FTBFS issues inline -
On Wed, Aug 11, 2021 at 3:01 AM Jonathan Wakely <jwak...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Aug 2021 at 10:21, Jonathan Wakely <jwak...@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 10 Aug 2021 at 18:23, Benjamin Beasley wrote:
> > >
> > > It looks like none of the packages I maintain or co-maintain that
> depend on boost-devel were rebuilt before the side tag was merged.
> > >
> > > Some (luminance-hdr, cpp-hocon) had automated FTI bugs filed; these
> were fixed by a manual rebuild on my part. Another (usd) should be in the
> same boat once some unrelated problems causing FTBFS are resolved.
> > >
> > > Others (cairomm/cairomm1.16) presumably used only header-only parts of
> Boost, and were silently continuing to use the old Boost. I rebuilt these
> as well.
> >
> > Strictly speaking, they don't need to be rebuilt. They don't have any
> > dependency on the version of boost that the rest of the distro uses.
> > In some cases it's possible that another package that depends on boost
> > libs and cairomm libs will encounter some incompatibility between the
> > Boost releases, but this doesn't happen often in practice.
> >
> > When we update boost in rawhide we never rebuild the packages that
> > only depend on boost headers from boost-devel (although often they get
> > rebuilt anyway by a mass rebuild after the boost update, but the mass
> > rebuild happened first this time).
>
> I suppose we could add to the set of rebuilds by doing a repoquery for
> packages which require boost-devel and also provide %{_libdir}/lib*.so
> files (or a -devel package). That would ensure that any boost types in
> the API and ABI of those shared libraries are using the new versions.
> For standalone applications that don't provide any libraries for other
> packages to use, there's no need to rebuild them.
>
> > > It’s probably worth looking into the process for finding and
> rebuilding dependent packages to see why these were not rebuilt, as there
> must be many other packages that also should have been rebuilt but were not.
> >
> >
> > The process to find them is a reqoquery using --whatrequires
> > libboost\* and is correct. It did find all three of luminance-hdr,
> > cpp-hocon and usd, so I'm not sure why rebuilds weren't issued for
> > them. I'll check to see if that happened to other packages. Thanks for
> > pointing it out.
>
> The packages that didn't get rebuilt are:
>
> 0ad *
>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1992882
> OpenImageIO ***
> blender ***
> botan *
>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1992883
> condor *
>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1992884
> cpp-hocon
> fawkes **
> fcitx5-chinese-addons *
>
libime dependency, libime not built against boost 1.76.0, should be **
> freecad *
>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1991078
gazebo **
> gpick *
>
no build?
> gqrx *
>
gnu-radio dependency, all of gnu-radio and gr-* need a rebuild, should be**
> hugin *
>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1991049
> libreoffice *
>
successfully rebuilt libreoffice-7.1.5.2-4.fc35
<https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1815197> 2021-08-11
06:40:30
> luminance-hdr
> luxcorerender ***
> ogre ***
> openms *
>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1992887
> openshadinglanguage
> opentrep *
>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1992889
> pcl *
>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1992893
> python-graph-tool *
>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1992610
> rb_libtorrent *
>
> shiny ***
> sourcextractor++ *
>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1992898
> springlobby **
> usd
> vtk *
>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1992899
>
> The ones marked with a single * were submitted but failed to build
> (some have now been fixed, some need a FTBFS bug filed).
>
> The ones marked ** depend on one of the ones that failed, so are blocked.
>
> The ones marked with *** couldn't be built because a dependency
> failed, but should have been resubmitted after the dep was fixed.
> Those are all done now except blender, which was already FTBFS before
> the boost update, and luxcorerender and shiny, which I'm rebuilding
> now, and gqrx which seems to be broken by the codec2 update.
>
> The rest were not submitted for a rebuild, for some reason. That's
> cpp-hocon, luminance-hdr, openshadinglanguage, and usd. I'm not sure
> why they didn't get submitted.
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
>
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
