Skip to content

travis: Move from travis_wait to time-passes #15323

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

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

alexcrichton
Copy link
Member

It's looking like we're still timing out all over the place with travis_wait
because the entire make -j4 rustc-stage1 command is taking too long. Instead,
achieve roughly the same idea by just having -Z time-passes printing
information. We shouldn't have a pass that takes longer than 10 minutes in
isolation.

It's looking like we're still timing out all over the place with travis_wait
because the entire `make -j4 rustc-stage1` command is taking too long. Instead,
achieve roughly the same idea by just having `-Z time-passes` printing
information. We shouldn't have a pass that takes longer than 10 minutes in
isolation.
@alexcrichton
Copy link
Member Author

It also appears that lost of travis builders don't have travis_wait, not entirely sure why...

bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 2, 2014
It's looking like we're still timing out all over the place with travis_wait
because the entire `make -j4 rustc-stage1` command is taking too long. Instead,
achieve roughly the same idea by just having `-Z time-passes` printing
information. We shouldn't have a pass that takes longer than 10 minutes in
isolation.
@bors bors closed this Jul 3, 2014
@alexcrichton alexcrichton deleted the no-travis-wait branch July 4, 2014 00:19
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Jul 24, 2023
internal: optimize `DepKindInfo` -> `DepKind` conversion

We don't need to allocate a `Vec`, nor do we need sorting.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants