Unneeded build loop

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
15 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Unneeded build loop

Mauricio Teixeira (netmask)
Hi!

Yesterday I was experiencing some problems with the build service. I
don't know if it was really slow, or it was a connection problem from my
part.

The fact is that I submitted the spec files many times, and triggered a
rebuild on each upload, which, let's say, created 5 build requests.
Today I woke up and found out that the build service is still trying to
build my packages, after my erroneous 5 triggers.

The question is: I think there is no need to schedule a rebuild if you
already scheduled one before. IMHO, the second rebuild request should
either (a) override the first one or (b) be dropped until the first one
is finished. I vote for (a), since people make mistakes and it's very
probable that the second request is the right one.

I guess that way we would spare some building time on the service.

WDYT?

--
% Mauricio Teixeira (netmask)
% mteixeira{a}webset{d}net <> Maceio/AL/BR
% http://mteixeira.webset.net <> http://pmping.sf.net

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Unneeded build loop

Bugzilla from listuser@peternixon.net
On Thu 10 Aug 2006 13:00, Mauricio Teixeira (netmask) wrote:

> Hi!
>
> Yesterday I was experiencing some problems with the build service. I
> don't know if it was really slow, or it was a connection problem from my
> part.
>
> The fact is that I submitted the spec files many times, and triggered a
> rebuild on each upload, which, let's say, created 5 build requests.
> Today I woke up and found out that the build service is still trying to
> build my packages, after my erroneous 5 triggers.
>
> The question is: I think there is no need to schedule a rebuild if you
> already scheduled one before. IMHO, the second rebuild request should
> either (a) override the first one or (b) be dropped until the first one
> is finished. I vote for (a), since people make mistakes and it's very
> probable that the second request is the right one.
>
> I guess that way we would spare some building time on the service.
I have had this problem before also. Definitely option A is the correct one.

--

Peter Nixon
http://www.peternixon.net/
PGP Key: http://www.peternixon.net/public.asc

attachment0 (196 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re: Unneeded build loop

CyberOrg
On 8/10/06, Peter Nixon <[hidden email]> wrote:

> > either (a) override the first one or (b) be dropped until the first one
> > is finished. I vote for (a), since people make mistakes and it's very
> > probable that the second request is the right one.
> >
> > I guess that way we would spare some building time on the service.
>
> I have had this problem before also. Definitely option A is the correct one.
>
I think it may be queuing for build for every uploaded file too, so if
we upload two changed files (spec and source tarball) it would build
twice. I may be wrong though.

It surely behaves that way uploading via web interface. Thanks to
buildservice irc (darix?) I no longer upload files that way.

It would also be useful for newbies like me to cancel the builds half
way if we realize we've made a mistake or is scheduled for a very long
time.

Jigish

PS. Sorry, the reply didn't go to the list the first time.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re: Unneeded build loop

Michael Schroeder-4
On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 03:48:02PM +0530, Jigish Gohil wrote:
> I think it may be queuing for build for every uploaded file too, so if
> we upload two changed files (spec and source tarball) it would build
> twice. I may be wrong though.

No, that's right. We need to change the web interface to allow
multiple uploads and a commit afterwards. Work in progress...

> It surely behaves that way uploading via web interface. Thanks to
> buildservice irc (darix?) I no longer upload files that way.
>
> It would also be useful for newbies like me to cancel the builds half
> way if we realize we've made a mistake or is scheduled for a very long
> time.

It's not easy to cancel running builds (scheduled ones are no problem,
though). I'll try to come up with something.

Cheers,
  Michael.

--
Michael Schroeder                                   [hidden email]
main(_){while(_=~getchar())putchar(~_-1/(~(_|32)/13*2-11)*13);}

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re: Unneeded build loop

Marcus Rückert
In reply to this post by CyberOrg
On 2006-08-10 15:48:02 +0530, Jigish Gohil wrote:

> Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 15:48:02 +0530
> From: Jigish Gohil <[hidden email]>
> Subject: Re: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: Unneeded build loop
> Cc: [hidden email]
>
> On 8/10/06, Peter Nixon <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> >> either (a) override the first one or (b) be dropped until the first one
> >> is finished. I vote for (a), since people make mistakes and it's very
> >> probable that the second request is the right one.
> >>
> >> I guess that way we would spare some building time on the service.
> >
> >I have had this problem before also. Definitely option A is the correct one.
> >
> I think it may be queuing for build for every uploaded file too, so if
> we upload two changed files (spec and source tarball) it would build
> twice. I may be wrong though.
>
> It surely behaves that way uploading via web interface. Thanks to
> buildservice irc (darix?) I no longer upload files that way.
>
> It would also be useful for newbies like me to cancel the builds half
> way if we realize we've made a mistake or is scheduled for a very long
> time.

