The file glob for debuginfo packages should be "*-debuginfo-*" since
the debuginfo rpms are called
%{name}-debuginfo-%{version}-%{release}.%{arch}.rpm
and not:
*.debuginfo.rpm
Repo.py.patch
Description: Binary data
--
Fedora-buildsys-list mailing list
Fedora-buildsys-list@redhat.com
https
Currently, when we sign and push built packages, we move them out of a
"repodir" while the build server may be copying new packages to that
directory.
We have not cleaned up repodir for a long time either, because it could
not be done automatically without risk. The corresponding section in the
pu
On Wed, 17 May 2006 12:00:56 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> Currently, when we sign and push built packages, we move them out of a
> "repodir" while the build server may be copying new packages to that
> directory.
>
> We have not cleaned up repodir for a long time
The ChangeLog doesn't cover this, but there is no BuildJob.py or
buildjob.py anymore.
Hence references to "BuildJob" objects should be called "PackageJob"
to avoid confusion.
In particular, in server/Repo.py it should be:
s/BuildJob/PackageJob/g
s/buildjob/pkgjob/g
--
Fedora-buildsys-list m
On Fri, 02 Jun 2006 12:38:40 -0400, Dan Williams wrote:
> Patch is applied to the Extras buildsys build server now too, so feel
> free to use the lockfile stuff in scripts and whatever on extras64.
Great. Found a bug, though:
--- Repo.py.~1.26.~ 2006-06-02 17:45:30.0 +0200
+++ Repo.p
I think this just broke two build jobs:
| Executing /usr/sbin/mock-helper yum --installroot
/var/lib/mock/fedora-5-i386-core-e4c5db6c7c922589d8995bf76b50bcc08e68b049/root
install 'zlib-devel' 'texi2html' 'compat-gcc-32' 'SDL-devel'
|
http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/plague-results/fedora-5-ex
On Thu, 08 Jun 2006 10:00:59 -0400, Dan Williams wrote:
> Any idea how long each push takes, for a reasonable # of packages?
In total, a lot longer than 30 minutes. :(
> Dave
> Woodhouse just ran into a repo timeout, where the repo was locked longer
> than 30 minutes and the builder killed the
On Fri, 14 Jul 2006 20:52:16 -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> It is for the purpose of doing more complete and accurate package
> reviews that I'd like to get at the mock chroot, install a couple of
> extra packages into it and run an arbitrary command or two. This is
> all running on my mach
Begin forwarded message:
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 13:04:20 -0500
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Bug 179852] /dev/std* missing in mock - FE buildsystem
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 10:19:37 -0500, Joe Todaro wrote:
> Does anyone know what happened to the following *plague-0.5.0* programs?
>
> File: ExtrasMultiLib.py Status: Entry Invalid
> File: ExtrasPushUtils.pyStatus: Entry Invalid
> File: extras-push-new Status: Entry Inval
FC-6]$ make build
/usr/bin/plague-client build SDL_image SDL_image-1_2_5-2_fc6 fc6
Package SDL_image enqueued. Job ID: 22289.
> http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/build-status/job.psp?uid=22289
22289: SDL_image-1.2.5-2.fc7 (building)
Where does the .fc7 come from? This is the FC-6 branch!
--
F
$ plague-client list
Error: an error ocurred communicating with the server.
'https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-buildsys-list
Is this supposed to read "Status: needsign/success"?
$ plague-client detail 22289
Detail for Job ID 22289 (SDL_image):
Source: SDL_image-1_2_5-2_fc6
Target: fedora-6-extras
Submitter: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Status: needsi
Build job 22303 (hammer2 for x86_64) produced a truncated x86_64 rpm:
http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/build-status/job.psp?uid=22303
Should be above 5MiB in size, but is only 114688 bytes short:
$ rpm -Kv kile-1.9.3-1.fc3.1.x86_64.rpm
error: kile-1.9.3-1.fc3.1.x86_64.rpm: headerRead failed
$
On Sun, 26 Nov 2006 22:04:14 -0600, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> On Saturday 25 November 2006 9:22 am, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> > Once upon a time Saturday 25 November 2006 9:10 am, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > > FC-6]$ make build
> > > /usr/bin/plague-client build SDL_imag
On Tue, 28 Nov 2006 10:06:20 -0600, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> On Monday 27 November 2006 3:38 am, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > On Sun, 26 Nov 2006 22:04:14 -0600, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> > > On Saturday 25 November 2006 9:22 am, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> > > > Once up
On Tue, 28 Nov 2006 13:39:31 -0600, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
>
> > > i did exactly the same set of steps you posted
> > > FC-6]$ make build
> > > /usr/bin/plague-client build SDL_image SDL_image-1_2_5-3_fc6 fc6
> > > Package SDL_image enqueued. Job ID: 22438.
