rel-eng February 2019

rel-eng@lists.fedoraproject.org

9 participants
265 discussions

[releng] Issue #7552: enable epel7-kde koji target
by Rex Dieter 11 Jun '19

11 Jun '19

rdieter reported a new issue against the project: `releng` that you are following: `` Will begin work on a large batch of interdependant builds, please (re)enable epel7-kde koji target, koji add-target epel7-kde epel7-kde thanks. `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/releng/issue/7552

4 10

[releng] Issue #7931: spam-o-matic (depcheck) is wildly, uselessly wrong
by Adam Williamson 10 Jun '19

10 Jun '19

adamwill reported a new issue against the project: `releng` that you are following: `` * Describe the issue The output of spam-o-matic (`depcheck` in the compose logs) is just utterly wrong for recent Rawhide composes. e.g. this, from the most recent Rawhide compose: [calamares] calamares-3.1.8-10.fc29.i686 requires hicolor-icon-theme calamares-3.1.8-10.fc29.i686 requires dnf calamares-3.1.8-10.fc29.i686 requires console-setup calamares-3.1.8-10.fc29.i686 requires system-release [calibre] calibre-3.29.0-2.fc30.i686 requires python2-cssutils calibre-3.29.0-2.fc30.i686 requires python2-dateutil calibre-3.29.0-2.fc30.i686 requires python2-dns calibre-3.29.0-2.fc30.i686 requires python2-enum34 calibre-3.29.0-2.fc30.i686 requires python2-feedparser calibre-3.29.0-2.fc30.i686 requires python2-beautifulsoup calibre-3.29.0-2.fc30.i686 requires python2-mechanize calibre-3.29.0-2.fc30.i686 requires python2-pygments calibre-3.29.0-2.fc30.i686 requires python2-odfpy All those deps actually *are* in the tree, they should not be shown as broken. We've known the output has been kinda unreliable for a while, but IIRC this related only to soft deps and/or modules. Aside from that it was still more or less correct for x86_64, so it was usable for spotting real broken deps. But it's now just stuffed with completely incorrect info and unusable. * When do you need this? (YYYY/MM/DD) It's not utterly critical, but I was hoping to find broken deps introduced by the Python 2 subpackage removal. Without any kind of usable dep check this is hard to do. * When is this no longer needed or useful? (YYYY/MM/DD) * If we cannot complete your request, what is the impact? It'll be harder to find and fix broken deps in Rawhide. `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/releng/issue/7931

3 6

[releng] Issue #8074: perl:5.26:20181205105946 module is in both updates and testing repositories
by Petr Pisar 10 Jun '19

10 Jun '19

ppisar reported a new issue against the project: `releng` that you are following: `` ~~~~ # dnf module info perl:5.26 | grep -E '^(Version|Repo)' Version : 20180417112647 Repo : fedora-modular Version : 20181205105946 Repo : updates-modular Version : 20181205105946 Repo : updates-testing-modular ~~~~ I would expect that the module build will be moved from testing to updates. Not copied. `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/releng/issue/8074

1 2

[releng] Issue #7671: Builders does not respect ExclusiveArch
by Vít Ondruch 09 Jun '19

09 Jun '19

vondruch reported a new issue against the project: `releng` that you are following: `` A while ago, there was a change in packaging guidelines: https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/751 And the ticket started with a claim: > A while back, Koji was fixed to actually pay attention to ExcludeArch: and ExclusiveArch: when choosing the host to build a noarch package. I don't think that it works, testing with either this: ~~~ diff --git a/rubygem-mongo.spec b/rubygem-mongo.spec index 1d436d7..82a9e00 100644 --- a/rubygem-mongo.spec +++ b/rubygem-mongo.spec @@ -26,6 +26,9 @@ BuildRequires: %{_bindir}/mongod BuildRequires: rubygem(bson) >= 4.3.0 BuildRequires: rubygem(rspec) BuildArch: noarch +# MongoDB serverved does not support all architectures. Use x86_64 for build +# to be sure Koji build is always successful. +ExclusiveArch: x86_64 noarch %description A Ruby driver for MongoDB. ~~~ https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=28734500 or ~~~ diff --git a/rubygem-mongo.spec b/rubygem-mongo.spec index 1d436d7..82a9e00 100644 --- a/rubygem-mongo.spec +++ b/rubygem-mongo.spec @@ -26,6 +26,9 @@ BuildRequires: %{_bindir}/mongod BuildRequires: rubygem(bson) >= 4.3.0 BuildRequires: rubygem(rspec) BuildArch: noarch +# MongoDB serverved does not support all architectures. Use x86_64 for build +# to be sure Koji build is always successful. +ExclusiveArch: x86_64 %description A Ruby driver for MongoDB. ~~~ https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=28734626 Both builds were done on i686 builders while only x86_64 builders should be used. `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/releng/issue/7671

5 13

[releng] Issue #8150: Please create a f30-gnome side tag
by Kalev Lember 05 Jun '19

05 Jun '19

kalev reported a new issue against the project: `releng` that you are following: `` Hi, Please create a new f30-gnome side tag and build target. We'll use it for building GNOME megaupdates before submitting them to Bodhi. Thanks, Kalev `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/releng/issue/8150

