Re: Who to contact to get a buildd retry on alpha?
On Nov 30, 2007 11:35 AM, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The test that failed is known to succeed most of the time but > > occasionally fail for no apparent reason; if the package is retried it > > should build fine. Who should I be bothering? > > No one; you should fix your package so that it builds reliably. > > The very test that's failing includes documentation of why the test is > broken and unreliable. Please either fix the test or disable it in the > build. Having to retry packages because they sometimes fail is obnoxious, > especially when a security update is involved. I think you may have misunderstood the comments in the test, which detail all the *previous* race conditions that were found and fixed. There is obviously still something wrong with the test, but the cause is not known; given that it only fails about once every fifty builds, fixing it has not been a high priority for upstream. Unless upstream does get around to fixing it for sure, the next upload will disable that test. However, I would prefer not to do yet another upload of 0.37 just to do that. I think it is a more efficient use of everyone's time if the package is retried on alpha as is. zw -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Who to contact to get a buildd retry on alpha?
On Nov 30, 2007 11:47 AM, Lennart Sorensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Is monotone some programing language? It doens't look like any language > I have seen before. It looks like the test has gone through a few > revisions to try and deal with race conditions, maybe they haven't got > it right yet. monotone is a version control system; the test suite is written in Lua (see lua.org). Yes, the test has some kind of bug in it, which no one has yet been able to find. It fails only about once in every fifty runs, so upstream has not bothered to investigate in detail. zw -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Who to contact to get a buildd retry on alpha?
On Fri, Nov 30, 2007 at 02:47:48PM -0500, Lennart Sorensen wrote: > On Fri, Nov 30, 2007 at 10:56:52AM -0800, Zack Weinberg wrote: > > I sent mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] about this yesterday but nothing seems > > to have happened. The most recent version of my package (monotone) > > failed to build on alpha due to a single failure in its testsuite (see > > http://buildd.debian.org/fetch.cgi?pkg=monotone;ver=0.37-4;arch=alpha;stamp=1196345446). > > The test that failed is known to succeed most of the time but > > occasionally fail for no apparent reason; if the package is retried it > > should build fine. Who should I be bothering? 0.37-4 might actually > > be able to make it into testing after a depressingly long hiatus, so I > > would really like to see it retried quickly. > Is monotone some programing language? It's a VCS. The test suite appears to be done in the lua language. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Who to contact to get a buildd retry on alpha?
On Fri, Nov 30, 2007 at 10:56:52AM -0800, Zack Weinberg wrote: > I sent mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] about this yesterday but nothing seems > to have happened. The most recent version of my package (monotone) > failed to build on alpha due to a single failure in its testsuite (see > http://buildd.debian.org/fetch.cgi?pkg=monotone;ver=0.37-4;arch=alpha;stamp=1196345446). > The test that failed is known to succeed most of the time but > occasionally fail for no apparent reason; if the package is retried it > should build fine. Who should I be bothering? 0.37-4 might actually > be able to make it into testing after a depressingly long hiatus, so I > would really like to see it retried quickly. Is monotone some programing language? It doens't look like any language I have seen before. It looks like the test has gone through a few revisions to try and deal with race conditions, maybe they haven't got it right yet. -- Len Sorensen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Who to contact to get a buildd retry on alpha?
On Fri, Nov 30, 2007 at 10:56:52AM -0800, Zack Weinberg wrote: > I sent mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] about this yesterday but nothing seems > to have happened. The most recent version of my package (monotone) > failed to build on alpha due to a single failure in its testsuite (see > http://buildd.debian.org/fetch.cgi?pkg=monotone;ver=0.37-4;arch=alpha;stamp=1196345446). > The test that failed is known to succeed most of the time but > occasionally fail for no apparent reason; if the package is retried it > should build fine. Who should I be bothering? No one; you should fix your package so that it builds reliably. The very test that's failing includes documentation of why the test is broken and unreliable. Please either fix the test or disable it in the build. Having to retry packages because they sometimes fail is obnoxious, especially when a security update is involved. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Who to contact to get a buildd retry on alpha?
I sent mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] about this yesterday but nothing seems to have happened. The most recent version of my package (monotone) failed to build on alpha due to a single failure in its testsuite (see http://buildd.debian.org/fetch.cgi?pkg=monotone;ver=0.37-4;arch=alpha;stamp=1196345446). The test that failed is known to succeed most of the time but occasionally fail for no apparent reason; if the package is retried it should build fine. Who should I be bothering? 0.37-4 might actually be able to make it into testing after a depressingly long hiatus, so I would really like to see it retried quickly. Thanks, zw -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
