Hello EPEL devs,
I would like to report on what we have been doing with EPEL on s390x.
At the last IRC meeting (September 4), bstinson suggested that I report bugs for EPEL package build failures on s390x. A couple of us at IBM have been doing that over the past couple of months, and even provided fixes for some of the packages. The bugs are listed under this report:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1267648
We recently uncovered a bug in our scripts that led to false failures, so we are re-building the packages again to try to get a more accurate success ratio. Some package groups are not buildable right now (e.g. nodejs-*, mongodb, etc.), as we are still porting the code upstream for those projects. There are other build failures that we haven't gotten to yet; we will continue our investigation, and document our findings in bugzilla.
nirik mentioned he was going to contact the Fedora s390 arch maintainer... Was there any news on that front?
Regards, Bryan -- bryanpkc
Hi,
I would like to report on what we have been doing with EPEL on s390x.
At the last IRC meeting (September 4), bstinson suggested that I report bugs for EPEL package build failures on s390x. A couple of us at IBM have been doing that over the past couple of months, and even provided fixes for some of the packages. The bugs are listed under this report:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1267648
We recently uncovered a bug in our scripts that led to false failures, so we are re-building the packages again to try to get a more accurate success ratio. Some package groups are not buildable right now (e.g. nodejs-*, mongodb, etc.), as we are still porting the code upstream for those projects. There are other build failures that we haven't gotten to yet; we will continue our investigation, and document our findings in bugzilla.
nirik mentioned he was going to contact the Fedora s390 arch maintainer... Was there any news on that front?
I'm the secondary architecture release engineering lead. I've not yet decided how to proceed with s390 support in EPEL. I've got a couple of ideas but nothing that is final. In the next few weeks we'll be building and importing ppc64le and once that is complete, as it's the first new EPEL arch added in some time, I'll have a better idea how best to proceed.
I've got grave concerns about remote builder capability. We would need to use the internal Red Hat mainframe but the remote ppc64le builders for COPR have been less that stellar causing consistent issues for the infrastructure team so to say I'm cautious in this regard doesn't even come close. I have another idea but I need to find some time to test that option to see if it's feasible.
Peter
Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com wrote on 2015-11-13 11:20:08 AM:
I'm the secondary architecture release engineering lead. I've not yet decided how to proceed with s390 support in EPEL. I've got a couple of ideas but nothing that is final. In the next few weeks we'll be building and importing ppc64le and once that is complete, as it's the first new EPEL arch added in some time, I'll have a better idea how best to proceed.
I've got grave concerns about remote builder capability. We would need to use the internal Red Hat mainframe but the remote ppc64le builders for COPR have been less that stellar causing consistent issues for the infrastructure team so to say I'm cautious in this regard doesn't even come close. I have another idea but I need to find some time to test that option to see if it's feasible.
Hi Peter, thanks for the update. Does the internal Red Hat mainframe count as a remote builder as well? Presumably it wouldn't have the same reliability issues that plague the remote ppc64le builders. For COPR are you looking for additional hardware or will you use the internal Red Hat mainframe as well?
Thanks, Bryan
I'm the secondary architecture release engineering lead. I've not yet decided how to proceed with s390 support in EPEL. I've got a couple of ideas but nothing that is final. In the next few weeks we'll be building and importing ppc64le and once that is complete, as it's the first new EPEL arch added in some time, I'll have a better idea how best to proceed.
I've got grave concerns about remote builder capability. We would need to use the internal Red Hat mainframe but the remote ppc64le builders for COPR have been less that stellar causing consistent issues for the infrastructure team so to say I'm cautious in this regard doesn't even come close. I have another idea but I need to find some time to test that option to see if it's feasible.
Hi Peter, thanks for the update. Does the internal Red Hat mainframe count as a remote builder as well? Presumably it wouldn't have the same reliability issues that plague the remote ppc64le builders. For COPR are you looking for additional hardware or will you use the internal Red Hat mainframe as well?
If it's not in the same physical datacentre it's classed as remote. So yes, it's remote. I can't say anymore about Red Hat's infrastructure.
The COPR infrastructure is a completely unrelated set of infrastructure, it was used as an example of how problematic remote infrastructure can be.
These are all considered production because a lot of people rely on it. People get woken up in the night and on the weekends if things are unavailable. This is a problem for me even if it's not me that's being woken up, we need to ensure there's escalation paths, means of mitigation etc. I'm not currently got time to deal with that. It's on my todo list, no I don't have a ETA.
Peter
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Bryan Chan -
Peter Robinson