Hey
Matthias kicked an armel rebuild of Ubuntu main with a gcc-4.4 + Linaro diff package. The rebuild copy-archive is visible at: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+archive/test-rebuild-20100707
The failed logs are at: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+archive/test-rebuild-20100707/+builds?build_te...
@Steve, you had offered help in reviewing the i386/amd64 rebuilds in the past (and I think Michael Hope was working on these); I would very much take help in reviewing the armel issues. Is this something the Foundations team could help with?
I'd like to discuss organizing this review a bit.
* First, we need to make sure we don't review the same build logs multiple times; the rebuild isn't over and builds are going to continue showing up; Matthias told me new build logs will show up at the top, so we only need to note the last package we reviewed.
* We need some place tracking the build logs which we skipped (for which we didn't file a bug) and/or note last reviewed package; I propose to note this down in a wiki page.
* For now, we should skip openjdk / java related issues; openjdk needs some bug fixing before we can consider using it on armel. Such issues should be documented along other instructions in the aforementioned wiki page.
* I think we should skip packages which FTBFS on x86. Do we actually compare build logs before classifying these?
* We should file bugs with some standard tags, perhaps linaro + armel?
* I would like us to develop helpers to analyze build-logs; perhaps Lucas Nussbaum has something since he manages to analyze the grid5000 rebuild logs decently. Ideally, these tools would also allow assigning build log reviews to people, leaving comments and such.
Comments welcome!
Cheers,
I had a quick hack with python-launchpadapi and python-apt: https://wiki.linaro.org/MichaelHope/Sandbox/BuildFailures https://wiki.linaro.org/MichaelHope/Sandbox/BuildFailures?action=AttachFile&...
It shows all of the current build failures with links off to the build page, build log, and a column for marking the ticket number. The packages are split into those that defiantly need java and those that don't.
Not sure if it's useful but it was a fun hack.
-- Michael
On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 1:49 AM, Loïc Minier loic.minier@linaro.org wrote:
Hey
Matthias kicked an armel rebuild of Ubuntu main with a gcc-4.4 + Linaro diff package. The rebuild copy-archive is visible at: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+archive/test-rebuild-20100707
The failed logs are at: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+archive/test-rebuild-20100707/+builds?build_te...
@Steve, you had offered help in reviewing the i386/amd64 rebuilds in the past (and I think Michael Hope was working on these); I would very much take help in reviewing the armel issues. Is this something the Foundations team could help with?
I'd like to discuss organizing this review a bit.
* First, we need to make sure we don't review the same build logs multiple times; the rebuild isn't over and builds are going to continue showing up; Matthias told me new build logs will show up at the top, so we only need to note the last package we reviewed.
* We need some place tracking the build logs which we skipped (for which we didn't file a bug) and/or note last reviewed package; I propose to note this down in a wiki page.
* For now, we should skip openjdk / java related issues; openjdk needs some bug fixing before we can consider using it on armel. Such issues should be documented along other instructions in the aforementioned wiki page.
* I think we should skip packages which FTBFS on x86. Do we actually compare build logs before classifying these?
* We should file bugs with some standard tags, perhaps linaro + armel?
* I would like us to develop helpers to analyze build-logs; perhaps Lucas Nussbaum has something since he manages to analyze the grid5000 rebuild logs decently. Ideally, these tools would also allow assigning build log reviews to people, leaving comments and such.
Comments welcome!
Cheers,
Loïc Minier
linaro-toolchain mailing list linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-toolchain
+++ Michael Hope [2010-07-13 14:48 +1200]:
I had a quick hack with python-launchpadapi and python-apt: https://wiki.linaro.org/MichaelHope/Sandbox/BuildFailures https://wiki.linaro.org/MichaelHope/Sandbox/BuildFailures?action=AttachFile&...
It shows all of the current build failures with links off to the build page, build log, and a column for marking the ticket number. The packages are split into those that defiantly need java and those that don't.
Not sure if it's useful but it was a fun hack.
Definately useful. Well hacked :-)
Wookey
I've knocked off a few of these. At least half are probably upstream issues or ARM specific, but there's a few such as segfaults when running tests that smell toolchain specific.
See https://wiki.linaro.org/MichaelHope/Sandbox/BuildFailures
-- Michael
On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 1:49 AM, Loïc Minier loic.minier@linaro.org wrote:
Hey
Matthias kicked an armel rebuild of Ubuntu main with a gcc-4.4 + Linaro diff package. The rebuild copy-archive is visible at: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+archive/test-rebuild-20100707
The failed logs are at: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+archive/test-rebuild-20100707/+builds?build_te...
