validate-x86_64-darwin failing
Hi devs, validate-x86_64-darwin seems to be failing. I've restarted it when I came across the failure, but several small patches last night tripped on this. Richard
Richard Eisenberg <rae@richarde.dev> writes:
Hi devs,
validate-x86_64-darwin seems to be failing. I've restarted it when I came across the failure, but several small patches last night tripped on this.
Which jobs in particular failed? I looked through the recent job list [1] but all Darwin jobs in the last 10 pages of jobs were either skipped (due to another job failing) or passing. Cheers, - Ben [1] https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/-/jobs
Here's one: https://gitlab.haskell.org/rae/ghc/-/jobs/173464 <https://gitlab.haskell.org/rae/ghc/-/jobs/173464> I don't know if you can get more information...
On Oct 9, 2019, at 1:21 PM, Ben Gamari <ben@smart-cactus.org> wrote:
Richard Eisenberg <rae@richarde.dev> writes:
Hi devs,
validate-x86_64-darwin seems to be failing. I've restarted it when I came across the failure, but several small patches last night tripped on this.
Which jobs in particular failed? I looked through the recent job list [1] but all Darwin jobs in the last 10 pages of jobs were either skipped (due to another job failing) or passing.
Cheers,
- Ben
Richard Eisenberg <rae@richarde.dev> writes:
Here's one: https://gitlab.haskell.org/rae/ghc/-/jobs/173464 <https://gitlab.haskell.org/rae/ghc/-/jobs/173464> I don't know if you can get more information...
Right, this particular job simply timed out (e.g. waited 10 hours) before a Darwin builder became available. It's not an indication of a failure, merely that we are underprovisioned on the Darwin front. Cheers, - Ben
On Oct 13, 2019, at 6:38 PM, Ben Gamari <ben@smart-cactus.org> wrote:
Richard Eisenberg <rae@richarde.dev> writes:
Here's one: https://gitlab.haskell.org/rae/ghc/-/jobs/173464 <https://gitlab.haskell.org/rae/ghc/-/jobs/173464> I don't know if you can get more information...
Right, this particular job simply timed out (e.g. waited 10 hours) before a Darwin builder became available. It's not an indication of a failure, merely that we are underprovisioned on the Darwin front.
That was my guess. But how often does this happen? Does this failure mean we should make the darwin build somehow optional? Increase the timeout? Any fragility in our CI infrastructure is damaging: it slows the acceptance of otherwise-ready patches and contributes to a "broken windows" effect encouraging developers to ignore CI failures. Conversely, how expensive would it be to improve our darwin provisioning? Thanks, Richard
Cheers,
- Ben
Apple makes that annoyingly difficult; someone has to in effect donate a Mac to the cause, preferably one with enough memory and fast CPU. (Not literally: one can keep the Mac physically, but would more or less lose use of it for any other purpose.)
We are in slow process of reprovisioning 1-2 new builders. One of our active builders had pretty bad hardware issues so for near term we’re down in mac builder capacity On Mon, Oct 14, 2019 at 8:41 AM Brandon Allbery <allbery.b@gmail.com> wrote:
Apple makes that annoyingly difficult; someone has to in effect donate a Mac to the cause, preferably one with enough memory and fast CPU. (Not literally: one can keep the Mac physically, but would more or less lose use of it for any other purpose.) _______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
participants (4)
-
Ben Gamari -
Brandon Allbery -
Carter Schonwald -
Richard Eisenberg