Continuous Integration toolchains for .NET and Java Continous Integration are relatively well defined, but the C++ market seems to have less consensus. By CI "toolchain" I specifically mean tools for the build scripts, automated testing, coding standards checking, etc. all with preference given to tools that integrate with CI tools easily (perhaps XML reports, etc). What are C++ programmers using for CI toolchains? (And why do our toolchains suck so bad compared to Java/.NET programmers??!?)
CruiseControl just provides the continuous integration server. I don't know of any built-in integrations with C++ build/make, unit testing, or coding standard checking tools. Almost all supported integration in CC is for Java tools. However, accepted as answer because it's the closest answer out there.
Joe Schneider
2009-06-11 17:42:45
I would say that Hudson is superior to CruiseControl in every single aspect. Is there anything CC does which Hudson doesn't do (better)?
JesperE
2009-06-11 18:20:34
+2
A:
Visual Build Professional is my favorite tool for pulling together all the other tools. Windows only, of course, but it integrates with all flavors of Visual Studio and a host of test tools, source controls tools, issue trackers, etc. It is windows only, though. I know that's not the entire stack, but it's a start.
Karim
2008-08-25 12:26:19
A:
G'day,
We actually faced this problem at a site where I was contracting previously.
One bloke sat down and wrote tools, mainly shell scripts, to
- check out the current code base every hour or so and do a build to check if it was broken, and
- check out the latest good build and do a complete build and run about 8,000 regression tests.
We just couldn't find anything commercially available to do this and so Charlie sat down and wrote this in bash shell scripts and it was running on HP-UX.
cheers, Rob
Rob Wells
2008-08-26 13:04:30
A:
As with seemingly every other task in C++, I'm just barely limping along with continuous integration. My setup starts with Eclipse. I set it to generate make files for my projects. I have ant scripts that do the overall build tasks by running 'make all' or 'make clean' on the appropriate makefiles. These ant scripts are part of my project, and I have to update them when I add a new build configuration or a new piece to the system. It's not that bad though.
I use CruiseControl to actually run the builds. Each project (all one of them) has an ant script of its own that performs build specific tasks (copying artifacts, processing results), calling into the project ant script to do the building.
I had to use cppunit for my testing and process the results with an xslt file I found somewhere. I also have the wrong svn revision label on each build because I can't find a suitable svn labeler. All I can find is half-completed years-old code and people arguing that other people are doing it wrong.
It looks to me like CC is a dying system, but I haven't found anything better for C++. Then again, I also feel like C++ is a dying language, so maybe it's bigger than just this.
Also... I recommend looking at CxxTest, if you have some time to kill. The project went nearly dead for a while, but I believe it's been picked up by new maintainers. By default it produces output compatible with either GCC's "file:line: message" or ICC/MSVC's "file(line): message". It would be very easy to create a jUnit-compatible XML output for it.
Tom
2009-10-28 01:03:21
+1
A:
Another option might be buildbot.
It's written in python, but is not just for python apps. It can execute any script for doing your build. If you look at their success stories, there appear to be a wide variety of languages.
mattwright
2009-06-11 15:18:45
A:
We used scons for continuous integration run by a central build server. Some projects migrated to buildbot.
I'm now getting into rake and considering solutions as surveyed in this blog. Fowler mentions that ThoughtWorks occasionally use rake for their build scripting in his Continuous Integration article.
Andy Dent
2009-11-12 23:12:17