On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 09:21:05AM +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote: > Am Dienstag, den 14.07.2009, 16:57 -0500 schrieb Matt Domsch: > > On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 09:41:57PM +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote: > > > Am Dienstag, den 14.07.2009, 13:22 -0500 schrieb Matt Domsch: > > > > > > > cwickert: gwget,lxappearance,lxlauncher,lxsession-edit,lxshortcut > > > > > > The epiphany extension of gwget is known to be broken. Already reported > > > upstream: http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=585401 > > > Should I disable it for now? > > So should I or should I not? Depends on how long you expect before upstream will have a fix in place. Right now the package just fails to rebuild. That's not a problem for most end users. However, rel-eng is investigating doing a mass rebuild for F12. If at the point that's ready to go, the package still doesn't build, yes, disabling that extension would be appropriate. > > > The rest are false positives. All have been updated last week without > > > problems and I verified they still build with a couple scratch builds: > > > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1473863 > > > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1473873 > > > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1473864 > > > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1473905 > > > > > > There must be something wrong with your builds: > > > lxappearance: build.log is 33 MB > > > lxlauncher: build.log is 46 MB > > > lxsession-edit: build.log is 19 MB > > > lxshortcut: build.log is 17 MB > > > > make got very upset... > > But only on your buildsys but not in Fedora's. I think you should stop > your script from mass-filing bugs until you found the error on your > side, because a high percentage are false positives. I don't think it's a "high percentage". There may be a few false positives, for which I'm sorry. But most are actual problems, either with the package noted, or with a dependency. The e2fsprogs/uuid split caught several apps. One difference between the Fedora buildsystem and mine is the environment running on the builders. While Fedora's builders run essentially RHEL5 plus specific fixes (e.g. newer RPM), mine are running Fedora 11. I strongly believe that Fedora needs to be capable of "self-hosting". But besides that, it's using mock, and a rawhide tree as of a given day as the buildroot. I'm re-running the failed builds right now, and I'll dig into those that succeed now, when they failed before. -- Matt Domsch Technology Strategist, Dell Office of the CTO linux.dell.com & www.dell.com/linux -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
