Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

ci_build.sh/Jenkinsfile-dynamatrix: constrain the sprawl of build cases (doc/distcheck) #1092

Merged
merged 14 commits into from
Sep 15, 2021

Conversation

jimklimov
Copy link
Member

@jimklimov jimklimov commented Sep 14, 2021

Our two most expensive build types are distchecks and especially builds with docs. Notably, these are less about code quality and more about recipe quality vs. available non-compiler tools provided on the build workers (make implementation, asciidoc and friends) so we do not need to run them as many times as we have various compiler versions.

This PR aims to reign them in, reducing the redundant builds and those that bring little value for much CPU churn, and revising/documenting what different BUILD_TYPE scenario names do.

At the moment of posting, it does not yet address the calling of (docs-included) builds once per target OS, which is a separate goal that may come later in this or future PR.

Partially helps address networkupstools/jenkins-dynamatrix#4 as well, by refactoring ci_build.sh with that needed direction in mind. This does however bring in some more churn to BUILD_TYPE=default-all-errors by building not only openssl and/or nss implementations, but also without-ssl which exposed some minor faults fixed below.

…lementations and refactor into a loop and case

Should be helftul for networkupstools/jenkins-dynamatrix#4 eventually
… other scenarios) and withdocs:man (redundant) from "various builds"
…not yet run a witdocs:all (and are declared capable of man)
@jimklimov jimklimov merged commit e574159 into networkupstools:master Sep 15, 2021
@jimklimov jimklimov deleted the jf-pr-scope branch September 15, 2021 01:21
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant