From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andreas Enge Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] gnu: gobject-introspection: Update to 1.44.0. Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2015 14:06:42 +0200 Message-ID: <20150422120642.GB4297@debian.math.u-bordeaux1.fr> References: <1429524721-21449-1-git-send-email-iyzsong@gmail.com> <87618p19aw.fsf@gnu.org> <20150421211500.GA6274@debian> <87pp6x6s6v.fsf@netris.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45365) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YktQq-0005JD-Nv for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Apr 2015 08:07:12 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YktQn-0001bO-Iv for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Apr 2015 08:07:08 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87pp6x6s6v.fsf@netris.org> List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Mark H Weaver Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 06:18:48PM -0400, Mark H Weaver wrote: > We shouldn't ask Hydra to build it until all of the relevant patches are > pushed. Therefore, I have deleted the 'wip-glib' jobset for now, since > it was about to rebuild 1335 builds based on the libidn-1.30 update, These were shared with master anyway, so the argument does not apply. I still think we should evaluate once without the patches in the new branch (which causes only little work, modulo the problems with the virtual machine...) so that we can see under "newly failing builds" what problems have been caused by the patches. Currently, all packages in wip-glib are listed under "new jobs", so the successful and the (currently close to 500) failed builds are mixed up in an enormous list of over 5000 packages, as well as those that already fail on master are mixed up with those that fail only in the new branch. > I also have an libxfont security update to add to the branch as well. Well, in an ideal world, these two patch sets would be built separately, so that any failure could be attributed to one or the other. So I would not call two rebuilds "wasted work" in such a context. Apart from that, maybe with the lack of build resources, we cannot afford to rebuild after each git commit... Andreas