On Mon, 2018-08-20 at 17:00 +0200, Erik Skultety wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 03:37:45PM +0200, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
> > None of our jobs create the archives as a side-effect, so
> > trying to remove them before generating them is pointless.
>
> Who cleans them after the jobs below? Is there a chance that you could trigger
> these jobs in a sequence that would expect the archives to be removed but
> wouldn't? If there is a risk that this could happen, then I think this patch
> should be dropped.
Cleanup is performed every time new commits are fetched from git,
so stale data shouldn't be a problem in practice; that said, I
agree that there's a chance we might end up using an old archive
if jobs are manually triggered, and keeping the extra rm there is
not really hurting anyone, so let's drop this commit :)
By the way, I just noticed that...
> > {strip_buildrequires}
> > - rm -f dist/*.tar.{{ archive_format }}
> > $PYTHON ./setup.py sdist
> > rpmbuild --clean --define "_topdir `pwd`/rpmbuild" -ta dist/*.tar.{{ archive_format }}
... I mistakenly used the Ansible-style variable substitution
instead of the Jenkins Job Builder-style one, so I fixed it up
before pushing the first four patches.
Thank you for the review! :)
--
Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization
--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
