Re: Koji feature proposals
On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 08:42 +0100, Oliver Falk wrote: > Alright. I got it now - I think :-) > > So a build in koji will produce a noarch package for every arch. And > then you need to decide which noarch package to take and how to find out > if there are (arch specific) differences in those "noarch's", right? Yep! You got it now. -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature! identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- Fedora-buildsys-list mailing list Fedora-buildsys-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-buildsys-list
Re: Koji feature proposals
Oliver Falk wrote: > Jesse Keating wrote: >> On Wed, 2009-01-07 at 17:23 +0100, Oliver Falk wrote: >>> OKOK. I thought rpmbuild will automagically produce arch-specific >>> and noarch packages in 'one step'... >> >> It will, for one arch. You do a rpmbuild --rebuild foo (on x86_64) and >> it'll spit out x86_64 binary packages and potentially a noarch package. >> What we care about is doing the same command on i386 and generating i386 >> packages and a noarch package, having the i386 produced noarch package >> match the x86_64 produced noarch package. To the best of my knowledge >> there is no way to convince rpmbuild to produce both i386 /and/ x86_64 >> packages in the same run. > > Alright. I got it now - I think :-) > > So a build in koji will produce a noarch package for every arch. And > then you need to decide which noarch package to take and how to find > out if there are (arch specific) differences in those "noarch's", right? > > -of > huh? the entire reason a package is noarch is that it doesn't have any difference on what architecture it was built or installed. Usually shell scripts or data sets make up the bulk of noarch rpms. If a noarch package differs when built on different architectures then you can't call it a noarch rpm! Now that said, I have generated noarch packages that are actually x86_64 binaries so that they will install in an x86 environment without a need to pass --ignorearch to rpm, but, they forced me do it *sob* I didn't want to do it that way *cry* it was awful, my soul is dead *breakdown bawl* Phil =--= -- Fedora-buildsys-list mailing list Fedora-buildsys-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-buildsys-list
Re: Koji feature proposals
Jesse Keating wrote: On Wed, 2009-01-07 at 17:23 +0100, Oliver Falk wrote: OKOK. I thought rpmbuild will automagically produce arch-specific and noarch packages in 'one step'... It will, for one arch. You do a rpmbuild --rebuild foo (on x86_64) and it'll spit out x86_64 binary packages and potentially a noarch package. What we care about is doing the same command on i386 and generating i386 packages and a noarch package, having the i386 produced noarch package match the x86_64 produced noarch package. To the best of my knowledge there is no way to convince rpmbuild to produce both i386 /and/ x86_64 packages in the same run. Alright. I got it now - I think :-) So a build in koji will produce a noarch package for every arch. And then you need to decide which noarch package to take and how to find out if there are (arch specific) differences in those "noarch's", right? -of -- Fedora-buildsys-list mailing list Fedora-buildsys-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-buildsys-list
Re: Koji feature proposals
On Wed, 2009-01-07 at 17:23 +0100, Oliver Falk wrote: > > OKOK. I thought rpmbuild will automagically produce arch-specific and > noarch packages in 'one step'... It will, for one arch. You do a rpmbuild --rebuild foo (on x86_64) and it'll spit out x86_64 binary packages and potentially a noarch package. What we care about is doing the same command on i386 and generating i386 packages and a noarch package, having the i386 produced noarch package match the x86_64 produced noarch package. To the best of my knowledge there is no way to convince rpmbuild to produce both i386 /and/ x86_64 packages in the same run. -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature! identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- Fedora-buildsys-list mailing list Fedora-buildsys-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-buildsys-list
Re: Koji feature proposals
Jesse Keating wrote: On Wed, 2009-01-07 at 09:08 +0100, Oliver Falk wrote: Yet another post install section processing script (YAPISPS) :-) And yes, if it's not really noarch, it should fail. But shouldn't rpm itself check that? I mean, if someone writes a script to check that it should possibly go directly into rpm upstream sources... rpm itself only ever builds for one target at a time, so a script to check to see if what was produced from one target build is different from another target build doesn't necessarily make sense in rpm sources, at least not something ran automated. OKOK. I thought rpmbuild will automagically produce arch-specific and noarch packages in 'one step'... -of -- Fedora-buildsys-list mailing list Fedora-buildsys-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-buildsys-list
Re: Koji feature proposals
On Wed, 2009-01-07 at 09:08 +0100, Oliver Falk wrote: > Yet another post install section processing script (YAPISPS) :-) > > And yes, if it's not really noarch, it should fail. But shouldn't rpm > itself check that? I mean, if someone writes a script to check that it > should possibly go directly into rpm upstream sources... rpm itself only ever builds for one target at a time, so a script to check to see if what was produced from one target build is different from another target build doesn't necessarily make sense in rpm sources, at least not something ran automated. -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature! identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- Fedora-buildsys-list mailing list Fedora-buildsys-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-buildsys-list
