tors 5 juni 2025 kl. 23:03 skrev Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org>: > On 5. 6. 25 22:27, Daniel Sahlberg wrote: > > Den sön 1 juni 2025 kl 19:39 skrev Nathan Hartman < > hartman.nat...@gmail.com > >> : > >> On Sun, Jun 1, 2025 at 11:39 AM Daniel Sahlberg < > >> daniel.l.sahlb...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>> Den sön 1 juni 2025 kl 16:31 skrev Daniel Sahlberg < > >>> daniel.l.sahlb...@gmail.com>: > >>> > >>>> Hi, > >>>> > >>>> I like the e-mail notifications from GitHub Actions when a build fails > >>> or > >>>> when it starts to work again - saves some time from going into the > >>> website > >>>> to check status. > >>>> > >>>> Should we enable this for Serf? > >>>> > >>>> Should it go to dev@ or should we create a separate notifications@ > >>> list? > >>>> I presume the safe path would be to just create a separate mailing > list > >>>> and add notifications there, but maybe there is not really need for a > >>>> separate list? > >>>> > >>> Oh, there IS a notifications@ list already, see > >>> https://lists.apache.org/list?notificati...@serf.apache.org. It was > last > >>> used in 2020 by BuildBot (I assume it was never migrated to the new > >>> ci2.apache.org, can't find Serf there). The list has TWO subscribers > >>> (actually: three, since I just joined) so I assume there is little > harm in > >>> setting up notifications to that list. > >>> > >>> I'm going to assume lazy consensus to do this, if no replies within the > >>> next 72 hours (although it may take longer than that). > >> > >> > >> +1 for this, similarly to how we've done for Subversion. Since most/all > >> (?) of the Serf devs are also Subversion devs, there's an advantage in > >> being consistent! > >> > > I went ahead with this.First notification was received earlier tonight > [1]. > > > > For the record, this is controlled by the ghactions.py script in ASF > > Infra's git repo infrastructure-gha-notifier[2]. I made a pull request > > which was kindly merged by Humbedooh [3]. > > > > Feel free to subscribe tonotificati...@serf.apache.org if you want to > > receive those notifications. > > Regarding the current state of GitHub actions: > > * Windows x86 (32-bit) CMake builds are failing and I have absolutely > no idea why. The last output is during the build, says "Generating > code...", then exits. No diagnostics, nothing.
@Timofei, any ideas? I also noted that it seems to download and build OpenSSL from source, taking quite a bit of time. Is it possible to install a binary version from vcpkg? > * Linux CMake builds are generally passing, although I just noticed > that builders running Ubuntu 24.04 don't even start. Again, no idea > why. I can try to look at this, comparing with Subversion. > * Linux SCons builds are failing. Something happened in SCons 4.x that > made the feature checks in OpenSSL mostly fail, killing the build. I > have a working build with SCons 4.7+, but the builders have SCons > 4.0 or 4.1. I haven't had time to debug that, but I do have a VM > running Debian 12 now. > > I don't have the bandwidth (or, quite frankly, the motivation) to chase > down the Windows x86 bug. I'll try to get SCons up and running again on > Debian. > > -- Brane > > P.S.: I've built a FreeBSD VM and got the CMake build running there. > Working on OpenBSD now, then I think I'll have more development > platforms than I know what to do with... someone else can try AIX and > HP-UX and Solaris (pardon me, Oracle Unix) and the Red Hat variants. I have a Sun SPARC box running one of the later Solaris 10 releases but I’m not sure if I have the bandwidth to work on it. Last time I tried it failed with too old dependencies. Cheers Daniel
