Re: Build failures on alternative ("secondary") arches
On Thu, 3 Aug 2017 15:34:03 +0200 Peter Lemenkov wrote: > Hello All! > I've got two nasty packages. One fails to pass the tests on BigEndian > arches (s390x, ppc64), another one fails to pass the tests on POWER > (ppc64 and ppc64le). > > So I have several questions. > > * Can I have a shell access to the ppc64 machine (which covers both > cases) where I can install packages and can run gdb / git / gcc? > * How maintainers are supposed to handle it? > * (A provocative one) - is it better to me just to set ExclusiveArch > and open a bugzilla ticket with build log of the failed build? > Sometimes it's hard to do anything even on supported architecture, so > asking me to support a package for the rarely used architecture (which > I don't even have access to) is, well, slightly overoptimistic, no? Using ExcludeArch/ExclusiveArch tags should be the last resort solution, but generally there is enough freedom for the maintainers to decide what route they will take. What packages are we talking about? Dan ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Build failures on alternative ("secondary") arches
On Thu, 3 Aug 2017 14:37:47 +0100 Tom Hughes wrote: > On 03/08/17 14:34, Peter Lemenkov wrote: > > > I've got two nasty packages. One fails to pass the tests on > > BigEndian arches (s390x, ppc64), another one fails to pass the > > tests on POWER (ppc64 and ppc64le). > > > > So I have several questions. > > > > * Can I have a shell access to the ppc64 machine (which covers both > > cases) where I can install packages and can run gdb / git / gcc? > > There are ppc64 and ppc64le machines - see here: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Machine_Resources_For_Package_Maintainers > > No s390x but a failure common to all big endians can likely be > debugged on ppc64. right, using ppc64 is the preferred (and easier) way, but we can provide access to s390x guest as well if needed Dan ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Build failures on alternative ("secondary") arches
On 03/08/17 14:34, Peter Lemenkov wrote: I've got two nasty packages. One fails to pass the tests on BigEndian arches (s390x, ppc64), another one fails to pass the tests on POWER (ppc64 and ppc64le). So I have several questions. * Can I have a shell access to the ppc64 machine (which covers both cases) where I can install packages and can run gdb / git / gcc? There are ppc64 and ppc64le machines - see here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Machine_Resources_For_Package_Maintainers No s390x but a failure common to all big endians can likely be debugged on ppc64. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Build failures on alternative ("secondary") arches
Hello All! I've got two nasty packages. One fails to pass the tests on BigEndian arches (s390x, ppc64), another one fails to pass the tests on POWER (ppc64 and ppc64le). So I have several questions. * Can I have a shell access to the ppc64 machine (which covers both cases) where I can install packages and can run gdb / git / gcc? * How maintainers are supposed to handle it? * (A provocative one) - is it better to me just to set ExclusiveArch and open a bugzilla ticket with build log of the failed build? Sometimes it's hard to do anything even on supported architecture, so asking me to support a package for the rarely used architecture (which I don't even have access to) is, well, slightly overoptimistic, no? -- With best regards, Peter Lemenkov. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
