-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, 14 Jan 2015 10:48:16 +0100 Vít Ondruch <vondruch@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Dne 14.1.2015 v 00:24 Dennis Gilmore napsal(a): > > On Tue, 13 Jan 2015 15:58:51 -0700 > > Kevin Fenzi <kevin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > On Tue, 13 Jan 2015 15:50:06 -0700 > > > Stephen John Smoogen <smooge@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > >> You forgot "too many packages?" There are 15842 packages in > > >> Fedora 21 and 16230 in Rawhide. That is a lot of packages that > > >> have to be rebuilt possibly multiple times due to FTBFS, multiple > > >> architectures, etc. > > >> > > >> 2.5 weeks is 25200 minutes. That means a mass rebuild is doing > > >> 0.6 packages a minute across 3 architectures. That is pretty > > >> darn fast > > > > > The Fedora 21 mass rebuild took about 40 hours. ;) > > > > > That's really not the reason for more time, its the fallout from > > > that. When the mass rebuild is tagged in, sometimes there's > > > things broken in the build root, those need humans to look at and > > > fix. Then, there are all the packages that didn't build for > > > whatever reason, those need humans to look at them and fix them > > > up. The ones with broken deps need fixing, etc. > > > > > So, while the mass rebuild itself is less than 2 days, it takes a > > > while to stablize things after that. If we branched right after > > > the mass rebuild we would have to then stablize both rawhide and > > > f22. > > > > > It's hard to say how much time we really need there... it depends > > > on how much stuff got broken, how hard it is to fix and how much > > > time maintainers have to fix things. > > > > right. in the past the building took around a week or a bit more, we > > have gotten that down. which is why I said we could drop the 4 > > weeks to 3. the time consuming part is the cleanup and fixing of > > issues. that needs people. If everything is perfect a week could > > well be sufficient. Ideally we want secondary arches to be done in > > the window as well. just to make sure that there is no fallout on > > them requiring a second rebuild. which could also happen on > > primary. we have had ABI issues etc in the past on all arches. > > > > Dennis > > What I would love to see is to leave out the packages which are build > in side tag from mass rebuild. > > E.g. if I have side tag for Ruby, I rebuild every package in the side > tag in two weeks before mass rebuild, I can hardly see any > justification to build them once again (unless there lands gcc in the > man time or something like this). So if you could exclude the > packages which are already build in side tag from mass rebuild, it > would help you with following merge and it would give me additional > time to rebuild Ruby packages. > > Is something like this feasible? It really depends on a lot of things. like does gcc 5 land after you have started your builds? we can go about excluding things viaa few different means. but it all really depends on a bunch of currently unknown factors. Dennis -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJUtoLsAAoJEH7ltONmPFDRBp8P/RpWJ1hF3plD/zUMh6jR8bZS frgXBJ/R9uFvLXASEAfLoaHjrALeygRCF/ZDvd5RaZz3folzXF7YYhXsAijTRiwU vfmZj4svkJrDCU+uSWZeIC/KKmza4n4mFw8894njJCHfxggD6VupsYAoaQfWboBa gz4mC9srLZX10KOhyPuf+5GZ+ywZbsf0ELkdYitTGVYjYWrxhHjW9pC7dLCBUk+a 4d+Y3fNHqzNzOLIhL/NASB1cJpPqTV89g5yemDjGPPojUtj2qK2IAxHIh573JfgN dmjmAHsgOBA1GneUXLlMi/X42S9rm5gYNf+Cbr3sIhQghUUC79aeW0gG93PzTxGk iI106UaxEYuJ/NZXWMOkHaw/pvLluo8CtneXXskGRGdPAKHGrdyqtfFP93UfDn5t uGkJ403ESZSxkSv1sDJW9IhUdyJyVcp/tvyCHCgPnGpEz7eDEj3K52jPlLOLPmeT nWSvw7doMBUJX0oHtbDsSGm7jt3QhAHX/ru5LsQYNARn1A406vffqYnZnN3FpVHL Mnt9fVzm8iH/8wtz3taRQuTVOWLXyJzrq1+CTqxvkxp72sLxgRAMog+paUoD77IZ EX/b9L65pQ4WxLAHkm4mSd0yyJb29xLNWchahqwu1w2dBTo0hX5jXlpgejFyBcPw bRyCWm2X1sgM3p8QAqkO =gxJf -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
