From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Toon Claes Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Multi-OS Emacs buildbot? Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 10:03:30 +0100 Message-ID: <87mtxz4o4d.fsf@iotcl.com> References: <871rfliy8h.fsf@gnus.org> <878s9tfqma.fsf@gnus.org> <87k0tc3loz.fsf@gmx.de> <871rfkbm9h.fsf@gmx.de> <03659494-2a6e-fdca-bc5d-8f76862d4521@yandex.ru> <877dpae4uz.fsf@iotcl.com> <87r1nh691b.fsf@gmx.de> <87v9cp4xd9.fsf@iotcl.com> <875z4pfzdy.fsf@gnus.org> <87im8p1vyn.fsf@gmx.de> <87sg7teiv8.fsf@gnus.org> <87a6u11uzh.fsf@gmx.de> <87eejdehw3.fsf@gnus.org> <87wnx5ymg9.fsf@gmx.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="28070"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Lars Ingebrigtsen , Dmitry Gutov , Alan Third , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Michael Albinus Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Dec 27 10:04:30 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1ktRyY-0007C9-Ho for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 27 Dec 2020 10:04:30 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:45106 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ktRyX-0002UG-HR for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 27 Dec 2020 04:04:29 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:47074) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ktRxt-00023W-HQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 27 Dec 2020 04:03:49 -0500 Original-Received: from outbound.soverin.net ([2a01:4f8:fff0:2d:8::218]:59795) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ktRxr-0005i9-0z for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 27 Dec 2020 04:03:49 -0500 Original-Received: from smtp.soverin.net (unknown [10.10.3.28]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by outbound.soverin.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8CFB3600E9; Sun, 27 Dec 2020 09:03:39 +0000 (UTC) Original-Received: from smtp.soverin.net (smtp.soverin.net [159.69.232.142]) by soverin.net In-Reply-To: <87wnx5ymg9.fsf@gmx.de> (Michael Albinus's message of "Sat, 26 Dec 2020 09:56:54 +0100") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a01:4f8:fff0:2d:8::218; envelope-from=toon@iotcl.com; helo=outbound.soverin.net X-Spam_score_int: -25 X-Spam_score: -2.6 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.6 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:261897 Archived-At: On Sat, Dec 26 2020, Michael Albinus wrote: > Lars Ingebrigtsen writes: > >> Well, the "make check" output is pretty regular, so it shouldn't be very >> difficult to recognise. GitLab is able to parse JUnit [1] formatted test output. It's an XML format specified by IBM [2]. But as far as I know, it's currently not possible to include these results in the pipeline emails. So that won't help us much at this point. >>> The best approximation I can think of is to add the last N lines of the >>> log file to the notification message. >> >> That's better than nothing. > > Yes. Toon, I have no idea whether this would be possible in the mail > template? Until a few months ago the last 30 lines of the log were included in the emails. But unfortunately they were removed [3] for security and performance reasons. There is a follow-up issue [4] to discuss an alternative. We can apply a patch to our installation to revert the above, we did something like this before. But there's an automatic update set up on the machine, so we need a mechanism to reapply the patch after updating. -- Toon [1] https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/ci/unit_test_reports.html [2] https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/en/SSQ2R2_14.1.0/com.ibm.rsar.analysis.codereview.cobol.doc/topics/cac_useresults_junit.html [3] https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/merge_requests/42395.patch [4] https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/issues/290306