rawhide report: 20130804 changes

[Paul Howarth]

On 06/08/13 03:30, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> On Dom, 2013-08-04 at 20:51 +0100, Paul Howarth wrote:
>> On Sun, 04 Aug 2013 16:28:00 +0100
>> Sérgio Basto <sergio at serjux.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Dom, 2013-08-04 at 13:03 +0000, Fedora Rawhide Report wrote:
>>>> Compose started at Sun Aug  4 08:15:02 UTC 2013
>>>
>>> DEBUG util.py:264:  Error: Package: po4a-0.44-10.fc20.noarch (build)
>>> DEBUG util.py:264:             Requires: perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.16.3)
>>> DEBUG util.py:264:  Error: Package: perl-Qt-0.96.0-6.fc19.armv7hl
>>> (build)
>>> DEBUG util.py:264:             Requires: libperl.so
>>> DEBUG util.py:264:  Error: Package: perl-Qt-0.96.0-6.fc19.armv7hl
>>> (build)
>>>
>>>
>>> debconf building is failing because po4a was fail too , isn't it ?
>>> and also perl-Qt seems is not in F20 updated .
>>
>> perl-Qt has test suite failures with Perl 5.18.
>>
>> See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/perl5.18 for status of the
>> Perl 5.18 rebuild.
>>
>
> Hi, in https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/perl5.18 I see po-debconf,
> it depends on po4a and perl-Qt . po4a-0.44-11 was rebuilt successfully
> with perl 5.18 , but po-debconf tried to use po4a-0.44-10

The latest po-debconf build I can see 
(http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5743618) used 
po4a-0.44-11 and didn't appear to use perl-Qt at all. The build failed 
for what appear to be non-Perl -related reasons.

> In list is missing (at least) debconf, https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=13893
> I just check now, also needs perl-Qt-devel

debconf can't build yet because perl-Qt is still broken. I don't know if 
Petr will be adding packages to the list on the wiki page if they can't 
be built simply because their dependencies have issues rather than being 
directly incompatible with Perl 5.18. Or at least not until the first 
attempt has been done at building all the Perl packages.

> and debhelper builds
> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=16206
> are in wrong order ...,  ausil rebuild first than ppisar.
> as ausil build fail , shouldn't be resubmitted by ausil ?

I don't expect ausil to resubmit anything. The Perl SIG members will 
probably do so where possible. However, I don't see much activity 
upstream for PerlQT so there may not be a fix for that (and its 
dependencies) any time soon.

Paul.