Re: Koji feature proposals
Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: "OF" == Oliver Falk writes: OF> And regarding your point: '... different arches build noarch OF> subpackage with different contents'. Well, then it's definitly not OF> *noarch*, is't it? :-) It is quite possible for the contents to differ by, say, date, or by timestamps being included in plain text output. Why would that render the output arch-specific? We where talking about *real* content... :-) What I could imaging to happen is something like this (just an example, but it should make my point clear): i386: somescript.sh #!/usr/libexec/blabla/i386-bla-bla/bla/binary ... x86_64: somescript.sh #!/usr/libexec/blabla/x86_64-bla-bla/bla/binary ... alpha: somescript.sh #!/usr/libexec/blabla/alpha-bla-bla/bla/binary ... It's hard to check something like this, isn't it? Well, as long as it's only the interpreter line at the beginning it might be simple, but But don't worry, since we do have a few arches already, such bugs should be found quite fast and maybe we can add additional checks later :-) -of -- Fedora-buildsys-list mailing list Fedora-buildsys-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-buildsys-list
Re: Koji feature proposals
Mike Bonnet wrote: On Tue, 2009-01-06 at 21:51 +0100, Oliver Falk wrote: Hi Mike! Mike Bonnet schrieb: I've just created tickets for a few Koji features that I've been wanting to implement for a while (as well as updated an old one), and I'm planning to devote some time to in the near future. If you have any comments on these features feel free to post to the tickets, or talk to me at FUDCon this weekend. Just figured people might want to see the direction that Koji is headed. The future is now! :) [ ... ] drop the rpmfiles and rpmdeps tables: https://fedorahosted.org/koji/ticket/124 -1 Only if you provide the same functionality using another approach :-) Yes, the plan is to query the information directly from the rpms rather than from the database. You'll likely need to cache the list of files somewhere. Just to mention it: Using yum metadata isn't enough, as you'll only query the latest pkgs... > The content on the rpminfo page in the web UI should not change at all from the user perspective. Good. *I* do use it quite often; Find out which file belongs to which pkg(s). However, this was quite slow and now doesn't even seem to work in koji.fpo. :-( Hmmm, it should be. In what way is it not working? Query for Files (eg. /bin/ls): Mod_python error: "PythonHandler mod_python.publisher" Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/mod_python/apache.py", line 299, in HandlerDispatch result = object(req) File "/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/mod_python/publisher.py", line 213, in handler published = publish_object(req, object) File "/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/mod_python/publisher.py", line 412, in publish_object return publish_object(req,util.apply_fs_data(object, req.form, req=req)) File "/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/mod_python/util.py", line 439, in apply_fs_data return object(**args) File "/usr/share/koji-web/scripts/index.py", line 1680, in search start=start, dataName='results', prefix='result', order=order) File "/usr/share/koji-web/lib/kojiweb/util.py", line 123, in paginateMethod totalRows = getattr(server, methodName)(*args, **kw) File "/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/koji/__init__.py", line 1133, in __call__ return self.__func(self.__name,args,opts) File "/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/koji/__init__.py", line 1378, in _callMethod raise err Fault: noarch subpackage support: https://fedorahosted.org/koji/ticket/125 Duh? We do have already (at least one) packages that build arch-specific and noarch pkgs -> kernel or do we use some *hack* in the kernel.spec? We use a hack in the kernel specfile and in the build system. The noarch subpackage support in rpm is much more generic and flexible, and we need to support it without build system hacks. OK. I wasn't quite sure how it's working now... However, now that I know I do understand. And regarding your point: '... different arches build noarch subpackage with different contents'. Well, then it's definitly not *noarch*, is't it? :-) True, but it's still possible, and we may need to check for this case and handle is appropriately (possibly by failing the build). Yet another post install section processing script (YAPISPS) :-) And yes, if it's not really noarch, it should fail. But shouldn't rpm itself check that? I mean, if someone writes a script to check that it should possibly go directly into rpm upstream sources... -of -- Fedora-buildsys-list mailing list Fedora-buildsys-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-buildsys-list
Re: Koji feature proposals
> "MB" == Mike Bonnet writes: MB> There is some set of post-build checks we may want to run on these MB> noarch subpackages to ensure they are in fact noarch, and that MB> their content is sane. I think it would be sufficient to collect all of the noarch packages generated from the various arch builds, run rpmdiff -t on them, and fail the build if there is any output. That's a pretty strict test, but honestly I'd be concerned of any package that didn't pass it. - J< -- Fedora-buildsys-list mailing list Fedora-buildsys-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-buildsys-list
Re: Koji feature proposals