> > >
> > > http://buildsys.fedoraproje
On Tue, 28 Nov 2006 16:50:05 -0600, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> On Tuesday 28 November 2006 16:01, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > 1) "FC-6" branch never points at "devel".
> I know this
In the previous message you wrote:
| but the only thing i thought was perhaps you
On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 08:13:37 +, Paul Howarth wrote:
> Perhaps a misconfiguration on one, rarely-used builder?
http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/build-status/job.psp?uid=24566
| 24566: toped-0.8.2-2.fc7 (needsign)
| Target: fedora-6-extras
| Submitter:cgoorah yahoo com au
| Source:
Does anyone understand the following build job? Copy of the page is
appended below.
http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/build-status/job.psp?uid=27730
Target fc6, tag fc6, but the buildsys used fc7 in paths and created
a fc7 src.rpm, but fc6 binary rpms:
http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/logs/fedo
Extras buildsys lists a couple of active build jobs for
fedora-developmentippc64-extras
without any build status. Is this anything of importance?
--
Fedora-buildsys-list mailing list
Fedora-buildsys-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-buildsys-list
On Mon, 19 Mar 2007 09:14:26 -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> > Extras buildsys lists a couple of active build jobs for
> >
> > fedora-developmentippc64-extras
> >
> > without any build status. Is this anything of importance?
> >
> That is the target i setup so we can build ppc64 on the side. th
On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 09:18:14 +0200, Oliver Falk wrote:
> I think, the bsys should raise up a list of deps that might need a
> rebuild; A webpage with checkboxes and a go button. :-) Eventuall a
> notification to the maintainer if build fails, and/or a bug#, whatever.
> But if you want autorebui
--- kojid~ 2007-04-09 19:23:38.0 +0200
+++ kojid 2007-04-22 13:18:09.0 +0200
@@ -2118,7 +2118,7 @@
if changelog:
changelog = "Changelog:\r\n%s" % changelog
-from_addr = self.from_addr
+from_addr = options.from_addr
to_addrs
> #for import-comps handler (currently disabled)
> #from rhpl.comps import Comps
I've ported this to FC6 yum.comps to make it work for the buildroot list,
but it's only rudimentary, because I didn't find anything about the
"biarchonly" attribute. The "basearchonly" attribute, on the other hand,
is
On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 12:24:22 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > #for import-comps handler (currently disabled)
> > #from rhpl.comps import Comps
>
> I've ported this to FC6 yum.comps to make it work for the buildroot list,
> but it's only rudimentary, because I
On Mon, 14 May 2007 11:13:34 -0400, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Monday 14 May 2007 11:03:00 Jeremy Katz wrote:
> > [1] It looks like the idea is to be able to store the comps info
> > directly in the buildsys so that a comps file could then just be spit
> > out. But I'm not 100% sure there. And it
a
say so), there are at least two patches necessary to make it work on
F7+F8 and with mock >= 0.8:
http://mschwendt.fedorapeople.org/plague-0.5.0-fedora8.patch
http://mschwendt.fedorapeople.org/plague-cvs-mock-0.8.patch
--
Michael Schwendt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Fedora release 8 (Wer
On Thu, 15 Nov 2007 11:31:17 -0600, Michael E Brown wrote:
> > For those, who test the cvs version of Plague 0.5.0 (tickets in bugzilla
> > say so), there are at least two patches necessary to make it work on
> > F7+F8 and with mock >= 0.8:
> >
> > http://mschwendt.fedorapeople.org/plague-0.5.0
On Thu, 15 Nov 2007 14:12:28 -0500, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-11-14 at 22:42 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > I've been working on fixing Plague 0.4.4.1 (and Plague in cvs) for Fedora
> > 8 (and 7). The following test package works for
On Mon, 03 Dec 2007 09:28:43 -0600, Rex Dieter wrote:
> With recent versions of mock, (ie, mock-0.8 series), I've noticed change in
> behavior, seemingly the mockbuild user doesn't include stuff
> >from /etc/profile.d/* (my guess is that it's no longer being treated as a
> login shell).
>
> I men
Koji sends a build failure notification which refers to non-existant log
file locations:
Forwarded message:
sylpheed-2.4.8-1 (29013) failed on xenbuilder4.fedora.phx.redhat.com (i386),
xenbuilder4.fedora.phx.redhat.com (noarch):
BuildrootError: error building package (arch i386), mock exited w
If in a failed job.log you see the message
Job waited too long for repo to unlock. Killing it...
please notify me.
It's a problem in the plague server code that results in a denial of
service for subsequent build jobs. I have a traceback from Dec 28th, but
in the context of the source code i
On Sun, 30 Dec 2007 20:14:36 +0200, Jonathan Dieter wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-12-30 at 17:54 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > If in a failed job.log you see the message
> >
> > Job waited too long for repo to unlock. Killing it...
