Some members of my team, as well as our build server, are getting a compiler error and failed build when using Incredibuild to build our largest Visual Studio solution. We get the following (sanitized) error:
Target ClCompile: stdafx.cpp
IncrediBuild: Error compiling stdafx.obj: Compiler failed to generate
PCH file (no errors reported)
Build FAILED.
Building the affected projects individually first before building the entire solution seems to resolve the issue, but that only works for the developers, it does nothing to solve the issue on the build server. At first, we thought it was an issue with the build order, but that no longer seems to be the case; in one instance we're seeing this with a project that has no other dependencies within the solution, and the other projects that depend on this project have that dependency correctly configured. One of the reasons we thought it might be a build order issue is that it seems to somewhat random, and experience has shown us that poorly defined build dependencies can lead to this type of random build failure. Another reason to think it's not a build order issue is that we haven't made any changes to project files, property files, or the solution files since this started. We did have a fairly significant set of updates applied recently, but that was after the first recorded instance of this issue.
What is the root cause of this issue, and how do we go about preventing it?
Apparently it is caused by some recent Windows Updates. There is a support bulletin about it on Incredibuild's support page with links to download an "emergency patch version" (9.6.10) that fixes the issue: https://incredibuild.force.com/s/.
I experienced the same problem - the build would succeed on some computers but fail with the "failed to generated PCH file" error on others. Installing this updated version seems to have fixed the issue.
Related
I use an onsite build agent to perform my VSTS builds. This is working fine, sort of. I have 2 build definitions, one of which is a clone of the other and the only difference between the 2 is the solution that is built, all other parameters are exactly the same.
One of my builds completes without error and creates build artifacts and compiled code zip files in the 'build/1/a' artifacts folder. My other build completes without error BUT there are no build artifacts and compiled zip files created, my 'build/3/a' directory for this build is empty and I cannot see anywhere in the logs where the tasks to create this was executed, if at all. This did used to work before I cloned the build definition though. These are the MSBuild arguments that I have defined for both build definitions;
/p:DeployOnBuild=true /p:WebPublishMethod=Package /p:PackageAsSingleFile=true /p:SkipInvalidConfigurations=true /p:PackageLocation="$(build.artifactstagingdirectory)\\" /p:PackageTempRootDir="D:\Build\SiteManagerDev"
The only difference between them is the last parameter '/p:PackageTempRootDir'.
I have tried switching between the 2 directories for both build definitions to make sure it is not a permission error and the definition that finishes correctly works against either directory. I am starting to tear my hair out now and I have even tried creating a completely new build definition for the solution that creates an incomplete build and it is the same result, it is almost as if it is the solution itself that is causing the issue?
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
UPDATE: 05/02/2017
I think I finally understand what is going on! Question, if a build is manually triggered, not by a check-in trigger, if there have been no changes made to the code, and even though the build is executed, does this prevent the build artifacts from being created again because nothing has changed? The reason I ask is because I have found a strange in-house housekeeping routine that goes and deletes the contents of the 'D:\Build\1\a' directory on our build machine on a regular basis (I have no idea why!) and this results in there being nothing to publish UNTIL there is a code change checked in and then they are generated again! What a waste of everyone time this has been, my apologies and thank you for your help.
I'm working on a project for my cryptography course, and I've been using the Windows Subsystem for Linux. Up until recently I was able to use make -j to build my entire project quickly.
Recently, I started getting compilation errors like the one below. Strangely enough, I have no issues compiling with just make (no -j)
Because this used to work fine, I do not believe the issue has anything to do with dependencies specified in my makefiles. (Most of my code is in header files anyway because templates)
In file included from /usr/include/stdlib.h:314:0,
from /usr/include/c++/5/cstdlib:72,
from /usr/include/c++/5/ext/string_conversions.h:41,
from /usr/include/c++/5/bits/basic_string.h:5249,
from /usr/include/c++/5/string:52,
from tests/cryptomath/../../catch.hpp:207,
from tests/cryptomath/test_extgcd.cpp:2:
/usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu/sys/types.h:219:25: fatal error: /home/ipiano/[student id]/Documents/Code/Homework/512/project/modules/module_crypto/unittests/../libclassiccrypto/affine/headers/sys/select.h: Invalid argument
It looks to me like the compiler is trying to find c++ source files (sys/select.h in this specific error) in my project directory, which implies maybe a path issue?
The only thing that I can think of that changed recently is that IT approved the Creator's Update and I installed that, but I don't know if it's relevant or not.
If anyone has seen this behavior or errors like this and knows how to resolve it, help would be appreciated.
---------EDIT---------
Was able to narrow down to a specific makefile that my main makefile was including. It was defining part of it's targets, but not all of them. Still not sure why the -j flag brought this to light, but at least it's working now
I had the same problem: my compilation failed when using "make -jN", for N>1. After some research I found the same issue described here.
The problem is likely caused by a bug introduced in DrvFs, the Windows filesystem plugin for WSL, and it happens at least in Windows builds 16273.1000, 16299.19 and 16299.64 (mine). It doesn't happen in build 16251.
According to this, the bug was fixed on Windows Build 16299.98.
Since I cannot update my Windows due the company policies and I couldn't execute this workaround, I moved my files from /mnt/c to /home/<username> and they compiled without further problems.
I'm trying to automate our main project build (C++) via Team Build system (TFS 2013).
However, I see that a couple of projects are always built, even if no code change has occurred, while this does not happen using VS2013 on my development machine. This would cause some headache since binaries would always be generated and sent to test team even if not really modified.
Enabling "diagnostic" verbosity in build output, I see that the two project exhibit different behavior.
In the first project the log says that all .cpp files are rebuilt because the .PCH file has been modified (although no change happened). I could try disabling the PCH but would really avoid it if possible. Besides, not going to the root cause of the error would leave an open door to the error representing again and again.
