John Hopkins (:jhopkins) Reporter
	Description • 12 years ago

      No description provided.

	bhearsum@mozilla.com (:bhearsum) Assignee
	Comment 1 • 12 years ago

I'm on the hook for 17.0.1 ESR.

	Justin Wood (:Callek)
	Comment 2 • 12 years ago

still blocking for same ESR date, but different version now (17.0.2 ESR)

	bhearsum@mozilla.com (:bhearsum) Assignee
	Comment 3 • 12 years ago

Is this 100% ready to go? We're about 48 hours from go to build.

	bhearsum@mozilla.com (:bhearsum) Assignee
	Comment 4 • 12 years ago

Oops, of course it's not ready to go yet, there's no patch!

	bhearsum@mozilla.com (:bhearsum) Assignee
	Comment 5 • 12 years ago

This should be landed in advance of the go to build, because I want to make sure that dep/nightly builds are working fine before we build a release with mock.

	bhearsum@mozilla.com (:bhearsum) Assignee
	Comment 6 • 12 years ago

in production, forcing some builds to verify it

	bhearsum@mozilla.com (:bhearsum) Assignee
	Comment 7 • 12 years ago

The builds that I triggered went fine.

	bhearsum@mozilla.com (:bhearsum) Assignee
	Comment 8 • 12 years ago

Comment on attachment 697053 [details] [diff] [review]
use mock for mozilla-esr17

Backed out due to bug 826567.

	bhearsum@mozilla.com (:bhearsum) Assignee
	Comment 9 • 12 years ago

We'll aim to have this for the next esr instead

	Nick Thomas [:nthomas] (UTC+12)
	Comment 10 • 12 years ago

Moving this to 17.0.4 because it's too close to 17.0.3 for comfort.

	bhearsum@mozilla.com (:bhearsum) Assignee
	Comment 11 • 12 years ago

I'm going to make sure this uplift happens right after we ship 17.0.3esr.

	bhearsum@mozilla.com (:bhearsum) Assignee
	Comment 13 • 12 years ago

Comment on attachment 716537 [details] [diff] [review]
fully enable mock for firefox esr17

wrong version of gcc - need to fix this.

	bhearsum@mozilla.com (:bhearsum) Assignee
	Comment 14 • 12 years ago

Need to test this in staging.

	bhearsum@mozilla.com (:bhearsum) Assignee
	Comment 16 • 12 years ago

glandium gave me a way to verify the build. Things look good:
[root@dev-stage01 fesr2]# tar -jvxf /pub/mozilla.org/firefox/nightly/2013/02/2013-02-21-08-20-01-mozilla-esr17/firefox-17.0.3esrpre.en-US.linux-x86_64.tar.bz2
readelf -D -s *.so | grep UNIQUE
[root@dev-stage01 firefox]#

	bhearsum@mozilla.com (:bhearsum) Assignee
	Comment 17 • 12 years ago

Comment on attachment 716557 [details] [diff] [review]
bump in repo files

Drivers, this patch will let us switch esr17 over to our new build slaves (larger pool, old slaves can be repurposed to help windows build wait times). It includes the new gcc built in bug 827354, so it does not cause a system requirements change.

	Alex Keybl [:akeybl]
	Comment 18 • 12 years ago

Comment on attachment 716557 [details] [diff] [review]
bump in repo files

We discussed this at the channel meeting and agreed that we'd be comfortable landing/testing for the next ESR. Approving for the ESR branch.

	u279076
	Comment 19 • 12 years ago

Assigning this to Matt Wobensmith for QA. What should we keep an eye on with this change (ie. what are the high risk areas)?

	bhearsum@mozilla.com (:bhearsum) Assignee
	Comment 20 • 12 years ago

The only test that needs to be done (AFAIK) is to see whether the new builds still work on certain Linux versions. It looks like bug 823487 has some background on this. (I wasn't very involved with finding the fix, you may want to talk to glandium or jhopkins if that bug doesn't have the information required.)

	bhearsum@mozilla.com (:bhearsum) Assignee
	Comment 22 • 12 years ago

Builds are out now:
https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/tinderbox-builds/mozilla-esr17-linux/1361816796/
https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/tinderbox-builds/mozilla-esr17-linux64/1361816796/

	bhearsum@mozilla.com (:bhearsum) Assignee
	Comment 23 • 12 years ago

John Hopkins was working with somebody in https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=832601 to test out his original builds with the new GCC, too. That person may be worth contacting if we can't test directly.

As far as I'm concerned, this is done.

