Closed Bug 731795 Opened 8 years ago Closed 8 years ago

MOZ_SOURCESTAMP_FILE shouldn't depend on MOZ_PKG_PRETTYNAMES

Categories

(Firefox Build System :: General, defect, P2)

x86_64
macOS
defect

Tracking

(firefox12 fixed, firefox13 fixed, firefox-esr10 fixed)

RESOLVED FIXED
mozilla14
Tracking Status
firefox12 --- fixed
firefox13 --- fixed
firefox-esr10 --- fixed

People

(Reporter: rail, Assigned: rail)

References

Details

(Whiteboard: [Leave open after merge][qa-])

Attachments

(2 files)

if you use MOZ_PKG_PRETTYNAMES=1, "make package" generates a sourcestamp file with pretty names (only for Mac), but the output goes to a different file. I don't think that we want this:

$ wget -O- -q http://stage.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/nightly/11.0b5-candidates/build1/mac/en-US/Firefox       
20120228210006 11.0b5.txt
http://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-beta/rev/8c9e4873d419 11.0b5.txt
Whiteboard: [Leave open after merge]
Comment on attachment 601774 [details] [diff] [review]
ignore pretty names

This patch can be reproduced only in release builds and doesn't affect any CI builds. Worked fine in m-c and staging release builds.

Regression caused by (bug #): the current bug
Testing completed (on m-c, etc.): tested in dev environment by running staging releases 
Risk to taking this patch (and alternatives if risky): very low
String changes made by this patch: none
Attachment #601774 - Flags: approval-mozilla-beta?
Comment on attachment 601774 [details] [diff] [review]
ignore pretty names

[Triage comment]
Approved based on dev testing and low risk.
Attachment #601774 - Flags: approval-mozilla-beta? → approval-mozilla-beta+
Comment on attachment 601774 [details] [diff] [review]
ignore pretty names

I would like to land this patch on m-r and esr10 branches. 12.0b1 release passed without any problems. The risk is very low since the patch contains only cosmetic changes.
Attachment #601774 - Flags: approval-mozilla-release?
Attachment #601774 - Flags: approval-mozilla-esr10?
Comment on attachment 601774 [details] [diff] [review]
ignore pretty names

[Triage Comment]
wfm. low risk, go for it.
Attachment #601774 - Flags: approval-mozilla-release?
Attachment #601774 - Flags: approval-mozilla-release+
Attachment #601774 - Flags: approval-mozilla-esr10?
Attachment #601774 - Flags: approval-mozilla-esr10+
This is a followup patch, which can be descried as "nobody loves xulrunner!". :)

It is similar to attachment 602897 [details] [diff] [review] from bug 732963: MOZ_SOURCESTAMP_FILE should contain platform name in its name since we upload all file in one directory.
Attachment #608485 - Flags: review?(khuey)
Try (https://tbpl.mozilla.org/?tree=Try&rev=69c7ac90311a) and staging tests pass.
Duplicate of this bug: 740814
Comment on attachment 608485 [details] [diff] [review]
xulrunner related part

I would land this trivial patch to m-a, m-b, m-r and esr10

Regression caused by (bug #): the current bug, xulrunner overwrites sourcestamp files
User impact if declined: N/A, the files affected are not used by end users
Testing completed (on m-c, etc.): ran a couple of staging releases
Risk to taking this patch (and alternatives if risky): very low
String changes made by this patch: None
Attachment #608485 - Flags: approval-mozilla-release?
Attachment #608485 - Flags: approval-mozilla-esr10?
Attachment #608485 - Flags: approval-mozilla-beta?
Attachment #608485 - Flags: approval-mozilla-aurora?
Comment on attachment 608485 [details] [diff] [review]
xulrunner related part

Thanks for the thorough risk assessment :)
Attachment #608485 - Flags: approval-mozilla-release?
Attachment #608485 - Flags: approval-mozilla-release+
Attachment #608485 - Flags: approval-mozilla-esr10?
Attachment #608485 - Flags: approval-mozilla-esr10+
Attachment #608485 - Flags: approval-mozilla-beta?
Attachment #608485 - Flags: approval-mozilla-beta+
Attachment #608485 - Flags: approval-mozilla-aurora?
Attachment #608485 - Flags: approval-mozilla-aurora+
All done here. Looks fine in 12.0b4
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 8 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → mozilla14
Rail, is there anything QA can do to verify this fix? Apart from checking for the changes in the source code of course.
(In reply to Anthony Hughes, Mozilla QA (irc: ashughes) from comment #21)
> Rail, is there anything QA can do to verify this fix? Apart from checking
> for the changes in the source code of course.

I don't think that you need to verify something here:

1) I verified that we don't generate pretty named source stamp files on ftp anymore
2) End users has nothing to do with this files

Thanks!
Okay, thanks Rail. Marking qa- to remove from my queries.
Whiteboard: [Leave open after merge] → [Leave open after merge][qa-]
Product: Core → Firefox Build System
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.