Hi! > On Fri, 2022-02-11 10:54:55 +0100, meskio <mes...@sindominio.net> wrote: > Quoting Jan-Benedict Glaw (2022-02-10 11:09:57) > > I had a few tickets with Oliver upstream. There were a few cornercases > > that my (quite large) setup triggered quickly. Seems that's all fixed > > by now. These included: > > > [...] > > > > So it would be nice to update the laminard/laminarc packages to > > current versions, and possibly trigger a rebuild when there's a new > > capnproto available? (I'm not sure how much of their *headers* > > actually end up in the binary...) > > Amazing, thank you for working the issues with upstream to fix them. I will > update the package in the coming days.
I'd like to suggest to roll an updated laminar{,c,d} soonish (or
with the next release --- I'd ask for one?) because that fixes two
issues (following the log and allowing to reorder queued jobs), while
waiting for the next capnproto will fix another issue (http server
socket becoming unavailable.)
Reordering is always helpful (ie. in my setup, I tend to queue more
than 1000 jobs, with a runtime of over a week, so issueing some
additional build to test a bugfix will face a _long_ delay), and the
log following thingie is quite easy to hit (have a job that outputs a
_lot_; can be triggered with following the log when in the time the
client needs to fetch the already stored log some more log content
comes in from the build.) That's totally annoying.
> I see capnproto 0.9.1 is already in experimental[0], so hopefully it will get
> into sid soon. I'm not sure about the rebuild, but it looks like we might
> want
> to depend on capnproto >= 0.9.0. Let's check with capnproto maintainer to see
> their plans for it and if we should upload laminar to experimental or wait
> for
> it to be in sid.
>
> [0] https://packages.debian.org/experimental/capnproto
I think 0.9.1 wouldn't even be enough to catch the fix for the server
socket being closed.
Thanks,
Jan-Benedict
--
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
