Re: SYSLINUX 6 x86_64 - syslinux-nonlinux & syslinux64.exe
On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 10:15:50AM +0200, poma wrote: > On 10.05.2014 18:22, poma wrote: > > On 09.05.2014 15:51, Peter Jones wrote: > >> On Fri, May 09, 2014 at 07:18:37AM +0200, poma wrote: > >>> On 08.05.2014 16:05, Peter Jones wrote: > On Thu, May 08, 2014 at 08:21:44AM +0200, poma wrote: > > > > $ rpmbuild -ba ./SPECS/syslinux.spec > > ... > > > > $ find -name syslinux*.rpm > > ./SRPMS/syslinux-6.02-4.fc21.src.rpm > > ./RPMS/x86_64/syslinux-perl-6.02-4.fc21.x86_64.rpm > > ./RPMS/x86_64/syslinux-6.02-4.fc21.x86_64.rpm > > ./RPMS/x86_64/syslinux-devel-6.02-4.fc21.x86_64.rpm > > ./RPMS/x86_64/syslinux-extlinux-6.02-4.fc21.x86_64.rpm > > > > > > # rpm -ivh $(ls ./RPMS/x86_64/syslinux*.rpm) > > error: Failed dependencies: > > syslinux-nonlinux = 6.02-4.fc21 is needed by > > syslinux-6.02-4.fc21.x86_64 > > syslinux-extlinux-nonlinux = 6.02-4.fc21 is needed by > > syslinux-extlinux-6.02-4.fc21.x86_64 > > > > > > Peter, why these three noarches are not built on x86_64? > > - syslinux-extlinux-nonlinux-6.02-4.fc21.noarch.rpm > > - syslinux-nonlinux-6.02-4.fc21.noarch.rpm > > - syslinux-tftpboot-6.02-4.fc21.noarch.rpm > > Because that'll result in a different 32-bit build on i686 vs x86_64. > Get them from the i686 build. > > >>> > >>> OK, can you explain this[5]? > >> > >> I can't - can you reproduce this with mock build instead of just raw > >> rpmbuild with the target set? When I use mock or koji to build them, I > >> get syslinux64.exe in one and syslinux.exe in the -nonlinux one. > >> > >> That's still a (minor) packaging bug, but it shouldn't be a > >> conflict. > >> > > > > ~~~ > > x86_64 - mock rebuild > > ~~~ > > $ mock -r fedora-rawhide-$(uname -i) syslinux-6.02-4.fc21.src.rpm > > $ mock -r fedora-rawhide-i386 syslinux-6.02-4.fc21.src.rpm > > > > ~~ > > syslinux > > ~~ > > # rpm -qlp builddir/build/RPMS/syslinux-6.02-4.fc21.x86_64.rpm | grep exe > > /usr/share/syslinux/syslinux64.exe > > > > $ repoquery -l syslinux-6.02-4.fc21.x86_64 | grep exe > > /usr/share/syslinux/syslinux64.exe > > > > # rpm -qlp builddir/build/RPMS/syslinux-6.02-4.fc21.i686.rpm | grep exe > > /usr/share/syslinux/syslinux.exe > > > > $ repoquery --archlist=i686 -l syslinux-6.02-4.fc21.i686 | grep exe > > /usr/share/syslinux/syslinux.exe > > > > $ rpm -qf /usr/share/syslinux/syslinux64.exe > > syslinux-6.02-4.fc21.x86_64 > > > > ~~~ > > syslinux-nonlinux > > ~~~ > > # rpm -qlp builddir/build/RPMS/syslinux-nonlinux-6.02-4.fc21.noarch.rpm | > > grep exe > > /usr/share/syslinux/syslinux.exe > > > > $ repoquery -l syslinux-nonlinux-6.02-4.fc21.noarch | grep exe > > /usr/share/syslinux/syslinux.exe > > > > $ rpm -qf /usr/share/syslinux/syslinux.exe > > syslinux-nonlinux-6.02-4.fc21.noarch > > > > ~~~ > > x86_64 - rpmbuild > > ~~~ > > $ rpmbuild -ba rpmbuild/SPECS/syslinux.spec > > > > $ rpm -qlp rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/syslinux-6.02-4.fc21.x86_64.rpm | grep exe > > /usr/share/syslinux/syslinux64.exe > > > > $ rpm -qlp rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/syslinux-nonlinux-6.02-4.fc21.noarch.rpm | > > grep exe > > /usr/share/syslinux/syslinux.exe > > /usr/share/syslinux/syslinux64.exe > > > > ~ > > ix86 - rpmbuild > > ~ > > $ rpmbuild -ba rpmbuild/SPECS/syslinux.spec > > > > $ rpm -qlp rpmbuild/RPMS/i686/syslinux-6.02-4.fc21.i686.rpm | grep exe > > /usr/share/syslinux/syslinux.exe > > > > $ rpm -qlp rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/syslinux-nonlinux-6.02-4.fc21.noarch.rpm | > > grep exe > > /usr/share/syslinux/syslinux.exe > > /usr/share/syslinux/syslinux64.exe > > > > $ rpm -qf /usr/share/syslinux/syslinux.exe > > syslinux-nonlinux-6.02-4.fc21.noarch > > syslinux-6.02-4.fc21.i686 > > > > How these two packages manage to install without problem, since both > > contain a file of the same name? RPM allows you to install two files with identical content coming from two different packages. Either that or multilib, but I don't think it's multilib in this case. > > Whence the difference in the file handling between mock rebuild and > > vulgairs rpmbuild, in the first place? > > > > Guys can you comment on this difference? > > The spec file in question is: > http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/syslinux.git/plain/syslinux.spec > > Richard, you mentioned in this thread[1]: > "Mock is really just a python wrapper that allows you to build packages for > different versions of Fedora in a clean chroot with just the build > requirements specified in the spec file installed (and some standard ones)." > > What "and some standard ones" stands for? > > Rich, you mentioned in the same thread[2]: > "You don't really need to use mock either. Just use 'rpmbuild -ba' > directly or 'fedpkg local' which is a wrapper." > > Why this is not the case in this instance
Re: Python 3.4 to rawhide
Thanks for the tip, did just that. - Original Message - > From: "Miro Hrončok" > To: "Fedora Python SIG" , "Development > discussions related to Fedora" > > Sent: Friday, May 9, 2014 1:10:40 PM > Subject: Re: Python 3.4 to rawhide > > I'd say ask releng for help and mass rebuild everything unless satisfied. > > Dne 9.5.2014 11:45, Matej Stuchlik napsal(a): > > What are you trying to rebuild? I think what you are getting is expected, > > since python-six is not yet rebuild against Python 3.4 in the tag. > > > > Sorry if this is not going as fast as it could, I've never done this > > sort of a mass rebuild before, still learning the ropes. > > > > Matt > > > > - Original Message - > >> From: "Orion Poplawski" > >> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" > >> , "Fedora Python SIG" > >> > >> Sent: Thursday, May 8, 2014 11:28:16 PM > >> Subject: Re: Python 3.4 to rawhide > >> > >> On 04/30/2014 04:22 AM, Matej Stuchlik wrote: > >>> Good day folks, > >>> Python 3.4 is now [ready and tagged] in f21-python, so I'd like to ask > >>> you > >>> to make whatever modifications that may be necessary and [rebuild] your > >>> Python packages into the tag. Once we have sufficient fraction up and > >>> running, > >>> we'll merge with rawhide. > >>> > >>> Note that your spec file may require slight tweaks due to some file > >>> suffixes > >>> changing: > >>> * bytecode files from .cpython-33.py[co] to .cpython-34.py[co] > >>> * extension modules from .cpython-33m.so to .cpython-34m.so and > >>>.cpython-33dm.so to .cpython-34dm.so > >>> > >>> There's also an upstream guide to [porting to Python 3.4] you may find > >>> helpful. > >>> > >>> Finally, should you need help with your package, feel free to contact me > >>> and > >>> I'll do my best to help... :) > >>> > >>> Matt > >>> > >>> [ready and tagged] > >>> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6794120 > >>> [rebuild] with fedpkg build --target f21-python > >>> [porting to Python 3.4] > >>> https://docs.python.org/dev/whatsnew/3.4.html#porting-to-python-3-4 > >>> > >> > >> > >> Looks like the f21-python buildroot is hosed. I can't build anything. > >> SRPM > >> builds are failing with: > >> > >> DEBUG util.py:281: Error: Package: python3-six-1.6.1-1.fc21.noarch > >> (build) > >> DEBUG util.py:281: Requires: python(abi) = 3.3 > >> DEBUG util.py:281: Installing: python-2.7.6-6.fc21.armv7hl > >> (build) > >> DEBUG util.py:281: python(abi) = 2.7 > >> DEBUG util.py:281: python(abi) = 2.7 > >> DEBUG util.py:281: Available: python3-3.4.0-3.fc21.armv7hl > >> (build) > >> DEBUG util.py:281: python(abi) = 3.4 > >> DEBUG util.py:281: python(abi) = 3.4 > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Orion Poplawski > >> Technical Manager 303-415-9701 x222 > >> NWRA, Boulder/CoRA Office FAX: 303-415-9702 > >> 3380 Mitchell Lane or...