On 02/04/16 13:58 +0200, Jan Pokorný wrote:
On 02/04/16 12:26 +0200, Jan Pokorný wrote:
> On 31/03/16 21:28 -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote:
>> I've just submitted
>> This update does two things:
>> - Updates python to version 2.7.11
>> - Splits out the python macros into separate packages
>> It would be helpful if packagers would try building python packages with
>> these packages installed.
> This might be the cause of a recent failure to build Pacemaker while
> other Fedoras (24 + 25) were OK:
>> Package python-macros is obsoleted by python-rpm-macros, but
>> obsoleting package does not provide for requirements
Subsequent build succeeded, though:
So it must have been an intermittent issue.
Can this be prevented next time a basic build dependency
is restructured? Or would it require additional support
in the build infra?
I tried to investigate this a little bit.
6 days ago, at around the point the build failed, several overrides
for the build root have been requested:
All but the last, expired on 2016-04-01, appear active at the moment.
The last one was superseded with python-2.7.11-3.fc23:
which is also active right now.
But clearly, at the moment of the linked build that failed,
python-rpm-macros and redhat-rpm-config were overridden whereas
python-macros-2.7.10-8.fc23+ wasn't. It looks to me I hit a racy
window in which python-2.7.11-2.fc23 override hasn't yet been
And later, at the moment of the linked build that succeeded,
no such override was active.
I would conclude, please be more careful about management of
overrides to prevent this kind of mess-ups.
Does bodhi allow to specify several builds as a means of an atomic
(non-racy) override? Should I file a RFE for that if not?