I just discovered - by coincidence - that Koji is already using DNF for F24 builds.
So unless somebody object I will change mock default config for F24 to use DNF too.
On Thursday, March 17, 2016 10:55:47 AM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
I just discovered - by coincidence - that Koji is already using DNF for F24 builds.
So unless somebody object I will change mock default config for F24 to use DNF too.
It was announced correctly[1] The change was made in rawhide 5 months ago, there is no way we would change f24 back to yum after having build rawhide using dnf
Dennis
[1] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel-announce@lists.fedorapro...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
Dne 17.3.2016 v 14:10 Dennis Gilmore napsal(a):
On Thursday, March 17, 2016 10:55:47 AM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
I just discovered - by coincidence - that Koji is already using DNF
for F24
builds.
So unless somebody object I will change mock default config for F24
to use
DNF too.
It was announced correctly[1] The change was made in rawhide 5 months
ago,
there is no way we would change f24 back to yum after having build
rawhide
using dnf
Please make sure that Koji as well as Mock are (not)installing weak dependencies.
Vít
On Thursday, March 17, 2016 2:24:30 PM CDT Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 17.3.2016 v 14:10 Dennis Gilmore napsal(a):
On Thursday, March 17, 2016 10:55:47 AM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
I just discovered - by coincidence - that Koji is already using DNF
for F24
builds.
So unless somebody object I will change mock default config for F24
to use
DNF too.
It was announced correctly[1] The change was made in rawhide 5 months
ago,
there is no way we would change f24 back to yum after having build
rawhide
using dnf
Please make sure that Koji as well as Mock are (not)installing weak dependencies.
Koji is installing them. I have asked FPC to decide how they should be handled. do note that yourchanges around rubypick have caused issues because for soem reason dnf is aacting different on different arches about it. so if we enforce weak dependencies not being installed you will have a lot of work to fix up all the ruby packages
Dennis
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
Dne 17.3.2016 v 15:12 Dennis Gilmore napsal(a):
On Thursday, March 17, 2016 2:24:30 PM CDT Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 17.3.2016 v 14:10 Dennis Gilmore napsal(a):
On Thursday, March 17, 2016 10:55:47 AM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
I just discovered - by coincidence - that Koji is already using DNF
for F24
builds.
So unless somebody object I will change mock default config for F24
to use
DNF too.
It was announced correctly[1] The change was made in rawhide 5 months
ago,
there is no way we would change f24 back to yum after having build
rawhide
using dnf
Please make sure that Koji as well as Mock are (not)installing weak dependencies.
Koji is installing them.
Yes, I know and I also know the mock does not install them by default. That was the point I wanted to made.
I have asked FPC to decide how they should be handled.
Any ticket number by a chance?
do note that yourchanges around rubypick have caused issues because for soem reason dnf is aacting different on different arches about
it. so if
we enforce weak dependencies not being installed you will have a lot
of work
to fix up all the ruby packages
I am fine with that work, since it is step in right direction ... and it was workarounded by Peter anyway.
TBH, since it seems secondary arches are currently doing just fine without weak dependencies installed (due to some weird DNF bug), I'd say that it should be fine to not install them on primary arches.
Vít
Dennis
-- buildsys mailing list buildsys@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/buildsys@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Friday, March 18, 2016 10:47:58 AM Vít Ondruch wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
Dne 17.3.2016 v 15:12 Dennis Gilmore napsal(a):
On Thursday, March 17, 2016 2:24:30 PM CDT Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 17.3.2016 v 14:10 Dennis Gilmore napsal(a):
On Thursday, March 17, 2016 10:55:47 AM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
I just discovered - by coincidence - that Koji is already using DNF
for F24
builds.
So unless somebody object I will change mock default config for F24
to use
DNF too.
It was announced correctly[1] The change was made in rawhide 5 months
ago,
there is no way we would change f24 back to yum after having build
rawhide
using dnf
Please make sure that Koji as well as Mock are (not)installing weak dependencies.
Koji is installing them.
Yes, I know and I also know the mock does not install them by default. That was the point I wanted to made.
I have asked FPC to decide how they should be handled.
Any ticket number by a chance?
do note that yourchanges around rubypick have caused issues because for soem reason dnf is aacting different on different arches about
it. so if
we enforce weak dependencies not being installed you will have a lot
of work
to fix up all the ruby packages
I am fine with that work, since it is step in right direction ... and it was workarounded by Peter anyway.
TBH, since it seems secondary arches are currently doing just fine without weak dependencies installed (due to some weird DNF bug), I'd say that it should be fine to not install them on primary arches.
We have taken steps to ensure weak dependencies get installed on secondary arches
Dennis
On Fri, 18 Mar 2016 07:07:33 -0500 Dennis Gilmore dennis@ausil.us wrote:
On Friday, March 18, 2016 10:47:58 AM Vít Ondruch wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
Dne 17.3.2016 v 15:12 Dennis Gilmore napsal(a):
On Thursday, March 17, 2016 2:24:30 PM CDT Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 17.3.2016 v 14:10 Dennis Gilmore napsal(a):
On Thursday, March 17, 2016 10:55:47 AM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
I just discovered - by coincidence - that Koji is already using DNF
for F24
builds.
