On Thu, 2016-08-04 at 11:41 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Thu, 2016-08-04 at 16:07 +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> We are planning to change the way Alternate Architectures (non x86_64)
> are handled
> in terms of "primary" vs "secondary". The definition of what is
> primary or secondary
> is already handled more in terms of the build artifact outputs (images, LiveCDs,
> installers, containers etc) for i686 deliverables. As part of this redefinition
> this means that the location in "koji instances" of the rpm builds is
removed as
> a part of the definition requirement of what constitutes
> primary/secondary and the
> architectures are named "Alternate Architectures" (and Experimental
> architectures
> for the likes of MIPs/RISC-V) as opposed to primary/secondary. As a
> result of this
> change it is planned to merge the old "secondary" koji instances into a
single
> koji instance along with all the current "Primary" architectures.
>
> All the details of the proposal along with FAQ have been put on a wiki
> page here[1]
> so please go and read it and ask any questions that aren't answered in
> the FAQ here.
I do have serious concerns about the impact of this in terms of build
failures. Reading the reply to " Q: Why do I have to worry about
s390x/powerpc/aarch64 when I didn't before?", it implies there will be
no change to koji in terms of build failures: i.e. a failure on *any*
arch will cause the entire build to be failed.
Sorry, just saw there was a more specific entry for my concern,
"Q: Will a single arch failure affect the overall build failure?" Still
not 100% sure, but thanks for addressing it.