@nwra.com > >> Boulder, CO 80301 http://www.nwra.com > >> -- > >> devel mailing list > >> devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > >> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel > >> Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct > > ___ > > python-devel mailing list > > python-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org > > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/python-devel > > > > -- > Miro Hrončok > -- > Phone: +420777974800 > IRC: mhroncok > ___ > python-devel mailing list > python-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/python-devel -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Python 3.4 to rawhide
Neat! Thanks a lot Orion. :) We've started working on getting all the necessary dependencies of Sphinx/Pillow in. - Original Message - > From: "Orion Poplawski" > To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" > , "Fedora Python SIG" > , > python-docutils-ow...@fedoraproject.org > Sent: Sunday, May 11, 2014 6:40:54 AM > Subject: Re: Python 3.4 to rawhide > > On 05/09/2014 09:57 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote: > > On 04/30/2014 04:22 AM, Matej Stuchlik wrote: > >> Good day folks, > >> Python 3.4 is now [ready and tagged] in f21-python, so I'd like to ask you > >> to make whatever modifications that may be necessary and [rebuild] your > >> Python packages into the tag. Once we have sufficient fraction up and > >> running, > >> we'll merge with rawhide. > >> > >> Note that your spec file may require slight tweaks due to some file > >> suffixes > >> changing: > >> * bytecode files from .cpython-33.py[co] to .cpython-34.py[co] > >> * extension modules from .cpython-33m.so to .cpython-34m.so and > >> .cpython-33dm.so to .cpython-34dm.so > >> > >> There's also an upstream guide to [porting to Python 3.4] you may find > >> helpful. > >> > >> Finally, should you need help with your package, feel free to contact me > >> and > >> I'll do my best to help... :) > >> > >> Matt > >> > >> [ready and tagged] > >> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6794120 > >> [rebuild] with fedpkg build --target f21-python > >> [porting to Python 3.4] > >> https://docs.python.org/dev/whatsnew/3.4.html#porting-to-python-3-4 > >> > > > > I've been rebuilding some things today. I'm ending today with docutils > > failing. Haven't looked at the porting guide yet. Maybe someone else > > will have time to take a look. > > Updating to current svn trunk allows the test to complete so > python-docutils has now be rebuilt with 3.4. > > > -- > Orion Poplawski > Technical Manager 303-415-9701 x222 > NWRA/CoRA DivisionFAX: 303-415-9702 > 3380 Mitchell Lane or...@cora.nwra.com > Boulder, CO 80301 http://www.cora.nwra.com > ___ > python-devel mailing list > python-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/python-devel -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: F21 System Wide Change: (A)Periodic Updates to Images
