Hi,
I noticed a difference between ipa in git.centos.org and the src.rpm used on buildlogs.centos.org.
my guess is that the latest manual debranding was not pushed to git.
as a second item: any idea when we could have access to signed versions of the src.rpms? I know that they might still change, but it would help me for the redsleeve build effort if I had access to the current (signed) set.
Jacco
On 11/08/17 12:13, Jacco Ligthart wrote:
Hi,
I noticed a difference between ipa in git.centos.org and the src.rpm used on buildlogs.centos.org.
my guess is that the latest manual debranding was not pushed to git.
as a second item: any idea when we could have access to signed versions of the src.rpms? I know that they might still change, but it would help me for the redsleeve build effort if I had access to the current (signed) set.
Jacco
Hi Jacco, the .src.rpm are only signed and pushed to vault.centos.org after the distro was validated by QA and so released.
In the mean time, you can find ( as you did ) those on either buildlogs.centos.org (for x86_64) or armv7.dev (like https://armv7.dev.centos.org/repodir/c71708-pass-1/ipa/4.5.0-20.el7.centos/S... in this example) But worth noting that both are also unsigned
On 11-08-17 12:53, Fabian Arrotin wrote:
On 11/08/17 12:13, Jacco Ligthart wrote:
Hi,
I noticed a difference between ipa in git.centos.org and the src.rpm used on buildlogs.centos.org.
my guess is that the latest manual debranding was not pushed to git.
as a second item: any idea when we could have access to signed versions of the src.rpms? I know that they might still change, but it would help me for the redsleeve build effort if I had access to the current (signed) set.
Jacco
Hi Jacco, the .src.rpm are only signed and pushed to vault.centos.org after the distro was validated by QA and so released.
In the mean time, you can find ( as you did ) those on either buildlogs.centos.org (for x86_64) or armv7.dev (like https://armv7.dev.centos.org/repodir/c71708-pass-1/ipa/4.5.0-20.el7.centos/S... in this example) But worth noting that both are also unsigned
I was hoping that they would be earlier available. Specifically, I hoped that it would be at 'CR' time in stead of at distro release time.
Jacco
On 08/11/2017 12:13 PM, Jacco Ligthart wrote:
Hi,
I noticed a difference between ipa in git.centos.org and the src.rpm used on buildlogs.centos.org.
my guess is that the latest manual debranding was not pushed to git.
There is a similar issue with abrt. abrt as it is in git does not build. it misses a "BuildRequires: dbus-glib-devel" and the last line of the %configure ends in a "". Now it thinks that "make -j4" is also a configure flag.
Jacco
On 08/12/2017 08:12 PM, Jacco Ligthart wrote:
On 08/11/2017 12:13 PM, Jacco Ligthart wrote:
Hi,
I noticed a difference between ipa in git.centos.org and the src.rpm used on buildlogs.centos.org.
my guess is that the latest manual debranding was not pushed to git.
There is a similar issue with abrt. abrt as it is in git does not build. it misses a "BuildRequires: dbus-glib-devel" and the last line of the %configure ends in a "". Now it thinks that "make -j4" is also a configure flag.
Those updates were setting in my local git unpushed. Now updated.
On 08/15/2017 02:09 PM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
On 08/12/2017 08:12 PM, Jacco Ligthart wrote:
On 08/11/2017 12:13 PM, Jacco Ligthart wrote:
Hi,
I noticed a difference between ipa in git.centos.org and the src.rpm used on buildlogs.centos.org.
my guess is that the latest manual debranding was not pushed to git.
There is a similar issue with abrt. abrt as it is in git does not build. it misses a "BuildRequires: dbus-glib-devel" and the last line of the %configure ends in a "". Now it thinks that "make -j4" is also a configure flag.
Those updates were setting in my local git unpushed. Now updated.
Actually ipa I can't push as there is another update after. I will push the ipa changes to that update.
-
Fabian Arrotin -
Jacco Ligthart -
Johnny Hughes