[lsb-discuss] LSB conf call notes for 2008-10-15
Jeff Licquia
jeff at licquia.org
Wed Oct 15 09:02:35 PDT 2008
Attendees: Jeff, Jesper, Russ, Mats, Darren, Ron, Robert, Kay, Stew,
Alexey, Vladimir
LSB 4.0. Jeff: builders were the biggest problem. Mats: ia32 issue
that was on IRC; some of the builds for that architecture weren't built
off the tags, and are too old. Jeff: any other archs? Mats: ok on
x86-64; don't have results on anything else. Darren: what's the
problem? Mats: dtk-manager doesn't pick up on the cairo test journal.
Darren: Jiri is running tests with the beta now; should be able to
report if it's a problem. Jeff: can those results be sent to us?
Darren: not a problem, except workload. Jeff: can do automatically.
Jeff: new autotest results page. Would like to see people contribute
results, request new reports.
Jeff: any worrisome results?
Jeff: back to builders. Clearly, it's too fragile. What to do? Mats:
question is too complicated; it doesn't work, but what doesn't work is
an issue. Jeff: start from scratch? Russ: could also refactor. Mats:
we have a sense of where the problems are. Uploads fail much of the
time. Another weakness: first phase is to build the development
environment, and have it replace itself. The sequence is tricky, and
can fail. Russ: tinderbox-type environment? Cascading change issue;
might be able to catch these problems earlier. Jeff: also, keeping
chroots around is fragile; keeping pristine tarballs for builds is
better. Mats: should kick off a project to improve this. Jeff: builder
doesn't probably take advantage of new SDK capabilities. Stew: that
part doesn't fail as much. Mats: would be cool to use virtual machines
as builders; could do copy-on-write off a pristine builder and throw
changes away. Jeff: how do we kick off the project? Use an
architecture as a guinea pig? Mats: if we can build without pushing,
then we can test without forcing changes into production. Russ:
conflating chroots with build instance; using copy-on-write. Where is
the proposal? Jeff: where is your stuff? Russ: old code is at
ftp://ftp.owlriver.com/pub/mirror/ORC/ORCrebuild/ Personally uses
mezzanine, centos uses mach. Always build packages, which may be a
discipline change. Jeff: also, don't have a good virtual machine
situation for some archs. Russ: IBM demonstrated something; ia64 is
almost there, and s390 is there. Kay: have a program for creating VMs
for ChipHopper people. It's a bit complicated. Russ: can use snapshots
of VMs for creating new ones, instead of "stock" images or new installs.
Jeff: schedule. Could gain time. Who? Michael and I? Mats: would
like to volunteer, but lots on plate; in particular, the 3.2 refresh.
Would like to be involved. Jeff: could make our main job, but pull Mats
in for discrete tasks.
Kay: update on Java stuff? Jeff: no progress in a month. Kay: even if
someone packages Java with their app, the fact that there's no
LSB-certified JDK is a problem. Russ: problem with testing.
End-of-lifing "100% Pure Java" is very troubling. No good test
situation. Robert: should push on both ends: Java in LSB, and
LSB-certified Java. Kay: not given up on certified Java side. Jeff:
need to do the vote yet on trial-use, but we're pretty sure Java isn't
ready. Robert: maybe after the 4.0 hump. Russ: and making sure we have
application testing is important.
Russ: concerned that the vote on trial-use status for Java will not
happen the way we expect. Jeff: have been non-committal, but most of
the people involved have been agreeing that Java should be trial use.
Russ: yes, but what about ballot surprises? Jeff: will probably put out
a position paper on the issues to vote on, and will include the
technical recommendation of the LSB workgroup and Sun.
More information about the lsb-discuss
mailing list