I really appreciate the work you are doing.
Could you clarify difference between 'stable' and 'testing'? I thought
'stable' means 'archived release' and guarantees that everything works,
and 'testing' means 'development release' and perhaps includes new
things not guaranteed to work. 'stable' and 'testing' do not seem
synonyms to me. I could be totally mixed up about this.
IMO, having a system that someone can download and know will work
correctly, if that is possible, seems pretty useful.
I can only speak for myself. I find msys2 quite useful. I mainly need
something that works correctly, not necessarily the newest version of
everything. I installed msys2 several years ago. Aside from a few
non-fatal glitches that I reported, everything has worked fine, and I
have not attempted to do any updates.
Daniel
On 6/5/2017 8:12 AM, Mario Emmenlauer wrote:
Dear All,
I just wanted to let you know that I have not given up on the idea
of a stable (better named "testing") repository for MSYS2. My goal
is to have in regular, short intervals a fully bootstrapped rebuild
of all MSYS2 MinGW packages (based on a current whitelist). With
this effort I will try to isolate packages that are broken in such a
way that the current CI does not pick up. I.e. the current CI tests
that any package X will build correctly. But it does not test that
other packages depending on X still build against the updated X.
My CI will do this. The cost is a much longer build time. So instead
of triggering builds by commit, I will trigger builds with a timer.
The current build interval is ~30hrs, but this may go up significantly
with a growing whitelist.
So in the past six months I set up the build system with dependency
tracking. Its not perfect but it should be quite ok. In 99.9% of the
cases I can identify the list of all recursive dependencies of an
MSYS2 MinGW package. I also have a small whitelist set up from which
I will start. Since a few months all this is working on a subset of
packages.
But in my whitelist, I'd like to include Qt and VTK since both are
very relevant for me. And I'd like to make a release only when *all*
included packages can be successfully compiled against themselves. So
any failing package from the whitelist or the recursive prerequisites
is a blocker. As of now I can still not build mingw-w64-SDL2, mingw-
w64-icu and mingw-w64-firebird2-git. I've reported the SDL2-issue
upstream a long while ago and the problem is isolated, but the fix
is not in yet. icu is undergoing a discussion as I am writing this
email. And firebird2 is broken since more than six months but it has
not received too much attention yet.
Cutting a long story short: hopefully soon there should be fixes for
the three missing packages, and then I can make a first "testing"
release. From there I'd like to gather user feedback. I'd also like to
gather requests for further whitelisted packages.
All the best,
Mario
On 30.08.2016 10:16, Mario Emmenlauer wrote:
I was wondering if people would like to have a "stable" repository?
I was thinking that when a plateau is reached (majority of packages
compiles fine), the current snapshot could be copied to stable. In my
eyes, the essential requirement would be that all base packages compile
fine. Everything else could be handled a bit ad-hoc.
All the best, Mario
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Msys2-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/msys2-users
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Msys2-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/msys2-users
