Hans-Peter Jansen writes:

Unfortunately, no packages appear in the monitor, but the usual problems of this behavior does not apply: * I added a repository (12.2) and * the spec filenames match the package names.

What am I do wrong here?

There are no architectures enabled. Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, SUSE Labs, schwab@suse.de GPG Key fingerprint = 0196 BAD8 1CE9 1970 F4BE 1748 E4D4 88E3 0EEA B9D7 "And now for something completely different." -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+owner@opensuse.org

Dne Čt 14. listopadu 2013 11:06:52, Stephan Kulow napsal(a):

...

What am I do wrong here?

There are no architectures in your branch

Greetings, Stephan

It seems the repo creation is somewheat borked. When I just tried to add some repos over the web-ui it also created them with empty archs. Of course good old osc meta prj -e let me fix it. Cheers Tom

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 14.11.2013 11:12, Tomáš Chvátal wrote:

Dne Čt 14. listopadu 2013 11:06:52, Stephan Kulow napsal(a):

...

...

What am I do wrong here?

There are no architectures in your branch

Greetings, Stephan

It seems the repo creation is somewheat borked.

When I just tried to add some repos over the web-ui it also created them with empty archs.

Of course good old osc meta prj -e let me fix it.

Would you please don't keep such issues for yourself but tell github? Thanks, Stephan -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iD8DBQFShKV1wFSBhlBjoJYRApIUAKDaEbUKNYj2i1cyJW0aYTCcbZXyPwCgyrEZ Xu0366x9wsEt72VGWhBzBlo= =Fbmx -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+owner@opensuse.org

Tomáš Chvátal writes:

Dne Čt 14. listopadu 2013 11:06:52, Stephan Kulow napsal(a):

...

...

What am I do wrong here?

There are no architectures in your branch

Greetings, Stephan

It seems the repo creation is somewheat borked.

Probably the architectures table in the api_production database is broken. Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, SUSE Labs, schwab@suse.de GPG Key fingerprint = 0196 BAD8 1CE9 1970 F4BE 1748 E4D4 88E3 0EEA B9D7 "And now for something completely different." -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+owner@opensuse.org

Stephan Kulow writes:

On 14.11.2013 11:30, Andreas Schwab wrote:

...

Tomáš Chvátal writes:

...

Dne Čt 14. listopadu 2013 11:06:52, Stephan Kulow napsal(a):

...

...

What am I do wrong here?

There are no architectures in your branch

Greetings, Stephan

It seems the repo creation is somewheat borked.

Probably the architectures table in the api_production database is broken.

Aehm - that's a pretty wild guess. What brought you to that conclusion?

That's where the `recommended' column is stored, which IIUC defines the default selection of architectures in a new repository. Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, SUSE Labs, schwab@suse.de GPG Key fingerprint = 0196 BAD8 1CE9 1970 F4BE 1748 E4D4 88E3 0EEA B9D7 "And now for something completely different." -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+owner@opensuse.org

On Donnerstag, 14. November 2013 11:06:52 Stephan Kulow wrote:

On 14.11.2013 10:39, Hans-Peter Jansen wrote:

...

Hi,

I branched LibreOffice:Stable yesterday to home:frispete:LibreOffice in order to build it for openSUSE 12.2 (as that project is broken for 12.2 and 12.3 since about a week).

Unfortunately, no packages appear in the monitor, but the usual problems of

this behavior does not apply: * I added a repository (12.2) and * the spec filenames match the package names.

What am I do wrong here?

There are no architectures in your branch

Thanks guys. Silly me. Beaten with blindness... Let me add this comment: that is a deviation in behavior at least. In former times, i386 and x86_64 were selected by default, when choosing the repo via the simple repo selection interface. It renders it somewhat useless, if no architectures are selected by default.. BTW, it's a few minutes after I selected the archs, and still no progress. Cheers, Pete -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+owner@opensuse.org

On 14.11.2013 12:27, Andreas Schwab wrote:

Stephan Kulow writes:

...

I fixed the bug, but I won't cheat on you - keep guessing ;)

There's also an entry with no name:

<entry name="" available="false" recommended="false"/>

That's indeed interesting, but it's not the problem - the ID of that entry is 13 which must be pretty old. No, the fix is: - <%= hidden_field_tag(reponame + '_arch[]', arch.name, :id => reponame + '_arch_' + arch.name) if arch.recommended == 'true' %> + <%= hidden_field_tag(reponame + '_arch[]', arch.name, :id => reponame + '_arch_' + arch.name) if arch.recommended %> Greetings, Stephan -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+owner@opensuse.org

Am Donnerstag, 14. November 2013, 15:30:36 schrieb Hans-Peter Jansen:

On Donnerstag, 14. November 2013 12:20:41 Hans-Peter Jansen wrote:

...

On Donnerstag, 14. November 2013 11:06:52 Stephan Kulow wrote:

...

On 14.11.2013 10:39, Hans-Peter Jansen wrote:

...

Hi,

I branched LibreOffice:Stable yesterday to home:frispete:LibreOffice in order to build it for openSUSE 12.2 (as that project is broken for 12.2 and 12.3 since about a week).