@Steve, you had offered help in reviewing the i386/amd64 rebuilds in the past (and I think Michael Hope was working on these); I would very much take help in reviewing the armel issues. Is this something the Foundations team could help with?
I'd like to discuss organizing this review a bit.
* First, we need to make sure we don't review the same build logs multiple times; the rebuild isn't over and builds are going to continue showing up; Matthias told me new build logs will show up at the top, so we only need to note the last package we reviewed.
* We need some place tracking the build logs which we skipped (for which we didn't file a bug) and/or note last reviewed package; I propose to note this down in a wiki page.
* For now, we should skip openjdk / java related issues; openjdk needs some bug fixing before we can consider using it on armel. Such issues should be documented along other instructions in the aforementioned wiki page.
* I think we should skip packages which FTBFS on x86. Do we actually compare build logs before classifying these?
* We should file bugs with some standard tags, perhaps linaro + armel?
* I would like us to develop helpers to analyze build-logs; perhaps Lucas Nussbaum has something since he manages to analyze the grid5000 rebuild logs decently. Ideally, these tools would also allow assigning build log reviews to people, leaving comments and such.
Comments welcome!
Cheers,
Loïc Minier
linaro-toolchain mailing list linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-toolchain
Oh: incidentally there's a ton of packages that you wouldn't think depend on Java but actually do. I was just looking at gettext and it fails due to something needing the 'ca-certificates-java' package, which segfaults during certificate generation.
-- Michael
On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 4:01 PM, Michael Hope michael.hope@linaro.org wrote:
I've knocked off a few of these. At least half are probably upstream issues or ARM specific, but there's a few such as segfaults when running tests that smell toolchain specific.
See https://wiki.linaro.org/MichaelHope/Sandbox/BuildFailures
-- Michael
On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 1:49 AM, Loïc Minier loic.minier@linaro.org wrote:
Hey
Matthias kicked an armel rebuild of Ubuntu main with a gcc-4.4 + Linaro diff package. The rebuild copy-archive is visible at: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+archive/test-rebuild-20100707
The failed logs are at: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+archive/test-rebuild-20100707/+builds?build_te...
@Steve, you had offered help in reviewing the i386/amd64 rebuilds in the past (and I think Michael Hope was working on these); I would very much take help in reviewing the armel issues. Is this something the Foundations team could help with?
I'd like to discuss organizing this review a bit.
* First, we need to make sure we don't review the same build logs multiple times; the rebuild isn't over and builds are going to continue showing up; Matthias told me new build logs will show up at the top, so we only need to note the last package we reviewed.
* We need some place tracking the build logs which we skipped (for which we didn't file a bug) and/or note last reviewed package; I propose to note this down in a wiki page.
* For now, we should skip openjdk / java related issues; openjdk needs some bug fixing before we can consider using it on armel. Such issues should be documented along other instructions in the aforementioned wiki page.
* I think we should skip packages which FTBFS on x86. Do we actually compare build logs before classifying these?
* We should file bugs with some standard tags, perhaps linaro + armel?
* I would like us to develop helpers to analyze build-logs; perhaps Lucas Nussbaum has something since he manages to analyze the grid5000 rebuild logs decently. Ideally, these tools would also allow assigning build log reviews to people, leaving comments and such.
Comments welcome!
Cheers,
Loïc Minier
linaro-toolchain mailing list linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-toolchain
On Tue, Jul 13, 2010, Michael Hope wrote:
I had a quick hack with python-launchpadapi and python-apt: https://wiki.linaro.org/MichaelHope/Sandbox/BuildFailures https://wiki.linaro.org/MichaelHope/Sandbox/BuildFailures?action=AttachFile&...
awesome! that's exactly what I had in mind when I noted we should develop tools to analyse these results, and I didn't even get the chance to share old scripts I had here doing LP API stuff with build logs!
On Tue, Jul 13, 2010, Michael Hope wrote:
Oh: incidentally there's a ton of packages that you wouldn't think depend on Java but actually do. I was just looking at gettext and it fails due to something needing the 'ca-certificates-java' package, which segfaults during certificate generation.
Right; java failures are hard to detect in this particular rebuild, I recommend we maintain some permanent regexps and some regexps specific to one rebuild.
linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org
-
Loïc Minier -
Michael Hope -
Wookey