On 02/04/16 13:58 +0200, Jan Pokorný wrote: > On 02/04/16 12:26 +0200, Jan Pokorný wrote: >> On 31/03/16 21:28 -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote: >>> I've just submitted >>> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-dcddcc1f06 >>> >>> This update does two things: >>> >>> - Updates python to version 2.7.11 >>> - Splits out the python macros into separate packages >>> >>> It would be helpful if packagers would try building python packages with >>> these packages installed. >> >> This might be the cause of a recent failure to build Pacemaker while >> other Fedoras (24 + 25) were OK: >> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=13522053 >> >> See >> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/2053/13522053/mock_output.log >> >>> Package python-macros is obsoleted by python-rpm-macros, but >>> obsoleting package does not provide for requirements > > Subsequent build succeeded, though: > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=750257 > > So it must have been an intermittent issue. > Can this be prevented next time a basic build dependency > is restructured? Or would it require additional support > in the build infra? I tried to investigate this a little bit. 6 days ago, at around the point the build failed, several overrides for the build root have been requested: python-rpm-macros-3-7.fc23: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/overrides/python-rpm-macros-3-7.fc23 redhat-rpm-config-36-1.fc23.1: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/overrides/redhat-rpm-config-36-1.fc23.1 python-2.7.11-2.fc23: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/overrides/python-2.7.11-2.fc23 All but the last, expired on 2016-04-01, appear active at the moment. The last one was superseded with python-2.7.11-3.fc23: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/overrides/python-2.7.11-3.fc23, which is also active right now. But clearly, at the moment of the linked build that failed, python-rpm-macros and redhat-rpm-config were overridden whereas python-macros-2.7.10-8.fc23+ wasn't. It looks to me I hit a racy window in which python-2.7.11-2.fc23 override hasn't yet been applied. And later, at the moment of the linked build that succeeded, no such override was active. I would conclude, please be more careful about management of overrides to prevent this kind of mess-ups. Does bodhi allow to specify several builds as a means of an atomic (non-racy) override? Should I file a RFE for that if not? -- Jan (Poki)
Attachment:
pgpaNOTLs7aYI.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
