Re: [ACTION NEEDED #2] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

On 03/07/2018 02:43 AM, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA256 > > This is the second iteration of my mass-scratch-rebuild without > gcc/gcc-c++ in the buildroot[0]. Everything what was written in > original mail still applies. > > Since people might have fixed

Re: [atomic-devel] tools and systemtap containers are available in Fedora

On 10/05/2017 10:33 AM, Jeremy Eder wrote: > Forgot to add Will Cohen (discussed stap errors with him briefly).  Also my > replies won't make it to the dev list since I am not subscribed (just fyi I > guess). > > On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 9:10 AM, Jeremy Eder

Re: Rawhide PAPI-5.3 rebase warning

On 01/09/2014 04:04 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote: On 01/09/2014 01:23 PM, William Cohen wrote: On 01/09/2014 01:29 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote: On 01/09/2014 10:48 AM, William Cohen wrote: PAPI-5.3.0 came out at the beginning of December 2013 (http://icl.cs.utk.edu/papi/news/news.html?id=331). I

Re: Rawhide PAPI-5.3 rebase warning

On 01/09/2014 04:04 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote: On 01/09/2014 01:23 PM, William Cohen wrote: On 01/09/2014 01:29 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote: On 01/09/2014 10:48 AM, William Cohen wrote: PAPI-5.3.0 came out at the beginning of December 2013 (http://icl.cs.utk.edu/papi/news/news.html?id=331). I

Rawhide PAPI-5.3 rebase warning

PAPI-5.3.0 came out at the beginning of December 2013 (http://icl.cs.utk.edu/papi/news/news.html?id=331). I would like to rebase Fedora rawhide PAPI to PAPI-5.3.0 January 16, 2014. openmpi build is definitely dependent on papi-devel, but I don't know if there are any other packages

Re: Rawhide PAPI-5.3 rebase warning

On 01/09/2014 01:29 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote: On 01/09/2014 10:48 AM, William Cohen wrote: PAPI-5.3.0 came out at the beginning of December 2013 (http://icl.cs.utk.edu/papi/news/news.html?id=331). I would like to rebase Fedora rawhide PAPI to PAPI-5.3.0 January 16, 2014. openmpi build

Review swap request for libpfm

Hi All, I am trying to clean up the papi package. The papi package currently bundles the libpfm sources with in it. I would like to split libpfm out into a separate package to follow the Fedora packaging guidelines. There have been some comments on package in the bz, but need to get the

Re: Strategy for packaging an ARM Cortex-M toolchain

On 05/23/2012 12:14 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: On 05/23/2012 06:07 PM, Rob Spanton wrote: Hi, There are an increasing number of ARM Cortex-M based boards around, and I'd like to get a cross-compilation toolchain for them into the Fedora repositories. I'd like to make it just as easy to

koji attempting to use qt3-devel rpm rather than qt-devel on fedora 13 build root

I am attempting to rebuild oprofile for fedora 13. However koji is converting the following in the spec file: BuildRequires: qt-devel into a dependency on the qt3-devel rpm, which is wrong. There is a qt-devel for qt4 available. Why isn't it using the proper qt-devel? The package built

Re: koji attempting to use qt3-devel rpm rather than qt-devel on fedora 13 build root

On 06/07/2011 06:37 PM, William Cohen wrote: I am attempting to rebuild oprofile for fedora 13. However koji is converting the following in the spec file: BuildRequires: qt-devel into a dependency on the qt3-devel rpm, which is wrong. There is a qt-devel for qt4 available. Why isn't

Using LD_PRELOAD wrappers to identify problem use of shared library functions

Shared library are heavily used through Linux distributions. Unfortunately, there are cases of functions in the libraries having undefined behavior. Rather than immediately reporting the dependence on that undefined behavior, the applications may later fail in odd and seemingly random ways. On