I probably use koji in a bit different way than Fedora maintainers as I
do not concentrate on few packages but instead check which ones are
broken (mostly on aarch64 secondary architecture).
My workflow goes like that:
1. package "xyz" fails on aarch64
2. check logs to find out is it dependency or build issue
3. check how situation on primary look
4. check how it looks on other secondary architectures
5. check bugs reported against package (there could be fix)
6. do local build
7. work on fixing
8. create patch
9. do scratch build on primary/secondaries
10. provide patch via bugzilla/irc/git
So the question is: are there plans to integrate primary and secondary
architectures into one koji?
This would allow to present state of each architecture/tag:
packagename
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
x86-64 | OK 1.2-3.fc24 | FAIL 1.1-7.fc23 | OK 1.1-2.fc22
i686 | OK 1.2-3.fc24 | FAIL 1.1-7.fc23 | OK 1.1-2.fc22
armhf | OK 1.2-3.fc24 | FAIL 1.1-7.fc23 | OK 1.1-2.fc22
aarch64 | FAIL 1.2-2.fc24 | OK 1.1-6.fc23 | OK 1.1-2.fc22
ppc64 | OK 1.2-1.fc24 | FAIL 1.1-7.fc23 | OK 1.1-2.fc22
ppc64le | OK 1.2-1.fc24 | FAIL 1.1-7.fc23 | OK 1.1-2.fc22
s390 | OK 1.2-3.fc24 | FAIL 1.1-7.fc23 | OK 1.1-2.fc22
s390x | OK 1.2-3.fc24 | FAIL 1.1-7.fc23 | OK 1.1-2.fc22
Then both package maintainers and architecture maintainers will see how
situation looks like. All newer NVRs would wait in a queue like it is
now with koji-shadow setups. And with links to builds being present in
this table it would be easier to follow ftbfs situations.
How it looks now? Koji web interface provides list of completed or
failed builds. If I see that 'somename' failed then I have to check all
builds of it to check did it completed in newer NVR or not. Or write
scripts which will follow fedmsg and query all koji instances (there are
at least two such on my hard drive).
Show replies by date