25 Mar
2011
25 Mar
'11
10:49 a.m.
Hi,
The package cdbs keeps failing on me. I try to backport it from Debian
and / or Ubuntu 10.10 to Ubuntu 10.04. Was always working, but now it
fails or it fails for one architecture (something one sometimes the
other arch...).
https://build.opensuse.org/package/show?package=cdbs3&project=home%3Aop…
I need some help cause pretty some packages depends on a newer version
of cdbs.
Thanks in advance,
~P
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help(a)opensuse.org
28 Mar
28 Mar
9:18 p.m.
New subject: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: Buil failor, cdbs ubuntu
On 03/25/2011 10:49 AM, peer wrote:
Hi,
The package cdbs keeps failing on me. I try to backport it from Debian
and / or Ubuntu 10.10 to Ubuntu 10.04. Was always working, but now it
fails or it fails for one architecture (something one sometimes the
other arch...).
https://build.opensuse.org/package/show?package=cdbs3&project=home%3Aop…
I need some help cause pretty some packages depends on a newer version
of cdbs.
Thanks in advance,
~P
Man this works on Debian, Ubuntu, Launchpad you name it, but it fails on
OBS!??
Tried to build it locally, no success :(
Would be nice if this gets fixed, pretty some packages has cdbs as
dependency!
~p
PASS: autotools-1.sh
PASS: autotools-2.sh
PASS: autotools-3.sh
PASS: autotools-4.sh
PASS: autotools-5.sh
PASS: autotools-lzma.sh
PASS: recursive.sh
PASS: udeb-1.sh
PASS: hdparm.sh
PASS: debhelper-1.sh
PASS: debhelper-2.sh
PASS: debhelper-3.sh
PASS: debhelper-4.sh
PASS: debhelper-5.sh
PASS: debhelper-6.sh
PASS: debhelper-7.sh
PASS: patchsys-1.sh
make[5]: warning: jobserver unavailable: using -j1. Add `+' to parent
make rule.
PASS: list-missing-1.sh
PASS: distutils-1.sh
PASS: distutils-2.sh
PASS: distutils-3.sh
PASS: distutils-4.sh
PASS: distutils-5.sh
PASS: distutils-6.sh
PASS: distutils-7.sh
PASS: distutils-8.sh
FAIL: distutils-9.sh
FAIL: distutils-10.sh
FAIL: distutils-11.sh
PASS: ant-1.sh
====================
3 of 30 tests failed
====================
make[4]: *** [check-TESTS] Error 1
make[4]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/packages/BUILD/test'
make[3]: *** [check-am] Error 2
make[3]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/packages/BUILD/test'
make[2]: *** [check-recursive] Error 1
make[2]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/packages/BUILD'
make[1]: *** [check] Error 2
make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/packages/BUILD'
make: *** [debian/stamp-makefile-check] Error 2
dpkg-buildpackage: error: debian/rules build gave error exit status 2
The buildroot was: /var/tmp/build-root
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help(a)opensuse.org
10:20 p.m.
New subject: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: Buil failor, cdbs ubuntu
On Mon, 2011-03-28 at 21:18 +0200, peer wrote:
PASS: distutils-8.sh
FAIL: distutils-9.sh
FAIL: distutils-10.sh
FAIL: distutils-11.sh
PASS: ant-1.sh
====================
3 of 30 tests failed
====================
Checking the current build failures on the linked project, the tests
actually pass all fine (even though it seems to be only 28 checks)
The builds abort due to a 'build appears to be stuck' error => trying a
local build shows that bash is actually dieing:
\_ /usr/bin/make install-am
\_ /usr/bin/make install-exec-am install-data-am
\_ [bash] <defunct>
\_ [bash] <defunct>
\_ [bash] <defunct>
So the clue is actually to find out why bash defunts on us in our build
environment.
A small verification with osc build -j 1 shows that once more, debian
stuff just does not work properly in parallel builds...
There was a discussion around about being able to disable that behavior.
Not sure if there went something more in this direction.
Dominique
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help(a)opensuse.org
29 Mar
29 Mar
4:08 p.m.
New subject: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: Buil failor, cdbs ubuntu
On 03/28/2011 10:20 PM, Dimstar / Dominique Leuenberger wrote:
On Mon, 2011-03-28 at 21:18 +0200, peer wrote:
Hi,
Thanks for your reply and efforts Dominique. Do you think that disabling
parallel builds will solve this issue here?
Regards,
~P
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help(a)opensuse.org
PASS: distutils-8.sh
FAIL: distutils-9.sh
FAIL: distutils-10.sh
FAIL: distutils-11.sh
PASS: ant-1.sh
====================
3 of 30 tests failed
====================
Checking the current build failures on the linked project, the tests
actually pass all fine (even though it seems to be only 28 checks)
The builds abort due to a 'build appears to be stuck' error => trying a
local build shows that bash is actually dieing:
\_ /usr/bin/make install-am
\_ /usr/bin/make install-exec-am install-data-am
\_ [bash]<defunct>
\_ [bash]<defunct>
\_ [bash]<defunct>
So the clue is actually to find out why bash defunts on us in our build
environment.
A small verification with osc build -j 1 shows that once more, debian
stuff just does not work properly in parallel builds...
There was a discussion around about being able to disable that behavior.
Not sure if there went something more in this direction.
Dominique
30 Mar
30 Mar
12:28 p.m.
