Re: [boost] [build] Headers rule does both too much and too little

Subject: Re: [boost] [build] Headers rule does both too much and too little
From: Tom Kent (lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-02-19 09:01:07

On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 4:07 PM, Peter Dimov <lists_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Steven Watanabe wrote:
>
>> Are the testers using incremental builds?
>
>
> I don't think so. This run, for example:
>
> http://www.boost.org/development/tests/develop/developer/output/teeks99-02e-win2008-64on64-boost-bin-v2-libs-smart_ptr-test-allocate_shared_alloc11_test-test-msvc-12-0-debug.html
>
> is apparently using an old version of shared_count.hpp, and there's no
> yellow i.

Sorry I haven't responded to this sooner...I should probably have
thrown my $0.02 since I seem to be the regression runner people are
seeing this on.

There are a couple things at work here.

Linux runners: All the teeks99 runners with the same number are
actually on the same (virtual) machine, they get run sequentially
(each with a different letter after the number). To save disk space, I
have one copy of the git repo that I copy into the directory (you
can't do a local git clone with submodules!) for that runner just
before kicking off the run.py script. As of last week, I had
accidentally left a copy of the headers inside that copy of the repo,
so it got copied with it. I would have expected it to be brought up to
date each time, but that wasn't happening. Late last week, I deleted
the copy of the headers from the repo I was copying (on all three
machines teeks99-03 -04 -05) everything looks like it is working fine
(it forced the headers to be generated each time).

tldr; We need to investigate why the headers aren't being correctly
re-generated.

Windows runners: Here each runner has its own repo, so nothing was
being copied in. It seemed that there was the same problem, headers
that should have been re-generated weren't being re-generated. To try
to force the re-generation, I added a line to my script to delete the
headers before starting each run. This caused immediate failures
everywhere (on teeks99-01...which is where I tried this first).
Apparently, since I first generated them the code had changed over to
using junctions, which weren't working for some reason with the test
code. As of yesterday, things were looking better, (someone fixed the
junction problem?) so I pushed this fix out to my 2nd windows machine
(teeks99-02). However, this morning, I see that -01 is failing again
with the same problem, so I expect to see that spread to -02 soon.

This appears to be related to the "Tests failing, missing user.hpp"
thread [http://lists.boost.org/boost-testing/2014/02/7561.php].

Tom