	Ryan VanderMeulen [:RyanVM]
	Comment 24 • 12 years ago

https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-esr17/rev/69a8f27115ea

	Matt Wobensmith [:mwobensmith][:matt:]
	Comment 25 • 12 years ago

Ben - comment 20 mentions bug 823487, but that bug does not appear to be related to this one. Can you double check? I'm seeking info on what Linux versions should be targeted for testing. Thanks.

	bhearsum@mozilla.com (:bhearsum) Assignee
	Comment 26 • 12 years ago

(In reply to Matt Wobensmith from comment #25)
> Ben - comment 20 mentions bug 823487, but that bug does not appear to be
> related to this one. Can you double check? I'm seeking info on what Linux
> versions should be targeted for testing. Thanks.

Whoops, apologies. That should be bug 827354.

	Matt Wobensmith [:mwobensmith][:matt:]
	Comment 27 • 12 years ago

I've run passes on CentOS 6.3 and Debian 6, both 64bit. All seems OK.

Are there concerns for other versions of the above - e.g. Debian 5, and/or 32bit?

If not, we can call this bug verified.

	bhearsum@mozilla.com (:bhearsum) Assignee
	Comment 28 • 12 years ago

(In reply to Matt Wobensmith from comment #27)
> I've run passes on CentOS 6.3 and Debian 6, both 64bit. All seems OK.
> 
> Are there concerns for other versions of the above - e.g. Debian 5, and/or
> 32bit?

Yes, it was specifically older versions of these distros that are a concern.

	bhearsum@mozilla.com (:bhearsum) Assignee
	Comment 29 • 12 years ago

Comment on attachment 716546 [details] [diff] [review]
use moz4 gcc

This was backed out due to bustage in the chemspill 17.0.4esr release. Will be relanded once all the chemspills are done. Also need to land the mozilla-esr17 patch on the relbranches.

	Phil Ringnalda (:philor)
	Comment 30 • 12 years ago

Comment on attachment 716557 [details] [diff] [review]
bump in repo files

Backed out in https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-esr17/rev/0e3e0b0e735f since I blindly stumbled into the situation where the tree still thought it was building with moz4 and buildbot thought it would use moz3.

	bhearsum@mozilla.com (:bhearsum) Assignee
	Comment 31 • 12 years ago

Comment on attachment 716546 [details] [diff] [review]
use moz4 gcc

Relanded now that chemspills are over. I'll be triggering some builds to verify once a reconfig puts these patches in production again.

	bhearsum@mozilla.com (:bhearsum) Assignee
	Comment 32 • 12 years ago

Comment on attachment 716557 [details] [diff] [review]
bump in repo files

This has been relanded on default and the relbranches.

	bhearsum@mozilla.com (:bhearsum) Assignee
	Comment 33 • 12 years ago

Builds are looking good.

	bhearsum@mozilla.com (:bhearsum) Assignee
	Comment 34 • 12 years ago

(In reply to Ben Hearsum [:bhearsum] from comment #32)
> Comment on attachment 716557 [details] [diff] [review]
> bump in repo files
> 
> This has been relanded on default and the relbranches.

Some of us were talking yesterday and it was pointed out to me that we probably don't want to take a change like this in a chemspill from a risk/reward standpoint. I backed out on both relbranches because of this, just in case.

	Matt Wobensmith [:mwobensmith][:matt:]
	Comment 35 • 12 years ago

As per conversation with Ben, our remaining concern w/r/t testing is that we want to verify that this build runs on a distro that has the following config:

GTK 2.10 to 2.17
Glib 2.12 to 2.21

This corresponds to the ESR system support page here:
https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/17.0.4/system-requirements/

Getting an older distro - that meets the above reqs - running in a virtualized environment (internally) has been difficult. Hence, we intend to ask someone who already has this config in place. Ben is reaching out to a community member who should have this config, and will update this bug shortly.

	bhearsum@mozilla.com (:bhearsum) Assignee
	Comment 36 • 12 years ago

(In reply to Matt Wobensmith from comment #35)
> As per conversation with Ben, our remaining concern w/r/t testing is that we
> want to verify that this build runs on a distro that has the following
> config:
> 
> GTK 2.10 to 2.17
> Glib 2.12 to 2.21
> 
> This corresponds to the ESR system support page here:
> https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/17.0.4/system-requirements/
> 
> Getting an older distro - that meets the above reqs - running in a
> virtualized environment (internally) has been difficult. Hence, we intend to
> ask someone who already has this config in place. Ben is reaching out to a
> community member who should have this config, and will update this bug
> shortly.

