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

Re: Proposed removal of packages with long-standing FTBFS failures



On Fri, Sep 05, 2008 at 04:55:39PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 05, 2008 at 10:40:06AM -0500, Matt Domsch wrote:
> > The following 90 packages have had FTBFS (Fails to Build From Source)
> > failures for several months, some as far back as February 2008.
> > 
> > There are several "trivial" failures which could be addressed easily.
> > 8 fail due to unpackaged files
> > 6 fail due to patch fuzz
> > 1 fails due to open() not passing a mode.
> > 
> > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FTBFS describes the FTBFS process.
> > 
> > As was proposed to FESCO, packages with unresolved FTBFS bugs
> > immediately following the Alpha release will be removed from the
> > distribution. Package owners may request that their package _not_ be
> > removed provided they are actively working on resolving the FTBFS and
> > have a plan to resolve the FTBFS before the Release Candidate
> > release.  FESCo has the final say of course, but these are the items
> > on my candidate list.  I'd prefer packages get fixed rather than
> > removed.  If you are the package owner, or are interested in the
> > future of these packages, please investigate these build failures and
> > fix them ASAP.
> 
> This list is far from complete - if you want to remove these 90, the
> dependancy chain ripple, will entail the removal of tonnes of other
> packages which depend on these.
> 
> Any chance you can generate a report which shows the ripple effect
> for each proposed package. If something is just a leaf-node, it isn't
> very important to worry about, but if something triggers removal
> of 50 dependant packages that's pretty damn  important to fix. This
> info would be useful in prioritizing which builds need fixing most
> urgently.

With sincere thanks to Seth Vidal, (he wrote a script do show what
packages depend on a given package, posted at
http://skvidal.fedorapeople.org/misc/pkg-provs-tree-view.py)
here is the list of non-leaf-nodes in "priority" order.

The number on the left is essentially the number of packages that
depend on the named package.

Use the above script as:

$ python pkg-provs-tree-view.py <package>
to get the results of the "what depends on <package>, recursively".  

e.g.  $ python --enablerepo=rawhide pkg-provs-tree-view.py gauche


604 gauche-0.8.13-1.fc9
551 xml-commons-resolver-1.1-1jpp.12
545 perl-MIME-Lite-3.01-6.fc9
138 libdap-3.7.10-2.fc9
62 plplot-5.9.0-1.fc9
46 mx-2.0.6-3
37 ladspa-1.12-9.fc9
34 libopensync-0.36-2.fc9
27 elektra-0.6.10-6.fc9
24 aiksaurus-1.2.1-15.fc6
22 libnc-dap-3.7.0-9.fc9
20 g-wrap-1.9.9-5.fc9
19 bes-3.5.3-3.fc9
17 libfwbuilder-2.1.16-2.fc9
16 brutus-keyring-0.9.0-6.fc8
14 pl-5.6.57-2.fc10
13 lineakd-0.9-5.fc6
10 libzzub-0.2.3-12.fc9
9 itpp-4.0.0-2.fc9
9 guile-gnome-platform-2.15.93-6.fc8
8 erlang-R12B-3.1.fc10
7 mimetic-0.9.3-2.fc8
7 libFoundation-1.1.3-11.fc9
7 gpsim-0.22.0-5.fc8
7 coolkey-1.1.0-6.fc9
5 gtk-sharp-1.0.10-12.fc7
5 fwbuilder-2.1.16-2.fc9
5 dap-freeform_handler-3.7.7-2.fc9
3 R-Matrix-0.999375-4.fc9
3 djvulibre-3.5.20-2.fc9
3 brltty-3.9-2.2.fc9
3 bmpx-0.40.14-5.fc9
2 qtiplot-0.9-8.fc9
2 mosml-2.01-11.fc9
2 lrmi-0.10-4.fc9
2 lilypond-2.10.33-1.fc8
2 dap-hdf4_handler-3.7.7-3.fc9

-- 
Matt Domsch
Linux Technology Strategist, Dell Office of the CTO
linux.dell.com & www.dell.com/linux


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