Mass Fortran rebuilds due to new GCC?

[Susi Lehtola]

Hi,


as has happened many times before, the GCC bump in rawhide has broken 
all Fortran packages, desperately needing a mass rebuild. Unfortunately, 
rpm is blissfully unaware of any breakage happening (BZ #1192617) so 
maintainers won't even know when this breakage happens.

Before I start rebuilding packages, are there any plans to do the 
rebuilds soon..?
-- 
Susi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
jussilehtola(a)fedoraproject.org

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Fri, 13 Feb 2015 12:47:07 -0800
Susi Lehtola <jussilehtola(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; wrote:

>  Hi,
>  
>  
>  as has happened many times before, the GCC bump in rawhide has broken 
>  all Fortran packages, desperately needing a mass rebuild. 
Can you expand on the breakage? Is it that they no longer rebuild?
Or that they no longer run? 

>  Unfortunately, rpm is blissfully unaware of any breakage happening
>  (BZ #1192617) so maintainers won't even know when this breakage
>  happens.
>  
>  Before I start rebuilding packages, are there any plans to do the 
>  rebuilds soon..? 
There is no mass rebuild this cycle. It would be good to isolate the
scope here and see what needs to be rebuilt. Do you have a list of all
affected packages or a way to come up with one?

kevin

[Jakub Jelinek]

On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 01:53:12PM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>  On Fri, 13 Feb 2015 12:47:07 -0800
>  Susi Lehtola <jussilehtola(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; wrote:
>  > as has happened many times before, the GCC bump in rawhide has broken 
>  > all Fortran packages, desperately needing a mass rebuild.
>  
>  Can you expand on the breakage? Is it that they no longer rebuild?
>  Or that they no longer run?  
The ABI has not changed, libgfortran is backwards compatible, the only thing
that changed is (as with any GCC version bump) the *.mod file format.
Not all Fortran packages ship modules...

	Jakub

[Orion Poplawski]

On 02/13/2015 01:57 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>  On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 01:53:12PM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > On Fri, 13 Feb 2015 12:47:07 -0800
> > Susi Lehtola <jussilehtola(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; wrote:
> >> as has happened many times before, the GCC bump in rawhide has broken 
> >> all Fortran packages, desperately needing a mass rebuild.
> >
> > Can you expand on the breakage? Is it that they no longer rebuild?
> > Or that they no longer run? 
>  
>  The ABI has not changed, libgfortran is backwards compatible, the only thing
>  that changed is (as with any GCC version bump) the *.mod file format.
>  Not all Fortran packages ship modules...
>  
>  	Jakub
>   
Would be really nice if we could track this in rpm.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=983057

-- 
Orion Poplawski
Technical Manager                     303-415-9701 x222
NWRA, Boulder/CoRA Office             FAX: [phone]
3380 Mitchell Lane                       orion(a)nwra.com
Boulder, CO 80301                   http://www.nwra.com

[Björn Esser]

Am Freitag, den 13.02.2015, 13:53 -0700 schrieb Kevin Fenzi:
>  On Fri, 13 Feb 2015 12:47:07 -0800
>  Susi Lehtola <jussilehtola(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; wrote:
>  
>  > Hi,
>  > 
>  > 
>  > as has happened many times before, the GCC bump in rawhide has broken 
>  > all Fortran packages, desperately needing a mass rebuild.
>  
>  Can you expand on the breakage? Is it that they no longer rebuild?
>  Or that they no longer run?  
I think, he's talking about the fact they are segfaulting…  ;)


>  > Unfortunately, rpm is blissfully unaware of any breakage
> happening
>  > (BZ #1192617) so maintainers won't even know when this breakage
>  > happens.
>  > 
>  > Before I start rebuilding packages, are there any plans to do the 
>  > rebuilds soon..?
>  
>  There is no mass rebuild this cycle. It would be good to isolate the
>  scope here and see what needs to be rebuilt. Do you have a list of all
>  affected packages or a way to come up with one? 
Why is mass rebuild skipped this time?

For this particular case it is:  repoquery --whatrequires libgfortran

Cheers,
  Björn

[M. Edward (Ed) Borasky]

I need FORTRAN for R and R packages - if it's not 100% for the R
ecosystme I'd consider any bugs to be at least blockers for beta, if
not alpha.

On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 12:59 PM, Björn Esser <bjoern.esser(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  Am Freitag, den 13.02.2015, 13:53 -0700 schrieb Kevin Fenzi:
> > On Fri, 13 Feb 2015 12:47:07 -0800
> > Susi Lehtola <jussilehtola(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > >
> > > as has happened many times before, the GCC bump in rawhide has broken
> > > all Fortran packages, desperately needing a mass rebuild.
> >
> > Can you expand on the breakage? Is it that they no longer rebuild?
> > Or that they no longer run?
>
>  I think, he's talking about the fact they are segfaulting…  ;)
>
>
> > > Unfortunately, rpm is blissfully unaware of any breakage happening
> > > (BZ #1192617) so maintainers won't even know when this breakage
> > > happens.
> > >
> > > Before I start rebuilding packages, are there any plans to do the
> > > rebuilds soon..?
> >
> > There is no mass rebuild this cycle. It would be good to isolate the
> > scope here and see what needs to be rebuilt. Do you have a list of all
> > affected packages or a way to come up with one?
>
>  Why is mass rebuild skipped this time?
>
>  For this particular case it is:  repoquery --whatrequires libgfortran
>
>  Cheers,
>    Björn
>
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>  Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct 


-- 
OSJourno: Robust Power Tools for Digital Journalists
http://www.znmeb.mobi/stories/osjourno-robust-power-tools-for-digital-jou...

