Does anyone have any example of how to use modification reader task?
Ok, I use this over XML:
<modificationReader>
<filename>mods.xml</filename>
<path>path/to/my/file/</path>
</modificationReader>
then, what? How do I get the information in "mods.xml" and use it?
Thanks
This appears to be used with the modificationWriter task which writes the modifications to a file (in the artifact directory by default).
http://build.sharpdevelop.net/ccnet/doc/CCNET/Modification%20Writer%20Task.html
If you're just trying to read in the modifications in to a different projects' buildLog, the above - with a path to the first project - should be sufficient.
Are you trying to do something different?
CruiseControl.NET: Build subproject obtained by SVN
Related
I have started working with the libzip library today. But I do not understand the principle how libzip works.
My focus is on zipping a directory with all the files and dirs within
into a zip-file.
Therefore, I started with zip_open(), then I read the directory
contents and add all the dirs with zip_dir_add() to the archive.
After that, I closed the zip-file with zip_close(). Everything was
fine. The next step should be to add all the files to the archive with
zip_file_add(). But it doesn't work. The last step closing the file
fails.
OK, I forgot to create a zip_source to get this done. I added a
statement a line before to get this source (zip_source_file()). But
still it doesn't work.
What is wrong in my thinking? Do I have to fopen() and fclose() the file on the filesystem also?
And what is the difference between zip_source_file() and zip_source_filep()?
Do I have to fopen() and fclose() the file on the filesystem also?
No, you can just use zip_source_file().
From your comments I think you have the right general idea, but there is probably some detail that is making it fail. Make sure you perform all the error checking the documentation suggests after each libzip call so you can get more information about what is causing it to fail.
You could also compare your code with https://gist.github.com/clalancette/bb5069a09c609e2d33c9858fcc6e170e
I'm trying to store whole the output of my build, this includes some empty folders. These aren't included by the artefact mechanism in teamcity:
What doesn't work:
OAR\=> OAR.zip
OAR->OAR.zip
OAR
Inside of OAR i have a folder structure that needs to be stored. I know i could put a placeholder file in each but that is not the answer i'm after. Otherwise ill have to zip it myself?
Unfortunately TeamCity, by design, searches for files and uploads them as artifacts which means that empty folders are never included. Given the open and very old issue in the TeamCity tracker I doubt they are going to fix it any time soon.
I would recommend zipping the folder yourself, that is the approach we have taken. How you implement that depends on the build technology you are using. For example, if you are building using Nant you could add the zip task to your build, there are similar options for MSBuild and Ant.
If you don't want to rely on the build performing the zip I would recommend installing 7zip on your build agents and using the command line to perform the zip. Just remember if you want 7zip to include empty directories use * as the wildcard rather than *. * like so:
7z a -r OAR.zip *
Technically you could use powershell to do the zipping, which would be better than having to install something on your agents. I haven't tried this option myself.
Apologies for not linking all my references above. Apparently, and understandably so, I need at least 10 reputation to post more than 2 links.
(I'm using InstallShield2012 V.18)
In setup.rul I defined a function per prototype declaration, included the file with the function definition and compiled it successfully (InstallShield compile).
Now I'd like to test this function (only).
I don't want to run the whole installation, not even test (Ctrl-T) because I want to avoid a complete re-build which takes too long time to do it often.
Is there a way to test only the custom function in InstallShield or per command line?
Not really although I can give you some tips.
Create a dummy feature with a release flag of DEVONLY.
Create a dummy component for that feature.
Create a ProductConfiguration that builds a single MSI with no EXE and a release flag of DEVONLY.
Building this production configuration will be very fast. A couple seconds on my laptop with an SSD. You can selectivly include other features through the use of release flags if you need certain components in order to setup the test environment for your CA.
Another strategy is to develop your CA in a test harness project and then transplant the code into your real installer when you know it all works.
Christopher, thanks for this fast reply. I have to put my answer here because commenting was restricted, because too long.
I also thought about using such a workaround but first wanted to avoid it if possible.
But ok, now I tried these steps, 1 and 2 no problem, but 3: InstallShield didn't allow me to configure a Product Configuration without Setup.exe in my .ism file (although we have IS2012 Pro).
