Re: Pidgin on EPEL8

[Stephen John Smoogen]

On Wed, 7 Aug 2019 at 10:52, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel <
[e-mail]> wrote:
> Hello all.
>
> While building my Fedora packages for EPEL8, got a very strange error on
> aarch64 and s390x architectures:
>
> No matching package to install: 'pkgconfig(pidgin)'
>
> But it builds fine with the same SPEC on x86_64 and ppc64le.

OK so it turns out that RHEL-8 is NOT 1:1 across platforms. For some reason
desktop is only on x86_64 and ppc64le and s390/aarch64 are a more limited
set of packages. I don't know if this was the case with the beta's and I
missed it or if this was something done between the beta and the final.

At this point, i am going to say that ExclusiveArch:x86_64,ppc64le will be
needed for most desktop/graphical utilities.
> Affected builds:
>
> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1348098
> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1348097
>
> --
> Sincerely,
>   Vitaly Zaitsev ([e-mail])
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list -- [e-mail]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[e-mail]

Pidgin on EPEL8

[Pablo Sebastián Greco]

El 7/8/19 a las 12:30, Stephen John Smoogen escribió:
> On Wed, 7 Aug 2019 at 10:52, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel 
> <[e-mail] > 
> wrote:
> Hello all.
>
> While building my Fedora packages for EPEL8, got a very strange
> error on
> aarch64 and s390x architectures:
>
> No matching package to install: 'pkgconfig(pidgin)'
>
> But it builds fine with the same SPEC on x86_64 and ppc64le.
>
>
> OK so it turns out that RHEL-8 is NOT 1:1 across platforms. For some 
> reason desktop is only on x86_64 and ppc64le and s390/aarch64 are a 
> more limited set of packages. I don't know if this was the case with 
> the beta's and I missed it or if this was something done between the 
> beta and the final.
>
> At this point, i am going to say that ExclusiveArch:x86_64,ppc64le 
> will be needed for most desktop/graphical utilities.

Smooge, can we ask to add %{arm} to those ExclusiveArch?
O in fact, go the ExcludeArch route?

That will do my armhfp rebuild much simpler.
> Affected builds:
>
> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1348098
> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1348097
>
> -- 
> Sincerely,
>   Vitaly Zaitsev ([e-mail]
> <mailto:[e-mail]>)
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list -- [e-mail]
> <mailto:[e-mail]>
> To unsubscribe send an email to
> [e-mail]
> <mailto:[e-mail]>
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[e-mail]
>
>
>
> -- 
> Stephen J Smoogen.

Pablo.

Pidgin on EPEL8

[Stephen John Smoogen]

On Wed, 7 Aug 2019 at 11:44, Pablo Sebastián Greco 
wrote:
> El 7/8/19 a las 12:30, Stephen John Smoogen escribió:
>
> On Wed, 7 Aug 2019 at 10:52, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel <
> [e-mail]> wrote:
> > Hello all.
> >
> > While building my Fedora packages for EPEL8, got a very strange error on
> > aarch64 and s390x architectures:
> >
> > No matching package to install: 'pkgconfig(pidgin)'
> >
> > But it builds fine with the same SPEC on x86_64 and ppc64le.
>
> OK so it turns out that RHEL-8 is NOT 1:1 across platforms. For some
> reason desktop is only on x86_64 and ppc64le and s390/aarch64 are a more
> limited set of packages. I don't know if this was the case with the beta's
> and I missed it or if this was something done between the beta and the
> final.
>
> At this point, i am going to say that ExclusiveArch:x86_64,ppc64le will be
> needed for most desktop/graphical utilities.
>
> Smooge, can we ask to add %{arm} to those ExclusiveArch?
> O in fact, go the ExcludeArch route?

Whichever works within the policies and tools Fedora uses. My comment was
off the top of my head and may not be valid.
> That will do my armhfp rebuild much simpler.
> > Affected builds:
> >
> > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1348098
> > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1348097
> >
> > --
> > Sincerely,
> >   Vitaly Zaitsev ([e-mail])
> > _______________________________________________
> > devel mailing list -- [e-mail]
> > To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
> > Fedora Code of Conduct:
> > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> > List Archives:
> > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[e-mail]
>
> --
> Stephen J Smoogen.
>
> Pablo.

Pidgin on EPEL8

[Troy Dawson]

On Wed, Aug 7, 2019 at 8:44 AM Pablo Sebastián Greco
 wrote:
> El 7/8/19 a las 12:30, Stephen John Smoogen escribió:
>
> On Wed, 7 Aug 2019 at 10:52, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel  wrote:
> > Hello all.
> >
> > While building my Fedora packages for EPEL8, got a very strange error on
> > aarch64 and s390x architectures:
> >
> > No matching package to install: 'pkgconfig(pidgin)'
> >
> > But it builds fine with the same SPEC on x86_64 and ppc64le.
>
> OK so it turns out that RHEL-8 is NOT 1:1 across platforms. For some reason desktop is only on x86_64 and ppc64le and s390/aarch64 are a more limited set of packages. I don't know if this was the case with the beta's and I missed it or if this was something done between the beta and the final.
>
> At this point, i am going to say that ExclusiveArch:x86_64,ppc64le will be needed for most desktop/graphical utilities.
>
> Smooge, can we ask to add %{arm} to those ExclusiveArch?
> O in fact, go the ExcludeArch route?
>
> That will do my armhfp rebuild much simpler.

I don't think Smooge was saying that EPEL8 would have a build policy
for ExclusiveArch, he was meaning that package maintainers would need
to put that in their spec file.
Ahh .... and now I see what you mean.  You are asking the package
maintainers to put %{arm} in.

OK, I just put it on the packages I have been working on.

Also, here is the EPEL issue about this problem
https://pagure.io/epel/issue/66
And the Beta was the same way as this.  But I personally, never tested
the desktop on s390x or aarch64.  So I never noticed.

Troy