15:01:38 <mboddu> #startmeeting RELENG (2020-03-24)
15:01:38 <zodbot> Meeting started Tue Mar 24 15:01:38 2020 UTC.
15:01:38 <zodbot> This meeting is logged and archived in a public location.
15:01:38 <zodbot> The chair is mboddu. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
15:01:38 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
15:01:38 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'releng_(2020-03-24)'
15:01:39 <mboddu> #meetingname releng
15:01:39 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'releng'
15:01:39 <mboddu> #chair nirik sharkcz pbrobinson pingou mboddu dustymabe ksinny jednorozec
15:01:39 <mboddu> #topic init process
15:01:39 <zodbot> Current chairs: dustymabe jednorozec ksinny mboddu nirik pbrobinson pingou sharkcz
15:01:54 <nirik> morning.
15:01:59 <mboddu> morning nirik
15:02:00 <mboddu> How goes?
15:02:12 <nirik> not sure yet, just got up a bit ago. :)
15:03:56 <mboddu> nirik: Thats nice
15:04:37 <mboddu> Okay, lets get started
15:04:38 <mboddu> #topic #9329 F33/Changes/MAKE43
15:04:44 <mboddu> #link https://pagure.io/releng/issue/9329
15:05:04 <mboddu> nirik: Do you think we should include in mass rebuild or not?
15:05:13 * mboddu feels like we should
15:05:19 <nirik> well, if we have other reasons to do one, sure!
15:06:44 <mboddu> nirik: Well, if we there are others reasons then it will definitely will go in since they build make 4.3 last week
15:07:12 <nirik> yeah, so I would just keep it in mind for now and see what else we get...
15:07:13 * mboddu cant type and needs tea
15:07:30 <nirik> I suspect there will be a mass rebuild, as these days there's always some change that needs one
15:08:48 <mboddu> nirik: Right, since its already built, I am going to close the ticket, if we run the mass rebuild it will go with it
15:08:58 <nirik> ok, fair.
15:10:22 <mboddu> nirik: Well - https://pagure.io/releng/issue/9286#comment-630286, we have to run the mass rebuild :)
15:10:52 <mboddu> #topic #9308 F33 system wide change: Sqlite Rpmdb
15:10:58 <mboddu> #link https://pagure.io/releng/issue/9308
15:11:26 <nirik> ah, indeed.
15:13:44 <mboddu> nirik: Okay, to be frank, some of the stuff they talked went over my head
15:13:51 <mboddu> :D
15:14:07 <mboddu> Were you able to follow it?
15:14:20 <nirik> I think we should do some testing in stg on it...
15:14:36 <nirik> it could all work fine, but it could blow up in a way people don't expect.
15:15:07 <nirik> and I have a related issue on mock I wanted to talk about at some point...
15:17:06 <mboddu> nirik: Do you want to test it before it lands in prod?
15:18:52 <nirik> well, it needs testing in stg... it's going to mean the f33 rpm on f32 builders and we need to make sure we can set that macro to override the database per tag...
15:18:56 * cverna waives
15:20:02 * mboddu waives back at cverna
15:20:03 <nirik> so I guess we could keep this open to track, or make a new one... it will be a while before we can test.
15:20:48 <mboddu> nirik: Okay, I will comment on the ticket asking them to let us know when it lands so that we can do some testing in stg
15:21:28 <nirik> sure, that works.
15:21:30 <mboddu> #info mboddu will comment on the ticket asking them to let us know when the work is done so that we can do some testing in staging.
15:23:55 <mboddu> #topic #9154 F32 Change: new buildroot for CPU baseline update
15:24:01 <mboddu> #link https://pagure.io/releng/issue/9154
15:25:32 <nirik> so, we should hold off on this one... as it's merged with a new one?
15:25:38 <nirik> or at least ask them
15:25:45 <mboddu> merged with a new one?
15:26:05 <nirik> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ELN_Buildroot_and_Compose
15:26:13 <mboddu> You mean https://pagure.io/releng/issue/9334?
15:26:18 <nirik> "This Change supersedes the previously-approved Change to enable an additional buildroot."
15:27:11 <mboddu> Okay, I will ping in the ticket then
15:29:01 <mboddu> #topic #9336 Exception for epel8 branch for rpms/asio
15:29:07 <mboddu> #link https://pagure.io/releng/issue/9336
15:29:13 <mboddu> Its not as easy as we thought yesterday
15:29:28 <nirik> ah bummer. ;(
15:29:30 <mboddu> Its happening in fedpkg request-branch, but not in fedscm-admin processing
15:29:49 <mboddu> nirik: Well, I have a fix for it, but not the full fix
15:29:58 <mboddu> And the fix I have might be the full fix, I dunno
15:30:28 <mboddu> So, I am fixing fedscm-admin to process the tickets
15:30:40 <mboddu> But I dont know how to fix it in fedpkg?
15:31:06 <mboddu> Or should we leave it as it and ask people to create tickets and we create the branches with fixed fedscm-admin?
15:31:34 <nirik> yeah, I guess thats ok for now until we see how many of these we get?
