fix --copy-artifacts-to issue in build_example.py #10437
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
pullapprove
bot
requested review from
andy31415,
anush-apple,
balducci-apple,
bzbarsky-apple,
carol-apple,
cecille,
chrisdecenzo,
chulspro,
Damian-Nordic,
franck-apple,
hawk248,
holbrookt,
jelderton,
jepenven-silabs,
jmartinez-silabs,
LuDuda,
mlepage-google,
msandstedt,
mspang,
pan-apple,
robszewczyk,
sagar-apple,
saurabhst,
shana-apple,
tcarmelveilleux,
turon,
vivien-apple,
wbschiller and
woody-apple
andy31415
reviewed
Oct 14, 2021
The difficutly I had was that a compile error was impossible to track down because I assumed that my src was clean (according to git status) but that was wrong: I had jnilibs in places hidden by .gitignore. At first I assumed 'this does not compile at all' hence the changes requested. The "Dirty source" is still there I guess. |
I tried
I tried this:
# Workaround: using relative path for -PbuildDir to avoid below issue
# https://stackoverflow.com/questions/69564314/android-studio-project-with-library-project-build-failed-when-set-pbuilddir
try:
self._Execute(['rm', '%s/src/android/%s/app/build' % (self.root,
self.app.AppName())])
except:
pass
try:
self._Execute(['mkdir', '-p', '%s/android_build/%s/app' %
(self.output_dir,
self.app.AppName())])
except:
pass
self._Execute(['ln', '-s', '%s/android_build/%s/app' % (self.output_dir,
self.app.AppName()), '%s/src/android/%s/app/build' % (self.root, self.app.AppName())
])
try:
self._Execute(['rm', '%s/src/android/%s/chip-library/build' % (self.root,
self.app.AppName())])
except:
pass
try:
self._Execute(['mkdir', '-p', '%s/android_build/%s/chip-library' %
(self.output_dir,
self.app.AppName())])
except:
pass
self._Execute(['ln', '-s', '%s/android_build/%s/chip-library' % (self.output_dir,
self.app.AppName()), '%s/src/android/%s/chip-library/build' % (self.root, self.app.AppName())
])So, do you think we should do as 1 ( put build under android/CHIPTool/app/out/android-androidstudio-chip-tool ) or as 2 ( syslinke 3 build folders to out/android-androidstudio-chip-tool/xxx ) ? |
xylophone21
force-pushed
the
android-ci-fix-artifacts
branch
from
466a290 to
bcb793e
Compare
|
PR #10437: Size comparison from a56c83e to bcb793e 8 builds
14 builds
12 builds
|
xylophone21
force-pushed
the
android-ci-fix-artifacts
branch
from
bcb793e to
8162189
Compare
|
PR #10437: Size comparison from f1555d1 to 8162189 2 builds
18 builds
2 builds
12 builds
|
xylophone21
force-pushed
the
android-ci-fix-artifacts
branch
from
8162189 to
a27f0a1
Compare
|
PR #10437: Size comparison from 1623b4b to a27f0a1 8 builds (for k32w, p6, qpg, telink)
14 builds (for efr32, linux, mbed)
12 builds (for esp32, nrfconnect)
|
xylophone21
force-pushed
the
android-ci-fix-artifacts
branch
from
a27f0a1 to
2f2f64a
Compare
|
PR #10437: Size comparison from 4c7f664 to 2f2f64a 8 builds (for k32w, p6, qpg, telink)
14 builds (for efr32, linux, mbed)
2 builds (for esp32)
10 builds (for nrfconnect)
|
I find some way to clear the symlink code and now it is ok, please review it again, thanks |
andy31415
reviewed
Oct 19, 2021
|
PR #10437: Size comparison from 4c7f664 to 221f15f 8 builds (for k32w, p6, qpg, telink)
12 builds (for efr32, linux)
2 builds (for mbed)
12 builds (for esp32, nrfconnect)
|
andy31415
approved these changes
Oct 19, 2021
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Approving: it seems that my request of trying not to dirty our source code resulted in significant build complexity. I did not expect or intended this to be as derailing.
If in-source build keeps complexity lower, I am ok with that as well and seem to even prefer it now that I see hacks regarding dry run and other rmdir/mkdir logic
andy31415
reviewed
Oct 19, 2021
|
Agree with Andrei, I don't like how complex this is. Could we instead have the build script accept a custom build directory (i.e. the in-source build dir) just for Android, independent of |
So do you think we should revert to the 1st version which is more simple but build in-source build dir? Let me revert to that version and please help to have a look? |
xylophone21
force-pushed
the
android-ci-fix-artifacts
branch
from
221f15f to
2b4de26
Compare
xylophone21
force-pushed
the
android-ci-fix-artifacts
branch
from
2b4de26 to
9fa4220
Compare
|
PR #10437: Size comparison from e1d51c5 to 9fa4220 8 builds (for k32w, p6, qpg, telink)
14 builds (for efr32, linux, mbed)
2 builds (for esp32)
10 builds (for nrfconnect)
|
I have revert back to the simple but build in source dir version, could you please help to review it again? Thanks |
austinh0
approved these changes
Oct 20, 2021
andy31415
approved these changes
Oct 21, 2021
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Problem
*Android ide build and CHIPTest build into CI #10371 (comment)
Change overview
fixed file path
Testing