On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 07:38:29PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote: > > Somewhere to start, mostly. I'd love to see it extend across the project. > It would be very useful for ARM images too. Cool. Maybe we could get some of the ARM people working with the cloud SIG to come up with the initial plan? See https://fedorahosted.org/cloud/ticket/51 -- Matthew Miller-- Fedora Project-- "Tepid change for the somewhat better!" -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: FYI: koji builders re-installed
On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 10:54:43AM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > Additionally, our slow storage issues have all been solved, so newrepos > are back down to 11-12min for rawhide. Awesome! Nice to hear good news -- and sounds like you had a busy weekend. (I think maybe every Monday should be sysadmin appreciation day.) -- Matthew Miller-- Fedora Project-- "Tepid change for the somewhat better!" -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
[Owner-change] Fedora packages ownership change
Change in ownership over the last 168 hours === 4 packages were orphaned hostname [devel,f19,f20] was orphaned by jpopelka Provides commands which can be used to display the system's DNS name, and to display or set its hostname or NIS domain name https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/hostname libedit [EL-5,devel,f19] was orphaned by kdudka The NetBSD Editline library https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/libedit cifs-utils [devel,f19,f20] was orphaned by jlayton Utilities for mounting and managing CIFS shares https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/cifs-utils webcpp [devel,f19,f20] was orphaned by kevin Convert C++ code to HTML https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/webcpp 4 packages unorphaned - thozza unorphaned : hostname [devel,f19,f20] nonamedotc unorphaned : webcpp [devel,f19,f20] branto unorphaned : libedit [EL-5,devel,f19,f20] sprabhu unorphaned : cifs-utils [devel,f19,f20] 6 packages were retired whenjobs [devel] was retired by rjones Replacement for cron with dependencies https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/whenjobs php-channel-phpunit [devel,epel7] was retired by remi Adds phpunit channel to PEAR https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/php-channel-phpunit libyui [EL-6] was retired by besser82 GUI-abstraction library https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/libyui seam-solder [devel] was retired by gil A portable CDI extensions library https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/seam-solder maven-wagon-ahc [devel] was retired by galileo A wagon provider for HTTP transfers https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/maven-wagon-ahc expat21 [devel] was retired by besser82 An XML parser library https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/expat21 7 packages changed owner limbgave to ktdreyer : perl-CGI-FastTemplate [EL-6] limbgave to comzeradd : xdotool [EL-6] limbgave to ktdreyer : perl-CGI-FormBuilder [EL-6] limbgave to cicku : uthash [epel7] limbgave to besser82 : libdb4 [EL-5,epel7] limbgave to jamielinux : nodejs-grunt-contrib-uglify [EL-6,f19,f20] limbgave to jamielinux : nodejs-maxmin [EL-6,f19,f20] Sources: https://github.com/pypingou/fedora-owner-change -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: SYSLINUX 6 x86_64 - syslinux-nonlinux & syslinux64.exe