Unfortunately, no packages appear in the monitor, but the usual problems of

this behavior does not apply: * I added a repository (12.2) and * the spec filenames match the package names.

What am I do wrong here?

There are no architectures in your branch

Thanks guys. Silly me. Beaten with blindness...

Let me add this comment: that is a deviation in behavior at least.

In former times, i386 and x86_64 were selected by default, when choosing the repo via the simple repo selection interface. It renders it somewhat useless, if no architectures are selected by default..

BTW, it's a few minutes after I selected the archs, and still no progress.

It's 3 hours later and still no go.

osc meta prj home:frispete:LibreOffice repo has still no architecture lines. -- Adrian Schroeter email: adrian@suse.de SUSE LINUX GmbH, GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg) Maxfeldstraße 5 90409 Nürnberg Germany -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+owner@opensuse.org

Quoting Adrian Schröter :

Am Donnerstag, 14. November 2013, 15:30:36 schrieb Hans-Peter Jansen:

...

On Donnerstag, 14. November 2013 12:20:41 Hans-Peter Jansen wrote:

...

On Donnerstag, 14. November 2013 11:06:52 Stephan Kulow wrote:

...

On 14.11.2013 10:39, Hans-Peter Jansen wrote:

...

Hi,

I branched LibreOffice:Stable yesterday to home:frispete:LibreOffice in order to build it for openSUSE 12.2 (as that project is broken for 12.2 and 12.3 since about a week).

Unfortunately, no packages appear in the monitor, but the usual problems of

this behavior does not apply: * I added a repository (12.2) and * the spec filenames match the package names.

What am I do wrong here?

There are no architectures in your branch

Thanks guys. Silly me. Beaten with blindness...

Let me add this comment: that is a deviation in behavior at least.

In former times, i386 and x86_64 were selected by default, when choosing the repo via the simple repo selection interface. It renders it somewhat useless, if no architectures are selected by default..

BTW, it's a few minutes after I selected the archs, and still no progress.

It's 3 hours later and still no go.

osc meta prj home:frispete:LibreOffice

repo has still no architecture lines.

This indicates a clear 'defect' in OBS now: if you check the 'meta' in https://build.opensuse.org/project/meta/home:frispete:LibreOffice there is clearly a difference.. so seems webui and osc no longer read (and write?) the same meta. Dominique -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+owner@opensuse.org

On Thu, 2013-11-14 at 20:46 +0100, Stephan Kulow wrote:

Am 14.11.2013 16:47, schrieb Dominique Leuenberger a.k.a. Dimstar:

...

This indicates a clear 'defect' in OBS now: if you check the 'meta' in https://build.opensuse.org/project/meta/home:frispete:LibreOffice there is clearly a difference..

so seems webui and osc no longer read (and write?) the same meta.

As I can't see it anymore - could anyone please write a test case?

Not the test case you were hoping for, but still better than nothing: https://build.opensuse.org/project/meta/home:dimstar:testprj => shows i586 and x86_64 in the meta whereas

osc meta prj home:dimstar:testprj <project name="home:dimstar:testprj"> <title>Test No content</title> <description>For fun</description> <person userid="dimstar" role="maintainer"/> <repository name="openSUSE_13.1"> <path project="openSUSE:13.1" repository="standard"/> </repository> </project>

Cheers, Dominique -- Dimstar / Dominique Leuenberger -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+owner@opensuse.org

On Thu, 2013-11-14 at 22:20 +0100, Stephan Kulow wrote:

Am 14.11.2013 20:22, schrieb Dimstar / Dominique Leuenberger:

...

On Thu, 2013-11-14 at 20:46 +0100, Stephan Kulow wrote:

...

Am 14.11.2013 16:47, schrieb Dominique Leuenberger a.k.a. Dimstar:

...

This indicates a clear 'defect' in OBS now: if you check the 'meta' in https://build.opensuse.org/project/meta/home:frispete:LibreOffice there is clearly a difference..

so seems webui and osc no longer read (and write?) the same meta.

As I can't see it anymore - could anyone please write a test case?

Not the test case you were hoping for, but still better than nothing:

https://build.opensuse.org/project/meta/home:dimstar:testprj => shows i586 and x86_64 in the meta

whereas

...

osc meta prj home:dimstar:testprj <project name="home:dimstar:testprj"> <title>Test No content</title> <description>For fun</description> <person userid="dimstar" role="maintainer"/> <repository name="openSUSE_13.1"> <path project="openSUSE:13.1" repository="standard"/> </repository> </project>

Hmm, that's also what's in the backend. That looks suspiciously like some invalid caching

I'd say with 99.5% certainty it is NOT any cache on my system: - I added the archs from withing Firefox (before sending the mail) - I now just verified if I see the same in Epiphany: yes; and they clearly do not share caches. Dominique -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+owner@opensuse.org

Am 14.11.2013 21:29, schrieb Dimstar / Dominique Leuenberger:

I'd say with 99.5% certainty it is NOT any cache on my system: - I added the archs from withing Firefox (before sending the mail) - I now just verified if I see the same in Epiphany: yes; and they clearly do not share caches.

I was talking about the cache of _meta within the API. Greetings, Stephan -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+owner@opensuse.org