On Tue, 30 May 2006 11:53:58 +0100, Paul Howarth wrote: > Michael Schwendt wrote: > > On Mon, 29 May 2006 23:19:01 -0500, Matt Domsch wrote: > > > >> extras Rawhide-in-Mock Build Results for i386 Mon May 29 23:00:43 CDT 2006 > >> Number failed to build: 176 > >> Number expected to fail due to ExclusiveArch or ExcludeArch: 1 > >> Leaving: 175 > >> (there may be some duplicates if rawhide has 2 versions of a package) > >> > >> Of those expected to have worked... > >> Without a bug filed: 173 > >> ---------------------------------- > >> abe > >> alacarte > >> amaya > >> anjuta-gdl > >> balsa > > > > -snip- > > > > Note sure what the goal of this rebuild attempt is. Extras buildsys uses > > mock for a long time. So every package in Extras has built successfully in > > mock before. Most (if not all) of the rebuild failures you've caught here > > are due to updates in Rawhide, such as compiler updates or API changes. > > This report is misleading. > > No, it's because he's building the packages with the reduced build > environment that closely matches the exceptions list in the packaging > guidelines rather than default mock configuration that pulls in lots of > extra packages. So these build failures are mostly due to missing > buildreqs of things like perl(XML::Parser), gettext, flex, etc. That is not the impression I got after looking at probably two dozen builds reports. Only a few were due to missing BR. Is this modified version of mock ready and available in Extras? -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