> >
> > please notify m
On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 11:00:12 -0500, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-12-30 at 17:54 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > If in a failed job.log you see the message
> >
> > Job waited too long for repo to unlock. Killing it...
> >
> > please notify me.
>
On Sun, 30 Dec 2007 17:54:51 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> If in a failed job.log you see the message
>
> Job waited too long for repo to unlock. Killing it...
>
> please notify me.
>
> It's a problem in the plague server code that results in a denial of
>
> Certainly related, job #37767 just failed
>
> Failed to copy
> /srv/rpmbuild/server_work/fedora-5-epel/37767-php-pecl-memcache-2.2.1-1.el5/ppc/php-pecl-memcache-2.2.1-1.el5.ppc.rpm
> to the repository directory.
>
Status update:
A work-around and debug-helper has been applied. I've moved
On Fri, 4 Jan 2008 15:55:56 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > Certainly related, job #37767 just failed
> >
> > Failed to copy
> > /srv/rpmbuild/server_work/fedora-5-epel/37767-php-pecl-memcache-2.2.1-1.el5/ppc/php-pecl-memcache-2.2.1-1.el5.ppc.rpm
> >
Does that work successfully in koji? Here, the mock Python processes
survive the kill signal. Only the parent mock process terminates. The
other ones keep building until the job succeeds or fails.
--
Fedora-buildsys-list mailing list
Fedora-buildsys-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/
On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 15:30:19 -0500, Mike McLean wrote:
> > Does that work successfully in koji? Here, the mock Python processes
> > survive the kill signal. Only the parent mock process terminates. The
> > other ones keep building until the job succeeds or fails.
>
> Koji is pretty aggressive ab
On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 00:50:33 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 15:30:19 -0500, Mike McLean wrote:
>
> > > Does that work successfully in koji? Here, the mock Python processes
> > > survive the kill signal. Only the parent mock process terminates. T
On Fri, 08 Feb 2008 17:00:30 -0800, Fernando Lopez-Lezcano wrote:
> Would this be the right list for this question?
>
> I have a mock/plague build system I'm just configuring and I wonder how
> can I get rid of old builds? (ie: erase all related files and clean up
> the database). Should be simpl
On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 17:10:16 -0500, Doug Chapman wrote:
> We have a koji server set up for ia64 where I have been running rawhide
> builds through. I am seeing something that I imagine is a regression in
> rpmbuild that is likely to be seen on the main koji server as well.
>
> Take for exam
On Fri, 22 Feb 2008 07:40:59 -0500, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Feb 2008 11:17:29 +0100
> Michael Schwendt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > + mv
> > > '/var/tmp/openser-1.3.0-8.fc9-root-mockbuild//usr/lib/openser/perl/*'
> > > /var/t
On Fri, 22 Feb 2008 20:21:56 -0500, Doug Chapman wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2008-02-22 at 20:18 -0500, Jesse Keating wrote:
> > On Fri, 22 Feb 2008 19:54:34 -0500
> > Doug Chapman wrote:
> >
> > > $ sh -x foo.sh
> > > + cp 'missingfile/*' /tmp
> > > cp: cannot stat `missingfile/*': No such file or dire
On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 01:48:48 -0400, Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-04-21 at 22:19 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> > So, the question would be... is this worth it? Do we want to keep
> > supporting this?
>
> Is the fact that you can check out e.g. "FC-5" even *documented*
> anywhere?
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/phpMyAdmin-2.11.9-1.fc8
[and several other updates]
+1 dcottle - 2008-08-30 08:09:35
+1 acottle - 2008-08-30 08:11:54
+1 auscity - 2008-08-30 08:21:14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/accounts/user/view/auscity
(David Cottle)
https://admin.fedorap
A copy of my private answer to a flood of four (!) replies I've
received after the original post:
[...]
David,
first of all, there's a question mark in the subject line. In other
words, I *ask* whether this is intended usage of bodhi, because I have
doubts that it is.
Secondly, in my opinion,
On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 18:00:00 +0100 (CET), Andreas wrote:
> AFAICS BuildRequirements were implemented by parsing #-commented lines and
> adding the named packages to the dependency list.
Confirmed.
> Has this behaviour changed?
Yes.
http://en.opensuse.org/SUSE_Package_Conventions/RPM_Style#1.3.
$ koji latest-pkg dist-f12 mcs
Build Tag Built by
mcs-0.7.1-4.fc12 dist-f12 mschwendt
$ koji latest-pkg dist-f12-build mcs
Bu
On Fri, 17 Jul 2009 16:32:40 +0200, Gianluca wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 5:44 AM, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> > What arech are you building the srpm on? if its not one of the ifarch'd
> > arches it wont be in the BR's for the srpm. thats part of why we create the
> > sroms on th ebuild arch in
51 matches
Mail list logo
