[ACTION REQUIRED] FTBFS Packages in rawhide (2015-07-22)
vondruch at redhat.com
Fri Jul 24 10:54:46 UTC 2015
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Dne 23.7.2015 v 21:23 Dennis Gilmore napsal(a):
> On Thursday, July 23, 2015 09:44:58 AM Vít Ondruch wrote:
>> Dne 22.7.2015 v 21:43 opensource at till.name napsal(a):
>>> rubygem-git-up jvcelak 62
>> This is actually interesting piece. This might or might not be FTBFS.
>> This package was not touched by mass rebuild scripts, since it contains
>> "noautobuild" file [1, 2], which (although not mentioned in F23 mass
>> rebuild page ) is apparently honored. So this package should not be
>> retired IMO and I am wondering how many other similar packages we have
>> in Fedora.
>> Till, would you mind to improve your script?
>> Actually I am not sure what is the state of "noautobuild". It is not
>> mentioned in F23 mass rebuild notes  at all, for F21 there is
>> mentioned opt-out  but the actual section is missing. For F20 - F15
>> was opt-out probably disabled .
> opt out was disabled in the f21 mass rebuild. but was not disabled in any
> other rebuild.
Well, the mass rebuild pages says otherwise, you can take F20 as an example:
But this might be just Copy/Paste issue.
> if you have the noautobuild file in place the onus is on you to
> build the package yourself. Perhaps we should remove all ability to
+1 for removing the opt-out. Or does anybody have any valid reason for
not rebuilding his/her packages? I don't think "The rubygem-git-up
package is noarch, rebuild is usualy not needed." is good justification.
> in this case I think retiring the package is the right thing to do
> is rebuilt.
Till removed the "noautobuild" and rebuilt the package, so problem
solved for this instance.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the devel