use "osc" and not the webfrontend.

darix

--
          openSUSE - SUSE Linux is my linux
              openSUSE is good for you
                  www.opensuse.org

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Unneeded build loop

Bugzilla from listuser@peternixon.net
In reply to this post by Michael Schroeder-4
On Thu 10 Aug 2006 13:26, Michael Schroeder wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 03:48:02PM +0530, Jigish Gohil wrote:
> > I think it may be queuing for build for every uploaded file too, so if
> > we upload two changed files (spec and source tarball) it would build
> > twice. I may be wrong though.
>
> No, that's right. We need to change the web interface to allow
> multiple uploads and a commit afterwards. Work in progress...

Yep. I always try to commit source, patches and spec in one go with osc but I
invariable forget something or other and have to do a second commit, then
wait for the first build to fail :-(

> > It surely behaves that way uploading via web interface. Thanks to
> > buildservice irc (darix?) I no longer upload files that way.
> >
> > It would also be useful for newbies like me to cancel the builds half
> > way if we realize we've made a mistake or is scheduled for a very long
> > time.
>
> It's not easy to cancel running builds (scheduled ones are no problem,
> though). I'll try to come up with something.
Cool

--

Peter Nixon
http://www.peternixon.net/
PGP Key: http://www.peternixon.net/public.asc

attachment0 (196 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re: Unneeded build loop

Adrian Schröter
Am Thursday 10 August 2006 12:38 schrieb Peter Nixon:

> On Thu 10 Aug 2006 13:26, Michael Schroeder wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 03:48:02PM +0530, Jigish Gohil wrote:
> > > I think it may be queuing for build for every uploaded file too, so if
> > > we upload two changed files (spec and source tarball) it would build
> > > twice. I may be wrong though.
> >
> > No, that's right. We need to change the web interface to allow
> > multiple uploads and a commit afterwards. Work in progress...
>
> Yep. I always try to commit source, patches and spec in one go with osc but
> I invariable forget something or other and have to do a second commit, then
> wait for the first build to fail :-(

you can also test your build before via "osc build" on your local system. So
there is no reason why you need to wait for the server.

(exception is that BuildRequires: changs needs to commited atm, will be fixed
after the API change).

bye
adrian


--

Adrian Schroeter
SUSE Linux Products GmbH,  Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nuernberg, Germany
email: [hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re: Unneeded build loop

Mauricio Teixeira (netmask)
Em Qui, 2006-08-10 às 15:07 +0200, Adrian Schröter escreveu:

> you can also test your build before via "osc build" on your local system. So
> there is no reason why you need to wait for the server.

Excuse me if I sound rude, but, I, personally, can't see the need of the
build server if I had to build locally first. :)

No harm intended.

--
% Mauricio Teixeira (netmask)
% mteixeira{a}webset{d}net <> Maceio/AL/BR
% http://mteixeira.webset.net <> http://pmping.sf.net


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Unneeded build loop

Bugzilla from bernhard.walle@gmx.de
Hello,

"Mauricio Teixeira (netmask)" <[hidden email]> [2006-08-10]:
> Em Qui, 2006-08-10 às 15:07 +0200, Adrian Schröter escreveu:
>
> > you can also test your build before via "osc build" on your local system. So
> > there is no reason why you need to wait for the server.
>
> Excuse me if I sound rude, but, I, personally, can't see the need of the
> build server if I had to build locally first. :)

Maybe you have no x86_64 machine at home? Maybe you don't want to
rebuild factory every time some library changes? Maybe you don't want
to rebuild kernel modules every time an update kernel is released?

There are several reasons. :)


Regards,
   Bernhard
--
Die Arbeit ist ein Segen, der wie ein Fluch aussieht.
        -- Paul Auster


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re: Unneeded build loop

Marcus Rückert
In reply to this post by Mauricio Teixeira (netmask)
On 2006-08-10 16:59:39 -0300, Mauricio Teixeira (netmask) wrote:
> Em Qui, 2006-08-10 às 15:07 +0200, Adrian Schröter escreveu:
>
> > you can also test your build before via "osc build" on your local system. So
> > there is no reason why you need to wait for the server.
>
> Excuse me if I sound rude, but, I, personally, can't see the need of the
> build server if I had to build locally first. :)
>
> No harm intended.

