----- Original Message ----- > Dne 23.8.2013 10:24, Peter Robinson napsal(a): > > > > On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 4:12 PM, Matthew Miller < mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > wrote: > > > > On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:08:18PM +0800, Christopher Meng wrote: > > > What things we do _now_ could be > > > improved with the investment of some effort? > > Perl rebuild always take a lot of time, and as a result it will affect > > the mass rebuild. > > Apparently less so with all the new ARM builders, right? Is this something > you're saying could be improved, or is it just something we always need to > budget time for? > > The perl upgrade process is some what manual and there's a whole bunch of > circular dependencies that cause/require a bunch of manual bootstrapping of > certain packages so the perl mass rebuild is some what different to a > standard all in mass rebuild. > > Peter > > > > The same applies for Ruby. It is definitely not just "fire the rebuild and > forget". During the process, there is typically need to update some packages > to be compatible with latest release, some were FTBFS already before, some > others need bootstrap due to circular dependencies. I'd say we need a real solution for ordered rebuilds. Every team that needs this has a different tools/scripts to do it. Perl, I'd say Ruby, KDE (actually not ordered one), GNOME... And not usable by infra for mass rebuilds etc. Mirek, any ideas? ;-) Jaroslav > > Vít > > -- > devel mailing list > devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel > Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
