Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-buildservice (124 mails)

< Previous Next >
[opensuse-buildservice] making SR review easier (was Re: [opensuse-packaging] Review policy)
  • From: Adam Spiers <aspiers@xxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2013 11:09:50 +0000
  • Message-id: <20130321110950.GK21519@pacific.linksys.moosehall>
[setting Cc and Reply-To to the opensuse-buildservice list]

Sascha Peilicke (speilicke@xxxxxxxx) wrote:
On 03/21/2013 09:50 AM, Togan Muftuoglu wrote:
On 03/21/2013 09:10 AM, Sascha Peilicke wrote:
The reason is I had a declination with a comment why I have not
explained use of %ghost macro in a spec file, but a person who would
have reviewed the rpm buildlogs for the package would realize the fact
that rpmlint gives the following error.

Who seriously looks at buildlogs when reviewing requests?

I do and I would expect those who review requests do as well other wise
why bother in the first place to generate a build log and rpmlint log.
If the package doesnot build it is recommended to have a look at the
build log. Well I would assume if it builds fine one still should look
the logs and especially the rpmlint log

Well, we review packages building for multiple architectures and a
plethora of distros. Of course I mostly care about openSUSE:Factory
(i586,x86_64) but still. And yes, I look at the rpmlint log for that
target too. And no, I don't look at any build-log. On a calm day, I
review ~50 packages

8-O Wow, I had no idea any one person did that much work!

AFAICS, the rpmlint results are only available in two places:

- the build log
- the Rpmlint Results tab on each package's Overview page

Right? And neither of these are formatted in a very nice way.

I simply don't have the time and it makes no
sense either. Packages that don't build are declined by
'factory-auto' already, packages that build are good enough. I doubt
people would appreciate if we start commenting the fuzzy mess that
build-logs are ;-)

Since I am not currently a regular reviewer, feel free to tell me if
I'm talking rubbish, but it seems to me that there are some
low-hanging fruit changes we could make here to make life much easier
for reviewers, e.g.:

- Change the Rpmlint Results tab to group warnings/errors by
filter type, and just show the number of occurrences in each
group. Then you can mouseover or click to see more details.

- Add a way to view an rpmlint results summary via osc (is there an
API call for this, or do you just have to grep the build log
client-side?)

- Automatically color the build log according to patterns.

- Automatically split the build log into the different phases, e.g.

- booting the VM
- init_buildsystem etc.
- %prep
- %build
- %install
- /usr/lib/rpm/brp-* hooks
- autoreqprov calculation
- %clean
- post-build checks (01-check-debuginfo ... 99-check-remove-rpms)
- rpmlint
- post-build tasks (e.g. "creating baselibs", "comparing built
packages with former built")
- VM power down

and make each section expandable in the webUI with all sections
starting collapsed and colour-coded red/green according to whether
the section's contents matched any known failure patterns.
(Actually I already have some code which might help implement this
last idea.)

Maybe an idea for the next hack week? If that makes sense to people
then I can submit the idea as a proposal.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+owner@xxxxxxxxxxxx

< Previous Next >
Follow Ups