9:04 a.m.
I rebuilt libcutl the other day and then noticed that later boost was
rebuilt. libcutl depends on boost, so is it a problem that it was rebuilt
before boost was?
Thanks,
Dave
9:54 a.m.
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 08:04:53AM -0700, Dave Johansen wrote:
I rebuilt libcutl the other day and then noticed that later boost
was
rebuilt. libcutl depends on boost, so is it a problem that it was rebuilt
before boost was?
Yes. Jakub Jelinek wrote on this list:
<quote>
Also, a releng mass rebuild, which I believe is a random package order,
would very likely not help very much, due to the ABI changes one needs to
rebuild the packages in topological order, non-C++ packages or C++ packages
that nothing C++ depends on of course can be left for the mass rebuild, but
ideally the rest should be rebuilt manually before the mass rebuild.
</quote>
Rich.
--
Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com
Fedora Windows cross-compiler. Compile Windows programs, test, and
build Windows installers. Over 100 libraries supported.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MinGW
11:39 a.m.
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 8:54 AM, Richard W.M. Jones <rjones(a)redhat.com>
wrote:
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 08:04:53AM -0700, Dave Johansen wrote:
> I rebuilt libcutl the other day and then noticed that later boost was
> rebuilt. libcutl depends on boost, so is it a problem that it was rebuilt
> before boost was?
Yes. Jakub Jelinek wrote on this list:
<quote>
Also, a releng mass rebuild, which I believe is a random package order,
would very likely not help very much, due to the ABI changes one needs to
rebuild the packages in topological order, non-C++ packages or C++
packages
that nothing C++ depends on of course can be left for the mass rebuild,
but
ideally the rest should be rebuilt manually before the mass rebuild.
</quote>
I had read through the original "results of a test mass rebuild" and didn't
notice anything like that. Sorry for the oversight on my part and thanks
for the info.
Dave
1:12 p.m.
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 10:39:16AM -0700, Dave Johansen wrote:
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 8:54 AM, Richard W.M. Jones
<rjones(a)redhat.com>
wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 08:04:53AM -0700, Dave Johansen wrote:
> > I rebuilt libcutl the other day and then noticed that later boost was
> > rebuilt. libcutl depends on boost, so is it a problem that it was rebuilt
> > before boost was?
>
> Yes. Jakub Jelinek wrote on this list:
>
> <quote>
> Also, a releng mass rebuild, which I believe is a random package order,
> would very likely not help very much, due to the ABI changes one needs to
> rebuild the packages in topological order, non-C++ packages or C++
> packages
> that nothing C++ depends on of course can be left for the mass rebuild,
> but
> ideally the rest should be rebuilt manually before the mass rebuild.
> </quote>
>
I had read through the original "results of a test mass rebuild" and
didn't
notice anything like that. Sorry for the oversight on my part and thanks
for the info.
I sound a bit accusatory there. Wasn't meant that way :-) I don't
read even a tenth of all the email lists I'm subscribed to either ..
Rich.
--
Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com
virt-builder quickly builds VMs from scratch
http://libguestfs.org/virt-builder.1.html
9:46 p.m.
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 12:12 PM, Richard W.M. Jones <rjones(a)redhat.com>
wrote:
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 10:39:16AM -0700, Dave Johansen wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 8:54 AM, Richard W.M. Jones <rjones(a)redhat.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 08:04:53AM -0700, Dave Johansen wrote:
> > > I rebuilt libcutl the other day and then noticed that later boost was
> > > rebuilt. libcutl depends on boost, so is it a problem that it was
rebuilt
> > > before boost was?
> >
> > Yes. Jakub Jelinek wrote on this list:
> >
> > <quote>
> > Also, a releng mass rebuild, which I believe is a random package
order,
> > would very likely not help very much, due to the ABI changes one
needs to
> > rebuild the packages in topological order, non-C++ packages or C++
> > packages
> > that nothing C++ depends on of course can be left for the mass
rebuild,
> > but
> > ideally the rest should be rebuilt manually before the mass rebuild.
> > </quote>
> >
>
> I had read through the original "results of a test mass rebuild" and
didn't
> notice anything like that. Sorry for the oversight on my part and thanks
> for the info.
I sound a bit accusatory there. Wasn't meant that way :-) I don't
read even a tenth of all the email lists I'm subscribed to either ..
No worries. I was very appreciative of the help and the quick response.
3378
days inactive
3379
days old
4 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
Dave Johansen -
Richard W.M. Jones