Re: [Scitech] mpich in el6
by Sébastien Boisvert
----------------------------------------
> Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2014 22:07:15 +0200
> From: jussilehtola(a)fedoraproject.org
> To: seb(a)boisvert.info
> CC: scitech(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> Subject: Re: mpich in el6
>
> On Mon, 24 Feb 2014 14:36:06 -0500
> Sébastien Boisvert <seb(a)boisvert.info> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> What's the name of mpich in el6 ?
>>
>> Is it still named mpich2 ?
>>
>
> yes
OK.
I added a variable for the mpich package name.
This builds successfully in koji for f19, f20, rawhide.
But for el6, it fails (after pulling mpich2 and other dependencies, though).
But I get this error in root.log:
DEBUG util.py:281: error: cannot open Name index using db3 - Invalid argument (22)
In build.log, I get:
/var/tmp/rpm-tmp.u87pWh: line 50: fg: no job control
error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.u87pWh (%build)
el6 build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6566767 (the i696 build fails).
I am not sure what is going on.
> --
> Susi Lehtola
> Fedora Project Contributor
> jussilehtola(a)fedoraproject.org
10 years, 1 month
mpich in el6
by Sébastien Boisvert
Hi,
What's the name of mpich in el6 ?
Is it still named mpich2 ?
10 years, 2 months
Re: [Scitech] Broken dependencies: Ray
by Sébastien Boisvert
----------------------------------------
> Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2014 20:49:47 +0200
> From: jussilehtola(a)fedoraproject.org
> To: seb(a)boisvert.info
> Subject: Re: Broken dependencies: Ray
>
> On Mon, 24 Feb 2014 13:47:07 -0500
> Sébastien Boisvert <seb(a)boisvert.info> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I updated the Ray version with upstream (now 2.3.1-1 instead of 2.1.0-8).
>
> OK, although this wasn't necessary to perform the rebuild. You could
> have just increased the release tag by one by hand, or by using
> rpmdev-bumpspec.
>
>> Will my packages be submitted to Bodhi automatically ?
>
> Uhh, what do you mean?
>
> The rawhide package will automatically hit rawhide with the next repo
> compose, which IIRC happens every 30 minutes.
I mean:
The workflow is to first build packages in koji [1]. The same page says
that packages are "submitted to Bodhi" [2]. I was wondering if the submission
to Bodhi is automated or not.
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Bodhi#Workflow
[2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Bodhi#Package_States
> So that will fix the
> dependency problem for which you got the mails about.
> --
> Susi Lehtola
> Fedora Project Contributor
> jussilehtola(a)fedoraproject.org
10 years, 2 months
Re: [Scitech] Broken dependencies: Ray
by Sébastien Boisvert
----------------------------------------
> Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2014 19:16:56 +0200
> From: jussilehtola(a)fedoraproject.org
> To: seb(a)boisvert.info
> Subject: Re: Broken dependencies: Ray
>
> On Mon, 24 Feb 2014 12:14:33 -0500
> Sébastien Boisvert <seb(a)boisvert.info> wrote:
>
>> ----------------------------------------
>>> Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2014 18:57:04 +0200
>>> From: jussilehtola(a)fedoraproject.org
>>> To: seb(a)boisvert.info
>>> Subject: Re: Broken dependencies: Ray
>>>
>>> On Mon, 24 Feb 2014 11:42:00 -0500
>>> Sébastien Boisvert <seb(a)boisvert.info> wrote:
>>>>>> I see. Do I need to change Ray's spec file ?
>>>>>
>>>>> No, a rebuild is enough. Which you already did
>>>>> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6561314
>>>>
>>>> I am still getting automated emails telling me about Broken dependencies.
>>>>
>>>> Should I worry about that ?
>>>
>>> Actually, that rebuild was from September, and the one you did just now
>>> was just a scratch build...
>>
>> When I try to do the rawhide build, it tells me that it has already been
>> built.
>>
>> [seb@localhost Ray]$ fedpkg build
>> Could not execute build: Ray-2.1.0-8.fc21 has already been built
>
> Yes, you need to bump the release.
Hi,
I updated the Ray version with upstream (now 2.3.1-1 instead of 2.1.0-8).
Builds:
rawhide
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6565962
f20
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6565974
f19
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6565964
Will my packages be submitted to Bodhi automatically ?
Thanks.
