On 2007-10-23T15:42:03, David Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 1. "of our bugs" -> "of the Linux/32bit subset of bugs".
I agree with most of your points, but I need to make a distinction here.
;-) At least x86-32 and x86-64 are considered, and across a considerable
range of distributions.
(Internally, we also build for s390, s390-64bit, ia64, ppc, and ppc64,
but those are not available via the openSUSE build service.
Unfortunately.)
Yes, a community based build service would be a very nice addition for
QA reasons, even if we don't chose to _distribute_ the RPMs from there
(for QA reasons, paradoxically).
So I'm not disagreeing, I'm just not sure whether on the list of
priorities - compared to our ever-too-long buglist - it is something
where I'd encourage someone to get started.
That doesn't mean I wouldn't _appreciate_ it if someone did, it just
wouldn't be my next step.
Does that make sense?
> Thinking more laterally... could we improve our own "make test" (i.e.
> before we get to install/BSC) capabilities? There is a little under
> "lib/clplumbing"; might there be scope for more, across the Linux-HA
> software?
The openSUSE Build Service can run BSC as part of the build, and I do
this regularly on the internal build system, so it does get run across a
significant variety of architectures and versions (if not, as you
correctly point out, different OS vendors).
BSC is a pretty good thing to have already. I think we probably can
improve it, but then, it also mustn't be too heavy weight, or noone
will run it. Do you have anything in particular in mind?
(I for example recently added some "basic" tests for the resource
agents; I'd like to see that extended, and more.)
> With a centrally-run buildbot, we (developer-like people and other keen
> volunteers) could contribute in our own machines, with their subtleties of
> architectures, OSes, OS-releases, environments, conventions, etc.
Again, I'd be happy if you did. If you ask me if that's what I think you
should be working on, my personal answer might be different. ;-)
> Can we do that with openSuse? (Let me know! I'll seek permission from
> the PHBs to join!)
Hm. Yes. The openSUSE Build Service can be installed on other systems,
so presumably you could do what you suggest. It is quite possibly rather
Linux-specific at this time, though.
And part of the openSUSE Build Service - which makes a lot of sense for
a build service with the intent of building redistributable binary
packages! - is to create a consistent build environment every time. (It
does that by essentially running every build inside a clean and fresh
chroot or virtual guest.) So the subtleties of the specific environments
are more-or-less filtered on purpose and normalized to the "packaged"
environment.
Maybe the needs of such users would be better served by a less
heavy-weight approach: "make basicsanitycheck", which would build to the
point of being able to run BSC and report back? (Assuming that "make
package" or "make install" actually works for them already.)
I'm trying very hard to make clear I like and support your goal of
improving heartbeat, the packaging across diffferent OS/archs and so on.
But if you asked me what I'd suggest right now, I'd probably suggest
bugzilla, tests, running CTS on the archs you have, triaging etc; I
think these are more pressing issues.
Regards,
Lars
--
Teamlead Kernel, SuSE Labs, Research and Development
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)
"Experience is the name everyone gives to their mistakes." -- Oscar Wilde
_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev@lists.linux-ha.org
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/
