With a bit of fiddling, I was able to fix gerrit 9440 so that indent 2.2.10 and 2.2.11 appear to produce identical results...
HTH... Dave From: vpp-dev-boun...@lists.fd.io [mailto:vpp-dev-boun...@lists.fd.io] On Behalf Of Gabriel Ganne Sent: Friday, December 15, 2017 8:42 AM To: Billy McFall <bmcf...@redhat.com>; Marco Varlese <mvarl...@suse.de> Cc: Damjan Marion (damarion) <damar...@cisco.com>; vpp-dev <vpp-dev@lists.fd.io> Subject: Re: [vpp-dev] openSUSE build fails Hi, If you browse the source http://hg.savannah.gnu.org/hgweb/indent/ The tag 2.2.11 is there, the source seems updated regularly. Best regards, -- Gabriel Ganne ________________________________ From: vpp-dev-boun...@lists.fd.io<mailto:vpp-dev-boun...@lists.fd.io> <vpp-dev-boun...@lists.fd.io<mailto:vpp-dev-boun...@lists.fd.io>> on behalf of Billy McFall <bmcf...@redhat.com<mailto:bmcf...@redhat.com>> Sent: Friday, December 15, 2017 2:26:42 PM To: Marco Varlese Cc: Damjan Marion (damarion); vpp-dev Subject: Re: [vpp-dev] openSUSE build fails On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 5:15 AM, Marco Varlese <mvarl...@suse.de<mailto:mvarl...@suse.de>> wrote: Hi Damjan, On Fri, 2017-12-15 at 09:06 +0000, Damjan Marion (damarion) wrote: On 15 Dec 2017, at 08:52, Marco Varlese <mvarl...@suse.de<mailto:mvarl...@suse.de>> wrote: Damjan, On Thu, 2017-12-14 at 16:04 +0000, Damjan Marion (damarion) wrote: Folks, I'm hearing from multiple people that OpenSUSE verify job is failing (again). I haven't heard (or read) anything over the mailing list otherwise I would have looked into it. Also, if you hear anything like that you can always ping me directly and I will look into it... yes, people pinging me... See https://gerrit.fd.io/r/#/c/9440/<https://url10.mailanyone.net/v1/?m=1ePq0t-0001Fl-6M&i=57e1b682&c=68TFeWozfVWr0cOeQcoSLfj_6UOcLVL45-kDlIThNR_ycQZG5LOgi7NnZMJtDMUAmhIPtu-lSoEuMy-6KVT4RlufdWPa2MdfXzb_ObzIVcMVqAGqH7isJhFQHsNuaRick9gGwiEgwUQHltVsqpH-j4MwmcVniuBLxSiCuh2d9gPyZ9J_DeIXB9ebiI349MT3YFcKCmnf4x6PSEKrRYEoXYvyBIR1brcxBEL7qox2rRo> also: https://gerrit.fd.io/r/#/c/9813/<https://url10.mailanyone.net/v1/?m=1ePq0t-0001Fl-6M&i=57e1b682&c=CrMjX_E-jo7WRmm-sopHZy5U_DhywlV7a5A369OJyOow2Mnl2gcRxDLpcasYhpTRR5BtPvolweaLRScakJLx-NDgwKa8ITMZEpYTSnZ33x76qqlb_GnK382fDZNMYQn6KPDthHl7JZPOslzVKjUVDmvIaFaOxiQgDYkMHw02f9pC0xMMRtuuURi0fwbx8lfGUi64rlyZBA0T4tJOBYSPjVrm_yF86cI4X2Cc5I7XB8s> - abandoned but it shows that something was wrong Ok, so just summarizing our conversation on IRC for others too. That issue is connected to the different versions of INDENT (C checkstyle) installed on the different distros. openSUSE runs 2.2.10 whilst CentOS and Ubuntu run 2.2.11 What strikes me is that the upstream repo https://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/indent/<https://url10.mailanyone.net/v1/?m=1ePq0t-0001Fl-6M&i=57e1b682&c=SSiBFtZ5JbQhgjd9dEVXNEBYOdVo_Zo1ALr23wlHN44ValS-HDgjsawWJnWi-UHq0Pe9bgVnD5fLzJs6yISu-7ZkpGlAUgLW-IeDY4i6dsSzbSrCQ97iLT5lh93ItR7CCJtRvXBazqKbU6mxvPD_UTUCxm8qPdLPUdki9viMke3Q_tIJAReRf4KOT37lCP3T5tgGg3r1OT86tvKq2dovxDIjSQuPwKrDpiZ8AsSTB5w> has 2.2.10 as last revision. Our indent package maintainer is looking at possible other sources where Indent could "live" these days and will let me know as soon as she finds out. @Thomas Herbert, would you know the source where the Indent package on CentOS come from? Maybe that could help... Marco, I can't find the source. I'll look around a little more. From CentoOS 7.4: $ sudo yum provides indent : indent-2.2.11-13.el7.x86_64 : A GNU program for formatting C code Repo : base : $ sudo repoquery -i indent Name : indent Version : 2.2.11 Release : 13.el7 Architecture: x86_64 Size : 359131 Packager : CentOS BuildSystem <http://bugs.centos.org<https://url10.mailanyone.net/v1/?m=1ePq0t-0001Fl-6M&i=57e1b682&c=Oxgo1-3NKrvdr09W1lYMqTengBfLr3NBV2FFVNtp8fYGuDtJWoThOJlSD8GJqvFV073z9nD7sN8CIc6cGMY5Ktf0s2dmicXgEpxSpJ-1vWF3HJzKuKhaong1C79JraHgpv_RMkyn1Ti3ea_6V8IRf2brmeHyPuhEYTWSI_QG6AqFtjvX0aPRaSumejPxEeXCAykFMtWiapGJkmDmUsNaddheKgKeaLKrV5Dta5pVn40>> Group : Applications/Text URL : http://indent.isidore-it.eu/beautify.html<https://url10.mailanyone.net/v1/?m=1ePq0t-0001Fl-6M&i=57e1b682&c=ZsJ-B8LyIX_mcc1NX7wX4Kz57W648StYyqnjXbWD3QB20zhg9sd-OE6uScITWGKPDbg3FdfOIcmaGdewo2XSUck4otKAX5pyaWrAGli_LgaJNiL2fVH3-_g_lpB-3bQcL8W1ZlpPrbqD68TvAI6C6z7tcNwHg0U_FIw8kpDJOMSsgSyNZUCsqnzwkIgeZe790v-TLfFaLYfMKISLfgPJ1n3pylMyG4MyoPbPaxa7ujz76HRn4NLQhDlQ-T3OQMlI> <-- BUSTED LINK Repository : base Summary : A GNU program for formatting C code Source : indent-2.2.11-13.el7.src.rpm Description : Indent is a GNU program for beautifying C code, so that it is easier to read. Indent can also convert from one C writing style to a different one. Indent understands correct C syntax and tries to handle incorrect C syntax. Install the indent package if you are developing applications in C and you want a program to format your code. So generally speaking i would like to question having verify jobs for multiple distros. Is there really a value in compiling same code on different distros. Yes I know gcc version can be different, but that can be addressed in simpler way, if it needs to be addressed at all. More distros means more moving parts and bigger chance that something will fail. Well, I am not sure how to interpret this but (in theory) a build should be reproducible in the first place and I should not worry about problems with build outcomes. It doesn't only affect openSUSE and I raised it many times over the mailing-list; when you need to run "recheck" multiple times to have a build succeed. IMHO the issue should be addressed and not solved by putting it under the carpet... We all know that we have extreme fragile system, as obviously we are not be able to fix that in almost 2 years, so as long as the system is as it increasing complexity doesn't help and just causes frustration. Also it cost resources.... That is a different matter and if that's the case then it should be discussed seriously; raising this argument now, after having had people investing their times in getting stuff up and running isn't really a cool thing... Marco, decision to have verify jobs on 2 distros was made much before you joined the project, and I don't remember serious decision on that topic, it might be that at that time we were simply unexperienced, or maybe we didn't expect infra to be so fragile. Fact is that now we have ridiculous situation, 2 verify jobs says patch is OK, 3rd one says it is not. Which one to trust? So please don't take this personal, i know you invested time to get suse build working, but still I think it is a valid question to ask, do we really need 3 verify jobs. Should we have 4 tomorrow if somebody invest his time to do verify job on Archlinux for example? Thanks, Damjan -- Marco V SUSE LINUX GmbH | GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg) Maxfeldstr. 5, D-90409, Nürnberg _______________________________________________ vpp-dev mailing list vpp-dev@lists.fd.io<mailto:vpp-dev@lists.fd.io> https://lists.fd.io/mailman/listinfo/vpp-dev<https://url10.mailanyone.net/v1/?m=1ePq0t-0001Fl-6M&i=57e1b682&c=7veTGjW2PEZwzpAnV_14wLm1RJLE0eBIIdKooMLpEhc1DuQA4LWWLKWNj5E1JmbsV0E-JD2t8TVWmm9sMZjeVSk8bpBxoSYbKvU027OCJW9LFnQ_7F-JHNW23S4fFMr9W8JtB7u3v9ACTRBc332mzLJSHyRorEuZ8I9XOyWzssGWl0xSRT09Zophz8rODsTgUerKztBpFhRgGLez37jhHrSKvp-To0CjEOB4Xbts03WIXHUBA6yrfrddN5MXObSl>
_______________________________________________ vpp-dev mailing list vpp-dev@lists.fd.io https://lists.fd.io/mailman/listinfo/vpp-dev
