Re: Why there is no sync for libicu soname rebuilds?
Hi, On Wed, Feb 04, 2015 at 08:43:52PM +0530, Parag Nemade wrote: Thanks David and Mikolaj. I am not sure if separate tag for libicu could have finished its rebuilds earlier than building it with boost tag. Faster, yes. Earlier, no. It is not possible to do the two rebuilds independently, because boost itself depends on icu. Because we were ready with the icu build at about the same time the boost rebuild started, we would have to wait for it to finish. It would also mean that 15-20 packages that depend on both boost and icu would be rebuilt twice. D. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Why there is no sync for libicu soname rebuilds?
Parag Nemade panem...@gmail.com writes: I actually got more confused when pmachata built harfbuzz without giving specific information in the changelog. The reason was that I was rebuilding both Boots and ICU deps, and since I just took a list of conflicts en blocks (as explained in another e-mail), I needed a neutral commit message. Thanks, Petr -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Why there is no sync for libicu soname rebuilds?
Mikolaj Izdebski mizde...@redhat.com writes: I don't know why 0.9.38-3 was built, it looks like unnecessary build. Yes, it is. About 30 packages diverged after f22-boost side-tag had been created. It's impractical to check by hand whether any happened to be already rebuilt in the short window since the merge. So I just took the list of merge conflicts and scheduled a rebuild for all of them, and harfbuzz ended up being rebuilt twice. Thanks, Petr -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Why there is no sync for libicu soname rebuilds?
Hi, I remember one year back also harfbuzz was attempted by 2 people on the same day for libicu rebuilds and now this time 3 builds by 2 people. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=606443 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=609035 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=609067 Regards, Parag. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Why there is no sync for libicu soname rebuilds?
Hi, On Wed, Feb 04, 2015 at 06:51:46PM +0530, Parag N(पराग़) wrote: Hi, I remember one year back also harfbuzz was attempted by 2 people on the same day for libicu rebuilds and now this time 3 builds by 2 people. We did the rebuild in a side tag (together with the boost update, to save time and rebuilds), which was only merged back to rawhide today (probably because of FOSDEM). But several packages were updated _before_ the tag was merged back, so they have to be rebuilt again. Sorry, but that is the best we can do. Nor we can hold off impatient maintainers from starting rebuilds of those failed packages in parallel... D. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Why there is no sync for libicu soname rebuilds?
Hi, On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 8:04 PM, Mikolaj Izdebski mizde...@redhat.com wrote: On 02/04/2015 02:21 PM, Parag N(पराग़) wrote: Hi, I remember one year back also harfbuzz was attempted by 2 people on the same day for libicu rebuilds and now this time 3 builds by 2 people. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=606443 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=609035 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=609067 Regards, Parag. harfbuzz 0.9.37-2 was built in f22-boost against new icu, but in meantime it was updated to 0.9.38-1 in f22. I had to rebuild the new version again after f22-boost was merged into f22. I don't know why 0.9.38-3 was built, it looks like unnecessary build. Thanks David and Mikolaj. I am not sure if separate tag for libicu could have finished its rebuilds earlier than building it with boost tag. I actually got more confused when pmachata built harfbuzz without giving specific information in the changelog. Regards, Parag. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Why there is no sync for libicu soname rebuilds?
On 02/04/2015 02:21 PM, Parag N(पराग़) wrote: Hi, I remember one year back also harfbuzz was attempted by 2 people on the same day for libicu rebuilds and now this time 3 builds by 2 people. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=606443 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=609035 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=609067 Regards, Parag. harfbuzz 0.9.37-2 was built in f22-boost against new icu, but in meantime it was updated to 0.9.38-1 in f22. I had to rebuild the new version again after f22-boost was merged into f22. I don't know why 0.9.38-3 was built, it looks like unnecessary build. -- Mikolaj Izdebski Software Engineer, Red Hat IRC: mizdebsk -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Why there is no sync for libicu soname rebuilds?
Dne 4.2.2015 v 16:13 Parag Nemade napsal(a): Hi, On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 8:04 PM, Mikolaj Izdebski mizde...@redhat.com wrote: On 02/04/2015 02:21 PM, Parag N(पराग़) wrote: Hi, I remember one year back also harfbuzz was attempted by 2 people on the same day for libicu rebuilds and now this time 3 builds by 2 people. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=606443 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=609035 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=609067 Regards, Parag. harfbuzz 0.9.37-2 was built in f22-boost against new icu, but in meantime it was updated to 0.9.38-1 in f22. I had to rebuild the new version again after f22-boost was merged into f22. I don't know why 0.9.38-3 was built, it looks like unnecessary build. Thanks David and Mikolaj. I am not sure if separate tag for libicu could have finished its rebuilds earlier than building it with boost tag.I actually got more confused when pmachata built harfbuzz without giving specific information in the changelog. Well ideally, when you noticed that somebody touched your package and you are going to update it, you should check where the updated package actually is. If you built it once again in boost tag, the things would be simpler. But yes, the changelog might be better and make a difference. The Fedora's mass rebuild changelog usually contains links to wiki and for Ruby rebuilds, we link to change proposal wiki page, which might be (I believe) good starting point to know what is going on. Vít -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