On 10.05.2014 18:22, poma wrote: > On 09.05.2014 15:51, Peter Jones wrote: >> On Fri, May 09, 2014 at 07:18:37AM +0200, poma wrote: >>> On 08.05.2014 16:05, Peter Jones wrote: On Thu, May 08, 2014 at 08:21:44AM +0200, poma wrote: > > $ rpmbuild -ba ./SPECS/syslinux.spec > ... > > $ find -name syslinux*.rpm > ./SRPMS/syslinux-6.02-4.fc21.src.rpm > ./RPMS/x86_64/syslinux-perl-6.02-4.fc21.x86_64.rpm > ./RPMS/x86_64/syslinux-6.02-4.fc21.x86_64.rpm > ./RPMS/x86_64/syslinux-devel-6.02-4.fc21.x86_64.rpm > ./RPMS/x86_64/syslinux-extlinux-6.02-4.fc21.x86_64.rpm > > > # rpm -ivh $(ls ./RPMS/x86_64/syslinux*.rpm) > error: Failed dependencies: > syslinux-nonlinux = 6.02-4.fc21 is needed by syslinux-6.02-4.fc21.x86_64 > syslinux-extlinux-nonlinux = 6.02-4.fc21 is needed by > syslinux-extlinux-6.02-4.fc21.x86_64 > > > Peter, why these three noarches are not built on x86_64? > - syslinux-extlinux-nonlinux-6.02-4.fc21.noarch.rpm > - syslinux-nonlinux-6.02-4.fc21.noarch.rpm > - syslinux-tftpboot-6.02-4.fc21.noarch.rpm Because that'll result in a different 32-bit build on i686 vs x86_64. Get them from the i686 build. >>> >>> OK, can you explain this[5]? >> >> I can't - can you reproduce this with mock build instead of just raw >> rpmbuild with the target set? When I use mock or koji to build them, I >> get syslinux64.exe in one and syslinux.exe in the -nonlinux one. >> >> That's still a (minor) packaging bug, but it shouldn't be a >> conflict. >> > > ~~~ > x86_64 - mock rebuild > ~~~ > $ mock -r fedora-rawhide-$(uname -i) syslinux-6.02-4.fc21.src.rpm > $ mock -r fedora-rawhide-i386 syslinux-6.02-4.fc21.src.rpm > > ~~ > syslinux > ~~ > # rpm -qlp builddir/build/RPMS/syslinux-6.02-4.fc21.x86_64.rpm | grep exe > /usr/share/syslinux/syslinux64.exe > > $ repoquery -l syslinux-6.02-4.fc21.x86_64 | grep exe > /usr/share/syslinux/syslinux64.exe > > # rpm -qlp builddir/build/RPMS/syslinux-6.02-4.fc21.i686.rpm | grep exe > /usr/share/syslinux/syslinux.exe > > $ repoquery --archlist=i686 -l syslinux-6.02-4.fc21.i686 | grep exe > /usr/share/syslinux/syslinux.exe > > $ rpm -qf /usr/share/syslinux/syslinux64.exe > syslinux-6.02-4.fc21.x86_64 > > ~~~ > syslinux-nonlinux > ~~~ > # rpm -qlp builddir/build/RPMS/syslinux-nonlinux-6.02-4.fc21.noarch.rpm | > grep exe > /usr/share/syslinux/syslinux.exe > > $ repoquery -l syslinux-nonlinux-6.02-4.fc21.noarch | grep exe > /usr/share/syslinux/syslinux.exe > > $ rpm -qf /usr/share/syslinux/syslinux.exe > syslinux-nonlinux-6.02-4.fc21.noarch > > ~~~ > x86_64 - rpmbuild > ~~~ > $ rpmbuild -ba rpmbuild/SPECS/syslinux.spec > > $ rpm -qlp rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/syslinux-6.02-4.fc21.x86_64.rpm | grep exe > /usr/share/syslinux/syslinux64.exe > > $ rpm -qlp rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/syslinux-nonlinux-6.02-4.fc21.noarch.rpm | > grep exe > /usr/share/syslinux/syslinux.exe > /usr/share/syslinux/syslinux64.exe > > ~ > ix86 - rpmbuild > ~ > $ rpmbuild -ba rpmbuild/SPECS/syslinux.spec > > $ rpm -qlp rpmbuild/RPMS/i686/syslinux-6.02-4.fc21.i686.rpm | grep exe > /usr/share/syslinux/syslinux.exe > > $ rpm -qlp rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/syslinux-nonlinux-6.02-4.fc21.noarch.rpm | > grep exe > /usr/share/syslinux/syslinux.exe > /usr/share/syslinux/syslinux64.exe > > $ rpm -qf /usr/share/syslinux/syslinux.exe > syslinux-nonlinux-6.02-4.fc21.noarch > syslinux-6.02-4.fc21.i686 > > How these two packages manage to install without problem, since both contain > a file of the same name? > > Whence the difference in the file handling between mock rebuild and vulgairs > rpmbuild, in the first place? > Guys can you comment on this difference? The spec file in question is: http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/syslinux.git/plain/syslinux.spec Richard, you mentioned in this thread[1]: "Mock is really just a