For your consideration: Secondary Architectures in Fedora

Jesse Keating jkeating at
Wed May 30 19:14:58 UTC 2007

On Wednesday 30 May 2007 14:35:16 Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
> I'm concerned that this will be difficult to code correctly,
> specifically the "automagic bug filing". The first failure is easy, but
> what if I thought I fixed it, but hadn't. It files a new bug. Rinse,
> repeat, bloat bugzilla and/or spend time chasing down dupes.
> I could be wrong about that though.

Yes, care would need to be taken to prevent dupes and such.  How that is 
implemented I don't think we have to get into right yet.

> The very specific logic path is this:
> 1. A build is submitted.
> 2. Primary architectures run. If any primary architecture fails, it
> stops.
> 3. When all primary architectures pass, then the build is sent to all
> secondary architectures.
> 4. Each secondary architecture runs to completion. Failures by any
> secondary architecture do not affect other secondary architectures.
> 5. Secondary architectures which failed make a lot of noise. (This is
> where automagic bug filing occurs, emailing architecture teams, etc).

Seems right to me.

Jesse Keating
Release Engineer: Fedora
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <>

More information about the fedora-devel-list mailing list