[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: For your consideration: Secondary Architectures in Fedora



On 05/31/2007 08:20 PM, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 17:03 +0200, Oliver Falk wrote:
>>>  1. A spurious build or test failure which happens on all arches
>>>     but intermittently.
>>>  2. A simple error introduced in the package update.
>>>  3. Something 'hard' which the arch team need to look into.
>>>  4. A compiler bug.
>> OK, for is possible sure, but doesn't happen quite often hopefully.
> 
> You mean that #4 is possible but shouldn't happen often? That's true at
> the moment but once we start pulling in new architectures it could
> happen more often.

Yes, of course. You're totally right... There are enough bugs in the
'other archs'...

> We should make sure that it's relatively easy for a package maintainer
> to see a compiler failure, and just say "Don't Care" and leave it for
> the arch maintainer to deal with (although the more conscientious
> package maintainers would actually file the compiler bug with test case
> for themselves). Being able to file a bug and then push a button for
> 'release the build anyway' seems not to be too much of an imposition.
> 
> In fact, _other_ than compiler bugs, I suspect that the _majority_ of
> bugs which just happen to kill one build but not others may well be
> generic bugs which are sensitive to timing or other criteria, and not
> really arch-specific at all. Which is why it's so irresponsible to let
> partially-failed builds make it through to the repo without _any_
> interaction from the maintainer at all.

We will see. :-)

-of


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]