> --
> Susi Lehtola
> Fedora Project Contributor
> jussilehtola(a)fedoraproject.org
10 years, 2 months
Re: [Scitech] Broken dependencies: Ray
by Sébastien Boisvert
----------------------------------------
> Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2014 18:57:04 +0200
> From: jussilehtola(a)fedoraproject.org
> To: seb(a)boisvert.info
> Subject: Re: Broken dependencies: Ray
>
> On Mon, 24 Feb 2014 11:42:00 -0500
> Sébastien Boisvert <seb(a)boisvert.info> wrote:
>>>> I see. Do I need to change Ray's spec file ?
>>>
>>> No, a rebuild is enough. Which you already did
>>> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6561314
>>
>> I am still getting automated emails telling me about Broken dependencies.
>>
>> Should I worry about that ?
>
> Actually, that rebuild was from September, and the one you did just now
> was just a scratch build...
When I try to do the rawhide build, it tells me that it has already been
built.
[seb@localhost Ray]$ fedpkg build
Could not execute build: Ray-2.1.0-8.fc21 has already been built
>
> So yes, a rebuild is still necessary. At least some of my packages have
> been rebuilt by the mpich maintainer.
>
> I'm still wondering about the dead silence on the devel list about
> this. Soname bumps should be preannounced.
> --
> Susi Lehtola
> Fedora Project Contributor
> jussilehtola(a)fedoraproject.org
10 years, 2 months
Re: [Scitech] Broken dependencies: Ray
by Sébastien Boisvert
----------------------------------------
> Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2014 15:44:33 +0200
> From: jussilehtola(a)fedoraproject.org
> To: seb(a)boisvert.info
> CC: scitech(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> Subject: Re: Broken dependencies: Ray
>
> On Sun, 23 Feb 2014 08:33:20 -0500
> Sébastien Boisvert <seb(a)boisvert.info> wrote:
>>>>> Ray has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree:
>>>>> On x86_64:
>>>>> Ray-mpich-2.1.0-8.fc21.x86_64 requires libmpichcxx.so.10()(64bit)
>>>>> Ray-mpich-2.1.0-8.fc21.x86_64 requires libmpich.so.10()(64bit)
>>>>> On i386:
>>>>> Ray-mpich-2.1.0-8.fc21.i686 requires libmpichcxx.so.10
>>>>> Ray-mpich-2.1.0-8.fc21.i686 requires libmpich.so.10
>>>>> On armhfp:
>>>>> Ray-mpich-2.1.0-8.fc21.armv7hl requires libmpichcxx.so.10
>>>>> Ray-mpich-2.1.0-8.fc21.armv7hl requires libmpich.so.10
>>>>> Please resolve this as soon as possible.
>>>
>>> No, this is because mpich has had an unannounced soname bump once
>>> again. Soname bumps break requirements, so all dependent packages have
>>> to be rebuilt.
>>>
>>
>> I see. Do I need to change Ray's spec file ?
>
> No, a rebuild is enough. Which you already did
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6561314
I am still getting automated emails telling me about Broken dependencies.
Should I worry about that ?
> --
> Susi Lehtola
> Fedora Project Contributor
> jussilehtola(a)fedoraproject.org
10 years, 2 months
Re: [Scitech] Broken dependencies: Ray
by Sébastien Boisvert
----------------------------------------
> Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2014 15:44:33 +0200
> From: jussilehtola(a)fedoraproject.org
> To: seb(a)boisvert.info
> CC: scitech(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> Subject: Re: Broken dependencies: Ray
>
> On Sun, 23 Feb 2014 08:33:20 -0500
> Sébastien Boisvert <seb(a)boisvert.info> wrote:
>>>>> Ray has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree:
>>>>> On x86_64:
>>>>> Ray-mpich-2.1.0-8.fc21.x86_64 requires libmpichcxx.so.10()(64bit)
>>>>> Ray-mpich-2.1.0-8.fc21.x86_64 requires libmpich.so.10()(64bit)
>>>>> On i386:
>>>>> Ray-mpich-2.1.0-8.fc21.i686 requires libmpichcxx.so.10
>>>>> Ray-mpich-2.1.0-8.fc21.i686 requires libmpich.so.10
>>>>> On armhfp:
>>>>> Ray-mpich-2.1.0-8.fc21.armv7hl requires libmpichcxx.so.10
>>>>> Ray-mpich-2.1.0-8.fc21.armv7hl requires libmpich.so.10
>>>>> Please resolve this as soon as possible.
>>>
>>> No, this is because mpich has had an unannounced soname bump once
>>> again. Soname bumps break requirements, so all dependent packages have
>>> to be rebuilt.
