ci: Build and run tests once on freebsd #15338

1. 
   MarcoFalke commented at 1:48 pm on February 4, 2019: member

   Could be activated through https://github.com/marketplace/cirrus-ci
2. cirrus ci: Inital config fa1d400003
3. MarcoFalke added the label Tests on Feb 4, 2019
4. 
   fanquake commented at 1:56 pm on February 4, 2019: member

   Concept ACK running tests on a BSD. Is this on Cirrus CI because we’ve run out of capacity with Travis?
5. 
   MarcoFalke commented at 2:00 pm on February 4, 2019: member

   I believe cirrus ci is the only solution that offers freebsd.
6. 
   laanwj commented at 8:06 pm on February 4, 2019: member

   While I like the idea of adding BSDs, I’m not sure I’d like to add yet another different, incompatible CI besides AppVeyor and Travis. They all work slightly different for restarting the build, checking the logs, etc.
7. 
   MarcoFalke commented at 8:46 pm on February 4, 2019: member

   I tend to agree that our ci turns into a jungle of traffic lights that no one really knows how to handle. Also, I am not aware of the last time something broke on freebsd, so adding this has little value. Though, I remember someone asked for adding some bsd to the ci, which is why I took a stab here to see if it would work.
8. 
   practicalswift commented at 9:54 pm on February 4, 2019: contributor

   Concept ACK

   I think the benefit of testing in diverse environments outweighs the maintenance cost.

   Given how straight forward the script looks the maintenance cost is hopefully near zero.

9. 
   MarcoFalke commented at 9:59 pm on February 4, 2019: member

   @practicalswift Please remind me of the last failure we had that was seen on freebsd but not on any other platform. If there was none, it seems this test adds little value in its current form.
10. 
    practicalswift commented at 10:02 pm on February 4, 2019: contributor

    @MarcoFalke During the last year we’ve had at least #13503 and #13314 :-)
11. 
    laanwj commented at 4:59 pm on February 5, 2019: member

    I think the benefit of testing in diverse environments outweighs the maintenance cost.

    This is not a matter of “maintenance cost”. I agree the CI script itself needs very little maintenance.

    The problem is that every PR kind of becomes a slot machine of different CIs. I think it will fail much more often randomly than due to an actual problem. I’m already a bit skeptical about adding AppVeyor in that regard.

    I’d have no problem with this if it could be added as another Travis run.

12. 
    MarcoFalke commented at 5:19 pm on February 5, 2019: member

    It could be merged and it would only be run by people that opt-in (by activating the cirrus ci app)
13. 
    MarcoFalke commented at 5:21 pm on February 5, 2019: member

    In the same regard we could disable the appveyor on this repo again.
14. 
    laanwj commented at 2:40 pm on February 12, 2019: member

    In the same regard we could disable the appveyor on this repo again.

    Yea, though I’d say appveyor windows is pretty useful. It’s sufficiently different from Linux, .e.g. breaking on windows but not linux is pretty common!

15. MarcoFalke added this to the milestone Future on Feb 12, 2019
16. 
    kev009 commented at 11:36 pm on February 15, 2019: none

    I am the ports net-p2p/bitcoin{, -daemon, -utils} maintainer and would appreciate this CI feedback in the repo.
17. MarcoFalke removed this from the milestone Future on Feb 16, 2019
18. MarcoFalke added this to the milestone 0.19.0 on Feb 16, 2019
19. 
    MarcoFalke commented at 2:54 pm on March 2, 2019: member

    Going to merge this, without enabling any hooks on this repo, so it doesn’t turn into a slot machine
20. MarcoFalke merged this on Mar 2, 2019
21. MarcoFalke closed this on Mar 2, 2019

    ---

22. MarcoFalke referenced this in commit 849f37fa22 on Mar 2, 2019
23. MarcoFalke deleted the branch on Mar 2, 2019
24. 
    fkorotkov commented at 5:27 pm on March 2, 2019: none

    Hey @MarcoFalke, what do you mean by “it doesn’t turn into a slot machine”? 😅
25. 
    MarcoFalke commented at 5:40 pm on March 2, 2019: member

    Right now we use several ci solutions:

    • Travis for cross builds to windows + mac, as well as to run the functional tests in different config settings on ubuntu
    • Appveyor to check the msvc compilation and run the functional tests on windows

    We have had some intermittent issues with those two in the past that were hard to debug, as they’d often only happen in the ci system. So the solution to that would be to rerun the build, i.e. pull the arm of the slot machine :slot_machine: and hope it turns green. #15338 (comment)

    I will keep an eye on the results in my private repo, and if all looks fine, we can enable it for this repo as well.

26. 
    MarcoFalke commented at 5:46 pm on March 2, 2019: member

    https://cirrus-ci.com/github/MarcoFalke/bitcoin
27. 
    scravy commented at 5:47 pm on March 2, 2019: contributor

    What’s the deal with enabling them? It does not ban anyone from merging, doesn’t it? It just gets automatically triggered and may give reviewers some additional input.
28. 
    fkorotkov commented at 5:49 pm on March 2, 2019: none

    @MarcoFalke got it! Thanks for explaining the allegory. 🙌
29. MarcoFalke referenced this in commit 5a454d7882 on May 16, 2020
30. sidhujag referenced this in commit 57550416d6 on May 17, 2020
31. PastaPastaPasta referenced this in commit 990e31643d on Jun 27, 2021
32. PastaPastaPasta referenced this in commit bd06f2305f on Jun 27, 2021
33. PastaPastaPasta referenced this in commit f7c1aea9db on Jun 28, 2021
34. PastaPastaPasta referenced this in commit 89af2c3e3a on Jun 28, 2021
35. PastaPastaPasta referenced this in commit 2849c863f3 on Jun 29, 2021
36. PastaPastaPasta referenced this in commit 1842efe1a1 on Jun 29, 2021
37. PastaPastaPasta referenced this in commit f75fea4937 on Jul 1, 2021
38. PastaPastaPasta referenced this in commit c7821f4148 on Jul 1, 2021
39. PastaPastaPasta referenced this in commit d091e1853e on Jul 1, 2021
40. PastaPastaPasta referenced this in commit 8a08aa2cef on Jul 1, 2021
41. PastaPastaPasta referenced this in commit c65ac87227 on Jul 8, 2021
42. PastaPastaPasta referenced this in commit 1c374ebf5b on Jul 10, 2021
43. PastaPastaPasta referenced this in commit 4839664069 on Jul 14, 2021
44. PastaPastaPasta referenced this in commit 08492610e2 on Jul 15, 2021
45. MarcoFalke locked this on Dec 16, 2021

Contributors
MarcoFalke fanquake laanwj practicalswift kev009 fkorotkov scravy

Labels
Tests

Milestone
0.19.0