15:32:08 <mboddu> See, as I said, the temp fix might be the full fix :)
15:34:33 <nirik> I wouldn't think there would be many, but I could be wrong
15:34:56 <mboddu> #info mboddu will fix fedscm-admin and will leave fedpkg as is for now. People can file releng tickets and releng will manually fix them if this happens. Also, if there a huge load of tickets like this, we will look at how to fix it properly in fedpkg.
15:35:04 <mboddu> #topic #9267 aarch64 upgrade from branched release to rawhide fails
15:35:12 <mboddu> #link https://pagure.io/releng/issue/9267
15:35:40 <mboddu> I thought its a mirrors issue, but apparently he was able to upgrade other machines
15:36:31 * nirik reads it again
15:37:18 <nirik> it's becase I think of our naming? we need a mirrormanager alias for modular-updates and modular-updates-testing to modular-rawhide?
15:37:29 <nirik> so, we should ask adrian to look
15:38:25 <nirik> added a comment
15:39:11 <mboddu> Thanks nirik
15:39:28 <mboddu> I will be back in 5 min
15:40:46 <nirik> ok
15:45:39 <mboddu> nirik: I am back
15:45:52 * mboddu had to make a call
15:47:35 <mboddu> #topic #9220 Failure to start build during mass rebuild
15:47:41 <mboddu> #link https://pagure.io/releng/issue/9220
15:48:26 <nirik> so I go some ways on this, still needs more work which I haven't had a chance to look at yet
15:48:31 <mboddu> For all the packages listed in https://pagure.io/releng/issue/9220#comment-635220 see if there a build after mass rebuild, if not submit a build for both f32 and f33?
15:48:48 <mboddu> ^ is that what we need to do?
15:48:48 <nirik> yes to the first part, but no to the second.
15:49:09 <nirik> check for a build after mass rebuild, if none, file FTBFS like bug
15:49:30 <nirik> leave it to the maintainer if they want to build/push an update
15:49:47 <nirik> although I guess we could do f33...
15:50:33 <mboddu> Cant we just add it to existing ftbfs?
15:50:43 <mboddu> Or do we have to file a new ftbfs?
15:51:31 <mboddu> They should be already included in the ftbfs, right?
15:51:37 <mboddu> ftbfs bug
15:51:55 <nirik> no, I don't think they are.
15:52:02 <nirik> we could check tho.
15:52:12 <nirik> These emitted no fedmsg...
15:52:22 <nirik> so I doubt the FTBFS process saw them at all.
15:52:44 <mboddu> Right, but ftbfs doesn't use fedmsg, they look at packages and whether they are built or not
15:52:52 * mboddu looks
15:54:09 <mboddu> nirik: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1799112 for 0ad
15:54:35 <nirik> man, bugzilla iis slow
15:55:14 <nirik> interesting... thats not the build my query found
15:56:09 <mboddu> Huh
15:56:16 <nirik> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=41163489
15:56:36 <nirik> oh right, I rebuilt a bunch that failed...
15:57:04 <nirik> so really I guess we need to check that all those have either a ftbfs or a successfull build after mass rebuild...
15:58:44 <mboddu> nirik: If they have ftbfs its fine or a successful build is also fine
15:59:30 <mboddu> I am not sure if there are any that dont have ftbfs bug and dont have a successful build, if there are, we should add it to ftbfs bug
15:59:34 <mboddu> Thats it, right?
16:00:08 <nirik> yeah, I would say so
16:00:15 <nirik> so we just need to do the work to check
16:00:21 <mboddu> And also rebuild for f33?
16:00:32 <nirik> or leave it to the maintainer?
16:00:43 <mboddu> Okay
16:01:57 <nirik> I guess it will depend on how many there are... if there are 0 we are done. ;)
16:02:10 <mboddu> #info we have to check if any of packages in https://pagure.io/releng/issue/9220#comment-635220 did not build after mass rebuild and dont have ftbfs bug, then we need to add them to the ftbfs bug and ask the maintianers to build for f33 as well.
16:03:44 <mboddu> nirik: Do you have the task url for GitPython?
16:04:11 <nirik> not off hand... ;(
16:04:43 <mboddu> Okay, we can use that as an example
16:05:01 <mboddu> I am not seeing successful build for it and also no ftbfs
16:05:06 <nirik> it's one of those 88 taskid's. ;)
16:05:14 <mboddu> Anyway, thats all I got
16:05:25 <nirik> I wanted to mention mock real quick...
16:05:32 <mboddu> Sure
16:05:37 <mboddu> #topic Open Floor
16:05:42 <nirik> I updated all the builders this last weekend. This included (I didn't notice) mock-2.1
16:06:06 <nirik> we are going to need a number of adjustments before this can work for us. ;( I downgraded back to 1.4.21 for now
16:06:41 <mboddu> Yeah, I remember that
16:06:46 <nirik> by default it uses bootstrap build, it changed how you specifiy old-chroot vs nspawn and it defaults to dnf
16:07:03 <nirik> I think there's a koji ticket already. I need to update it with our issues.
16:07:11 <mboddu> Thanks nirik
16:07:56 <nirik> thats it I think...
16:07:58 <mboddu> #info nirik updated all the builders over the weekend which upgraded mock to 2.1 and he downgraded it back to 1.4.21
16:08:07 <mboddu> Cool
16:08:07 <mboddu> Thanks for joining
16:08:10 <mboddu> #endmeeting