python wrapper that allows you to build packages for different versions of Fedora in a clean chroot with just the build requirements specified in the spec file installed (and some standard ones)." What "and some standard ones" stands for? Rich, you mentioned in the same thread[2]: "You don't really need to use mock either. Just use 'rpmbuild -ba' directly or 'fedpkg local' which is a wrapper." Why this is not the case in this instance? Clark, as maintainer of the Mock, and Lubomir, as maintainer of the shortrpm i.e. rpmbuild, you are also welcome to comment. Adam and Kevin, too. :) poma "Differences between Fakeroot and Mock & Suggested method" [1] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2013-October/190033.html [2] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2013-October/190051.html -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct
Re: SYSLINUX 6 x86_64 - syslinux-nonlinux & syslinux64.exe
On 12.05.2014 10:30, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 10:15:50AM +0200, poma wrote: >> On 10.05.2014 18:22, poma wrote: >>> On 09.05.2014 15:51, Peter Jones wrote: On Fri, May 09, 2014 at 07:18:37AM +0200, poma wrote: > On 08.05.2014 16:05, Peter Jones wrote: >> On Thu, May 08, 2014 at 08:21:44AM +0200, poma wrote: >>> >>> $ rpmbuild -ba ./SPECS/syslinux.spec >>> ... >>> >>> $ find -name syslinux*.rpm >>> ./SRPMS/syslinux-6.02-4.fc21.src.rpm >>> ./RPMS/x86_64/syslinux-perl-6.02-4.fc21.x86_64.rpm >>> ./RPMS/x86_64/syslinux-6.02-4.fc21.x86_64.rpm >>> ./RPMS/x86_64/syslinux-devel-6.02-4.fc21.x86_64.rpm >>> ./RPMS/x86_64/syslinux-extlinux-6.02-4.fc21.x86_64.rpm >>> >>> >>> # rpm -ivh $(ls ./RPMS/x86_64/syslinux*.rpm) >>> error: Failed dependencies: >>> syslinux-nonlinux = 6.02-4.fc21 is needed by >>> syslinux-6.02-4.fc21.x86_64 >>> syslinux-extlinux-nonlinux = 6.02-4.fc21 is needed by >>> syslinux-extlinux-6.02-4.fc21.x86_64 >>> >>> >>> Peter, why these three noarches are not built on x86_64? >>> - syslinux-extlinux-nonlinux-6.02-4.fc21.noarch.rpm >>> - syslinux-nonlinux-6.02-4.fc21.noarch.rpm >>> - syslinux-tftpboot-6.02-4.fc21.noarch.rpm >> >> Because that'll result in a different 32-bit build on i686 vs x86_64. >> Get them from the i686 build. >> > > OK, can you explain this[5]? I can't - can you reproduce this with mock build instead of just raw rpmbuild with the target set? When I use mock or koji to build them, I get syslinux64.exe in one and syslinux.exe in the -nonlinux one. That's still a (minor) packaging bug, but it shouldn't be a conflict. >>> >>> ~~~ >>> x86_64 - mock rebuild >>> ~~~ >>> $ mock -r fedora-rawhide-$(uname -i) syslinux-6.02-4.fc21.src.rpm >>> $ mock -r fedora-rawhide-i386 syslinux-6.02-4.fc21.src.rpm >>> >>> ~~ >>> syslinux >>> ~~ >>> # rpm -qlp builddir/build/RPMS/syslinux-6.02-4.fc21.x86_64.rpm | grep exe >>> /usr/share/syslinux/syslinux64.exe >>> >>> $ repoquery -l syslinux-6.02-4.fc21.x86_64 | grep exe >>> /usr/share/syslinux/syslinux64.exe >>> >>> # rpm -qlp builddir/build/RPMS/syslinux-6.02-4.fc21.i686.rpm | grep exe >>> /usr/share/syslinux/syslinux.exe >>> >>> $ repoquery --archlist=i686 -l syslinux-6.02-4.fc21.i686 | grep exe >>> /usr/share/syslinux/syslinux.exe >>> >>> $ rpm -qf /usr/share/syslinux/syslinux64.exe >>> syslinux-6.02-4.fc21.x86_64 >>> >>> ~~~ >>> syslinux-nonlinux >>> ~~~ >>> # rpm -qlp builddir/build/RPMS/syslinux-nonlinux-6.02-4.fc21.noarch.rpm | >>> grep exe >>> /usr/share/syslinux/syslinux.exe >>> >>> $ repoquery -l syslinux-nonlinux-6.02-4.fc21.noarch | grep exe >>> /usr/share/syslinux/syslinux.exe >>> >>> $ rpm -qf /usr/share/syslinux/syslinux.exe >>> syslinux-nonlinux-6.02-4.fc21.noarch >>> >>> ~~~ >>> x86_64 - rpmbuild >>> ~~~ >>> $ rpmbuild -ba rpmbuild/SPECS/syslinux.spec >>> >>> $ rpm -qlp rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/syslinux-6.02-4.fc21.x86_64.rpm | grep exe >>> /usr/share/syslinux/syslinux64.exe >>> >>> $ rpm -qlp rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/syslinux-nonlinux-6.02-4.fc21.noarch.rpm | >>> grep exe >>> /usr/share/syslinux/syslinux.exe >>> /usr/share/syslinux/syslinux64.exe >>> >>> ~ >>> ix86 - rpmbuild >>> ~ >>> $ rpmbuild -ba rpmbuild/SPECS/syslinux.spec >>> >>> $ rpm -qlp rpmbuild/RPMS/i686/syslinux-6.02-4.fc21.i686.rpm | grep exe >>> /usr/share/syslinux/syslinux.exe >>> >>> $ rpm -qlp rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/syslinux-nonlinux-6.02-4.fc21.noarch.rpm | >>> grep exe >>> /usr/share/syslinux/syslinux.exe >>> /usr/share/syslinux/syslinux64.exe >>> >>> $ rpm -qf /usr/share/syslinux/syslinux.exe >>> syslinux-nonlinux-6.02-4.fc21.noarch >>> syslinux-6.02-4.fc21.i686 >>> >>> How these two packages manage to install without problem, since both >>> contain a file of the same name? > > RPM allows you to install two files with identical content coming from > two different packages. Either that or multilib, but I don't think > it's multilib in this case. > >>> Whence the difference in the file handling between mock rebuild and >>> vulgairs rpmbuild, in the first place? >>> >> >> Guys can you comment on this difference? >> >> The spec file in question is: >> http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/syslinux.git/plain/syslinux.spec >> >> Richard, you mentioned in this thread[1]: >> "Mock is really just a python wrapper that allows you to build packages for >> different versions of Fedora in a clean chroot with just the build >> requirements specified in the spec file installed (and some standard ones)." >> >> What "and some standard ones" stands for? >> >> Rich, you mentioned in the same thread[2]: >> "You don't really need to use mock either. Just use 'rpmbuild -ba' >> directly or 'fedpkg local' which is a wra
Re: Attempting to contact three unresponsive maintainers
On Tue, Apr 08, 2014 at 01:30:27PM +0200, Ondrej Vasik wrote: > > If you don't find any contact for llim, feel free to reassign redhat-lsb > to me - I'm monitoring the bugzillas of redhat-lsb package anyway and > I'm the owner in RHEL. We discussed with Lawrence transfer even in > Fedora, but it never happened. > A little late but this has been done now. Thanks for taking it. -Toshio pgpv5YcOgv06F.pgp Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: F21 System Wide Change: (A)Periodic Updates to Images
On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 1:41 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 07:38:29PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote: >> > Somewhere to start, mostly. I'd love to see it extend across the project. >> It would be very useful for ARM images too. > > Cool. Maybe we could get some of the ARM people working with the cloud SIG > to come up with the initial plan? See > https://fedorahosted.org/cloud/ticket/51 Will take a look, thanks for the heads up. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: making Ctrl-Alt-Bksp work