I did this over here: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=832601#c9.

	bhearsum@mozilla.com (:bhearsum) Assignee
	Comment 37 • 12 years ago

He responded, and the builds work fine:

(In reply to Camaleon from comment #10)
> (In reply to Ben Hearsum [:bhearsum] from comment #9)
> > Camaleon, if you don't mind, could you test one more build out for us?
> > https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/nightly/latest-mozilla-esr17/
> > firefox-17.0.4esrpre.en-US.linux-x86_64.tar.bz2
> 
> Sure, but as I don't have a 64-bits system I tested this file, instead:
> 
> https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/nightly/latest-mozilla-esr17/
> firefox-17.0.4esrpre.en-US.linux-i686.tar.bz2
> 
> By the way, it runs okay.

	bhearsum@mozilla.com (:bhearsum) Assignee
	Comment 38 • 11 years ago

Using mock, even with the new compiler, still caused runtime issues on some platforms:
> Alex Keybl wrote:
>> As we approach our next targeted ESR release date of 4/2/2013, we'd
>> like your help in smoke testing the latest pre-release builds. We're
>> not asking for a full qualification of the builds prior to release,
>> but rather minor exploratory testing of internal websites and
>> applications that our QA team wouldn't otherwise have access to.
>> Please directly email release-mgmt@mozilla.com or this list with any
>> critical regressions found. Note that this release will include an
>> upgrade of NSS from 3.13.6 to NSS 3.14.3 for user security. If you
>> utilize SSL client authentication with smartcards, please verify that
>> your users will not be impacted by this upgrade.
>> -Alex Keybl Release Manager
>> NOTE: Please do not deploy any of the builds linked to below - they
>> are pre-release software. Updates will not function correctly, and
>> these pre-release builds will not be supported by Mozilla.
>> ESR17 Windows:
>> https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/nightly/latest-mozilla-esr17/firefox-17.0.4esrpre.en-US.win32.installer.exe
>> ESR17 Mac OS X:
>> https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/nightly/latest-mozilla-esr17/firefox-17.0.4esrpre.en-US.mac.dmg
>> ESR17 Linux:
>> https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/nightly/latest-mozilla-esr17/firefox-17.0.4esrpre.en-US.linux-i686.tar.bz2
> 
> This Linux FF17.0.5esr pre-release doesn't run on RHEL/CentOS 5 - the
> error I get is:
> 
> Couldn't load XRE functions.
> 
> Which means it can't load libxul.so :
> 
> libxpcom.so: /lib/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.7' not found (required by
> ./libxul.so)
> 
> It also requires libgio-2.0.so.0 - which doesn't exist on CentOS 5
> 
> ESR 17.0.4 does run OK on CentOS 5


(Ignore the filenames - those builds were built this morning.) I'm backing this out *again*. I think it's about time we WONTFIX this bug, too.

	bhearsum@mozilla.com (:bhearsum) Assignee
	Comment 39 • 11 years ago

Backed out in https://hg.mozilla.org/build/buildbot-configs/rev/d42aa7b28de7 and https://hg.mozilla.org/build/buildbot-configs/rev/7b4d026f8a1d. Once the next reconfig happens I'll be backing out the mozilla-esr17 file, too.

	Phil Ringnalda (:philor)
	Comment 40 • 11 years ago

I couldn't figure out what it meant that only Linux64 builds broke in https://tbpl.mozilla.org/?tree=Mozilla-Esr17&rev=187596cad342 (in a way that looks sort of like it means "the NSS update we got while we were building with mock does not build without mock"), so I closed esr17 and comm-esr17.

	bhearsum@mozilla.com (:bhearsum) Assignee
	Comment 41 • 11 years ago

(In reply to Phil Ringnalda (:philor) from comment #40)
> I couldn't figure out what it meant that only Linux64 builds broke in
> https://tbpl.mozilla.org/?tree=Mozilla-Esr17&rev=187596cad342 (in a way that
> looks sort of like it means "the NSS update we got while we were building
> with mock does not build without mock"), so I closed esr17 and comm-esr17.

I filed this as bug 855263. Not sure what we're going to do yet.

	James Pearson
	Comment 42 • 11 years ago

(In reply to Ben Hearsum [:bhearsum] from comment #38)
> > 
> > This Linux FF17.0.5esr pre-release doesn't run on RHEL/CentOS 5 - the
> > error I get is:
> > 
> > Couldn't load XRE functions.
> > 
> > Which means it can't load libxul.so :
> > 
> > libxpcom.so: /lib/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.7' not found (required by
> > ./libxul.so)
> > 
> > It also requires libgio-2.0.so.0 - which doesn't exist on CentOS 5
> > 
> > ESR 17.0.4 does run OK on CentOS 5

The latest 32 bit Linux FF17.0.5esr pre-release (dated 27th March) runs OK on CentOS 5

	bhearsum@mozilla.com (:bhearsum) Assignee
	Comment 43 • 11 years ago

Given all of the issues we've had with trying to do this, I don't think it's worthwhile investing any more time into. We'll just have to prop up the old build platform until esr17 dies.