Thanks to all involved in resolving this! Sean
On Tuesday 10 January 2017 12:45:17 Simon Hausmann wrote: > Hi, > > > As a heads-up to everyone: Tony's changes are in effect now and staging of > changes that target the dev branch for modules outside of qtbase should > work again. > > > > Simon > > ________________________________ > From: Tony Sarajärvi > Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2017 12:31:10 PM > To: Simon Hausmann; development@qt-project.org > Subject: RE: [Development] State of dev branch in CI > > Hi, > > Sounds good to me. I’ll proceed with that. > Funny that the only platform we’ve managed to get in during the last half a > year or year is immediately causing problems so that we have to remove it > ;) > > -Tony > > From: Development > [mailto:development-bounces+tony.sarajarvi=qt...@qt-project.org] On Behalf > Of Simon Hausmann Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2017 12:43 PM > To: development@qt-project.org > Subject: Re: [Development] State of dev branch in CI > > > Hi, > > > > I just had another chat with Liang about this situation. We can't get a > newer qtbase into qt5.git because tests in declarative fail, some of it > also due to a newer qtbase (and the qurl changes). So the path we would > propose is > > > > (1) The CI team reverts the addition of RHEL 7.2 to the dev branch that > brought us here. > > (2) We either get fixes or blacklist-additions into the corresponding > modules, WHILE the rest of development of modules in Qt outside qtbase with > the dev branch can resume. > > (3) RHEL 7.2 is re-added to the CI when it passes tests. > > > > We need agreement and help from the CI team to do that. > > > > Simon > > ________________________________ > From: Development > <development-bounces+simon.hausmann=qt...@qt-project.org<mailto:development > -bounces+simon.hausmann=qt...@qt-project.org>> on behalf of Simon Hausmann > <simon.hausm...@qt.io<mailto:simon.hausm...@qt.io>> Sent: Tuesday, January > 10, 2017 10:49:29 AM > To: Sean Harmer; > development@qt-project.org<mailto:development@qt-project.org> Subject: Re: > [Development] State of dev branch in CI > > > Hi, > > > > as far as I can tell this is not resolved yet. It appears that the macOS > 10.9 replacement with 10.10 happened, but a test failure on RHEL 7.2 showed > up. > > > > > > Simon > > ________________________________ > From: Development > <development-bounces+simon.hausmann=qt...@qt-project.org<mailto:development > -bounces+simon.hausmann=qt...@qt-project.org>> on behalf of Sean Harmer > <sean.har...@kdab.com<mailto:sean.har...@kdab.com>> Sent: Tuesday, January > 10, 2017 10:45:07 AM > To: development@qt-project.org<mailto:development@qt-project.org> > Subject: Re: [Development] State of dev branch in CI > > Hi Simon, > > is this resolved yet? > > Cheers, > > Sean > > On Saturday 07 January 2017 10:18:22 Simon Hausmann wrote: > > Hi, > > > > > > Brief "update": dev is still blocked. > > > > > > The build issue of https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-57935 appears to > > be due to the removal of macOS 10.9 support, while the CI still builds > > with 10.9. > > > > > > We can't bring qt5.git up-to-date with a newer qtbase that includes the > > pcre fix, because the macOS 10.9 drop > > (a670f063909689dc6c03c9090fff25c6f531d2b2) landed right before the pcre > > fix. > > > > > > A temporary reversal in https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/181578/ of > > the 10.9 drop until the CI "supports" it was rejected. > > > > > > So either > > > > (a) the temporary reversal gets approved instead of rejected. Then > > over > > > > the remaining weekend we could try to get a qt5.git update through with > > the > > pcre fix to unblock dev. > > > > > > or > > > > (b) the CI removes 10.9 support and moves the features the 10.9 tests > > > > (namespace, etc.) over to another macOS build. Then we could get a qt5.git > > update through that includes the pcre fix. > > > > > > Differently put, there are two things blocking Qt dev branch development > > > > outside of qtbase: > > (1) Propagation of the -qt-pcre fix from qtbase to qt5.git, or > > > > alternatively RHEL 7.2 temporary reversal in the CI. > > > > (2) Temporary reversal of the macOS 10.9 drop (that would allow (1) to > > > > proceed) or CI changes as mentioned in (b). > > > > > > > > > > Simon > > > > ________________________________ > > From: Development > > <development-bounces+simon.hausmann=qt...@qt-project.org<mailto:developme > > nt-bounces+simon.hausmann=qt...@qt-project.org>> on behalf of Simon > > Hausmann <simon.hausm...@qt.io<mailto:simon.hausm...@qt.io>> Sent: > > Thursday, January 5, 2017 8:50:52 PM > > To: development > > Subject: [Development] State of dev branch in CI > > > > > > Hi, > > > > I wanted to give a quick update on the state of the dev branch in the CI: > > > > Currently any changes to any module outside of qtbase targeting the dev > > branch will fail to pass the build stage in the CI. > > > > Recently RHEL 7.2 was added to dev. When that was tested - back in fall > > last year - all was fine. Then some configure options of qtbase were > > changed (-qt-pcre became -qt-pcre2), which are only passed with RHEL 7.2 > > (longer story but basically because of our binary packages). Earlier this > > week the change in the CI to add RHEL 7.2 to dev was taken into > > production and immediately broke the build of all modules in dev because > > -qt-pcre was not a valid configure parameter anymore and without qtbase > > nothing else builds. As a consequence the CI changes were reverted. > > > > Meanwhile the qtbase configure parameters were fixed and support for > > -qt-pcre was restored. Today the CI changes were taken in again and qtbase > > in the dev branch compiles on RHEL 7.2. > > > > Unfortunately all other modules are built against qtbase from qt5.git, > > which doesn't understand -qt-pcre yet (wants pcre2). Therefore all > > modules other than qtbase are broken in dev. > > > > An update of qt5.git with a newer qtbase is scheduled, but unfortunately > > it > > won't go through because of https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-57935 . > > > > There are different options for solving this. One would be to revert the > > CI > > change. Another would be to fix the above bug and get the qt5 change > > through. > > > > > > The right solution to prevent these types of situations in the future is > > to > > have these platform configs inside qt5.git, not in the CI. Unfortunately > > that is not a priority yet. > > > > > > > > Simon > > -- > Dr Sean Harmer | sean.har...@kdab.com<mailto:sean.har...@kdab.com> | > Managing Director UK KDAB (UK) Ltd, a KDAB Group company > Tel. +44 (0)1625 809908; Sweden (HQ) +46-563-540090 > Mobile: +44 (0)7545 140604 > KDAB - Qt Experts > _______________________________________________ > Development mailing list > Development@qt-project.org<mailto:Development@qt-project.org> > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development -- Dr Sean Harmer | sean.har...@kdab.com | Managing Director UK KDAB (UK) Ltd, a KDAB Group company Tel. +44 (0)1625 809908; Sweden (HQ) +46-563-540090 Mobile: +44 (0)7545 140604 KDAB - Qt Experts _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development