New subject: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: Buil failor, cdbs ubuntu
On 03/29/2011 04:08 PM, peer wrote:
On 03/28/2011 10:20 PM, Dimstar / Dominique
Leuenberger wrote:
Hmm no other replies from the list/ devs? Debian / Ubuntu issues are
less important then OpenSuse issues on OBS probably...
~P
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help(a)opensuse.org
On Mon, 2011-03-28 at 21:18 +0200, peer wrote:
Hi,
Thanks for your reply and efforts Dominique. Do you think that
disabling parallel builds will solve this issue here?
Regards,
~P PASS: distutils-8.sh
FAIL: distutils-9.sh
FAIL: distutils-10.sh
FAIL: distutils-11.sh
PASS: ant-1.sh
====================
3 of 30 tests failed
====================
Checking the current build failures on the linked project,
the tests
actually pass all fine (even though it seems to be only 28 checks)
The builds abort due to a 'build appears to be stuck' error => trying a
local build shows that bash is actually dieing:
\_ /usr/bin/make install-am
\_ /usr/bin/make install-exec-am install-data-am
\_ [bash]<defunct>
\_ [bash]<defunct>
\_ [bash]<defunct>
So the clue is actually to find out why bash defunts on us in our build
environment.
A small verification with osc build -j 1 shows that once more, debian
stuff just does not work properly in parallel builds...
There was a discussion around about being able to disable that behavior.
Not sure if there went something more in this direction.
Dominique
12:38 p.m.
New subject: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: Buil failor, cdbs ubuntu
Quoting peer <linuxpeerjam(a)gmail.com>om>:
Hmm no other replies from the list/ devs? Debian /
Ubuntu issues are
less important then OpenSuse issues on OBS probably...
I can't tell you much more than I did: If I build the package without
parallel, it does work (osc build -j 1).
but I have no idea how you can convince your .deb not to use parallel
builds. Sorry
Dominique
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help(a)opensuse.org
31 Mar
31 Mar
11:52 a.m.
New subject: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: [opensuse-buildservice] obs violates the debian policy §4.9.1 (was: Build failor, cdbs ubuntu)
Hi,
Because of the failing cdbs package for Ubuntu (and Debian) I've spoken
to the maintainer of cdbs which is also the maintainer of the cdbs
Debian package.
He sees the situation as follows:
Debian Policy §4.9.1 says: It is up to the package maintainer to decide
whether the package build times are long enough and the package build
system is robust enough to make supporting parallel builds worthwhile.
"The cdbs package did *not* explicitly enable support for parallel
builds, that makes the parallel building by OBS a violation of the
Debian Policy in this case."
If you do not agree and think this is a bug in cdbs, please explain that
clearly to me, then I will file a bugreport to the package. Otherwise
please chance the build behavior of OBS for Ubuntu / Debian packages.
Thank in advance,
~P
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-source.html
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help(a)opensuse.org
12:04 p.m.
New subject: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: [opensuse-buildservice] obs violates the debian policy §4.9.1
On 03/31/2011 11:52 AM, peer wrote:
Hi,
Because of the failing cdbs package for Ubuntu (and Debian) I've
spoken to the maintainer of cdbs which is also the maintainer of the
cdbs Debian package.
He sees the situation as follows:
Debian Policy §4.9.1 says: It is up to the package maintainer to
decide whether the package build times are long enough and the package
build system is robust enough to make supporting parallel builds
worthwhile.
"The cdbs package did *not* explicitly enable support for parallel
builds, that makes the parallel building by OBS a violation of the
Debian Policy in this case."
If you do not agree and think this is a bug in cdbs, please explain that
clearly to me, then I will file a bugreport to the package. Otherwise
please chan*g*e the build behavior of OBS for Ubuntu / Debian packages.
Thank in advance,
~P
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-source.html
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help(a)opensuse.org
12:22 p.m.
New subject: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: [opensuse-buildservice] obs violates the debian policy §4.9.1 (was: Build failor, cdbs ubuntu)
Am Donnerstag, 31. März 2011, 11:52:56 schrieb peer:
Hi,
Because of the failing cdbs package for Ubuntu (and Debian) I've spoken
to the maintainer of cdbs which is also the maintainer of the cdbs
Debian package.
He sees the situation as follows:
Debian Policy §4.9.1 says: It is up to the package maintainer to decide
whether the package build times are long enough and the package build
system is robust enough to make supporting parallel builds worthwhile.
And what would the packager do to enable parallel builds ?
bye
adrian
--
Adrian Schroeter
SUSE Linux Products GmbH
email: adrian(a)suse.de
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help(a)opensuse.org
8:48 p.m.
New subject: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: [opensuse-buildservice] obs violates the debian policy §4.9.1 (was: Build failor, cdbs ubuntu)
On Thursday March 31 2011 12:22:59 Adrian Schröter wrote:
Am Donnerstag, 31. März 2011, 11:52:56 schrieb peer:
He would do some bash scripting in the rules file to get the # of parallel
builds to from the DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS env variable and then calls make with the
parsed argument which is butt ugly to say it politely.
IMHO the debian way plain sucks and shouldn't be repeated. Instead some
"DISABLE_PARALLEL_BUILD=1" in the packages meta data is much preferable.
