but find
each fix broke some other 80%. I really don't think that outside of a
*cough* core *cough* set of packages it is possible to actually accomplish
without full time people constantly reworking the graphs every couple of
weeks ( I am looking at you go but AI python is not much better)
n the first place: it's the primary
warning system we have for discovering that a package that built previously
has stopped being buildable in the current environment.
>
> While I am not sure this is strictly needed for mass rebuild, having
> build order is generally useful. In modu
s rebuild: kde-partitionmanager
I think this could be a simple and quick solution to maintain build
chains on mass rebuilds. Thoughts?
While I am not sure this is strictly needed for mass rebuild, having
build order is generally useful. In modular days, we were able to
specify the build
On Fri, Oct 6, 2023 at 11:16 AM Stephen Gallagher wrote:
...
> So, as we all know, build ordering is hard (and, despite intuitive
> belief, not actually deterministic).
>
> ELN actually "cheats" somewhat when we do our builds. When we process
> a batch of builds (triggered by a set of tag events t
On Fri, 6 Oct 2023 at 15:45, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 06, 2023 at 11:16:17AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > So, as we all know, build ordering is hard (and, despite intuitive
> > belief, not actually deterministic).
> >
> > ELN actually "cheats" somewhat when we do our builds.
On Fri, Oct 6, 2023 at 3:45 PM Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 06, 2023 at 11:16:17AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > So, as we all know, build ordering is hard (and, despite intuitive
> > belief, not actually deterministic).
> >
> > ELN actually "cheats" somewhat when we do our build
On Fri, Oct 06, 2023 at 11:16:17AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> So, as we all know, build ordering is hard (and, despite intuitive
> belief, not actually deterministic).
>
> ELN actually "cheats" somewhat when we do our builds. When we process
> a batch of builds (triggered by a set of tag ev
TBFS bug:
> > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2242372
> > > >
> > > > I'll submit an update later today once I've done a few more checks.
> > >
> > > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-f0270d1
S bug:
> > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2242372
> > > >
> > > > I'll submit an update later today once I've done a few more checks.
> > >
> > > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-f0270d1637
> >
think the builds are complete, except one which is running now.
> > >
> > > Only swig failed to build but that appears to be a general FTBFS bug:
> > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2242372
> > >
> > > I'll submit an update later t
. 21 v 11:54 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
Can the ELN be fixed to stop doing rebuild like this? Of course the
issue is not in rubygem-thin but the issue is that once the Ruby side
tag was merged, ELN did not bothered with build order and now there is
rubygem-eventmachine which was built against Ruby
On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 3:48 PM Vít Ondruch wrote:
>
(snip)
>> I think that ELN should try to follow the Rawhide build order. If it can't
>> do that, then it should wait for manual intervention.
>
>
> This is on our todo list, but we have been balancing a lot of t
-thin but the issue is that once the
Ruby side tag was merged, ELN did not bothered with build order
and now there is rubygem-eventmachine which was built against
Ruby 2.7 where is should have been build against Ruby 3.0. I
can't rebuild it, because that would require r
e tag was merged, ELN did not bothered with build order
and now there is rubygem-eventmachine which was built against Ruby
2.7 where is should have been build against Ruby 3.0. I can't
rebuild it, because that would require release bump in Fedora (I
don't want to do t
On 14. 01. 21 11:15, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 09:22:26PM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote:
On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 3:57 PM Vít Ondruch wrote:
Also, rubygem-eventmachine should be installable after rebuild. But certainly,
there might happen race conditions a it h
On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 09:22:26PM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 3:57 PM Vít Ondruch wrote:
> >
> > Also, rubygem-eventmachine should be installable after rebuild. But
> > certainly, there might happen race conditions a it happened this time.
>
> This reminds me - over a
Actually that would not help in this situation, I was talking about Fedora,
ELN builds are not planned to be gated ..
I stand corrected, thanks @Michal Srb
/M
On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 9:42 AM Miroslav Vadkerti
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> can we share the timeline for making rpmdeplint and installability
Hi,
can we share the timeline for making rpmdeplint and installability gating
pls? Not sure where we have it.
Thank you!,
/M
On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 9:23 PM Fabio Valentini
wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 3:57 PM Vít Ondruch wrote:
> >
> > Also, rubygem-eventmachine should be installable aft
On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 3:57 PM Vít Ondruch wrote:
>
> Also, rubygem-eventmachine should be installable after rebuild. But
> certainly, there might happen race conditions a it happened this time.
This reminds me - over a year ago, I triggered discussion about making
the dist.rpmdeplint test bloc
e tag was merged, ELN did not bothered with build order
and now there is rubygem-eventmachine which was built against Ruby
2.7 where is should have been build against Ruby 3.0. I can't
rebuild it, because that would require release bump in Fedora (I
don't want to do t
On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 5:55 AM Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Can the ELN be fixed to stop doing rebuild like this? Of course the issue
> is not in rubygem-thin but the issue is that once the Ruby side tag was
> merged, ELN did not bothered with build order and now there is
> rubygem-eventm
Can the ELN be fixed to stop doing rebuild like this? Of course the
issue is not in rubygem-thin but the issue is that once the Ruby side
tag was merged, ELN did not bothered with build order and now there is
rubygem-eventmachine which was built against Ruby 2.7 where is should
have been build
22 matches
Mail list logo
