On 5. 6. 25 23:14, Daniel Sahlberg wrote:
tors 5 juni 2025 kl. 23:03 skrev Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org>:On 5. 6. 25 22:27, Daniel Sahlberg wrote: > Den sön 1 juni 2025 kl 19:39 skrev Nathan Hartman <hartman.nat...@gmail.com >> : >> On Sun, Jun 1, 2025 at 11:39 AM Daniel Sahlberg < >> daniel.l.sahlb...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Den sön 1 juni 2025 kl 16:31 skrev Daniel Sahlberg < >>> daniel.l.sahlb...@gmail.com>: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I like the e-mail notifications from GitHub Actions when a build fails >>> or >>>> when it starts to work again - saves some time from going into the >>> website >>>> to check status. >>>> >>>> Should we enable this for Serf? >>>> >>>> Should it go to dev@ or should we create a separate notifications@ >>> list? >>>> I presume the safe path would be to just create a separate mailing list >>>> and add notifications there, but maybe there is not really need for a >>>> separate list? >>>> >>> Oh, there IS a notifications@ list already, see >>> https://lists.apache.org/list?notificati...@serf.apache.org. It was last >>> used in 2020 by BuildBot (I assume it was never migrated to the new >>> ci2.apache.org <http://ci2.apache.org>, can't find Serf there). The list has TWO subscribers >>> (actually: three, since I just joined) so I assume there is little harm in >>> setting up notifications to that list. >>> >>> I'm going to assume lazy consensus to do this, if no replies within the >>> next 72 hours (although it may take longer than that). >> >> >> +1 for this, similarly to how we've done for Subversion. Since most/all >> (?) of the Serf devs are also Subversion devs, there's an advantage in >> being consistent! >> > I went ahead with this.First notification was received earlier tonight [1]. > > For the record, this is controlled by the ghactions.py script in ASF > Infra's git repo infrastructure-gha-notifier[2]. I made a pull request > which was kindly merged by Humbedooh [3]. > > Feel free to subscribe tonotificati...@serf.apache.org if you want to > receive those notifications. Regarding the current state of GitHub actions: * Windows x86 (32-bit) CMake builds are failing and I have absolutely no idea why. The last output is during the build, says "Generating code...", then exits. No diagnostics, nothing. @Timofei, any ideas?I also noted that it seems to download and build OpenSSL from source, taking quite a bit of time. Is it possible to install a binary version from vcpkg?* Linux CMake builds are generally passing, although I just noticed that builders running Ubuntu 24.04 don't even start. Again, no idea why. I can try to look at this, comparing with Subversion. * Linux SCons builds are failing. Something happened in SCons 4.x that made the feature checks in OpenSSL mostly fail, killing the build. I have a working build with SCons 4.7+, but the builders have SCons 4.0 or 4.1. I haven't had time to debug that, but I do have a VM running Debian 12 now. I don't have the bandwidth (or, quite frankly, the motivation) to chase down the Windows x86 bug. I'll try to get SCons up and running again on Debian. -- Brane P.S.: I've built a FreeBSD VM and got the CMake build running there. Working on OpenBSD now, then I think I'll have more development platforms than I know what to do with... someone else can try AIX and HP-UX and Solaris (pardon me, Oracle Unix) and the Red Hat variants.I have a Sun SPARC box running one of the later Solaris 10 releases but I’m not sure if I have the bandwidth to work on it. Last time I tried it failed with too old dependencies.
Yes, that could be a problem. We pretty much require OpenSSL 1.1.1 or 3.x, things like that would probably have to be installed manually.
-- Brane
