On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 08:02:39PM +0300, Kanstantsin Shautsou wrote:
On Dec 12, 2013, at 19:20 , Michael Schroeder <mls@suse.de> wrote:
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 01:44:34PM +0300, Kanstantsin Shautsou wrote:
I did more debug and found : - .mrev has duplicated entries during creation - https://github.com/openSUSE/open-build-service/issues/529
Yeah, that's a bug in the API or WEBUI.
- no need to increase revision when makeolder isn?t set
Why not? That really depends on your use case. As copying always resets the "rebuild counter", we always bump the revision so that the freshly build packages are "newer" than the old ones. Rebuild counter will be right if i copy .rev without changes in srcserver and history+meta in repserver.
Yes, *if* you copy everything in the reposerver you can get away with not bumping the revision. The "$packid/history" file containing the "rebuild counter" is currently not copied, though.
- why you do renumbering for ?withhistory??
Because we can't have multiple revisions with the same id. If the package did not exist before, it will get the same ids. But this is a problem only in case when we want increase vrev (and that?s why do additional commit) that has no sense when we have makeolder that adds the second commit.
What's vrev got to do with the revisions? My point is that when the package already exists in the target project, with have multiple "rev=1" entries.
- lsrev() and addmeta() are changing hashes for SERVICE entries => it enough to just copy existed .rev with MD5SUMS files
Not in all cases. Maybe if "noservice" is given. Otherwise, all services are re-run (or course only for the latest revision). Even with noservices.
That's fixed with the latest commits.
- why do you need random generator for SERVICE entries? It can avoid new revision when nothing changed (related https://github.com/openSUSE/open-build-service/issues/278 )
Because the result does not only depend on the package content, but also on the services configured in the project. And, maybe more important, if the service is of the "fetch this url" type, the result may be different files, so we need to have a different identifier for the result. No matter how service configured, you have resulted files from what you can do md5 and then create summary md5, so when service fetch the same files you will have the same hash. And this can avoid new MD5SUMS with the same content + avoid new revisions.
I think you're missing my point. If "noservice" is not used in the copy, it is expected that the servic is re-run and may create a different result.
That's not true for package links, here the result only depends on the link content, so we don't need to have to create unique ids.
- copying .rev without changes allow to be in sync with ?history? entries, i think it make sense to pass ?withhistory? option to rep_server so it copy ?history? and meta files?
checkin history and meta files only live on the source server, so passing that to the repo server makes no sense. :meta/$pack and $pack/history lives in /build/project/repo/arch/ directory so if i use withhistory+withbinaries+ no makeolder - i can have one in one copy of project.
$pack/history is the build history, not the source history. The "withhistory" parameter is used to copy the source history.
I think we can have all variants of copy (including without rebuild) using existed parameters...
Yes, the "copy binaries" part is currently a bit lacking. M. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+owner@opensuse.org