Re: [gentoo-dev] A constructive reommendation on stablity improvemt

FWIW: I have worked on a project for years where exception reporting was used as a "pump handle" for Bugzilla. It can be done; the trick is getting good data *in* and automating recognition of which failures are the same failure, doing NOTHING until some threshold number of failures are logged,

Re: [gentoo-dev] A constructive reommendation on stablity improvemt

On 10 August 2014 07:22, Jeroen Roovers wrote: > > Example 2: Mr. I.B. User configured his system with CFLAGS=-fomg-faster > and now it generates a ton of build failures. All of these should go > to /dev/null, but there we are running an automated service that cannot > be taught how to distinguis

Re: [gentoo-dev] A constructive reommendation on stablity improvemt

On 10 August 2014 06:15, Igor wrote: > Communication protocol is already there - it's HTTP, method POST > HTTP protocol is already with Python - CURL, WGET > A reliable server ready to accept data from portage is all so there - > it's Apache web server. For the sake of this discussion, those p

Re: [gentoo-dev] minimalistic emerge

On Sat, 09 Aug 2014 11:12:46 -0400 Chris Reffett wrote: > Then write it. I think he's still working on his "Portage QOS" project. http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/89472/ jer

Re: [gentoo-dev] A constructive reommendation on stablity improvemt

On Sat, 9 Aug 2014 22:15:17 +0400 Igor wrote: > I really don't think data processing unit comes first. The thing is, almost everything for automated build failure reporting is in place on the client side. Build logs are automatically generated and `emerge --info =$CATEGORY/${PF}' is easy, which

Re: [gentoo-dev] A constructive reommendation on stablity improvemt

Kent, Saturday, August 9, 2014, 9:42:18 PM, you wrote: Thank you for your opinion. I really don't think data processing unit comes first. Communication protocol is already there - it's HTTP, method POST HTTP protocol is already with Python - CURL, WGET A reliable server ready to accept data from

Re: [gentoo-dev] A constructive reommendation on stablity improvemt

On 10 August 2014 04:18, Igor wrote: > 5. Wait for server-side implementations to appear. They will appear once >emerge can report. And once it's clear for the rest that there is > seriously >going to be a change soon. > It really needs to be designed from the server side, not the client

Re: [gentoo-dev] minimalistic emerge

On Sat, 09 Aug 2014 11:12:46 -0400 Chris Reffett wrote: > Then write it. Portage's source is available to anyone. It's quicker to start from scratch than to try to add things to Portage's source... -- Ciaran McCreesh signature.asc Description: PGP signature

[gentoo-dev] A constructive reommendation on stablity improvemt

Hi all, Hereby the summary of my personal suggestions to increase GENTOO stability and help it's maintainers and developers. 1. make.conf Add BUG_REPORT_URL "http://";(or similar name) BUG_REPORT ON/OFF BUG_REPORT_LEVEL to make.conf (several URLs should be supported

Re: [gentoo-dev] minimalistic emerge

On August 9, 2014 11:46:54 AM EDT, Chris Reffett wrote: >On August 9, 2014 10:56:49 AM EDT, Igor wrote: >[snip] >>Just the main blockers are: >> >>- Somebody has to implement this technology >>- That requires time and effort >>- People have to be convinced of its value >>- Integration must happ

Re: [gentoo-dev] minimalistic emerge

On August 9, 2014 10:56:49 AM EDT, Igor wrote: [snip] >Just the main blockers are: > >- Somebody has to implement this technology >- That requires time and effort >- People have to be convinced of its value >- Integration must happen at some level somehow somewhere in the >portage toolchain(s) >-

Re: [gentoo-dev] minimalistic emerge

On August 9, 2014 10:56:49 AM EDT, Igor wrote: [snip] >Just the main blockers are: > >- Somebody has to implement this technology >- That requires time and effort >- People have to be convinced of its value >- Integration must happen at some level somehow somewhere in the >portage toolchain(s)

Re: [gentoo-dev] minimalistic emerge

On August 9, 2014 10:56:49 AM EDT, Igor wrote: [snip] >Just the main blockers are: > >- Somebody has to implement this technology >- That requires time and effort >- People have to be convinced of its value >- Integration must happen at some level somehow somewhere in the >portage toolchain(s)

Re: [gentoo-dev] minimalistic emerge

Hello Paweł, Saturday, August 9, 2014, 1:34:29 PM, you wrote: > Possibly relevant article would be > >>> The number of bugs is the same. It's more difficult to hack into 1996 >>> system >>> than in

Re: [gentoo-dev] minimalistic emerge

Hello Kent, Saturday, August 9, 2014, 1:33:30 AM, you wrote: Yes. As I said, INSTALLATION metrics reporting is easy enough to do. I use those sorts of tools EXTENSIVELY with the CPAN platform, and I have valuable reports on what failed, what the interacting components were, and what systems

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: minimalistic emerge

Hey all. Regarding updates breaking the system, NixOS might be worth a try. The functional nature of the package manager there lets you try out an update, either live or in a VM, as well as roll back to the old configuration in case of problems. Due to the design there's no risk in building update

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: minimalistic emerge

Duncan: > Peter Stuge posted on Sat, 09 Aug 2014 10:34:58 +0200 as excerpted: > >> Duncan wrote: >>> Red Hat is the gold standard, very long term commercial support, >>> IIRC 10 years, and very good community relations >> >> I've heard this on occasion, but reality is actually quite different. >>

[gentoo-dev] Re: minimalistic emerge

Peter Stuge posted on Sat, 09 Aug 2014 10:34:58 +0200 as excerpted: > Duncan wrote: >> Red Hat is the gold standard, very long term commercial support, >> IIRC 10 years, and very good community relations > > I've heard this on occasion, but reality is actually quite different. > > Red Hat is a s

Re: [gentoo-dev] minimalistic emerge

On 8/8/14, 6:27 PM, Igor wrote: >> Is there any warranty that updated with -uDN system will remain >> full functional for 1 year? I have 100% warranty that not updated >> system is going to remain functional for 5 or 6 years. I have some with >> 7 years uptime. I'd say there is no "warranty". H

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: minimalistic emerge

Duncan wrote: > Red Hat is the gold standard, very long term commercial support, > IIRC 10 years, and very good community relations I've heard this on occasion, but reality is actually quite different. Red Hat is a software service provider. They do whatever their paying customers ask for. They d

Re: [gentoo-dev] minimalistic emerge

Rich Freeman wrote: > If upstream happens to say it requires foo-1.5, by all means just > take their word for it and list it, Don't take their documentation's word for it however, but look at what the build actually requires. (E.g. configure.ac.) //Peter