On Mon, 2016-11-07 at 14:48 +0100, Dan Horák wrote: > On Sun, 6 Nov 2016 12:35:35 -0500 > Josh Boyer <jwboyer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > On Sun, Nov 6, 2016 at 12:06 PM, Julien Enselme <jujens@xxxxxxxxx> > > wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > I recently (2016-10-23) updated libsearpc on rawhide. I also > > > proposed the update of fedora 25 [1] (still in testing). After my > > > successful build on rawhide, Dan Horak opened a bug [2] about > > > test > > > failures on ppc and s390 architectures with the update. > > > > > > The previous version doesn't seem affected by this issue. I'd > > > like > > > some inputs on how I can do to solve these issues and update or > > > push back packages that require libsearpc in fedora (ccnet, > > > seafile > > > and seafile- client). > > > > > > I see two solutions (skipping the tests isn't one IMHO): > > > > > > - Downgrade to the previous version in rawhide and f25 (I am not > > > sure if it's event possible or a good idea) > > > - Exclude ppc and s390 for libspearpc and its dependencies until > > > the > > > tests are fixed on these architectures. > > > > Is there a reason you couldn't disable the tests for only pc and > > s390x, but leave the packages building? Excluding them via > > ExcludeArch means you will have more work to do to fix up > > dependencies > > and such after the tests are fixed. > > yep, "excluding" is the last resort, but usually it's more likely the > code (the new functionality) is broken than the test being broken. > > Rolling back to a working version is legal and also possible, if the > dependent packages (ccnet, ...) don't require the functionality added > in 1.3.1. As far as I know, ccnet and cie requires 1.0 so downgrading is possible. I can just exclude the tests but since they fail, it may signal a true bug in the package. Since I don't think this lib is widely used outside seafile so I don't think this is a big deal. So, in the short term, this may be the best solution. I'll just need to find a way to detect the arch. If I remember correctly, there are macros for that. > > > > > josh > > > > > > > > > > > Either way, I'll report the bug upstream (even though I don't > > > know > > > how since they don't appear to have a bug tracker). I don't think > > > I'll be able to propose a patch for it, my knowledge of C is to > > > limited. > > sounds like a weird upstream without a way to report issues ... > We can add the libsearpc package on our team's todo list, but without > an > ETA. The only idea I have to to find the mail of a developer in the commit list and send a mail to this developer. > > > Dan > > > [1] https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016- > > > 47c35e70e5 > > > [2] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1388453 -- Julien Enselme http://www.jujens.eu/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
