-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 14 Jan 2015 10:48:16 +0100
Vít Ondruch <vondruch(a)redhat.com> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Dne 14.1.2015 v 00:24 Dennis Gilmore napsal(a):
> On Tue, 13 Jan 2015 15:58:51 -0700
> Kevin Fenzi <kevin(a)scrye.com> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 13 Jan 2015 15:50:06 -0700
> > Stephen John Smoogen <smooge(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> You forgot "too many packages?" There are 15842 packages in
> >> Fedora 21 and 16230 in Rawhide. That is a lot of packages that
> >> have to be rebuilt possibly multiple times due to FTBFS, multiple
> >> architectures, etc.
> >>
> >> 2.5 weeks is 25200 minutes. That means a mass rebuild is doing
> >> 0.6 packages a minute across 3 architectures. That is pretty
> >> darn fast
>
> > The Fedora 21 mass rebuild took about 40 hours. ;)
>
> > That's really not the reason for more time, its the fallout from
> > that. When the mass rebuild is tagged in, sometimes there's
> > things broken in the build root, those need humans to look at and
> > fix. Then, there are all the packages that didn't build for
> > whatever reason, those need humans to look at them and fix them
> > up. The ones with broken deps need fixing, etc.
>
> > So, while the mass rebuild itself is less than 2 days, it takes a
> > while to stablize things after that. If we branched right after
> > the mass rebuild we would have to then stablize both rawhide and
> > f22.
>
> > It's hard to say how much time we really need there... it depends
> > on how much stuff got broken, how hard it is to fix and how much
> > time maintainers have to fix things.
>
> right. in the past the building took around a week or a bit more, we
> have gotten that down. which is why I said we could drop the 4
> weeks to 3. the time consuming part is the cleanup and fixing of
> issues. that needs people. If everything is perfect a week could
> well be sufficient. Ideally we want secondary arches to be done in
> the window as well. just to make sure that there is no fallout on
> them requiring a second rebuild. which could also happen on
> primary. we have had ABI issues etc in the past on all arches.
>
> Dennis
What I would love to see is to leave out the packages which are build
in side tag from mass rebuild.
E.g. if I have side tag for Ruby, I rebuild every package in the side
tag in two weeks before mass rebuild, I can hardly see any
justification to build them once again (unless there lands gcc in the
man time or something like this). So if you could exclude the
packages which are already build in side tag from mass rebuild, it
would help you with following merge and it would give me additional
time to rebuild Ruby packages.
Is something like this feasible?
It really depends on a lot of things. like does gcc 5 land after you
have started your builds? we can go about excluding things viaa few
different means. but it all really depends on a bunch of currently
unknown factors.
Dennis
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2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=gxJf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----