2 5

[releng] Issue #7523: rubygem-connection_pool mess
by Vít Ondruch 04 Jun '19

04 Jun '19

vondruch reported a new issue against the project: `releng` that you are following: `` There is package rubygem-connection_pool, where although the review was finished \[[1]\], the package was never imported neither built. Later, somebody wanted to use rubygem-connection_pool, so there was other review \[[2]\]. This was approved (while unnoticed, there is rubygem-connection_pool already in Fedora) and repository rubygem-connection-pool was requested (please note the dash instead of underscore in the repository name). From there, there are coming builds of rubygem-connection_pool here \[[3]\]. Somebody later noticed and retired the rubygem-connection-pool package \[[4]\], but really, I am not sure this was the best possible action. There are several concerns: 1. It is not obvious what happened and where the package is coming from. It is surprising, that the repo request was approved, although it did not match the review. 2. The package is escaping mass rebuilds. Actually I am surprised this kind of repositories is not detected/reported after rebuild. 3. It is not obvious who is maintaining the package. For (1) and (2), I hope you can check your tooling and avoid these situations in the future. For (3) neither one of the current maintainers is really active. I haven't hear about @anujmore for past 4 years. I've heard about @axilleas, but I believe he is busy with other stuff. @ilgrad might still be interested in this package. I can also take the package over, since it is dependency of Ruby on Rails. [1]: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=967334 [2]: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1267328 [3]: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=16736 [4]: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rubygem-connection-pool/commits/master `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/releng/issue/7523

3 8

[releng] PR #7881: Add a script to send reminders to FTBFs bugzillas
by Miro Hrončok 02 Jun '19

02 Jun '19

churchyard opened a new pull-request against the project: `releng` that you are following: `` Add a script to send reminders to FTBFs bugzillas `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/releng/pull-request/7881

5 24

[releng] Issue #7763: define and implement retention policy for nightly composes
by Dan Horák 29 May '19

29 May '19

sharkcz reported a new issue against the project: `releng` that you are following: `` * Describe the issue Right now we have only last 14 days of the nightly composes. Which makes it impossible to compare current compose with an old one to see what changed (mainly functionally). The polocy could be time based (like keep 1 compose per week for 4 weeks preceding the 14 days, then keep 1 per month, until previous GA). Or it can be based on the openqa testing and keep composes "nominated for further testing". Or something else. One of the reason for this request is https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623547 where I'm almost sure I had a F-29 nightly compose behaving sanely on s390x in the past, but have nothing I could compare with the current state. * When do you need this? (YYYY/MM/DD) soon * When is this no longer needed or useful? (YYYY/MM/DD) never * If we cannot complete your request, what is the impact? Difficult to find out what changed (functionally) in the composes as the previous compose is the GA compose of the last release. AFAIK it's almost impossible to recreate an old compose from a given date on demand. `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/releng/issue/7763

4 7

[releng] Issue #7802: Several EPEL7 package conflicts with RHEL/CentOS 7.5
by Eli Young 29 May '19

29 May '19

elyscape reported a new issue against the project: `releng` that you are following: `` #### Describe the issue The releases of RHEL and CentOS 7.5 (and likely earlier versions) brought with them new packages that were previously provided by EPEL7. Some of these are still present in EPEL, potentially causing conflicts. Particularly problematic are various packages that are provided in EPEL as python2-* and provided in upstream as python-*. While fully-overlapping names are suboptimal, these partially-overlapping names that provide the same actual package leads to issues like [certbot #6314][certbot] and [RHBZ #1578071][bugzilla]. I have attached 4 files containing lists of problematic packages: filename|description|impact if unresolved -|-|- base-and-updates-full.txt|EPEL7 packages also in upstream base or updates|moderate base-and-updates-partial.txt|EPEL7 packages also in upstream base or updates as python-*|significant extras-full.txt|EPEL7 packages also in upstream extras|moderate extras-partial.txt|EPEL78 packages also in upstream extras as python-*|significant #### When do you need this? (YYYY/MM/DD) No specific date, but sooner is better. #### When is this no longer needed or useful? (YYYY/MM/DD) N/A #### If we cannot complete your request, what is the impact? EPEL-provided packages with full name overlap may potentially override upstream packages. EPEL-provided packages with partial name overlap may cause issues like [certbot #6314][certbot] and [RHBZ #1578071][bugzilla]. <!!image> <!!image> <!!image> <!!image> [certbot]: https://github.com/certbot/certbot/issues/6314 [bugzilla]: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1578071 `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/releng/issue/7802

5 7

[releng] Issue #7738: fedpkg build - Connection aborted.
by Vít Ondruch 21 May '19

21 May '19

vondruch reported a new issue against the project: `releng` that you are following: `` * Describe the issue The fedpkg connection with server fails during build almost every time: ~~~ $ fedpkg scratch-build --srpm /usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/fedora/client/bodhi.py:48: DeprecationWarning: fedora.client.bodhi has been deprecated. Please use bodhi.client.bindings instead. DeprecationWarning) /usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/fedpkg/__init__.py:235: DeprecationWarning: dist() and linux_distribution() functions are deprecated in Python 3.5 runtime_os, runtime_version, _ = platform.linux_distribution() Zapsáno: /home/vondruch/fedora-scm/own/ruby/ruby-2.5.1-99.fc30.src.rpm /usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/koji/__init__.py:1704: DeprecationWarning: This method will be removed in future versions. Use 'parser.read_file()' instead. config.readfp(f) [====================================] 100% 00:00:03 10.90 MiB 3.16 MiB/sec Building ruby-2.5.1-99.fc30.src.rpm for rawhide Created task: 29377062 Task info: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=29377062 Watching tasks (this may be safely interrupted)... Could not execute scratch_build: ('Connection aborted.', RemoteDisconnected('Remote end closed connection without response')) ~~~ This happens already for some time and it is quite annoying. ~~~ $ rpm -q fedpkg fedpkg-1.35-1.fc30.noarch ~~~ `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/releng/issue/7738

10 16

← Newer
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
...
27
Older →

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

rel-eng February 2019