Remember, if you're traveling to Bactria, Hump Day is Tuesday and Thursday.

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Fri, 13 Feb 2015 21:59:06 +0100
Björn Esser <bjoern.esser(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:

>  Am Freitag, den 13.02.2015, 13:53 -0700 schrieb Kevin Fenzi:
>  > On Fri, 13 Feb 2015 12:47:07 -0800
>  > Susi Lehtola <jussilehtola(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; wrote:
>  > 
>  > > Hi,
>  > > 
>  > > 
>  > > as has happened many times before, the GCC bump in rawhide has
>  > > broken all Fortran packages, desperately needing a mass rebuild.
>  > 
>  > Can you expand on the breakage? Is it that they no longer rebuild?
>  > Or that they no longer run? 
>  
>  I think, he's talking about the fact they are segfaulting…  ;) 
Well, thats not really clear to me at least. "broken" is pretty generic
and vuage. 

>  > > Unfortunately, rpm is blissfully unaware of any breakage
> happening
>  > > (BZ #1192617) so maintainers won't even know when this breakage
>  > > happens.
>  > > 
>  > > Before I start rebuilding packages, are there any plans to do the 
>  > > rebuilds soon..? 
I think the plan was to do one in rawhide as soon as gcc5 is ready. 
So, likely sometime in the next few weeks perhaps?

>  > 
>  > There is no mass rebuild this cycle. It would be good to isolate the
>  > scope here and see what needs to be rebuilt. Do you have a list of
>  > all affected packages or a way to come up with one?
>  
>  Why is mass rebuild skipped this time? 
Not enough time in the cycle. 
 
>  For this particular case it is:  repoquery --whatrequires libgfortran
But it sounds like it's a subset of these (only those with .mod files)
that are actually affected?

So, something like: 

% repoquery -qf /usr/lib64/gfortran/modules/\*.mod | sort | uniq
elpa-mpich-devel-0:2013.11-5.008.fc22.x86_64
elpa-openmpi-devel-0:2013.11-5.008.fc22.x86_64
getdata-devel-0:0.8.6-1.fc22.x86_64
grib_api-devel-0:1.13.0-1.fc22.x86_64
hdf5-devel-0:1.8.14-1.fc22.x86_64
healpix-devel-0:2.13a-15.fc22.x86_64
libxc-devel-0:2.1.0-4.fc22.x86_64
netcdf-fortran-devel-0:4.4.1-1.fc22.x86_64
plplot-fortran-devel-0:5.10.0-17.fc22.x86_64
qd-devel-0:2.3.15-1.fc22.x86_64
wannier90-devel-0:2.0.0-3.fc22.x86_64

And then I suppose everything that buildrequires them? 

kevin

[Susi Lehtola]

On 02/15/2015 01:05 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>  On Fri, 13 Feb 2015 21:59:06 +0100
>  Björn Esser <bjoern.esser(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
> > Am Freitag, den 13.02.2015, 13:53 -0700 schrieb Kevin Fenzi:
> >> Can you expand on the breakage? Is it that they no longer rebuild?
> >> Or that they no longer run?
> >
> > I think, he's talking about the fact they are segfaulting…  ;)
>
>  Well, thats not really clear to me at least. "broken" is pretty generic
>  and vuage. 
Well, yes. Broken here means that if you have packages foo and bar, with 
bar being built on foo,
  1) if you try to rebuild bar, it will fail because foo's module is of
     the wrong version.
  2) after foo is rebuilt, bar will typically segfault when it's run.

so you'll need to rebuild both with the new version of GFortran.

> > For this particular case it is:  repoquery --whatrequires
> libgfortran
>
>  But it sounds like it's a subset of these (only those with .mod files)
>  that are actually affected?
>
>  So, something like:
>
>  % repoquery -qf /usr/lib64/gfortran/modules/\*.mod | sort | uniq
>  elpa-mpich-devel-0:2013.11-5.008.fc22.x86_64
>  elpa-openmpi-devel-0:2013.11-5.008.fc22.x86_64
>  getdata-devel-0:0.8.6-1.fc22.x86_64
>  grib_api-devel-0:1.13.0-1.fc22.x86_64
>  hdf5-devel-0:1.8.14-1.fc22.x86_64
>  healpix-devel-0:2.13a-15.fc22.x86_64
>  libxc-devel-0:2.1.0-4.fc22.x86_64
>  netcdf-fortran-devel-0:4.4.1-1.fc22.x86_64
>  plplot-fortran-devel-0:5.10.0-17.fc22.x86_64
>  qd-devel-0:2.3.15-1.fc22.x86_64
>  wannier90-devel-0:2.0.0-3.fc22.x86_64
>
>  And then I suppose everything that buildrequires them? 
Yes, that might be a sane assumption.
-- 
Susi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
jussilehtola(a)fedoraproject.org