[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Possible regressions with trunk autoconf (vs 2.71)
From: |
Frederic Berat |
Subject: |
Re: Possible regressions with trunk autoconf (vs 2.71) |
Date: |
Sat, 19 Nov 2022 08:21:31 +0100 |
For now I track the failures through a "meta-bug" in Fedora [1], and
create individual bugs for each package's maintainer individually as
the analysis progresses [2][3][4][5], and if the issue is assumed to
be on their side. Considering the amount of work, I leave the upstream
discussion to the respective package maintainers.
I have a bit more than 10 remaining failures to analyse. At the
current pace it'll take about 2 work weeks [assuming there is no
change in priorities and that uncovered problems have the same level
of complexity in average].
Anybody that wants to give a hand is welcome, we can use [1] to
distribute the tasks.
[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143303
[2] krb5: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143306
[3] am-utils: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143639
[4] wine: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143724
[5] anjuta: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143718
On Fri, Nov 18, 2022 at 6:30 PM Sam James <sam@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 18 Nov 2022, at 07:11, Frederic Berat <fberat@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks, I'll update the bug I opened for them.
>
> Could you share the links? Thanks.
- Re: Possible regressions with trunk autoconf (vs 2.71), (continued)
- Re: Possible regressions with trunk autoconf (vs 2.71), Frederic Berat, 2022/11/16
- Re: Possible regressions with trunk autoconf (vs 2.71), Sam James, 2022/11/16
- Re: Possible regressions with trunk autoconf (vs 2.71), Arsen Arsenović, 2022/11/16
- Re: Possible regressions with trunk autoconf (vs 2.71), Zack Weinberg, 2022/11/16
- Re: Possible regressions with trunk autoconf (vs 2.71), Frederic Berat, 2022/11/17
- Re: Possible regressions with trunk autoconf (vs 2.71), Zack Weinberg, 2022/11/17
- Re: Possible regressions with trunk autoconf (vs 2.71), Zack Weinberg, 2022/11/17
- Re: Possible regressions with trunk autoconf (vs 2.71), Frederic Berat, 2022/11/18
- Re: Possible regressions with trunk autoconf (vs 2.71), Sam James, 2022/11/18
- Re: Possible regressions with trunk autoconf (vs 2.71),
Frederic Berat <=
- Re: Possible regressions with trunk autoconf (vs 2.71), Frederic Berat, 2022/11/24
- Re: Possible regressions with trunk autoconf (vs 2.71), Paul Eggert, 2022/11/17
- Re: Possible regressions with trunk autoconf (vs 2.71), Frederic Berat, 2022/11/18
- Re: Possible regressions with trunk autoconf (vs 2.71), Frederic Berat, 2022/11/18
- Re: Possible regressions with trunk autoconf (vs 2.71), Nick Bowler, 2022/11/18
Re: Possible regressions with trunk autoconf (vs 2.71), Paul Eggert, 2022/11/17
Re: Possible regressions with trunk autoconf (vs 2.71), Sam James, 2022/11/16