| Summary: | Autobuilder additional task log availability | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Infrastructure] AutoBuilder | Reporter: | Benjamin Esquivel <benjamin.esquivel> |
| Component: | autobuilder | Assignee: | Unassigned <unassigned> |
| Status: | RESOLVED OBSOLETE | QA Contact: | |
| Severity: | enhancement | ||
| Priority: | Medium | CC: | anibal.limon, elizabeth.flanagan, infras.ab.watcher, Infras.watcher, JPEWhacker, randy.macleod, tvgamblin |
| Version: | unspecified | ||
| Target Milestone: | Future | ||
| Hardware: | x86 | ||
| OS: | Multiple | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| OS type for building Yocto: | --- | Type of Regression: | --- |
| Verified: | Documentation change: | No (bug/feature does not impact docs) | |
|
Description
Benjamin Esquivel
2015-12-03 22:59:42 UTC
So, some potential issues with this. 1. build-workers are not normally accessible outside of the build cluster. This is for security reasons to ensure that only the build controller is accessible. 2. While we can do this, there is no way of ensuring that the data will be there. Build directories are reused the moment that particular build is farmed out to that particular server. A better solution here might be to publish the logs. However, that is a substantial amount of data which causes it's own set of issues. thanks for replying, I see your point. On publishing the logs, we would need to whitelist what we want to publish (dir level won't be that bad) and then we could tar them, they are mostly text so compression would be very nice there It might be possible to report the log files into the bitbake event stream, which already has mechanisms to be recorded and views (e.g. via toaster). We've done other thing and so there are alternatives. Open a new bug if you disagree. |