Hi, On Tue, 10 Sep 2019, SZEDER Gábor wrote: > On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 12:51:01AM +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > On Fri, 6 Sep 2019, SZEDER Gábor wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Sep 06, 2019 at 12:27:11PM +0200, SZEDER Gábor wrote: > > > > > Let's install P4 from the package repository, because this > > > > approach seems to be simpler and more future proof. > > > > > > > > Note that we used to install an old P4 version (2016.2) in the > > > > Linux build jobs, but with this change we'll install the most > > > > recent version available in the Perforce package repository > > > > (currently 2019.1). > > > > > > So I'm not quite sure whether we really want this patch. It > > > depends on how important it is to test 'git-p4' with an old P4 > > > version, but I don't really have an opinion on that. > > > > I'd rather have that patch. It seems to be a much better idea to use > > the package management system than to rely on one host, especially > > when said host already displayed hiccups. > > Well, I'm not so sure. As far as I remember this was the first time > that this Perforce filehost was inaccessible and a simple "Restart > job" could not rectify the situation, because it was inaccessible for > about a day or more. Right. > OTOH, transient errors or timeouts from 'apt-get update' or 'install' > from the official Ubuntu package repositories are not uncommon (at > least on Travis CI), although in those cases it's usually enough to > just restart the errored job. My impression precisely. I trust the Ubuntu package servers to have transient, _short-lived_ problems ;-) Ciao, Dscho