Then I tried to do it in a Basic MSI Project (is that what you meant?), which really builds in very short time. And now I can see my scripting during Test Release, yeah :-)
To "transplant" my script now to the main ism I'm missing an export function for .rul files as it exists for custom actions, but there is only a import. So I will have to copy-paste while switching between ism files, but never mind.
I'm using CC.net on against a Source Safe database, and have a problem that someone deleted some files from the database, and the deleted files weren't removed. I didn't see a config switch or anything that I could set for it to clear the code directory prior to building.
Am I missing something?
As Alex says there is a CleanCopy flag in the source code block. However, my situation was a little different. I use subversion and I found the CleanCopy flag was NOT doing what it said it would on the box.
To solve the problem I added a task which runs a batch file that clears out the build's working copy prior to checkout. It is a bit slower (about 1 min for code base of 400Mb) but guarantees no old code.
Kindness,
Dan
All you need to do is set CleanCopy to true in your source control block. The documentation is very clear on this. The above answer is the wrong way.
This question already has answers here:
Closed 10 years ago.
Possible Duplicate:
Pre-build task - deleting the working copy in CruiseControl.NET
I would like to delete my working directory during the cruisecontrol build process...I'm sure this is easy, but I have been unable to find an example of it...
If you know how to create a directory, that would be useful as well.
Thanks.
One of two ways.
If you're already using an MSBuild file or something similar, add the action to the MSBuild file.
Instead of directly executing some command, create a batch file that executes that command and then deletes the directory, and have CCnet call that batch file instead.
My guess is that you want to delete the working directory before CruiseControl.NET gets the latest code from source control. If this is the case, then the only way to accomplish this is to write a custom source control provider for CruiseControl.NET that first deletes the working directory and then gets the latest code. Have a look at CruiseControl.NET's source code for examples of how to write a source control provider.
If you want to delete the working directory after the latest code is retrieved from source control, then you can use CruiseControl.NET's executable task by running "cmd /c del directoryname".
In the ASP.NET work, for me, the easiest way I do it (which allows me to hit either MSBUild or NAnt depending upon the project) was to roll my own exe that takes an argument which I pass in with a bat file fired by CC.NET. It's not the safest thing in the world, but if you have total control over your automated build machine; it's not too shabby. Quick and reusable.
Drop in the exe somewhere that does the recursive delete:
static void Main(string[] args)
{
for (int n = 0; n < args.Length; n++)
{
if (Directory.Exists(args[n].ToString()))
{
Directory.Delete(args[n].ToString(), true);
}
}
}
Drop it in somewhere multiple files can pass arguments to it and just write a custom .bat file for each project. So my task block looks like this:
<tasks>
<msbuild>
<executable>C:\WINDOWS\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v3.5\MSBuild.exe</executable>
<workingDirectory>Z:\WorkingDirectory</workingDirectory>
<projectFile>YourSolution.sln</projectFile>
<logger>C:\Program Files\CruiseControl.NET\server\ThoughtWorks.CruiseControl.MsBuild.dll</logger>
</msbuild>
<exec>
<executable>Z:\SomePathToBuildScripts\YourCustomBat.bat</executable>
</exec>
</tasks>
Then the final step is setting up that .bat file to perform the delete/rebuild functions after use. In the bat file just make sure you rebuild ("MD") the directories you deleted if youexpect to publish a site back to them. On our dev boxes I found this to be the best way to prevent the beloved Frankenbuild.
The way I've done this in the past is to not have CC.Net checkout source itself. Instead, there are two <msbuild> elements for the project, the first one calling a build target that runs svn-clean.pl (compiled to .exe), and then updates the source using svn.exe. The second <msbuild> element starts the main build process.
You can easily replace svn-clean with a delete command. For my projects, deleting chaff from a checkout has always been faster than checking out a fresh working copy.
The two msbuild elements are necessary because the main project build file is often updated. This is important because updates to your build file(s) will only be reloaded if you start a new msbuild process.
This setup breaks down when I (very rarely) move or change the dependencies of that clean-and-update build target to the extent that the msbuild process would need to reload for valid instructions to run the clean-and-update target. When this happens, I stop CC.Net before committing, go into the CC.Net server, and do an 'svn update' by hand.
Sidelight: It could well be that CC.Net has a natural clean-before-build operation by now. I've since moved to TeamCity, which is configurable to do this every build or only when the developer chooses (e.g., when you know you've made a change that would not update cleanly--svn moves of directories with build products comes to mind).