Daniel P. Berrangé wrote on 2021/11/02 21:33:
On Tue, Nov 02, 2021 at 09:22:06PM +0900, Mamoru TASAKA wrote:
Daniel P. Berrangé wrote on 2021/11/02 20:50:
On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 05:35:45PM -0400, Michael Jeanson wrote:
I have started the process of updating lttng-ust to 2.13 in rawhide which
implies a soname bump of liblttng-ust to 1 and liblttng-ust-ctl to 5.

  From what I understand, the following packages will need to be rebuilt:

libcamera
mir-server-libs

These packages might also be impacted:

ceph-base
dotnet-runtime
librados2
librbd1
librgw2
lttng-tools
mir-test-tools

I have created a side tag 'f36-build-side-47029' and built lttng-ust and
lttng-tools. I plan to have the side-tag merged in rawhide in about a week.

What's the status of the dependant builds for the side tag ?

I've just tried to build libvirt in rawhide and it fails to install
the build root because librbd is still linking against the old soname
for liblttng-ust

    https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/8499/78208499/root.log

    Error:
     Problem 1: package librbd-devel-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64 requires 
librbd.so.1()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
      - package librbd-devel-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64 requires 
librbd_tp.so.1()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
      - package librbd-devel-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64 requires librbd1 = 
2:16.2.6-2.fc36, but none of the providers can be installed
      - conflicting requests
      - nothing provides liblttng-ust.so.0()(64bit) needed by 
librbd1-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64
     Problem 2: package librados-devel-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64 requires 
librados.so.2()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
      - package librados-devel-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64 requires 
librados_tp.so.2()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
      - package librados-devel-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64 requires librados2 = 
2:16.2.6-2.fc36, but none of the providers can be installed
      - conflicting requests
      - nothing provides liblttng-ust.so.0()(64bit) needed by 
librados2-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64

Regards,
Daniel


Looks like only lttng-ust and lttng-tools are built on the side tag and
they are merged:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-758d58d74f

So perhaps the dependant packages needs rebuilding...

Sigh.

I long for a day when rawhide gating CI blocks RPM updates that
break soname until all affected packages are re-built...

soname bump breakage is what makes rawhide so unpleasant use or
work with.

Regards,
Daniel


$ dnf repoquery --qf '%{name}-%{epoch}:%{version}-%{release}.%{arch}\t%{sourcerpm}' 
--whatrequires "liblttng-ust.so.0()(64bit)"
ceph-base-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64        ceph-16.2.6-2.fc36.src.rpm
dotnet-runtime-3.1-0:3.1.17-2.fc35.x86_64       dotnet3.1-3.1.117-2.fc35.src.rpm
dotnet-runtime-5.0-0:5.0.8-1.fc35.x86_64        dotnet5.0-5.0.205-1.fc35.src.rpm
libcamera-0:0.0.0~git.20210928.e00149f-1.fc36.x86_64    
libcamera-0.0.0~git.20210928.e00149f-1.fc36.src.rpm
librados2-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64        ceph-16.2.6-2.fc36.src.rpm
librbd1-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64  ceph-16.2.6-2.fc36.src.rpm
librgw2-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64  ceph-16.2.6-2.fc36.src.rpm
mir-server-libs-0:2.4.0-3.fc35.x86_64   mir-2.4.0-3.fc35.src.rpm
mir-test-tools-0:2.4.0-3.fc35.x86_64    mir-2.4.0-3.fc35.src.rpm

ceph - currently rebuilding
dotnet3.1 - rebuild fails, looks like bootstrapping is needed
dotnet5.0 - rebuild fails, looks like bootstrapping is needed
libramera - currently rebuilding
mir - rebuild failed - looks like wlcs needs rebuild against new gtest first

Regards,
Mamoru
_______________________________________________
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

Reply via email to