Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-buildservice (327 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: obs violates the debian policy §4.9.1
On Thursday 14 April 2011, 18:53:28 Stephan Kleine wrote:
On Wednesday April 13 2011 20:52:09 Hans-Peter Jansen wrote:
On Wednesday 13 April 2011, 19:18:03 Stephan Kleine wrote:
On Tuesday April 12 2011 23:36:45 peer wrote:
On 04/12/2011 10:56 PM, Adrian Schröter wrote:
Am Dienstag, 12. April 2011, 22:38:17 schrieb Peter Linnell:
On 04/12/2011 10:19 PM, Adrian Schröter wrote:
Am Dienstag, 12. April 2011, 21:54:56 schrieb Peter Linnell:
On 04/02/2011 09:51 PM, peer wrote:
On 04/02/2011 08:20 PM, Stephan Kleine wrote:
On Saturday April 2 2011 19:13:48 you wrote:
Here is the bug report

http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=62035
0

Well, it is obvious that the debian folks don´t care
about anything outside
their ivory tower. I meant filing a bug at the cdbs
upstream that their build scripts are broken cause
being unable to build in parallel _is_ a bug IMHO, so
they would perhaps fix this.

Er, sry, I forgot what cdbs is, seems like you are
screwed ;P

But more seriously, not doing the builds in parallel is
just a waste of time
and resources and debian& buntu builds already take
much longer than rpm builds (e.g. during package
install) so disabling parallel builds to please
some broken packages isn't an option imho. Simply wait
till a way to disable
them in the packages meta data is implemented and fix it
in the meantime by
adding "-j1" to your make call.

You didn't read the reply by the author well. The package
is not broken, it's a choice to have the package like it
is. That's why it's not a accident that it fails on obs
and not on the Debian, Ubuntu and Launchpad build
systems. They doesn't violate the Debian policy and I
think that's a good choice. That's also why the cdbs
author argues that obs is broken, not the package and I
do agree with him here.

It's fundamentally wrong imo to provide a service for
Debian packages and not accept the Debian way and the
Debian policy. Of course you could discuss the way of
building with the Debian devs and try to convince them
(at least the cdbs author seems to be open for a rational
discussion). But at the end the best thing a service for
Debian packages can do, it to adapt to the Debian way.
Then we as users are assured that we don't need all kinds
of hacks to get our Debian packages build.


~P

I read the Debian policy carefully and nothing there it
seems _prohibits_ parallel building.

Quote:

"parallel=n

Where is this set exactly ?

We can parse that maybe in build script and limit it to
"n". Or take the dpkg tools already care of that ?

http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-source.html#s-deb
ianr

ules-opt ions Section 4.9.1

okay, so it seems that the packages really need to get fixed
debian/rules file to avoid the usage of parallel builds too
me. (similar as in spec files where the macro must not be
used).

Thanks for digging into it.
adrian

Enabling parallel building via DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS, parallel=n
seems to be the proper way to enable parallel building on
Debian. But if this is not set by the package maintainer, obs
shouldn't build the package in parallel, because that would
violate the Debian policy.

~P

No, make it the other way round. Until explicitly disabled in the
packages meta data build the stuff in parallel since .deb builds
already waste enough time during package installation and most
people probably will never know or care to enable parallel builds
for working packages.

And if they choose to punish themself, why not meet their policy,
but simply penalize those non parallel builds in the scheduler
adequately in order to lower burden of other BS users.

Guess, how fast the self-healing power will change this silly
situation.

Again, because that "policy" is screwing over everyone else cause the
.deb builds already waste loads of time (e.g. the package
installation takes considerable longer than on rpm based distros) so
anything that makes .deb builds faster is plain awesome in my book.

Also the majority of the packages should "just work" when build in
parallel because - again - the only reason that wouldn't work is
because the packages build scripts have a bug in the first place.

So please explain me why everyone else should get punished and time
get wasted just cause a handful of people happen to want to build
broken packages they refuse to fix?

So simply fix your packages build scripts and send the patch upstream
or implement some option to turn of parallel builds in the packages
meta data or wait till someone else does it for you but stop
punishing everyone cause your stuff is broken and you refuse to fix
it.

Stephan, you probably misunderstood me. Given, debian require BS to
build their stuff with a single CPU by default, no problem, just
penalize these builds in the scheduler by _lowering_ their priority
with _factor_ 10 (est. avg. 6 CPUs, e.g. estimated to hog a build node
10 times longer than other projects packages, iow. 10 RPM builds and
then one "single CPU" debian build).

Result: bigger debian builds will take ages, but this is exactly, what
they _demand_¹. debian packagers, that run off their patience will try
to solve this by enabling parallel builds in their packages.

The idea is, that debian packagers stop being jobworths, and start
fixing their issues for their own sake and the rest of us doesn't
suffer from debian project policy silliness too much.

This is not about punishment, it's about fairness and raising the
attraction to fix this with self-healing power.

Hopefully, I expressed myself better this time,
Pete

¹) Well, not exactly, but OTOH this scheduler penalization does work
pretty well: before Stephan Kulow fixed this, I remember having
packages hanging around in scheduled state for several _days_!
Enough time for them to think about solutions to the problem.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx

< Previous Next >
Follow Ups