tinderbox information.

[Egbert Eich]

Jim Gettys writes:
 > On Tue, 2004-03-09 at 13:06, Egbert Eich wrote:
 > > I'm still trying to understand the build that takes place in
 > > tinderbox. It looks like it checks out pieces of the tree
 > > and does a 'make -k'. 
 > > This has two disadvantages:
 > > 1. It doesn't stop on the problem, therefore the area
 > >    where the problem happened is not easy to spot.
 > 
 > I can make it do so; but then you only get the one problem when
 > there may be others lurking, and it will take longer to detect them.

That's fine. Let's hope I only breake on thing at a time.

 > 
 > You can check the raw log and search for ***.

That's what I did on several of the red-flagged logs. (It took ages to get
them transferred). I did not find a single occurance of '***'.

 > 
 > But if people think it is better not to do a make -k,
 > I can go to a plain make, but I suspect that will slow things down.
 > 
 > > 2. The Makefiles don't get rebuild. If something was
 > >    changed within an Imakefile or config file it will
 > >    not show up in the logs.
 > > 
 > 
 > This seems like a mistake: the Makefiles should be depending
 > on the Imakefiles, it would seem to me, and have them rebuild
 > if they have changed.  But I don't know what the current system
 > actually does in this area.

They should depend on the Imakefiles and all files in config/cf, 
right. Since this is not feasable one needs to redo them by hand.

 > 
 > The tinderbox admin can request a "clobber" build any time,
 > which removes everything, does a full check out, and a "make World".
 > If you want to be an admin, just let me know.

We may not need a full checkout, but we may need to do a 
'make World' (or at least a 'make Everything').
 > 
 > I have memory that in theory clobbers are supposed to happen
 > once a day whether it needs it or not, but my memory may be
 > playing tricks on me.  I'll go look.

OK, thanks.

Egbert.