netmask... of course you can do the "upload -> wait -> fail" loop on the
build server. but building at least _once_ locally sounds smart to me.
so you at least know that the package, you are about to submit, passed
at least on one distro/arch combination. noone asked you to build for
all targets before.

if that is too much for you ... and you still dont see the benefit of
the buildservice ... i dont know what to say.

darix

--
          openSUSE - SUSE Linux is my linux
              openSUSE is good for you
                  www.opensuse.org

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re: Unneeded build loop

Michael Schroeder-4
On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 10:44:51PM +0200, Marcus Rueckert wrote:

> On 2006-08-10 16:59:39 -0300, Mauricio Teixeira (netmask) wrote:
> > Em Qui, 2006-08-10 às 15:07 +0200, Adrian Schröter escreveu:
> >
> > > you can also test your build before via "osc build" on your local system. So
> > > there is no reason why you need to wait for the server.
> >
> > Excuse me if I sound rude, but, I, personally, can't see the need of the
> > build server if I had to build locally first. :)
> >
> > No harm intended.
>
> netmask... of course you can do the "upload -> wait -> fail" loop on the
> build server. but building at least _once_ locally sounds smart to me.
> so you at least know that the package, you are about to submit, passed
> at least on one distro/arch combination. noone asked you to build for
> all targets before.
>
> if that is too much for you ... and you still dont see the benefit of
> the buildservice ... i dont know what to say.

Please, folks, we don't care about how the users of the build service
work. I don't mind uploading without testing.

This is a policy issue, i.e. multiple users working on one project
might decide that the uploaded packages have to compile. But it is
a local decision, not something we have to enforce globally.

Cheers,
  Michael.

--
Michael Schroeder                                   [hidden email]
main(_){while(_=~getchar())putchar(~_-1/(~(_|32)/13*2-11)*13);}

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re: Unneeded build loop

Mauricio Teixeira (netmask)
In reply to this post by Marcus Rückert
Em Qui, 2006-08-10 às 22:44 +0200, Marcus Rueckert escreveu:

> if that is too much for you ... and you still dont see the benefit of
> the buildservice ... i dont know what to say.

I use the build service so I don't need to have all the necessary
packages to compile locally.

It's just a matter of option, but sure your way sounds much more polite
for people that build lots of packages.

;)

--
% Mauricio Teixeira (netmask)
% mteixeira{a}webset{d}net <> Maceio/AL/BR
% http://mteixeira.webset.net <> http://pmping.sf.net

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re: Unneeded build loop

Marcus Rückert
On 2006-08-10 22:06:13 -0300, Mauricio Teixeira (netmask) wrote:

> Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 22:06:13 -0300
> From: "Mauricio Teixeira (netmask)" <[hidden email]>
> Subject: Re: [opensuse-buildservice] Re: Unneeded build loop
> To: [hidden email]
> X-Mailer: Evolution 2.6.0
>
> Em Qui, 2006-08-10 às 22:44 +0200, Marcus Rueckert escreveu:
>
> > if that is too much for you ... and you still dont see the benefit of
> > the buildservice ... i dont know what to say.
>
> I use the build service so I don't need to have all the necessary
> packages to compile locally.
>
> It's just a matter of option, but sure your way sounds much more polite
> for people that build lots of packages.
>

"osc build repos arch yourspec"

it will download the needed rpms into a local cache dir and starts
"build".
build (a script) sets up a chroot and runs the rpmbuild process inside.

you can build with the same magic as the build service locally.

darix

--
          openSUSE - SUSE Linux is my linux
              openSUSE is good for you
                  www.opensuse.org

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re: Unneeded build loop

Klaas Freitag-2
In reply to this post by Michael Schroeder-4
Am Donnerstag, 10. August 2006 22:49 schrieb Michael Schroeder:

> > if that is too much for you ... and you still dont see the benefit of
> > the buildservice ... i dont know what to say.
>
> Please, folks, we don't care about how the users of the build service
> work.
That sentence might be easily missunderstood ;-) but I agree fully in this
context.

> I don't mind uploading without testing.
Right. We can't avoid so we have to accept it :-)

Klaas

>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re: Unneeded build loop

Klaas Freitag-2
In reply to this post by Marcus Rückert
Am Donnerstag, 10. August 2006 12:37 schrieb Marcus Rueckert:

>
> use "osc" and not the webfrontend.
I can not understand this statement. Do you think we should stop
developing the webfrontend?

My understanding is that all clients should work correctly and non
should be more functional than another. So I go with Michael in
another mail where he says: "that's a missing webclient feature that
will come."
>
Klaas