[Mesa-dev] [RFC] Build testing, wine style

[Dave Airlie]

On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 5:45 AM, Emil Velikov <emil.l.velikov at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 13/01/14 18:47, Tom Stellard wrote:
>> On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 03:53:58PM +0000, Emil Velikov wrote:
>>> Hello list,
>>>
>>> While going though mesa's build systems I was wondering what it would
>>> take to improve the overall experience of build testing.
>>>
>>> The only thing I can think of is a more centralised solution similar to
>>> the one used by wine [1]. Having buildbots test every patch what is send
>>> to the ML [2] :)
>>>
>>> I'm sure that some companies/organisations may have similar
>>> infrastructure but I was thinking what is the possibility of having a
>>> more open/shared experience, thus one does not need to test the same
>>> environment/setup across multiple bots.
>>>
>>> Here are a couple of nice words for each build system that mesa has:
>>>
>>> * automake - tons of many build variations, most of which handled by
>>> debian/ubuntu, fedora and suse build systems.
>>>
>>> * scons - less build variations, mainly used for non-public
>>> state-trackers and/or drivers
>>>
>>> * android - possibly the most painful one out there (IMHO), 10GiB code
>>> cloned a ton of libraries build and alot more that fair rather randomly :\
>>>
>>> Kind of wondering what it would take to have such a feature and if
>>> people will see benefits from it.
>>
>> Hi Emil,
>>
>> I've been playing around with buildbot, and I even had a local one doing
>> Mesa builds a few weeks ago.  I just need to find a dedicated machine so
>> I can have it running full-time.
>>
>> For me, I'm mostly interested in using buildbot for piglit testing,
>> but I think it would also be useful to catch build breakages for the
>> various configurations people care about.
>>
> Indeed piglit testing would be great as well, considering it does not
> lockup the machine :\
> My idea was "get it compiling first and then piglit test it", as the
> former can be done virtually any type of machine unlike the latter.
>
>> I still don't understand the whole master/slave relationship of buildbot,
>> so I'm not sure what kind of centralized resources would be needed, but
>> maybe if someone would volunteer to maintain it we could use some of the fdo
>> resources for hosting buildbot.
>>
>> You also may want to take a look at tinderbox.x.org, which already does
>> some build testing.  I prefer buildbot mainly because I was unable to find
>> very much documentation for tinderbox, but it might be worth looking at.
>>
> To be honest I did not find much documentation about tinderbox either.
> What I've noticed is that openSUSE Build Service offers a "drop the
> distro specific build script here" approach while handling all major
> distributions. Scons and Android builds are still a bit of a mist though.
>
> Thanks for the input Tom, I'll need to take a look at
> tinderbox/buildbot/obs more closely.

mesa master gets built in the X.org tinderbox as well,

Dave.