See also http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-source.html section 4.9.1
(besides that parallel builds being broken _IS_ a bug in the packages build
system which should be filed upstream and not at debian)
@Peer: did you file a bug about that at cdbs upstream?
regards,
Stephan
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help(a)opensuse.org
Hi,
Because of the failing cdbs package for Ubuntu (and Debian) I've spoken
to the maintainer of cdbs which is also the maintainer of the cdbs
Debian package.
He sees the situation as follows:
Debian Policy §4.9.1 says: It is up to the package maintainer to decide
whether the package build times are long enough and the package build
system is robust enough to make supporting parallel builds worthwhile.
And what would the packager do to enable parallel builds ?
2 Apr
2 Apr
5:45 p.m.
New subject: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: [opensuse-buildservice] obs violates the debian policy §4.9.1
On 03/31/2011 08:48 PM, Stephan Kleine wrote:
@Peer: did you file a bug about that at cdbs upstream?
Yes I did file a bugreport, this is the reply:
When building cdbs on the opensuse buildservice (obs),
cdbs fails. Obs
uses parallel building by default.
I believe this can only happen if obs plays tricks to enforce parallel
building - e.g. directly sets make option -j - which is unsupported.
Obs should follow Debian Policy §4.9.1 and only _request_ the use of
parallel building with DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=parallel=n.
I am therefore closing this as a non-bug. You are quite welcome to
continue posting to this bugreport (closed does not mean closed for
debate), to try convince us that this is in fact a bug in this package,
not in your build environment.
A small verification with osc build -j 1 shows that
once more, debian
stuff just does not work properly in parallel builds...
...or it simply shows that obs is failing in its attempts to outsmart
explicitly documented behaviour of Debian.
And what would the packager do to enable parallel
builds ?
He would do some bash scripting in the rules file to get the # of
parallel builds to from the DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS env variable and then
calls make with the parsed argument which is butt ugly to say it
politely.
This is butt ugly?:
DEB_BUILD_PARALLEL=yes
Please note that above deliberately was _not_ added to the CDBS
packaging, because we - the package maintainers of CDBS - did not feel
that "the package build times are long enough and the package build
system is robust enough to make supporting parallel builds worthwhile"
as it is phrased in Debian Policy §4.9.1.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help(a)opensuse.org
6:02 p.m.
New subject: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: obs violates the debian policy §4.9.1
On 04/02/2011 05:45 PM, peer wrote:
On 03/31/2011 08:48 PM, Stephan Kleine wrote:
Here is the bug report
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=620350
This is an automatic notification regarding your Bug report
which was filed against the cdbs package:
#620350: cdbs fails when building in parallel
It has been closed by Jonas Smedegaard<dr(a)jones.dk> (reply
to620350(a)bugs.debian.org).
Their explanation is attached below along with your original report.
If this explanation is unsatisfactory and you have not received a
better one in a separate message then please contact Jonas Smedegaard<dr(a)jones.dk>
(reply to620350(a)bugs.debian.org) by
replying to this email.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help(a)opensuse.org
@Peer: did you file a bug about that at cdbs upstream?
Yes I did file a bugreport, this is the reply:
When building cdbs on the opensuse buildservice
(obs), cdbs fails.
Obs uses parallel building by default.
I believe this can only happen if obs plays tricks to enforce parallel
building - e.g. directly sets make option -j - which is unsupported.
Obs should follow Debian Policy §4.9.1 and only _request_ the use of
parallel building with DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=parallel=n.
I am therefore closing this as a non-bug. You are quite welcome to
continue posting to this bugreport (closed does not mean closed for
debate), to try convince us that this is in fact a bug in this
package, not in your build environment.
A small verification with osc build -j 1 shows
that once more, debian
stuff just does not work properly in parallel builds...
...or it simply shows that obs is failing in its attempts to outsmart
explicitly documented behaviour of Debian.
And what would the packager do to enable parallel
builds ?
He would do some bash scripting in the rules file to get the # of
parallel builds to from the DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS env variable and then
calls make with the parsed argument which is butt ugly to say it
politely.
This is butt ugly?:
DEB_BUILD_PARALLEL=yes
Please note that above deliberately was _not_ added to the CDBS
packaging, because we - the package maintainers of CDBS - did not feel
that "the package build times are long enough and the package build
system is robust enough to make supporting parallel builds worthwhile"
as it is phrased in Debian Policy §4.9.1.
7:13 p.m.
New subject: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: obs violates the debian policy §4.9.1
On Saturday April 2 2011 18:02:30 peer wrote:
On 04/02/2011 05:45 PM, peer wrote:
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.
On 03/31/2011 08:48 PM, Stephan Kleine wrote:
Here is the bug report
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=620350 @Peer: did you file a bug about that at cdbs
upstream?
Yes I did file a bugreport, this is the reply:
When building cdbs on the opensuse buildservice
(obs), cdbs fails.
Obs uses parallel building by default.
I believe this can only happen if obs plays tricks to enforce parallel
building - e.g. directly sets make option -j - which is unsupported.
Obs should follow Debian Policy §4.9.1 and only _request_ the use of
parallel building with DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=parallel=n.
I am therefore closing this as a non-bug. You are quite welcome to
continue posting to this bugreport (closed does not mean closed for
debate), to try convince us that this is in fact a bug in this
package, not in your build environment.
A small verification with osc build -j 1 shows
that once more, debian
stuff just does not work properly in parallel builds...
...or it simply shows that obs is failing in its attempts to outsmart
explicitly documented behaviour of Debian.
And what would the packager do to enable parallel
builds ?
He would do some bash scripting in the rules file to get the # of
parallel builds to from the DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS env variable and then
calls make with the parsed argument which is butt ugly to say it
politely.
This is butt ugly?:
DEB_BUILD_PARALLEL=yes
Please note that above deliberately was _not_ added to the CDBS
packaging, because we - the package maintainers of CDBS - did not feel
that "the package build times are long enough and the package build
system is robust enough to make supporting parallel builds worthwhile"
as it is phrased in Debian Policy §4.9.1. This is an automatic notification regarding your Bug
report
which was filed against the cdbs package:
#620350: cdbs fails when building in parallel
It has been closed by Jonas Smedegaard<dr(a)jones.dk> (reply
to620350(a)bugs.debian.org).
Their explanation is attached below along with your original report.
If this explanation is unsatisfactory and you have not received a
better one in a separate message then please contact Jonas
Smedegaard<dr(a)jones.dk> (reply to620350(a)bugs.debian.org) by replying to
this email.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help(a)opensuse.org
8:20 p.m.
New subject: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: obs violates the debian policy §4.9.1
On Saturday April 2 2011 19:13:48 you wrote:
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.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help(a)opensuse.org
Here is the
bug report
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=620350
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.
9:51 p.m.
New subject: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: obs violates the debian policy §4.9.1
On 04/02/2011 08:20 PM, Stephan Kleine wrote:
On Saturday April 2 2011 19:13:48 you wrote:
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
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help(a)opensuse.org
Here is
the bug report
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=620350
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.
3 Apr
3 Apr
12:55 a.m.
New subject: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: obs violates the debian policy §4.9.1
On Saturday April 2 2011 21:51:24 peer wrote:
On 04/02/2011 08:20 PM, Stephan Kleine wrote:
You misunderstood me. The packages source _is_ broken cause it can't be built
in parallel. So their (debian) packaging is fine but the packages (cdbs´)
build scripts contain a bug that screw you over if you build it in parallel.
Simply fix that and send the patch upstream.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help(a)opensuse.org
On Saturday April 2 2011 19:13:48 you wrote:
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. Here is
the bug report
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=620350
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.
11:52 a.m.
New subject: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: obs violates the debian policy §4.9.1
On 04/03/2011 12:55 AM, Stephan Kleine wrote:
On Saturday April 2 2011 21:51:24 peer wrote:
You could be right on this, I'll report it back. But this doesn't
change
the fact that obs is broken also. Again, I think violating the Debian
policy is a fundamental bug and obs should fix this imho.
~P
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help(a)opensuse.org
On 04/02/2011 08:20 PM, Stephan Kleine wrote:
You misunderstood me. The packages source _is_ broken cause it can't be
built
in parallel. So their (debian) packaging is fine but the packages (cdbs´)
build scripts contain a bug that screw you over if you build it in parallel.
Simply fix that and send the patch upstream.
On Saturday April 2 2011 19:13:48 you wrote:
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.
> Here is the bug report
>
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=620350
>
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.
12 Apr
12 Apr
9:54 p.m.
New subject: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: obs violates the debian policy §4.9.1
On 04/02/2011 09:51 PM, peer wrote:
On 04/02/2011 08:20 PM, Stephan Kleine wrote:
I read the Debian policy carefully and nothing there it seems
_prohibits_ parallel building.
Quote:
"parallel=n
This tag means that the package should be built using up to n
parallel processes if the package build system supports this.[25] If the
package build system does not support parallel builds, this string must
be ignored. If the package build system only supports a lower level of
concurrency than n, the package should be built using as many parallel
processes as the package build system supports. It is up to the package
maintainer to decide whether the package build times are long enough and
the package build system is robust enough to make supporting parallel
builds worthwhile."
So, reading that it seems then that in the case of OBS, it can provide a
robust build system to parallel builds. Therefore, perhaps it might be
worthwhile for Debian to reconsider what might be an out of date policy
- especially in light of the prevalence of multi-core CPUS.
Moreover, from my long time experience with OBS as a user/packager, the
statement that OBS is broken is fundamentally wrong. It is one of the
true gems of openSUSE. I'd sense more NIH syndrome :(
Peter
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help(a)opensuse.org
On Saturday April 2 2011 19:13:48 you wrote:
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 Here is
the bug report
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=620350
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.
10:19 p.m.
New subject: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: obs violates the debian policy §4.9.1
Am Dienstag, 12. April 2011, 21:54:56 schrieb Peter Linnell:
On 04/02/2011 09:51 PM, peer wrote:
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 ?
--
Adrian Schroeter
SUSE Linux Products GmbH
email: adrian(a)suse.de
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help(a)opensuse.org
On 04/02/2011 08:20 PM, Stephan Kleine wrote:
I read the Debian policy carefully and nothing there it seems
_prohibits_ parallel building.
Quote:
"parallel=n On Saturday April 2 2011 19:13:48 you wrote:
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 > Here is the bug report
>
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=620350
>
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.
10:38 p.m.
New subject: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: obs violates the debian policy §4.9.1
On 04/12/2011 10:19 PM, Adrian Schröter wrote:
Am Dienstag, 12. April 2011, 21:54:56 schrieb Peter
Linnell:
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-source.html#s-debianrules-options
Section 4.9.1
HTH,
Peter
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help(a)opensuse.org
On 04/02/2011 09:51 PM, peer wrote:
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 ?
On 04/02/2011 08:20 PM, Stephan Kleine wrote:
I read the Debian policy carefully and nothing there it seems
_prohibits_ parallel building.
Quote:
"parallel=n On Saturday April 2 2011 19:13:48 you wrote:
>> Here is the bug report
>>
>> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=620350
>>
> 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
10:56 p.m.
New subject: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: obs violates the debian policy §4.9.1
Am Dienstag, 12. April 2011, 22:38:17 schrieb Peter Linnell:
On 04/12/2011 10:19 PM, Adrian Schröter wrote:
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
--
Adrian Schroeter
SUSE Linux Products GmbH
email: adrian(a)suse.de
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help(a)opensuse.org
Am Dienstag, 12. April 2011, 21:54:56 schrieb
Peter Linnell:
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-source.html#s-debianrules-options
Section 4.9.1 On 04/02/2011 09:51 PM, peer wrote:
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 ?
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=620350
>>>
>> 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
11:36 p.m.
New subject: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: obs violates the debian policy §4.9.1
On 04/12/2011 10:56 PM, Adrian Schröter wrote:
Am Dienstag, 12. April 2011, 22:38:17 schrieb Peter
Linnell:
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
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help(a)opensuse.org
On 04/12/2011 10:19 PM, Adrian Schröter wrote:
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
Am Dienstag, 12. April 2011, 21:54:56 schrieb
Peter Linnell:
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-source.html#s-debianrules-options
Section 4.9.1
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=620350
>>>>
>>>>
>>> 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 ?
13 Apr
13 Apr
7:18 p.m.
New subject: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: obs violates the debian policy §4.9.1
On Tuesday April 12 2011 23:36:45 peer wrote:
On 04/12/2011 10:56 PM, Adrian Schröter wrote:
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.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help(a)opensuse.org
Am Dienstag, 12. April 2011, 22:38:17 schrieb
Peter Linnell:
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 On 04/12/2011 10:19 PM, Adrian Schröter wrote:
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 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=620350
>>>>
>>>> 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-debianrules-opt
ions Section 4.9.1 
8:52 p.m.
New subject: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: obs violates the debian policy §4.9.1
On Wednesday 13 April 2011, 19:18:03 Stephan Kleine wrote:
On Tuesday April 12 2011 23:36:45 peer wrote:
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.
Pete
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help(a)opensuse.org
On 04/12/2011 10:56 PM, Adrian Schröter wrote:
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. Am Dienstag, 12. April 2011, 22:38:17 schrieb
Peter Linnell:
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 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=620350
>>>>>
>>>>> 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-debianr
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
14 Apr
14 Apr
6:53 p.m.
New subject: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: obs violates the debian policy §4.9.1
On Wednesday April 13 2011 20:52:09 Hans-Peter Jansen wrote:
On Wednesday 13 April 2011, 19:18:03 Stephan Kleine
wrote:
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.
regards,
Stephan
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help(a)opensuse.org
On Tuesday April 12 2011 23:36:45 peer wrote:
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. On 04/12/2011 10:56 PM, Adrian Schröter wrote:
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. 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=620350
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 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-debianr
>
>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
10:04 p.m.
New subject: [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:
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(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help(a)opensuse.org
On Wednesday 13 April 2011, 19:18:03 Stephan
Kleine wrote:
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. On Tuesday April 12 2011 23:36:45 peer wrote:
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. 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.
10:22 p.m.
New subject: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: obs violates the debian policy §4.9.1
On 04/14/2011 10:04 PM, Hans-Peter Jansen wrote:
On Thursday 14 April 2011, 18:53:28 Stephan Kleine
wrote:
This doesn't sounds like an constructive and adult way to solve these
issues. You harm the end-users because of something they have little
influence on. People use obs just to publish packages for their
projects. They aren't necessarily Debian developers themselves. The real
Debian developers do prefer other services instead of obs, so they won't
be impressed or forced to change their policy at all.
At the end you only hurt the end-user of obs who likes to publish Ubuntu
| Debian packages via obs. If you slow down the build process of Debian
packages heavily, the only thing you achieve is that people like me are
forced to choose other services like Launchpad. I personally prefer obs,
but this discussion doesn't make me feel that obs really cares about the
Debian based projects and it makes me wonder why it even provide the
option to build for Debian.
Best regards,
~P
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help(a)opensuse.org
On Wednesday April 13 2011 20:52:09 Hans-Peter
Jansen wrote:
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.
On Wednesday 13 April 2011, 19:18:03 Stephan
Kleine wrote:
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.
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.
10:46 p.m.
New subject: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: obs violates the debian policy §4.9.1
On 14.4.2011 22:04, Hans-Peter Jansen wrote:
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).
It's 2011. So how about just passing -j1 to the one or two packages
that still don't work, instead of implementing elaborate solutions that
needlessly penalize all deb builds? Mindlessly sticking to questionable
policies kills any progress.
Michal
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help(a)opensuse.org
10:56 p.m.
New subject: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: obs violates the debian policy §4.9.1
On 04/14/2011 10:46 PM, Michal Marek wrote:
On 14.4.2011 22:04, Hans-Peter Jansen wrote:
Is that something I should do as end-user? Via local build? How do I
publish that package then?
Best regards,
~P
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help(a)opensuse.org
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).
It's 2011. So how about just passing -j1 to the one or two packages
that still don't work,
15 Apr
15 Apr
12:13 a.m.
New subject: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: obs violates the debian policy §4.9.1
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 10:56:09PM +0200, peer wrote:
On 04/14/2011 10:46 PM, Michal Marek wrote:
You should patch the build scripts to pass -j1 to make. Looking at the
package in question,
diff --git a/1/class/makefile-vars.mk.in b/1/class/makefile-vars.mk.in
index 4cdc2c1..9154fbc 100644
--- a/1/class/makefile-vars.mk.in
+++ b/1/class/makefile-vars.mk.in
@@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ DEB_MAKE_PARALLEL ?= $(and
$(DEB_BUILD_PARALLEL),$(DEB_PARALLEL_JOBS),-j$(DEB_PA
# should set this variable to empty.
DEB_MAKE_EXTRA_ARGS ?= CFLAGS="$(or $(CFLAGS_$(cdbs_curpkg)),$(CFLAGS))"
CXXFLAGS="$(or $(CXXFLAGS_$(cdbs_curpkg)),$(CXXFLAGS))" CPPFLAGS="$(or
$(CPPFLAGS_$(cdbs_curpkg)),$(CPPFLAGS))" LDFLAGS="$(or
$(LDFLAGS_$(cdbs_curpkg)),$(LDFLAGS))" $(DEB_MAKE_PARALLEL)
-DEB_MAKE_INVOKE ?= $(DEB_MAKE_ENVVARS) $(MAKE) $(if $(DEB_MAKE_MAKEFILE), -f
$(DEB_MAKE_MAKEFILE),) -C $(cdbs_make_curbuilddir) $(DEB_MAKE_EXTRA_ARGS)
+DEB_MAKE_INVOKE ?= $(DEB_MAKE_ENVVARS) $(MAKE) $(if $(DEB_MAKE_MAKEFILE), -f
$(DEB_MAKE_MAKEFILE),) -C $(cdbs_make_curbuilddir) $(DEB_MAKE_EXTRA_ARGS) -j1
DEB_MAKE_BUILD_TARGET ?= $(DEB_BUILD_MAKE_TARGET)
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help(a)opensuse.org
On 14.4.2011 22:04, Hans-Peter Jansen wrote:
Is that something I should do as end-user? Via local
build? How do I
publish that package then? 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).
It's 2011. So how about just
passing -j1 to the one or two packages
that still don't work,
12:21 a.m.
New subject: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: obs violates the debian policy §4.9.1
On Thursday 14 April 2011, 22:46:07 Michal Marek wrote:
On 14.4.2011 22:04, Hans-Peter Jansen wrote:
Michal, debian policy _requires_ BS to build debian packages with a
single CPU, if not stated _otherwise_.
Your suggestion is fine, but it doesn't fit the the problem in question.
Please note the $subject, and what both debian packagers in this thread
say.
As long as they stick to their _policy_ and some of their developers
_insist_ in complying to it, how can you avoid to "still violating the
debian policy §4.9.1", or take the whole burden of fixing _their_
sillyness.
Probably, I should consult an attorney before further commenting to this
thread.
Pete
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help(a)opensuse.org
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).
It's 2011. So how about just passing -j1 to the one or two packages
that still don't work, instead of implementing elaborate solutions
that needlessly penalize all deb builds? Mindlessly sticking to
questionable policies kills any progress.
8:23 a.m.
New subject: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: obs violates the debian policy §4.9.1
Am Freitag, 15. April 2011, 00:21:37 schrieb Hans-Peter Jansen:
On Thursday 14 April 2011, 22:46:07 Michal Marek
wrote:
understanding this, I have commented out the parallel build parameter in
build script again.
However, we have no switch to enable it again so far.
--
Adrian Schroeter
SUSE Linux Products GmbH
email: adrian(a)suse.de
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help(a)opensuse.org
On 14.4.2011 22:04, Hans-Peter Jansen wrote:
Michal, debian policy _requires_ BS to build debian packages with a
single CPU, if not stated _otherwise_. 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).
It's 2011. So how about just passing -j1 to the one or two packages
that still don't work, instead of implementing elaborate solutions
that needlessly penalize all deb builds? Mindlessly sticking to
questionable policies kills any progress.
21 Apr
21 Apr
11:03 a.m.
New subject: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: obs violates the debian policy §4.9.1
On 04/15/2011 08:23 AM, Adrian Schröter wrote:
Am Freitag, 15. April 2011, 00:21:37 schrieb
Hans-Peter Jansen:
Ok, thanks.
However the package still seems to fail
https://build.opensuse.org/package/live_build_log?arch=i586&package=cdb…
~P
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help(a)opensuse.org
On Thursday 14 April 2011, 22:46:07 Michal Marek
wrote:
understanding this, I have commented out the parallel build parameter in
build script again.
However, we have no switch to enable it again so far.
On 14.4.2011 22:04, Hans-Peter Jansen wrote:
Michal, debian policy _requires_ BS to build debian packages with a
single CPU, if not stated _otherwise_.
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).
It's 2011. So how about just passing -j1 to the one or two
packages
that still don't work, instead of implementing elaborate solutions
that needlessly penalize all deb builds? Mindlessly sticking to
questionable policies kills any progress.
11:07 a.m.
New subject: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: obs violates the debian policy §4.9.1
On 04/21/2011 11:03 AM, peer wrote:
On 04/15/2011 08:23 AM, Adrian Schröter wrote:
This is on a Ubuntu based project. I do assume the parallel build
parameter is also commented out on the Debian based projects, e.g. Ubuntu.
Regards,
~P
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help(a)opensuse.org
Am Freitag, 15. April 2011, 00:21:37 schrieb
Hans-Peter Jansen:
Ok, thanks.
However the package still seems to fail
https://build.opensuse.org/package/live_build_log?arch=i586&package=cdb…
On Thursday 14 April 2011, 22:46:07 Michal Marek
wrote:
understanding this, I have commented out
the parallel build parameter in
build script again.
However, we have no switch to enable it again so far.
On 14.4.2011 22:04, Hans-Peter Jansen wrote:
> 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).
It's 2011. So how about just passing -j1 to the one or two packages
that still don't work, instead of implementing elaborate solutions
that needlessly penalize all deb builds? Mindlessly sticking to
questionable policies kills any progress.
Michal, debian policy _requires_ BS to
build debian packages with a
single CPU, if not stated _otherwise_.
12:09 p.m.
New subject: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: obs violates the debian policy §4.9.1
On 04/21/2011 11:07 AM, peer wrote:
On 04/21/2011 11:03 AM, peer wrote:
The
package builds fine on a Debian based project. So it seems that the
parallel build parameter is not commented out for Ubuntu. Could you fix
that please?
Thanks in advance,
~P
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help(a)opensuse.org
On 04/15/2011 08:23 AM, Adrian Schröter wrote:
This is on a Ubuntu based project. I do assume the parallel build
parameter is also commented out on the Debian based projects, e.g. Ubuntu. Am Freitag, 15. April 2011, 00:21:37 schrieb
Hans-Peter Jansen:
Ok, thanks.
However the package still seems to fail
https://build.opensuse.org/package/live_build_log?arch=i586&package=cdb…
On Thursday 14 April 2011, 22:46:07 Michal Marek
wrote:
> On 14.4.2011 22:04, Hans-Peter Jansen wrote:
>> 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).
> It's 2011. So how about just passing -j1 to the one or two packages
> that still don't work, instead of implementing elaborate solutions
> that needlessly penalize all deb builds? Mindlessly sticking to
> questionable policies kills any progress.
Michal, debian policy _requires_ BS to build debian packages with a
single CPU, if not stated _otherwise_.
understanding this, I have commented out
the parallel build
parameter in
build script again.
However, we have no switch to enable it again so far.
10 May
10 May
7:31 p.m.
New subject: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: obs violates the debian policy §4.9.1
On 04/21/2011 12:09 PM, peer wrote:
On 04/21/2011 11:07 AM, peer wrote:
Hi,
Is this fixed in Ubuntu already?
Thanks.
~P
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help(a)opensuse.org
On 04/21/2011 11:03 AM, peer wrote:
The package builds fine on a Debian based project. So it seems that
the parallel build parameter is not commented out for Ubuntu. Could
you fix that please?
Thanks in advance,
~P On 04/15/2011 08:23 AM, Adrian Schröter wrote:
This is on a Ubuntu based project. I do assume the parallel build
parameter is also commented out on the Debian based projects, e.g.
Ubuntu. Am Freitag, 15. April 2011, 00:21:37 schrieb
Hans-Peter Jansen:
> On Thursday 14 April 2011, 22:46:07 Michal Marek wrote:
>> On 14.4.2011 22:04, Hans-Peter Jansen wrote:
>>> 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).
>> It's 2011. So how about just passing -j1 to the one or two packages
>> that still don't work, instead of implementing elaborate solutions
>> that needlessly penalize all deb builds? Mindlessly sticking to
>> questionable policies kills any progress.
> Michal, debian policy _requires_ BS to build debian packages with a
> single CPU, if not stated _otherwise_.
understanding this, I have commented out the parallel build
parameter in
build script again.
However, we have no switch to enable it again so far.
Ok, thanks.
However the package still seems to fail
https://build.opensuse.org/package/live_build_log?arch=i586&package=cdb…
15 Apr
15 Apr
10:45 a.m.
New subject: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: obs violates the debian policy §4.9.1
On 15.4.2011 00:21, Hans-Peter Jansen wrote:
I wouldn't be surprised it the policy also required any package to fit
on a 3.5" floppy. But most of the world uses neither floppies nor UP
machines nowadays, so makefiles are expected to work fine with -j. If
not, it's a bug.
But now you now got what you wanted, so the BS is super compliant, just
a little bit unusable for building deb packages. *sigh*
It's 2011.
So how about just passing -j1 to the one or two packages
that still don't work, instead of implementing elaborate solutions
that needlessly penalize all deb builds? Mindlessly sticking to
questionable policies kills any progress.
Michal, debian policy _requires_ BS to build debian packages with a
single CPU, if not stated _otherwise_. Probably, I should consult an attorney before further
commenting to this
thread.
Huh? :-)
Michal
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help(a)opensuse.org
12 Apr
12 Apr
10:36 p.m.
New subject: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: obs violates the debian policy §4.9.1
On 04/12/2011 09:54 PM, Peter Linnell wrote:
On 04/02/2011 09:51 PM, peer wrote:
QUOTE:
"It is up to the package maintainer to decide whether the package build
times are long enough and the package build system is robust enough to
make supporting parallel builds worthwhile."
It's up to the package maintainer to decide, not to obs. That's the point.
~P
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help(a)opensuse.org
On 04/02/2011 08:20 PM, Stephan Kleine wrote:
I read the Debian policy carefully and nothing there it seems
_prohibits_ parallel building.
Quote:
"parallel=n
This tag means that the package should be built using up to n
parallel processes if the package build system supports this.[25] If the
package build system does not support parallel builds, this string must
be ignored. If the package build system only supports a lower level of
concurrency than n, the package should be built using as many parallel
processes as the package build system supports. It is up to the package
maintainer to decide whether the package build times are long enough and
the package build system is robust enough to make supporting parallel
builds worthwhile."
So, reading that it seems then that in the case of OBS, it can provide a
robust build system to parallel builds. Therefore, perhaps it might be
worthwhile for Debian to reconsider what might be an out of date policy
- especially in light of the prevalence of multi-core CPUS.
Moreover, from my long time experience with OBS as a user/packager, the
statement that OBS is broken is fundamentally wrong. It is one of the
true gems of openSUSE. I'd sense more NIH syndrome :(
Peter
On Saturday April 2 2011 19:13:48 you wrote:
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
> Here is the bug report
>
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=620350
>
>
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.
13 Apr
13 Apr
9:38 a.m.
New subject: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: obs violates the debian policy §4.9.1
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 10:36:04PM +0200, peer wrote:
>So, reading that it seems then that in the case of
OBS, it can provide a
>robust build system to parallel builds. Therefore, perhaps it might be
>worthwhile for Debian to reconsider what might be an out of date policy
>- especially in light of the prevalence of multi-core CPUS.
>
Indeed, and I belive that DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS is meant to be a progression
towards this. I may even suggest it as a goal for the next release, to
have -jN safe compiles for all packages.
It'd certainly improve package quality.
"It is up to the package maintainer to decide
whether the package
build times are long enough and the package build system is robust
enough to make supporting parallel builds worthwhile."
It's up to the package maintainer to decide, not to obs. That's the point.
Well, yes. I would agree that by default, Debian packages should be
built with -j1.
Mind you, getting the data as to which packages *don't* build with N > 1
would also be very useful.
Neil
(aka, neilm(a)debian.org, Debian Release Manager)
--
Neil McGovern, Software Development Team Lead, Amino Communications Ltd
Buckingway Business Park, Anderson Road, Swavesey, Cambridge, CB24 4UQ, UK
nmcgovern(a)aminocom.com http://www.aminocom.com Tel: +44 1954 234 100
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help(a)opensuse.org
7:21 p.m.
New subject: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: obs violates the debian policy §4.9.1
On 04/13/2011 09:38 AM, Neil McGovern wrote:
"It is up to the package maintainer to decide
whether the package
Right. And packagers which are set to build in parallel by the Debian
package maintainer should be build in parallel.
~P
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help(a)opensuse.org
build times are long enough and the package build
system is robust
enough to make supporting parallel builds worthwhile."
It's up to the package maintainer to decide, not to obs. That's the point.
Well, yes. I would agree that by default, Debian packages should be
built with -j1.
Neil
(aka, neilm(a)debian.org, Debian Release Manager)
7:55 p.m.
New subject: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: obs violates the debian policy §4.9.1
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 07:21:49PM +0200, peer wrote:
On 04/13/2011 09:38 AM, Neil McGovern wrote:
That would be a choice for OpenSUSE build service authors, so I won't
comment about what it *should* do, but I belive that it *could* do
sucessfully.
Neil
--
Neil McGovern, Software Development Team Lead, Amino Communications Ltd
Buckingway Business Park, Anderson Road, Swavesey, Cambridge, CB24 4UQ, UK
nmcgovern(a)aminocom.com http://www.aminocom.com Tel: +44 1954 234 100
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help(a)opensuse.org
"It is up to the package maintainer to decide
whether the package
Right. And packagers which are set
to build in parallel by the
Debian package maintainer should be build in parallel.
build times are long enough and the package build
system is robust
enough to make supporting parallel builds worthwhile."
It's up to the package maintainer to decide, not to obs. That's the point.
Well, yes. I would agree that by default, Debian packages should be
built with -j1.
Neil
(aka, neilm(a)debian.org, Debian Release Manager)
8:09 p.m.
New subject: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: obs violates the debian policy §4.9.1
On 04/13/2011 07:55 PM, Neil McGovern wrote:
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 07:21:49PM +0200, peer wrote:
You're right and *could* might fit better then *should* here.
~p
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help(a)opensuse.org
On 04/13/2011 09:38 AM, Neil McGovern wrote:
That would be a choice for OpenSUSE build service authors, so I won't
comment about what it *should* do, but I belive that it *could* do
sucessfully.
"It is up to the package maintainer to
decide whether the package
Right. And packagers which are set to build in parallel by the
Debian package maintainer should be build in parallel.
build times are long enough and the package build
system is robust
enough to make supporting parallel builds worthwhile."
It's up to the package maintainer to decide, not to obs. That's the point.
Well, yes. I would agree that by default, Debian packages should be
built with -j1.
Neil
(aka, neilm(a)debian.org, Debian Release Manager)
3541
days inactive
3587
days old
buildservice@lists.opensuse.org
41 comments
9 participants
participants (9)
-
Adrian Schröter -
Dimstar / Dominique Leuenberger -
Dominique Leuenberger a.k.a DimStar
-
Hans-Peter Jansen -
Michal Marek -
Neil McGovern -
peer -
Peter Linnell -
Stephan Kleine