Why there is no sync for libicu soname rebuilds?

[Parag Nemade]

Hi,
  I remember one year back also harfbuzz was attempted by 2 people on
the same day for libicu rebuilds and now this time 3 builds by 2
people.

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=606443
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=609035
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=609067

Regards,
Parag.

[David Tardon]

Hi,

On Wed, Feb 04, 2015 at 06:51:46PM +0530, Parag N(पराग़) wrote:
>  Hi,
>    I remember one year back also harfbuzz was attempted by 2 people on
>  the same day for libicu rebuilds and now this time 3 builds by 2
>  people. 
We did the rebuild in a side tag (together with the boost update, to
save time and rebuilds), which was only merged back to rawhide today
(probably because of FOSDEM). But several packages were updated _before_
the tag was merged back, so they have to be rebuilt again. Sorry, but
that is the best we can do. Nor we can hold off impatient maintainers
from starting rebuilds of those failed packages in parallel...

D.

[Mikolaj Izdebski]

On 02/04/2015 02:21 PM, Parag N(पराग़) wrote:
>  Hi,
>    I remember one year back also harfbuzz was attempted by 2 people on
>  the same day for libicu rebuilds and now this time 3 builds by 2
>  people.
>  
>  http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=606443
>  http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=609035
>  http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=609067
>  
>  Regards,
>  Parag.
>   
harfbuzz 0.9.37-2 was built in f22-boost against new icu, but in
meantime it was updated to 0.9.38-1 in f22. I had to rebuild the new
version again after f22-boost was merged into f22.

I don't know why 0.9.38-3 was built, it looks like unnecessary build.

-- 
Mikolaj Izdebski
Software Engineer, Red Hat
IRC: mizdebsk

[Parag Nemade]

Hi,

On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 8:04 PM, Mikolaj Izdebski <mizdebsk(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  On 02/04/2015 02:21 PM, Parag N(पराग़) wrote:
> > Hi,
> >   I remember one year back also harfbuzz was attempted by 2 people on
> > the same day for libicu rebuilds and now this time 3 builds by 2
> > people.
> >
> > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=606443
> > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=609035
> > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=609067
> >
> > Regards,
> > Parag.
> >
>
>  harfbuzz 0.9.37-2 was built in f22-boost against new icu, but in
>  meantime it was updated to 0.9.38-1 in f22. I had to rebuild the new
>  version again after f22-boost was merged into f22.
>
>  I don't know why 0.9.38-3 was built, it looks like unnecessary build. 
Thanks David and Mikolaj. I am not sure if separate tag for libicu
could have finished its rebuilds earlier than building it with boost
tag. I actually got more confused when pmachata built harfbuzz without
giving specific information in the changelog.

Regards,
Parag.

[Vít Ondruch]

Dne 4.2.2015 v 16:13 Parag Nemade napsal(a):
>  Hi,
>
>  On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 8:04 PM, Mikolaj Izdebski <mizdebsk(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
> > On 02/04/2015 02:21 PM, Parag N(पराग़) wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>   I remember one year back also harfbuzz was attempted by 2 people on
> >> the same day for libicu rebuilds and now this time 3 builds by 2
> >> people.
> >>
> >> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=606443
> >> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=609035
> >> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=609067
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Parag.
> >>
> > harfbuzz 0.9.37-2 was built in f22-boost against new icu, but in
> > meantime it was updated to 0.9.38-1 in f22. I had to rebuild the new
> > version again after f22-boost was merged into f22.
> >
> > I don't know why 0.9.38-3 was built, it looks like unnecessary build.
>  Thanks David and Mikolaj. I am not sure if separate tag for libicu
>  could have finished its rebuilds earlier than building it with boost
>  tag.I actually got more confused when pmachata built harfbuzz without
>  giving specific information in the changelog. 
Well ideally, when you noticed that somebody touched your package and
you are going to update it, you should check where the updated package
actually is. If  you built it once again in boost tag, the things would
be simpler.

But yes, the changelog might be better and make a difference. The
Fedora's mass rebuild changelog usually contains links to wiki and for
Ruby rebuilds, we link to change proposal wiki page, which might be (I
believe) good starting point to know what is going on.

Vít

[Petr Machata]

Parag Nemade <panemade(a)gmail.com&gt; writes:

>  I actually got more confused when pmachata built harfbuzz without
>  giving specific information in the changelog. 
The reason was that I was rebuilding both Boots and ICU deps, and since
I just took a list of conflicts en blocks (as explained in another
e-mail), I needed a neutral commit message.

Thanks,
Petr

[David Tardon]

Hi,

On Wed, Feb 04, 2015 at 08:43:52PM +0530, Parag Nemade wrote:
>  Thanks David and Mikolaj. I am not sure if separate tag for libicu
>  could have finished its rebuilds earlier than building it with boost
>  tag. 
Faster, yes. Earlier, no. It is not possible to do the two rebuilds
independently, because boost itself depends on icu. Because we were
ready with the icu build at about the same time the boost rebuild
started, we would have to wait for it to finish. It would also mean that
15-20 packages that depend on both boost and icu would be rebuilt twice.

D.

[Petr Machata]

Mikolaj Izdebski <mizdebsk(a)redhat.com&gt; writes:

>  I don't know why 0.9.38-3 was built, it looks like unnecessary
> build. 
Yes, it is.

About 30 packages diverged after f22-boost side-tag had been created.
It's impractical to check by hand whether any happened to be already
rebuilt in the short window since the merge.  So I just took the list of
merge conflicts and scheduled a rebuild for all of them, and harfbuzz
ended up being rebuilt twice.

Thanks,
Petr