So unless somebody object I will change mock default config for F24
to use
DNF too.
It was announced correctly[1] The change was made in rawhide 5 months
ago,
there is no way we would change f24 back to yum after having build
rawhide
using dnf
Please make sure that Koji as well as Mock are (not)installing weak dependencies.
Koji is installing them.
Yes, I know and I also know the mock does not install them by default. That was the point I wanted to made.
I have asked FPC to decide how they should be handled.
Any ticket number by a chance?
do note that yourchanges around rubypick have caused issues because for soem reason dnf is aacting different on different arches about
it. so if
we enforce weak dependencies not being installed you will have a lot
of work
to fix up all the ruby packages
I am fine with that work, since it is step in right direction ... and it was workarounded by Peter anyway.
TBH, since it seems secondary arches are currently doing just fine without weak dependencies installed (due to some weird DNF bug), I'd say that it should be fine to not install them on primary arches.
We have taken steps to ensure weak dependencies get installed on secondary arches
the workaround for explicitly BR: ruby was applied by Peter to a subset of packages only and unfortunately the problem with weak deps still exists on s390(x). But it went away on aarch64.
Dan
Dne 17.3.2016 v 15:12 Dennis Gilmore napsal(a):
On Thursday, March 17, 2016 2:24:30 PM CDT Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 17.3.2016 v 14:10 Dennis Gilmore napsal(a):
On Thursday, March 17, 2016 10:55:47 AM Miroslav Suchý wrote: > I just discovered - by coincidence - that Koji is already > using DNF
for F24
> builds. > > So unless somebody object I will change mock default config > for F24
to use
> DNF too.
It was announced correctly[1] The change was made in rawhide 5 months
ago,
there is no way we would change f24 back to yum after having build
rawhide
using dnf
Please make sure that Koji as well as Mock are (not)installing weak dependencies.
Koji is installing them.
Yes, I know and I also know the mock does not install them by default. That was the point I wanted to made.
I have asked FPC to decide how they should be handled.
Any ticket number by a chance?
do note that yourchanges around rubypick have caused issues because for soem reason dnf is aacting different on different arches about
it. so if
we enforce weak dependencies not being installed you will have a lot
of work
to fix up all the ruby packages
I am fine with that work, since it is step in right direction ... and it was workarounded by Peter anyway.
TBH, since it seems secondary arches are currently doing just fine without weak dependencies installed (due to some weird DNF bug), I'd say that it should be fine to not install them on primary arches.
We have taken steps to ensure weak dependencies get installed on secondary arches
the workaround for explicitly BR: ruby was applied by Peter to a subset of packages only and unfortunately the problem with weak deps still exists on s390(x). But it went away on aarch64.
In my experience
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 9:20 AM, Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com wrote:
Dne 17.3.2016 v 15:12 Dennis Gilmore napsal(a):
On Thursday, March 17, 2016 2:24:30 PM CDT Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 17.3.2016 v 14:10 Dennis Gilmore napsal(a): > On Thursday, March 17, 2016 10:55:47 AM Miroslav Suchý wrote: >> I just discovered - by coincidence - that Koji is already >> using DNF
for F24
>> builds. >> >> So unless somebody object I will change mock default config >> for F24
to use
>> DNF too. > > It was announced correctly[1] The change was made in rawhide 5 > months
ago,
> there is no way we would change f24 back to yum after having > build
rawhide
> using dnf
Please make sure that Koji as well as Mock are (not)installing weak dependencies.
Koji is installing them.
Yes, I know and I also know the mock does not install them by default. That was the point I wanted to made.
I have asked FPC to decide how they should be handled.
Any ticket number by a chance?
do note that yourchanges around rubypick have caused issues because for soem reason dnf is aacting different on different arches about
it. so if
we enforce weak dependencies not being installed you will have a lot
of work
to fix up all the ruby packages
I am fine with that work, since it is step in right direction ... and it was workarounded by Peter anyway.
TBH, since it seems secondary arches are currently doing just fine without weak dependencies installed (due to some weird DNF bug), I'd say that it should be fine to not install them on primary arches.
We have taken steps to ensure weak dependencies get installed on secondary arches
the workaround for explicitly BR: ruby was applied by Peter to a subset of packages only and unfortunately the problem with weak deps still exists on s390(x). But it went away on aarch64.
In my experience you need to add deps for rubypick and rubygems to get it to build. TBH I'm not sure whether it's a dnf issue or weird stuff the ruby packager is doing.
buildsys@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Dan Horák -
Dennis Gilmore -
Miroslav Suchý -
Peter Robinson -
Vít Ondruch