Re: Patchy email

[David Kastrup]

address@hidden writes:

> 10:01:55 (UTC) Begin LilyPond compile, previous commit at     
> f3279a829a6eb5c009440f39de15c0104b038b7c
> 10:02:00 Merged staging, now at:      f3279a829a6eb5c009440f39de15c0104b038b7c
> 10:02:01      Success:                ./autogen.sh --noconfigure
> 10:02:15      Success:                /tmp/lilypond-autobuild/configure 
> --enable-checking
> 10:02:18      Success:                nice make clean
> 10:08:14      Success:                nice make -j5 CPU_COUNT=5
> 10:13:11      Success:                nice make test -j5 CPU_COUNT=5
> 10:19:52 *** FAILED BUILD ***
>       nice make doc -j5 CPU_COUNT=5
>       Previous good commit:   aec018d7d4ed58e6d67e4621019a6cf2936b212f
>       Current broken commit:  f3279a829a6eb5c009440f39de15c0104b038b7c
> 10:19:52 *** FAILED STEP ***
>       merge from staging
>       Failed runner: nice make doc -j5 CPU_COUNT=5
> See the log file log-staging-nice-make-doc--j5-CPU_COUNT=5.txt
> 10:19:52 Traceback (most recent call last):
>   File 
> "/usr/local/tmp/lilypond-extra/patches/compile_lilypond_test/__init__.py", 
> line 528, in handle_staging
>     self.build (issue_id=issue_id)
>   File 
> "/usr/local/tmp/lilypond-extra/patches/compile_lilypond_test/__init__.py", 
> line 333, in build
>     issue_id)
>   File 
> "/usr/local/tmp/lilypond-extra/patches/compile_lilypond_test/__init__.py", 
> line 266, in runner
>     raise FailedCommand ("Failed runner: %s\nSee the log file %s" % (command, 
> this_logfilename))
> FailedCommand: Failed runner: nice make doc -j5 CPU_COUNT=5
> See the log file log-staging-nice-make-doc--j5-CPU_COUNT=5.txt

Thats the musicxml2ly thing again.  I now locally did make & make
install now and restarted to see whether this still breaks.

We probably need to make sure to use the right versions of musicxml2ly
(the ones in the build tree rather than the installed ones) in all
respects.  This failed build appears to be because of some module being
taken from the installed version rather than the build tree.  I expect
the next run to go through, but this makes tests non-representative.

-- 
David Kastrup