Il 12/11/2013 10:34, Patrick Hurrelmann ha scritto:
> Hi all,
> sorry for this rant, but...
> I now tried several times to test the beta 3.3.1 rpms, but they can't
> even be installed in the most times.

I'm glad to read you're testing 3.3.1. May I ask you to add yourself to ?

> One time it required a future
> selinux-policy, although the needed selinux fix was delivered in a much
> lower version. Now the rpms have broken requirements. It requires
> "hostname" instead of "/bin/hostname". This broken requirement is not
> included in the vdsm 3.3 branch, so I wonder where it comes from?
> Anyway. So I proceeded and tried to build vdsm myself once again.
> Currently the build fails with (but worked fine some days ago):
> /usr/bin/pep8 --exclude="," --filename '*.py,*' \
>               client lib/cpopen/*.py lib/vdsm/*.py lib/vdsm/* tests
> vds_bootstrap vdsm-tool vdsm/*.py vdsm/* vdsm/netconf
> vdsm/sos/ vdsm/storage vdsm/vdsm vdsm_api vdsm_hooks vdsm_reg
> vdsm/storage/imageRepository/ E128
> continuation line under-indented for visual indent
> - How can the quality of the vdsm builds be increased? It is frustrating
> to spend time on testing and then the hosts cannot even be installed to
> broken vdsm rpms.
> - How are the builds prepared? Is there a Jenkins job that prepares
> "stable" rpms in addition to the nightly job? Or is this totally
> handcrafted?
> - How can it be that the rpm spec differs between the 3.3 branch and
> released rpms? What is the source/branch for el6 vdsm rpms? Maybe I'm
> just tracking on the wrong source tree...

Since this is VDSM related, adding vdsm-devel list to the discussion.

> Thx and Regards
> Patrick

Sandro Bonazzola
Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration.
See how it works at
vdsm-devel mailing list

Reply via email to