This seems to have broken the build on Bionic as installation depends on libicu55 ceph-libboost-regex1.67-dev depends on ceph-libboost-regex1.67.0 which depends on libicu55. libicu55 is unavailable in Bionic (replaced by libicu60). I guess we are building the Bionic packages on a release prior to Bionic? http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/37513 On Sun, Sep 9, 2018 at 6:15 PM kefu chai <tchaikov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 6:53 PM kefu chai <tchaikov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 3:45 AM Ken Dreyer <kdreyer@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 8:15 AM, kefu chai <tchaikov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > hi guys, > > > > > > > > we build boost every time when building ceph. i don't think it's > > > > efficient, hence http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/25186 is filed to > > > > track this issue. > > in case anyone is interested: https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/23995 > > > > > > > > > to cache the built libboost for xenial and bionic, we can setup a PPA > > > > repo or host the repo by ourselves. if this approach works fine, we > > > > can also build libboost for centos. and expand the coverage to other > > > > dependencies, like dpdk, rocksdb and seastar. > > > > > > > > what do you think? > > > > > > This is a great idea and I would like to help. > > > > Thanks Ken! i think we can start with a customized boost-devel > > rpm.spec recipe, so it installs the built artifacts into /opt. > > ideally, we should could maintain the .spec file in a separated repo > > along with the debian/ directory, as they will share the same > > branching scheme which maps its branches to ceph/ceph's branches. does > > this make sense to you? > > > > > > > > - Ken > > > > > > > > -- > > Regards > > Kefu Chai > > > > -- > Regards > Kefu Chai -- Cheers, Brad
