Hi Saul, It looks like the first step is for all the 7.5 patches to be re-generated and de-fuzzed. I consider this to be gating the October release. Do you agree? I suggest that this gets addressed in master before the release branch creation. I will add a new task to the CentOS 7.5 rebase story for Cindy's team to work on. I would also like to propose that we continue to place master under code freeze/limited merge and only allow the items we consider gating for October. This would allow us to limit the churn to the next few days. Is this ok with everyone? Thanks, Ghada -----Original Message----- From: Saul Wold [mailto:sgw@linux.intel.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2018 7:45 PM To: starlingx-discuss@lists.starlingx.io Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] build-pkgs cannot complete std build On 09/26/2018 02:08 PM, Scott Little wrote:
I have also been investigating another intermittent build error affecting initscripts.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/starlingx/+bug/1794611
So any given package might be built by rpm-4.11.3, or by rpm-4.14.0. It's a race with many inputs. Ideally it shouldn't matter, but it does. build-pkgs --serial might reduce the odds, but likely won't solve it entirely.
Why is this the case in the first place, can't we ensure we only build rpm-4.14.0?
In this case it is a new option that rpm passes to the patch command, --no-backup-if-mismatch, first introduced by rpm-4.13. This option has the effect of suppressing the creation of '.orig' files.
Creation of .orig files are a consequence of applying patches that are not clean. Unclean patches are ones that require 'fuzzing', i.e. treat the patch line numbers as approximate, rather than a strict requirement, just so long as the before/after context seems to be correct.
Prior to StarlingX, my policy for rebasing patches was that no fuzz is tolerated in our patches.
All the work to upgrade to 7.5 has created a lot of fuzzy patches.
Wow, sorry I was not aware that they were all fuzzy patches.
audit-2.8.1-3.el7.tis.2 bash-4.2.46-30.el7.tis.3 dhcp-4.2.5-68.el7.centos.1.tis.8 dnsmasq-2.76-5.el7.tis.6 drbd-8.4.3-0.tis.6 facter-2.4.4-4.el7.tis.4 haproxy-1.5.18-7.el7.tis.7 initscripts-9.49.41-1.el7.tis.16 iptables-1.4.21-24.1.el7_5.tis.3 kubernetes-1.10.0-1.tis.1 libevent-2.0.21-4.el7.tis.2 lighttpd-1.4.50-1.el7.tis.6 logrotate-3.8.6-15.el7.tis.3 netpbm-10.79.00-7.el7.tis.2 net-snmp-5.7.2-33.el7_5.2.tis.10 net-tools-2.0-0.22.20131004git.el7.tis.2 nfs-utils-1.3.0-0.54.el7.tis.4 nss-pam-ldapd-0.8.13-16.el7.tis.4 ntp-4.2.6p5-28.el7.centos.tis.3 openldap-2.4.44-15.el7_5.tis.8 openssh-7.4p1-16.el7_4.tis.9 pam-1.1.8-22.el7.tis.4 puppet-4.8.2-1.el7.tis.2 puppet-ceph-2.4.1-1.el7.tis.4 puppet-horizon-11.5.0-1.el7.tis.1 python-2.7.5-69.el7_5.tis.3 python-keyring-5.7.1-1.tis.2 python-wsme-0.9.2-1.el7.tis.3 resource-agents-3.9.5-124.el7.tis.12 rsync-3.1.2-4.el7.tis.2 shadow-utils-4.1.5.1-24.el7.tis.4 sudo-1.8.19p2-14.el7_5.tis.3 watchdog-5.13-11.el7.tis.2
So any of these packages might or might not produce unwanted .orig files. The .orig files might or might not be packaged, or break packaging.
So there are a number of threads to pull at here. 1) Are fuzzy patches tolerated. I vote no. Sooner or later a fuzzy patch will be mis-applied and cause us problems.
Agreed, when updating patches should be rebased and de-fuzzed.
2) Can we force rpmbuild within mock to use a consistent policy with respect to creation of orig files?
It would be good to investigate that.
3) Can we pre-build rpm, such that all packages build against the same rpm version?
Yes, as mentioned above we should use a consistent version.
4) Are we patching any other low level build tools that have similar issues? Possibly explaining ceph? TBD
Yup more info is needed Sau!
On 18-09-26 12:16 PM, Scott Little wrote:
aclocal 'too many loops' has been popping up sporadically for a week or two now. Possibly 7.5 related.
I suspect that there is a build order and/or race condition element to this. It often goes away if you just run build-pkgs a second time.
The second possible element is that build-pkgs is using flags that preserve the mock environment between packages. The goal was to avoid reinstalling required packages that are often common across the packages we build. It was a build time speedup that has been in use for 2-3 years now without incident.
Google shows that other folks have hit 'aclocal too many loops' as well, and there are suggestions that it might be fixed in a recent update to automake. Scanning the changelog for the latest and greatest from gnu.org doesn't show any obvious fixes addressing this issue.
Scott
On 18-09-26 11:32 AM, Cordoba Malibran, Erich wrote:
BUILDSTDERR: aclocal: error: too many loops BUILDSTDERR: aclocal: Please contact<bug-automake@gnu.org>. BUILDSTDERR: at /usr/share/automake-1.13/Automake/Channels.pm line 662. BUILDSTDERR: Automake::Channels::msg('automake', '', 'too many loops') called at /usr/share/automake-1.13/Automake/ChannelDefs.pm line 212 BUILDSTDERR: Automake::ChannelDefs::prog_error('too many loops') called at /usr/bin/aclocal line 1187 BUILDSTDERR: error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.Sj0E7c (%build) BUILDSTDERR: Macro expanded in comment on line 214: %global _libexecdir %{_exec_prefix}/lib BUILDSTDERR: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.Sj0E7c (%build)
_______________________________________________ Starlingx-discuss mailing list Starlingx-discuss@lists.starlingx.io http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss
_______________________________________________ Starlingx-discuss mailing list Starlingx-discuss@lists.starlingx.io http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss
_______________________________________________ Starlingx-discuss mailing list Starlingx-discuss@lists.starlingx.io http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss