(original) (raw)

On Thu, 26 Sep 2013 14:43:48 -0400

Benjamin Peterson <benjamin@python.org> wrote:
\> 2013/9/26 Eli Bendersky <eliben@gmail.com>:
\> >
\> >
\> >
\> > On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 7:28 AM, Benjamin Peterson <benjamin@python.org>
\> > wrote:
\> >>
\> >> 2013/9/26 Eli Bendersky <eliben@gmail.com>:
\> >> > Hi All,
\> >> >
\> >> > Earlier this morning I had a slight tackle with a couple of the 3.4 bots
\> >> > (sorry everyone!). I fixed some problems in asdl.py -
\> >> > http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/21d46e3ae60c - and used the 'with'
\> >> > statement. Some bots don't have Python 2.6+ and couldn't bootstrap
\> >> > Python-ast.h/c
\> >> >
\> >> > Two questions:
\> >> >
\> >> > \* Should I always check-in Python-ast.h and Python-ast.c when I touch
\> >> > asdl\*
\> >> > ? The generated files are unchanged, it's only the timestamp that
\> >> > changed.
\> >> > \* Can we, in theory, use new Pythons for asdl\* code, because
\> >> > Python-ast.\*
\> >> > are, in fact, checked in so they don't have to be rebuilt by the bots or
\> >> > users?
\> >>
\> >> We should have the buildbots run "make touch", so they don't need to
\> >> run asdl\_c.py.
\> >
\> >
\> > How should we go about doing this?
\>
\> Complain to Antoine I suppose. :)

Here you are:
http://buildbot.python.org/all/builders/AMD64%20Snow%20Leop%203.x/builds/28/steps/compile/logs/stdio

Of course, when it's using "-jN" there may be a race condition :-)