Re: KDE Gear projects with failing CI (master + stable) (11 February 2026)

On 2/13/26 9:53 PM, Nicolas Fella wrote:
> On 2/13/26 9:24 PM, Ben Cooksley wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 12, 2026 at 1:09 PM Albert Astals Cid <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>     Please work on fixing them, otherwise i will remove the failing
>>     CI jobs on
>>     their 4th failing week, it is very important that CI is passing
>>     for multiple
>>     reasons.
>>
>>     Good news: 2 repo fixed
>>
>>
>>     Bad news: 5 repo started failing, 1 keeps failing
>>
>>
>>     kontact - LAST WEEK BEFORE REMOVAL
>>      * https://invent.kde.org/pim/kontact/-/pipelines/1162355
>>       * Craft Windows job running out of memory
>>
>>
>> PIM folks, could we resolve this for now by dropping KItinerary 
>> support in Craft Windows builds, or at the very least only target a 
>> release build of KItinerary?
>> In a cache build we are running in a High Memory VM which will have 
>> the resource to get through building this so the fix to this is stop 
>> rebuilding the whole PIM stack....
>>
>>
>>
>>     kdenlive - NEW
>>      * https://invent.kde.org/multimedia/kdenlive/-/pipelines/1162146
>>       * macos fails to compile
>>
>>
>>     kosmindoormap - NEW
>>      * https://invent.kde.org/libraries/kosmindoormap/-/pipelines/1161455
>>      *
>>     https://invent.kde.org/libraries/kosmindoormap/-/pipelines/1161715
>>     (stable)
>>       * Android build seems to be using the wrong binary format?
>>     cross-compilation issue?
>>
>>
>>     neochat - NEW
>>      * https://invent.kde.org/network/neochat/-/pipelines/1162323
>>     (stable)
>>       * flatpak build fails
>>
>>
>> Not sure why a stable branch is building against master of 
>> libquotient, but seems like 
>> https://invent.kde.org/network/neochat/-/commit/8ca1b8b1d387838fde1c1c448e5d2fe3a077a6e2 
>> needs to be cherry picked if that is intended?
>>
>>
>>
>>     kgpg - NEW
>>      * https://invent.kde.org/utilities/kgpg/-/pipelines/1161149
>>       * Timeout in kgpg-disable and kgpg-export
>>
>>
>>     kmbox - NEW
>>      * https://invent.kde.org/pim/kmbox/-/pipelines/1162163
>>       * Timeout in mbox-mboxbenchmark
>>
>>
>> This test seems to be sitting on the edge of whether it will pass or 
>> not - Qt 6.11 only just passed by running in 57 seconds vs. the 
>> timeout limit of 60 seconds.
>> What is it trying to achieve and why so many iterations?
> I don't follow what's going on there.
>
> Locally that benchmark finishes in ~1 second here, so no problem 
> whatsoever.
>
> On CI the first two sub-benchmarks seem completely fine, but 
> voidTestMD5Performance seems to hand/time out. It's not clear to me 
> how many iterations it does.
>
> It looks like QBENCHMARK automatically adjusts the number of 
> iterations until the results are "good" (whatever that exactly means). 
> Possibly some CI conditions trigger that to go haywire.
>
That said, all this seems to do is benchmark the performance of 
QCryptographicHash, which is nonsensical here.

https://invent.kde.org/pim/kmbox/-/merge_requests/18