Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

test: travis: cache stage0 #48769

Closed

Conversation

matthiaskrgr
Copy link
Member

@matthiaskrgr matthiaskrgr commented Mar 6, 2018

This is a test to see if we can cache stage0.
cc #48412

edit:
log 1: https://travis-ci.org/rust-lang/rust/builds/349703962
I force pushed to see if I could see any effect of this in the second log, but I am not sure if this will work / if the cache is retained per PR or if other PR builds that happened in between overwrote the cache.
log 2: https://travis-ci.org/rust-lang/rust/builds/349737662

@rust-highfive
Copy link
Collaborator

Thanks for the pull request, and welcome! The Rust team is excited to review your changes, and you should hear from @alexcrichton (or someone else) soon.

If any changes to this PR are deemed necessary, please add them as extra commits. This ensures that the reviewer can see what has changed since they last reviewed the code. Due to the way GitHub handles out-of-date commits, this should also make it reasonably obvious what issues have or haven't been addressed. Large or tricky changes may require several passes of review and changes.

Please see the contribution instructions for more information.

@rust-highfive rust-highfive added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Mar 6, 2018
@matthiaskrgr matthiaskrgr changed the title [TEST] travis: cache stage0 travis: cache stage0 Mar 6, 2018
@matthiaskrgr matthiaskrgr changed the title travis: cache stage0 test: travis: cache stage0 Mar 6, 2018
@alexcrichton
Copy link
Member

Thanks for the PR! Unfortunately though we've had pretty bad luck with caches and Travis historically. They tend to not work well across OSX/Linux/AppVeyor as they increase in size and only very irregularly get cleaned.

That being said the next-best solution we have is sccache which has historically been much more reliable and should perform similarly!

@matthiaskrgr
Copy link
Member Author

Ok, closing.

@matthiaskrgr matthiaskrgr deleted the travis_cache_stage0 branch August 28, 2018 17:35
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants