On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 02:14:56PM +0100, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 12 2019, Duy Nguyen wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 7:43 PM Duy Nguyen <pclouds@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> The test failures on NetBSD and Solaris/Sparc, not sure if we can do > >> anything without test logs or access to these systems. > > > > Actually if you could tweak your ci script a bit to run tests with -v, > > that would help. > > I vaguely remember doing that and running into some issue where it > truncated the output, so e.g. I wouldn't see compile warnings on AIX > because of the firehose of subsequent test output. > > But yeah, having this in some smart way would be great. I'd be most keen > to just work towards offloading this to some smarter test runner as > noted to Johannes upthread. > > I.e. a good test_for(SHA1, params) function would run the tests with > "prove", and e.g. spot that tests so-and-so failed, and then run those > specific ones with -v -x. Just follow suit of what we have been doing on Travis CI since the very beginning: run tests with '--verbose-log' to begin with, and then dump the logfiles of any failed tests, i.e. where the content of 'test-results/t1234-foo.exit' is not '0'. Re-running a failed test is not a good idea, as it won't help if the test managed to fail because of a rare flakiness. > That's how I was going to fix the log overflow problem, but I'd much > rather not continue hacking on this gitlab-gccfarm-specific thing, and > instead work towards something more general.