On Thu, May 08, 2014 at 11:43:08PM -0400, Felix Miata wrote: > On 2014-05-08 08:43 (GMT+1000) Peter Hutterer composed: > > >On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 02:38:59PM -0400, Felix Miata wrote: > > >>Your (locale pt) and Reindl's (locale de) answers beg two questions: > > >>1-why do 00-keyboard.conf for pt and de contain > >>terminate:ctrl_alt_bksp, but for locale us it is absent? > > >>2-what creates 00-keyboard.conf in the first place, since it doesn't > >>get automatically recreated even by rebooting if deleted? > > >systemd-localed. This file is written when you change the locale, either > >during install or later with localectl. It doesn't automatically get > >restored when you delete it. > > >http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Input_device_configuration > >lists the magic command as: > >localectl set-x11-keymap "us" "" "" "terminate:ctrl_alt_bksp" > > On a Rawhide system originally installed 6 weeks ago running in > multi-user I deleted 00-keyboard.conf, then did yum upgrade, and > before rebooting the new kernel tried that command, with these > results: > > Failed to set keymap: Connection timed out > new 00-keyboard.conf not written > I had to force a reboot, as most anything I tried related to shutting down > timed out. loginctl doesn't write the file, it talks over dbus to systemd-logind which writes out the file. This is the connection that failed, for some reason. > After reboot it succeeded, but I still wonder why CAD gets enabled > there at installation time for pt and de by not us. :-( what's in your /etc/vconsole.conf? We've now reached a point where it's better to file a bug report though. Cheers, Peter > >which communicates the new keymap to systemd-localed, which then writes out > >the file. > > >but having just tested this on F20, just running "localectl set-keymap us" > >also writes out the right configuration, including the terminate option. The > >above is needed for custom x11 keymaps, but shouldn't be needed for normal > >setup. > > >>re 2: Maybe your two installations have 00-keyboard.conf carried > >>over from before xorg-x11-drv-keyboard was superceded by > >>xorg-x11-drv-evdev, which on (re)installation does not create it if > >>it does not exist? > > >neither the keyboard nor the evdev driver have anything to do with it. the > >retirement of the keyboard driver should have no effect on anything newer > >than, say, Fedora 12. > > >Zapping in the server works as a two-stage process. A key combination is > >interpreted by a XKB as a Terminate_Server action. The server then > >interprets that and terminates. With DontZap you only control the > >second part, i.e. whether the server terminates when the action is triggered. > >If you don't have the XKB setting, you can't trigger it in the first place. > >And DontZap is only useful if you want to _prohibit_ zapping completely. It > >just makes Terminate_Server do nothing. > > >For your use-case, forget about DontZap, it has no effect. I'm the > >maintainer for these parts of the server, so regardless of how many > >configurations you find that tell you to enable it, please trust my word > >here. You need to get the terminate XKB option into your keymap, that's all > >that matters. > > FWIW, on one F21 system with radeon video here even a normal exit > from a startx KDE session is leaving the screen on the tty started > from black. A shift to a tty and back then draws what had been > expected. I've tried on 6+ other installations, one with radeon, and > all the others behave as expected. > -- > "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant > words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) > > Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! > > Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ > -- > devel mailing list > devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel > Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct > -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
