Re: Auto-filing of FTBFS bugs gone wild

Hi, On 19-07-18 17:42, Igor Gnatenko wrote: On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 5:33 PM Hans de Goede mailto:hdego...@redhat.com>> wrote: Hi All, I've just got 20 bugs auto-filed against packages which I co-maintain and that is just for packages starting with the letter 'a'. A quick

Re: Auto-filing of FTBFS bugs gone wild

Igor Gnatenko wrote: > Unfortunately I can't fix this automagically. You can. You just need to do more than one pass of fixing, instead of expecting other people to fix your breakage. Kevin Kofler ___ devel mailing list --

Re: Auto-filing of FTBFS bugs gone wild

On 07/20/2018 03:58 PM, Igor Gnatenko wrote: On Fri, Jul 20, 2018, 15:27 Kevin Kofler wrote: Igor Gnatenko wrote: No one promised that I'm going to fix 100% of packages, I've fixed around 2k packages. What my regex couldn't catch -- please send me list of packages, I will analyze them and

Re: Auto-filing of FTBFS bugs gone wild

On 07/21/2018 11:02 AM, Igor Gnatenko wrote: On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 10:28 AM Julian Sikorski wrote: This means that build failed on checking for gcc. There are some packages where it checks for both gcc and g++ and then fails, but there are packages where it fails after first.

Re: Auto-filing of FTBFS bugs gone wild

On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 10:28 AM Julian Sikorski wrote: > W dniu 19.07.2018 o 17:30, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek pisze: > > On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 05:15:47PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > >> Hi All, > >> > >> I've just got 20 bugs auto-filed against packages which I co-maintain > >> and that is

Re: Auto-filing of FTBFS bugs gone wild

W dniu 19.07.2018 o 17:30, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek pisze: > On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 05:15:47PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: >> Hi All, >> >> I've just got 20 bugs auto-filed against packages which I co-maintain >> and that is just for packages starting with the letter 'a'. >> >> A quick check

Re: Auto-filing of FTBFS bugs gone wild

On Fri, Jul 20, 2018, 15:27 Kevin Kofler wrote: > Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > No one promised that I'm going to fix 100% of packages, I've fixed around > > 2k packages. What my regex couldn't catch -- please send me list of > > packages, I will analyze them and try to fix as much as possible. > >

Re: Auto-filing of FTBFS bugs gone wild

On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 05:48:24PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > > > > If the FTBFS script has ran too early, all the FTBFS bugs need to be > > closed and the FTBFS script has to be run again later. > > > > If the automatic BuildRequires fixing script missed all these, then > > I suggest that: >

Re: Auto-filing of FTBFS bugs gone wild

Igor Gnatenko wrote: > No one promised that I'm going to fix 100% of packages, I've fixed around > 2k packages. What my regex couldn't catch -- please send me list of > packages, I will analyze them and try to fix as much as possible. IMHO, it is unacceptable that you make a change breaking

Re: Auto-filing of FTBFS bugs gone wild

Miro Hrončok wrote: > I know it is not comfortable, yet at this point reverting the change and > doing another mass rebuild is IMHO more work than fixing the packages. It may be more work for 1 or 2 rel-eng people, but it would save work for hundreds of affected maintainers and hence result in

Re: Auto-filing of FTBFS bugs gone wild

On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 11:02:19AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: > Honestly, I think Koschei should be mandatory for every package or at > least opt-out by default at this point. +1 That said, we should be working to reduce false positives as much as possible. Zbyszek

Re: Auto-filing of FTBFS bugs gone wild

Honestly, I think Koschei should be mandatory for every package or at least opt-out by default at this point. Vít Dne 20.7.2018 v 03:56 Dan Callaghan napsal(a): > Excerpts from Miro Hrončok's message of 2018-07-19 17:48 +02:00: >> I know it is not comfortable, yet at this point reverting the

Re: Auto-filing of FTBFS bugs gone wild

Excerpts from Miro Hrončok's message of 2018-07-19 17:48 +02:00: > I know it is not comfortable, yet at this point reverting the change > and doing another mass rebuild is IMHO more work than fixing the > packages. Also, let me take this opportunity to give Koschei a shout-out. I have it

Re: Auto-filing of FTBFS bugs gone wild

On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 6:13 PM Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi, > > On 19-07-18 17:42, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 5:33 PM Hans de Goede > wrote: > > > > Hi All, > > > > I've just got 20 bugs auto-filed against packages which I co-maintain > >

Re: Auto-filing of FTBFS bugs gone wild

Hi, On 19-07-18 17:42, Igor Gnatenko wrote: On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 5:33 PM Hans de Goede mailto:hdego...@redhat.com>> wrote: Hi All, I've just got 20 bugs auto-filed against packages which I co-maintain and that is just for packages starting with the letter 'a'. A quick

Re: Auto-filing of FTBFS bugs gone wild

On 19.7.2018 17:15, Hans de Goede wrote: Hi All, I've just got 20 bugs auto-filed against packages which I co-maintain and that is just for packages starting with the letter 'a'. A quick check shows that these are all caused by a missing BuildRequires on gcc / g++ related to:

Re: Auto-filing of FTBFS bugs gone wild

Hi, On 19-07-18 17:30, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 05:15:47PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: Hi All, I've just got 20 bugs auto-filed against packages which I co-maintain and that is just for packages starting with the letter 'a'. A quick check shows that these

Re: Auto-filing of FTBFS bugs gone wild

On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 5:33 PM Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi All, > > I've just got 20 bugs auto-filed against packages which I co-maintain > and that is just for packages starting with the letter 'a'. > > A quick check shows that these are all caused by a missing > BuildRequires on gcc / g++

Re: Auto-filing of FTBFS bugs gone wild

On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 05:15:47PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi All, > > I've just got 20 bugs auto-filed against packages which I co-maintain > and that is just for packages starting with the letter 'a'. > > A quick check shows that these are all caused by a missing > BuildRequires on gcc /

Auto-filing of FTBFS bugs gone wild

Hi All, I've just got 20 bugs auto-filed against packages which I co-maintain and that is just for packages starting with the letter 'a'. A quick check shows that these are all caused by a missing BuildRequires on gcc / g++ related to: