Hi, On Mon, 2015-06-01 at 16:41 +0200, Martin Pitt wrote: > Martin Pitt [2015-06-01 8:02 +0200]: > > Since this doesn't happen on our mipsel porter box, and I don't have > > any other mipsel hardware to check this on, it seems this needs some > > help from the mipsel buildd maintainers. It would be really helpful if > > our buildd and the porter box were more alike, to be able to reproduce > > such issues? > > Today's upload had no test failures: > > > https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=systemd&arch=mipsel&ver=220-3&stamp=1433167263 > > This was built on mipsel-aql-01. Looking into the history on > > https://buildd.debian.org/status/logs.php?pkg=systemd&arch=mipsel > > it seems that mipsel-aql-01 never failed, while mipsel-manda-01 > recently always failed, and eberlin is somewhat random. I guess one > shouldn't read too much into that short history, presumably they are > all a bit flaky. But do you know anything fundamental (kernel version > etc.) where the porter box (eder) is different from these buildds?
I tried building systemd on a few different machines and couldn't get it to fail on any of them. Then I looked at what packages were installed on the buildds. On the machines it fails on, sysvinit-core is installed and on mipsel-aql-01 (which passed the tests) systemd-sysv is installed. I then found this: https://bitbucket.org/Tarnyko/uselessd/issue/7/uselessd-7-test-strv-fails-on-slackware Presumably systemd has never been installed within the mipsel-manda-01 buildd chroot and so no machine-id has ever been generated for it (which the tests rely on). Thanks, James
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Pkg-systemd-maintainers mailing list Pkg-systemd-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-systemd-maintainers
