Re: F39 proposal: Modernize Thread Building Blocks for Fedora 39 (System-Wide Change proposal)

[Thomas Rodgers]

On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 7:46 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <
zbys...@in.waw.pl> wrote:

> On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 01:46:24PM +, Ian McInerney via devel wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 6:42 PM Ben Cotton  wrote:
> >
> > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/F39ModernizeTBB
> > >
> > > This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes
> > > process, proposals are publicly announced in order to receive
> > > community feedback. This proposal will only be implemented if approved
> > > by the Fedora Engineering Steering Committee.
> > >
> > > == Summary ==
> > > