Re: Fedora 37 mass rebuild complete

[Richard Shaw]

On Mon, Jul 25, 2022 at 4:47 PM Miro Hrončok <mhroncok(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:

>  On 25. 07. 22 23:38, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>  > On Mon, Jul 25, 2022 at 08:57:39AM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>  >> Hi all,
>  >>
>  >> Per the Fedora 37 schedule[1] we started a mass rebuild for Fedora
>  >> 37 on 2022/07/20. We did a mass rebuild for Fedora 37 for:
>  >>
>  >> https://pagure.io/releng/issues?status=Open&tags=mass+rebuild
>  >>
>  >> The mass rebuild was done in a side tag (f37-rebuild) and moved over to
>  >> f37. Failures can be seen
>  >> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/mass-rebuild/f37-failures.html
>  Things
>  >> still needing rebuilding
>  >> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/mass-rebuild/f37-need-rebuild.html
>  > I could be being stupid here, but what's the difference between
>  > packages that failed to build and packages that need rebuilding?
>
>  Considering "need-rebuild" is a superset of "failures" (I've just
> checked
>  [1])
>  the 2 differences I can think of are:
>
>  1) Only builds that manage to get past buildSRPMFromSCM are associated to
>  the
>  particular package by Koji. Hence, packages that failed buildSRPMFromSCM
>  or
>  when the Koji build was not even submitted (i.e. there was no spec file,
>  missing source, RPM parse error, noautobuild file, etc.) -- such package
>  swill
>  onyl be listed in "need-rebuild" as there is no known associated build
>  failure
>  with them.
>  
Exactly, almost all of the packages for me are not direct failures, but
related to vtk not building (and probably cascades down from there but I
stopped drilling down).

A couple are due to libusb-devel being retired. I'm surprised there weren't
bugs already filed for that. I would think detecting packages using retired
dependencies would be somewhat trivial to discover.

Thanks,
Richard