[Buildroot] [PATCH buildroot-test] web/import.inc.php: account for failures that contain an images/ path

Arnout Vandecappelle arnout at mind.be
Tue Jun 18 10:23:27 UTC 2019



On 18/06/2019 12:18, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> On Mon, 17 Jun 2019 21:39:22 +0200
> Arnout Vandecappelle <arnout at mind.be> wrote:
> 
>>> This commit adjusts the ugly PHP code with even more ugliness to take  
>>
>>  This sounds like a great idea :-)
> 
> Isn't it :-)
> 
>>  Note that the Python code already has similar logic to extract the reason. Why
>> don't we save that logic as part of the tarball in a "reason" file, and extract
>> it from there?
> 
> Because history, but indeed it would make a lot more sense to extract
> the reason only on the client side, because we anyway extract it
> already to be able to extract the relevant part of the build log.
> 
>>  That said, we still have to support the legacy database which doesn't have that
>> "reason" file. So it's still useful to apply this patch.
> 
> There is really no "legacy" to support here. On the server side, when a
> result is submitted, the reason is extracted from the build log, and
> then stored in the SQL database. Once that is done, when browsing build
> results, the reason is always taken from the SQL database.

 OK, I thought this code was executed on every query. But that would indeed be
crazy.


> So server-side, we can entirely drop the logic that calculates the
> reason from the build log, and instead replace it with just reading the
> reason from an additional "reason" file in the result tarball submitted
> by build slaves.
> 
> What needs to be done however is a transition period:
> 
>  - Adding the "reason" file to the build results on the client side is
>    implemented.
> 
>  - This change is deployed to all build slaves.
> 
>  - Once it's deployed to all build slaves, we can change the server
>    side to use the reason file instead of calculating the reason
>    manually.
> 
> Or we could avoid that transition by using the reason file if
> available, and fall back to the old logic if not available.

 This was the path I was assumed was going to be taken.


> In the mean time, should I still apply this patch ? :-)

 Depends a bit on how long it's going to take Atharva to implement this reason
file. Atharva?

 Regards,
 Arnout



More information about the buildroot mailing list