On Nov 17, 2009, at 14:47, Conrad Meyer <cemeyer(a)u.washington.edu>
wrote:
On Tuesday 17 November 2009 06:50:58 am Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-11-16 at 11:22 -0800, Jesse Keating wrote:
>> Many of you received emails over the weekend and this morning
>> regarding
>> broken deps in rawhide. If these emails mentioned that the deps
>> were
>> broken on ppc or ppc64 they can be ignored. We are no longer
>> producing
>> ppc/ppc64 as a primary arch, however we forgot to tag the config
>> change
>> that enacted this on our compose tools. We were attempting to
>> compose
>> ppc(64) trees with only noarch packages, and well things didn't
>> work so
>> hot.
>>
>> We should have this fixed today so that future emails about broken
>> deps
>> will be about actual broken deps, not broken configurations.
>> Sorry for
>> the mailbombing.
>
> *sigh*
>
> While we were successful in building a new mash package that would
> avoid
> making ppc repos, we forgot to update one of the rawhide creation
> configs so that it used dist-f13 content as opposed to dist-f12.
> So the
> rawhide creation process has been using dist-f12 content all this
> time
> to build up the chroot, which would then compose dist-f13 content.
> This
> means that the dist-f12 version of mash was used, not the dist-f13
> version we built to disable ppc.
>
> I've corrected that. Third try to kill the ppc deps should be the
> charm.
Could we just not send emails tomorrow, double check that it
produces the
correct result, and re-enable them for the next day? In case there's
something
else we-shouldn't-have-missed-but-we-did?
That's one of the changes I made today.
--
Jes