[fedora-arm] What is the best way to fix build issues with Fedora 13 RPMs?

Niels de Vos devos at fedoraproject.org
Tue Mar 8 12:20:10 UTC 2011

On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 10:01 AM, Gordan Bobic <gordan at bobich.net> wrote:
> Niels de Vos wrote:
>> Hello all,
>> it looks like not all Fedora 13 packages can be build on ARM yet. For
>> some packages there have been tickets opened at the Trac instance:
>> - https://fedorahosted.org/arm/report/1
>> I'd like to help out with building these packages, but am not a
>> 'proven packager' [1], so I can not fix the issues completely and rely
>> on the package maintainer or other proven packagers. What I am doing
>> right now is filing bugs against the packages that can not be build on
>> ARM. I'm including pointers to the issue and propose fixes, like:
>> - Bug 682515 - libgda-4.1.4-1.fc13.src.rpm does not rebuild on Fedora 13 for ARM
>> - Bug 682538 - geos-3.2.1-1.fc13.src.rpm does not build on Fedora-13 for ARM
>> These bugs are blockers for the ARMTracker which make them easily findable:
>> - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/showdependencytree.cgi?id=245418&hide_resolved=1
> We're tracking build failures as bugs now? Really??

Well, yeah. There is FTBFS:
- http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FTBFS
- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=FTBFS
- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/showdependencytree.cgi?id=440169&hide_resolved=1

I don's know what the best way would be to mark FTBFS bugs as ARM
specific. But we sure rely on the packagers for fixing the
build-issues for their package.

Maybe there should be a FTBFS-ARM tracker-bug?

> If build failures are now tracked as bugs, OpenOffice/LibreOffice would
> probably be an important one to address sooner rather than later. I have
> from rawhide _almost_ building when configured without the Java
> bits, but it fails in the packaging stage, erroneously trying to extract
> non-existant beanshell components. Without OO/LO, we haven't got a
> usable office package on ARM, which is a bit of an issue. And since
> Ubuntu have it working, we really ought to be keeping up.

I'd suggest creating a BZ for that. Maybe the packagers are interested
in helping out (well, they should imho).

> The main thing that's stopping me from making progress on this at a
> sensible rate is that OO/LO takes 3 or so days to build on my Sheevaplug.

Yeah, thats an issue. I dont know if the arm.koji builders are any
quicker? You might want to check out
fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/ARM/Package_Maintainers .
However, if you build from the srpm you'll need to upload it, which is
likely an other bottleneck for OO/LO.


More information about the arm mailing list