[fedora-arm] ExcludeArch tracker doesn't appear to be effective

Peter Robinson pbrobinson at gmail.com
Tue Jun 10 20:12:35 UTC 2014


On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 7:28 PM, Matthew Garrett <mjg59 at srcf.ucam.org> wrote:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485251 is depressing. Nine
> bugs have been closed - of these, one is a review request that was
> dropped, two were incorrectly closed after an ExcludeArch was added and
> one was closed as a duplicate. Further, one bug was just unsubscribed
> from the tracker after tests were disabled. We've correctly fixed *five*
> packages that have been flagged as FTBFS on ARM. At this rate of fixing,
> and given the rate at which new bugs are added, ARM will never build the
> entire archive.
>
> Fedora is supposed to provide a consistent experience across primary
> architectures. Having a subset of our packages fail to build on ARM
> means that's not true, and the current state of affairs clearly violates
> point 8 of the architecture promotion requirements. How can we fix this?

So at the moment there's around 15,000 source packages in Fedora
mainline and you're getting depressed over exactly 24 of them? I'm not
sure how 24 packages is providing a inconsistent experience. In some
cases the maintainer of the package hasn't bothered to close the bug
when support was added, in some cases ARM was added incorrectly. For
example just before mass rebuild we added Ada support which closed out
around 2 dozen other packages we didn't build prior.

We actively fix bugs that come up but there's some there that just
currently don't make sense such as the ovirt-node package because
oVirt manager doesn't support ARM virtualisation (it's just added PPC,
it's first non x86 architecture, support as of the 3.4 release).

Some of these are because the upstream projects either refuse to
support ARM or it's using languages that aren't supported on ARM. In
the case of the mono packages in that it would be supported if the
mono stack was actively maintained in Fedora mainline in general.
There was a proposal for F-21 to update mono to the latest 3.x release
but while I've been watching it awaiting for it to land so we can test
it on ARM it's failed to materialise to date in mainline.

Ultimately I fail to see how missing 20 odd packages out of 15,000 odd
fails to "provide a consistent experience across primary
architectures" so if there's something more specific and constructive
you'd like to provide it would be useful or is this just a random rant
because your bored?

Ultimately we've been working hard to provide as consistent
environment on ARM as possible and improving all the time and all you
seem to do is randomly come in Magpie style and shit on something
without any other visible involvement in the ARM process or community
or any context and pick on something of random like a bully. If you've
got constructive criticism feel free to engage properly to assist us
in improving and coming up to your exacting standards but this means
of bullying tactics isn't the way to do it.

Peter


More information about the devel mailing list