>>>
>>
>> I see. Do I need to change Ray's spec file ?
>
> No, a rebuild is enough. Which you already did
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6561314
Right.
Thank you for your guidance.
> --
> Susi Lehtola
> Fedora Project Contributor
> jussilehtola(a)fedoraproject.org
10 years, 2 months
Re: [Scitech] Broken dependencies: Ray
by Sébastien Boisvert
----------------------------------------
> Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2014 15:25:15 +0200
> From: jussilehtola(a)fedoraproject.org
> To: seb(a)boisvert.info
> CC: scitech(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> Subject: Re: Broken dependencies: Ray
>
> On Sun, 23 Feb 2014 07:58:25 -0500
> Sébastien Boisvert <seb(a)boisvert.info> wrote:
>
>> Hello SciTech group,
>>
>>
>> The Ray packages fails rawhide build (f21) because of mpich (again).
>> The last time, it was because the package mpich changed its name from
>> mpich2 to mpich.
>
> (clip)
>
>>> Ray has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree:
>>> On x86_64:
>>> Ray-mpich-2.1.0-8.fc21.x86_64 requires libmpichcxx.so.10()(64bit)
>>> Ray-mpich-2.1.0-8.fc21.x86_64 requires libmpich.so.10()(64bit)
>>> On i386:
>>> Ray-mpich-2.1.0-8.fc21.i686 requires libmpichcxx.so.10
>>> Ray-mpich-2.1.0-8.fc21.i686 requires libmpich.so.10
>>> On armhfp:
>>> Ray-mpich-2.1.0-8.fc21.armv7hl requires libmpichcxx.so.10
>>> Ray-mpich-2.1.0-8.fc21.armv7hl requires libmpich.so.10
>>> Please resolve this as soon as possible.
>
> No, this is because mpich has had an unannounced soname bump once
> again. Soname bumps break requirements, so all dependent packages have
> to be rebuilt.
>
I see. Do I need to change Ray's spec file ?
> Again, the mpich maintainer who did the bump has not informed about
> this.
>
>> In the repository, it has no f21 branch. [1]
>>
>> coreutils [2] does not also have the f21 branch.
>>
>> The git for maintainers documentation [3] refers to the admin request documentation
>> for creating branches [4]. Therefore, I understand that I don't get to create the
>> branch myself.
>>
>> Therefore, I suppose that the rawhide build is based on the master branch.
>
> Yes, rawhide is the master branch, and currently rawhide is f21. When
> f21 is branched, the master branch will become f22.
Thanks.
> --
> Susi Lehtola
> Fedora Project Contributor
> jussilehtola(a)fedoraproject.org
10 years, 2 months
Re: [Scitech] Broken dependencies: Ray
by Sébastien Boisvert
Hello SciTech group,
The Ray packages fails rawhide build (f21) because of mpich (again).
The last time, it was because the package mpich changed its name from
mpich2 to mpich.
koji rawhide scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6561314
In the repository, it has no f21 branch. [1]
coreutils [2] does not also have the f21 branch.
The git for maintainers documentation [3] refers to the admin request documentation
for creating branches [4]. Therefore, I understand that I don't get to create the
branch myself.
Therefore, I suppose that the rawhide build is based on the master branch.
The Ray master branch has the mpich name fix (branches f19, f20 and master
have the same head).
---
[1] http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/Ray.git
[2] http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/coreutils.git/refs/heads
[3] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Using_git_FAQ_for_package_maintainers
[4] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_SCM_admin_requests#Package_Change_...
----------------------------------------
> From: buildsys(a)fedoraproject.org
> To: Ray-owner(a)fedoraproject.org
> CC:
> Subject: Broken dependencies: Ray
> Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2014 14:07:18 +0000
>
>
>
> Ray has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree:
> On x86_64:
> Ray-mpich-2.1.0-8.fc21.x86_64 requires libmpichcxx.so.10()(64bit)
> Ray-mpich-2.1.0-8.fc21.x86_64 requires libmpich.so.10()(64bit)
> On i386:
> Ray-mpich-2.1.0-8.fc21.i686 requires libmpichcxx.so.10
> Ray-mpich-2.1.0-8.fc21.i686 requires libmpich.so.10
> On armhfp:
> Ray-mpich-2.1.0-8.fc21.armv7hl requires libmpichcxx.so.10
> Ray-mpich-2.1.0-8.fc21.armv7hl requires libmpich.so.10
> Please resolve this as soon as possible.
>
>
10 years, 2 months