windows, see issue #25264). But it's not easy to get a > Windows with the right compiler to develop on Python 2.7 on Windows. What are you think about backporting recent regrtest to 2.7? Most needed features to me are the -m and -G options. > Maybe it's time to move more 3.x buildbots to the "stable" category? > http://buildbot.python.org/all/waterfall?category=3.x.stable +1 > By the way, I don't understand why "AMD64 OpenIndiana 3.x" is > considered as stable since it's failing with multiple issues since > many months and nobody is working on these failures. I suggest to move > this buildbot back to the unstable category. I think the main cause is the lack of memory in this buildbot. I tried to minimize memory consumption and leaks, but some leaks are left, and they provoke other tests failures, and additional resource leaks. Would be nice to add a feature for running every test in separate subprocess. This will isolate the effect of failed tests.
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4