In the second project, we have a pre build step that generates a .h file. However, prebuild steps should not run if no change in the code has been detected (https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/42x5kfw4.aspx), so happens indeed on my development machine. On the build machine, instead, the prebuild step is executed, the .h is generated and this forces a complete rebuild.
In the team build settings I have "Clean workspace=false", "Clean build=false". I also tried "/p:IncrementalBuild=True" in MSBuild settings, but this did not fix the issue.
Note - I already looked at Visual Studio Rebuilds unmodified projects and VS2010 always rebuilds solution? before posting.
According to your info about project2, the pre build step executed on the build agent and not executed on your local machine. There must be something different with your local build environment and build agent environment. This may be the root cause.
Suggest you to double check it and make sure the environment is the same with each other. And try it again.
I'm having a problem with Visual Studio not invoking msbuild to actually build my solution. Invoking msbuild from the commandline results in a proper build, but in Visual Studio starting build results in an "everything is up to date" message. Manually compiling a .cpp file seems to partially or fully fix the problem.
Restarting VS2010 does not correct the problem, so I feel like VS2010 must be writing its own dependency information somewhere. By dependency information I mean what files actually require building, AKA which files have been altered since the last successful build.
Does VS2010 perform it's own dependency checking before invoking msbuild? Where does it store this information?
To force a build to occur from the Visual Studio GUI you can select "Rebuild All". That will trigger compilation of all your source files.
The problem with regular builds not working could be related to incorrect clock settings in your PC. Make sure your system clock is correct, including the time zone. Then do a project 'clean' and try to build again.
My Dad says to check your "obj folder" and clean it out. VS2010 is seeing that there are things on there so it assumes there's nothing new to build.
I've seen this kind of behavior occasionally, though I can't explain how it gets corrupted.
Try deleting all the intermediate files: everything in the Debug and Release directories, plus the project name files of types .suo, .ncb, and .aps. Then rebuild all.
If you are experiencing the same behavior as I do, this tends to make VS work properly for awhile—a few weeks or 50-100 builds (whichever comes first).
I have a project that builds fine If I build it manually but it fails with CC.NET.
The error that shows up on CC.NET is basically related to an import that's failing because file was not found; one of the projects (C++ dll) tries to import a dll built by another project. Dll should be in the right place since there's a dependency between the projects - indeeed when I build manually everything works fine (Note that when I say manually I am getting everything fresh from source code repository then invoking a Rebuild from VS2005 to simulate CC.NET automation).
looks like dependencies are ignored when the build is automated through CC.NET.
I am building in Release MinDependency mode.
Any help would be highly appreciated!
Can you change CC to use msbuild instead of devenv? That seems like the optimal solution to me, as it means the build is the same in both situations.
After a long investigation - my understanding on this at current stage is that the problem is related to the fact that I am using devenv to build through CruiseControl.NET but when I build manually VisualStudio is using msbuild.
Basically this causes dependencies to be ignored (because of some msbuild command arg that I am not reproducing using devenv).
I think the fact that dependencies are set between C++ projects is relevant too to some extent, since I've been able in other occasions to build properly with CC.NET setting dependencies between .NET projects and C++ projects.
In order to figure out exactly what is generating this different
behavior I'd have to follow this lead.
I'd like to hear other people's opinions on this.
Try building it from the command line and see what happens.
My guess would be that the user that the service is configured has different permissions and/or environment variables as you do when actually running it. If you are on the same physical box and it compiles fine with visual studio and you are also using visual studio in CruiseControl (not MSBuild) then it is almost assuredly the user. If however you are using MSBuild in CruiseControl there is a huge set of diffrence when MSBuild (2.0) compiles a C++ sln and when Visual Studio compiles it. If you must use MSBuild on C++ solutions try v3.5 it has much more support for C++ solutions.
I wonder if CC.Net is building with different environment variables, such that the necessary library directories aren't properly added to the path.
Is there any specific error message in the CC.Net build log as to why that particular DLL import failed? Could not find file? Permissions? Look in the detailed CC.Net build log for the failure and see where it differs from a normal command-line build.
I've run into instances where my solution builds if I open it in the IDE and compile, but fails if I run from a command line (either msbuild or devenv.) In each case, the problem was due to a bad reference - likely from paths not matching between your local box and the build server. You see it compile in the IDE correctly because VisualStudio, when opening a solution, will attempt to auto-resolve broken paths. When it does this, it won't tell you about it and usually won't change your solution and project files (which is what you'd hope for.)
Try opening your solution file and/or project files in a text editor and make sure all relative paths are valid.
As Alex said, I think that your problem is that the CC.NET service runs as a local user account. Unfortunatly some of the C++ environment variables are per user and will not be carried over to the default build environment. In my case it was the lib and include files defined in Tools -> Options -> Projects and Solutions -> VC++ Directories. This same issue evidently causes other issues and is called out in this article as a yellow block.
My solution was to create a new user (BuildUser) on the build machine specifically for building. The key was to then log in as BuildUser and set up the environment. Finally, I changed the CC.NET service to login as BuildUser and restarted it.
(reposting as my initial post seems to have failed)
VC2003 seems to have an inconsistency between dependencies and input libraries.
An example:
ProjectA --> A.lib
ProjectB --> B.exe
In Properties-->Linker-->Additional Input Libraries, A.lib is specified.
In Project Dependencies, ProjectA is unchecked (why it is not automatic is still a mystery to me)
When cleaning ProjectB, A.lib is not deleted, nor is it rebuilt when ProjectB is compiled. So the build appears to succeed in your local machine.
CC.NET starts from scratch, and the build fails as A.lib is not found in the first place.