Re: [Users] Low quality of el6 vdsm rpms

Hi all, sorry for this rant, but... I now tried several times to test the beta 3.3.1 rpms, but they can't even be installed in the most times.

One time it required a future selinux-policy, although the needed selinux fix was delivered in a much lower version. Now the rpms have broken requirements. It requires "hostname" instead of "/bin/hostname". This broken requirement is not included in the vdsm 3.3 branch, so I wonder where it comes from? Anyway. So I proceeded and tried to build vdsm myself once again. Currently the build fails with (but worked fine some days ago): /usr/bin/pep8 --exclude="config.py,constants.py" --filename '*.py,*.py.in' \ client lib/cpopen/*.py lib/vdsm/*.py lib/vdsm/*.py.in tests vds_bootstrap vdsm-tool vdsm/*.py vdsm/*.py.in vdsm/netconf vdsm/sos/vdsm.py.in vdsm/storage vdsm/vdsm vdsm_api vdsm_hooks vdsm_reg vdsm/storage/imageRepository/formatConverter.py:280:29: E128 continuation line under-indented for visual indent - How can the quality of the vdsm builds be increased? It is frustrating to spend time on testing and then the hosts cannot even be installed to broken vdsm rpms. - How are the builds prepared? Is there a Jenkins job that prepares "stable" rpms in addition to the nightly job? Or is this totally handcrafted? - How can it be that the rpm spec differs between the 3.3 branch and released rpms? What is the source/branch for el6 vdsm rpms? Maybe I'm just tracking on the wrong source tree...

Thx and Regards Patrick