Re: f27-override tag for glibc-2.25.90-29.fc27
by Peter Robinson
On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 8:57 AM, Florian Weimer <fweimer(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> Would the person who tagged glibc-2.25.90-29.fc27 into f27-override be
> so kind and remove that tag? I need glibc-2.25.90-30.fc27 to be able to
> build curl, which is needed to fix cmake, which in turn will fix a
> couple of FTBFS errors on ppc64le.
>
> Please contact some of the toolchain folks before tagging toolchain
> packages. I can only speculate why you set this tag, but I don't think
> it did what you thought it would do.
It's now untagged, you''l need to wait for a newRepo to complete, it
was rel-eng that did it so presumably it was to deal with some other
issue around the problems.
6 years, 9 months
Fwd: f27-override tag for glibc-2.25.90-29.fc27
by Florian Weimer
First message was rejected.
-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: f27-override tag for glibc-2.25.90-29.fc27
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2017 09:57:58 +0200
From: Florian Weimer <fweimer(a)redhat.com>
Reply-To: Development discussions related to Fedora
<devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>
To: Development discussions related to Fedora
<devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>, rel-eng(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Would the person who tagged glibc-2.25.90-29.fc27 into f27-override be
so kind and remove that tag? I need glibc-2.25.90-30.fc27 to be able to
build curl, which is needed to fix cmake, which in turn will fix a
couple of FTBFS errors on ppc64le.
Please contact some of the toolchain folks before tagging toolchain
packages. I can only speculate why you set this tag, but I don't think
it did what you thought it would do.
Thanks,
Florian
6 years, 9 months
[releng] Issue #6863: Separate Subpackage and Source Debuginfo releng review
by Mark Wielaard
mjw reported a new issue against the project: `releng` that you are following:
``
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/SubpackageAndSourceDebuginfo is a system wide change proposal for f27. All code is in rawhide already, but the feature isn't enable by default. Packages wishing to have a separate debugsource package and sub-debuginfo packages need to explicitly define one (or both) of the following in their spec file:
%global _debugsource_packages 1
%global _debuginfo_subpackages 1
This might need some release engineering magic to make sure the created <package>-debugsource and <subpackage>-debuginfo packages end up in the [fedora-debuginfo] repository.
There is some more background information on the various debuginfo improvements in the current rawhide rpmbuild and which macros packages can use in the spec files in this fedora devel mailinglist message:
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.or...
Depending on feedback on that we could enable one or both settings by default for the mass rebuild. Although that can also be done afterwards. Or if any issues are found we could keep it off by default and let packages explicitly opt-in.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/releng/issue/6863
6 years, 9 months