On Tue, 2009-01-06 at 15:21 -0600, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > > "OF" == Oliver Falk writes: > > OF> And regarding your point: '... different arches build noarch > OF> subpackage with different contents'. Well, then it's definitly not > OF> *noarch*, is't it? :-) > > It is quite possible for the contents to differ by, say, date, or by > timestamps being included in plain text output. Why would that render > the output arch-specific? I'm not so much worried about that level of difference as I am of say different file lists from noarch rpms built on different hosts, or maybe different endianness of data files. There is some set of post-build checks we may want to run on these noarch subpackages to ensure they are in fact noarch, and that their content is sane. This noarch subpackage feature is new, and there are things Koji can and probably should be doing to make sure it's being used correctly. -- Fedora-buildsys-list mailing list Fedora-buildsys-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-buildsys-list
Re: Koji feature proposals
> "OF" == Oliver Falk writes: OF> And regarding your point: '... different arches build noarch OF> subpackage with different contents'. Well, then it's definitly not OF> *noarch*, is't it? :-) It is quite possible for the contents to differ by, say, date, or by timestamps being included in plain text output. Why would that render the output arch-specific? - J< -- Fedora-buildsys-list mailing list Fedora-buildsys-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-buildsys-list
Re: Koji feature proposals
On Tue, 2009-01-06 at 21:51 +0100, Oliver Falk wrote: > Hi Mike! > > Mike Bonnet schrieb: > > I've just created tickets for a few Koji features that I've been wanting > > to implement for a while (as well as updated an old one), and I'm > > planning to devote some time to in the near future. If you have any > > comments on these features feel free to post to the tickets, or talk to > > me at FUDCon this weekend. Just figured people might want to see the > > direction that Koji is headed. The future is now! :) > > [ ... ] > > > drop the rpmfiles and rpmdeps tables: > > https://fedorahosted.org/koji/ticket/124 > > -1 > Only if you provide the same functionality using another approach :-) Yes, the plan is to query the information directly from the rpms rather than from the database. The content on the rpminfo page in the web UI should not change at all from the user perspective. > *I* do use it quite often; Find out which file belongs to which pkg(s). > > However, this was quite slow and now doesn't even seem to work in > koji.fpo. :-( Hmmm, it should be. In what way is it not working? > > noarch subpackage support: https://fedorahosted.org/koji/ticket/125 > > Duh? We do have already (at least one) packages that build arch-specific > and noarch pkgs -> kernel or do we use some *hack* in the kernel.spec? We use a hack in the kernel specfile and in the build system. The noarch subpackage support in rpm is much more generic and flexible, and we need to support it without build system hacks. > And regarding your point: '... different arches build noarch subpackage > with different contents'. Well, then it's definitly not *noarch*, is't > it? :-) True, but it's still possible, and we may need to check for this case and handle is appropriately (possibly by failing the build). -- Fedora-buildsys-list mailing list Fedora-buildsys-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-buildsys-list
Re: Koji feature proposals
Hi Mike! Mike Bonnet schrieb: I've just created tickets for a few Koji features that I've been wanting to implement for a while (as well as updated an old one), and I'm planning to devote some time to in the near future. If you have any comments on these features feel free to post to the tickets, or talk to me at FUDCon this weekend. Just figured people might want to see the direction that Koji is headed. The future is now! :) [ ... ] drop the rpmfiles and rpmdeps tables: https://fedorahosted.org/koji/ticket/124 -1 Only if you provide the same functionality using another approach :-) *I* do use it quite often; Find out which file belongs to which pkg(s). However, this was quite slow and now doesn't even seem to work in koji.fpo. :-( noarch subpackage support: https://fedorahosted.org/koji/ticket/125 Duh? We do have already (at least one) packages that build arch-specific and noarch pkgs -> kernel or do we use some *hack* in the kernel.spec? And regarding your point: '... different arches build noarch subpackage with different contents'. Well, then it's definitly not *noarch*, is't it? :-) -of -- Fedora-buildsys-list mailing list Fedora-buildsys-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-buildsys-list
Koji feature proposals
I've just created tickets for a few Koji features that I've been wanting to implement for a while (as well as updated an old one), and I'm planning to devote some time to in the near future. If you have any comments on these features feel free to post to the tickets, or talk to me at FUDCon this weekend. Just figured people might want to see the direction that Koji is headed. The future is now! :) Thanks, Mike build the srpm in a chroot: https://fedorahosted.org/koji/ticket/103 support for building isos and disk images in Koji: https://fedorahosted.org/koji/ticket/122 koji callback system: https://fedorahosted.org/koji/ticket/123 drop the rpmfiles and rpmdeps tables: https://fedorahosted.org/koji/ticket/124 noarch subpackage support: https://fedorahosted.org/koji/ticket/125 -- Fedora-buildsys-list mailing list Fedora-buildsys-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-buildsys-list
