Extras build system back up
by Dan Williams
Hi,
We're back up and using the latest plague code. yum update your
plague-client and you should be good to go.
Dan
16 years, 7 months
mock and fc5/fe5 and comps pain
by seth vidal
Hi,
As some of you are aware the comps changes that anaconda wanted changed
how comps works in yum which nicely BROKE Fedora Extras rawhide builds
once the comps.xml changes landed in rawhide. So what do we do to fix
it?
Jeremy and I tossed around a couple of ideas - none of them terribly
attractive but we settled on this, I'd like to hear some input:
- make three packages and put them in the buildgroups repo:
http://fedoraproject.org/buildgroups/
The packages would have no real payload but would have only
a requires list that matches the 3 groups listed in:
http://fedoraproject.org/buildgroups/4/i386/buildroots.xml
- modify mock to act on those packages instead of on group names.
Possibly
making that act be something you configure so we don't break
everyone with
the mock update.
- no longer have to worry about groups-file-format-changes screwing up
mock and
extras builds
So what do y'all think? That sound like a plan?
Would someone like to make the packages for us while I go futz with
mock?
thanks,
-sv
17 years, 5 months
Re: mock and fc5/fe5 and comps pain
by Mike McLean
seth vidal wrote:
> two questions:
> 1. what does giving this option buy us? Other than more code to
> maintain, I mean.
It seems like a reasonable config option to me, and it's hardly much
more code to maintain. It would make it somewhat easier for someone to
rapidly adjust their buildroot config while tinkering with builds.
> 2. why wouldn't you just go on using the older mock?
I could, or I could run a patched mock, although I had hoped to use what
the community is using.
Look, I don't seem to be winning anyone ever here. I think I'll just
deal with the fallout of the proposed change. Ultimately, staying in
tune with the rest of the mock community is more important to me than my
previously stated objections.
17 years, 5 months
Best way to sign packages before adding to the repos?
by Chris Weyl
Hey all--
Ok, so here's a question. What's the best way to sign a package(s)
before adding it to the repository? I was thinking that the easiest
way to do this would be while it's sitting in the "needsign/success"
state, but it looks like it's actually being added to the repository
before that state.
Is there an easy way to do this? Or even a not-so-easy one? <grin>
-Chris
17 years, 6 months
mock update
by seth vidal
hey,
we need a mock release. Who has patches in process for mock and would
like to get things in for it?
We need to fix two items:
1. make log files dump out on the fly rather than only at the end.
2. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=163576
I know the second one is fixed in cvs - anyone know about the first one?
-sv
17 years, 6 months