Re: What is happening on buildfarm member baiji?
От | Magnus Hagander |
---|---|
Тема | Re: What is happening on buildfarm member baiji? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4646E9F4.7030503@hagander.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: What is happening on buildfarm member baiji? ("Andrew Dunstan" <andrew@dunslane.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: What is happening on buildfarm member baiji?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Andrew Dunstan wrote: > Tom Lane wrote: >> The last two runs on baiji have failed at the installcheck stage, >> with symptoms that look a heck of a lot like the most recent system >> catalog changes haven't taken effect (eg, it doesn't seem to know >> about pg_type.typarray). Given that the previous "check" step >> passed, the most likely explanation seems to be that some part >> of the "install" step failed --- I've not tried to reproduce the >> behavior but it looks like it might be explained if the install >> target's postgres.bki file was not getting overwritten. So we >> have two issues: what exactly is going wrong (some new form of >> Vista brain death no doubt), and why isn't the buildfarm script >> noticing? >> > > > The script will not even run if the install directory exists: > > die "$buildroot/$branch has $pgsql or inst directories!" > if ((!$from_source && -d $pgsql) || -d "inst"); > > But the install process is different for MSVC. It could be that we are > screwing up there. Uh, but that piece of code you're referring to is from the bulidfarm code, right? Isn't it the same? > I no longer have an MSVC box, so I can't tell so easily ;-( Non-Vista MSVC boxes seem to pass fine (mastodon and skylark, for example - skylark fails on something completely different, not fully investigated yet, but looks to be a buildfarm problem rather than a backend one), so I don't think it's the MSVC procedure alone that's the cause of it. //Magnus
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: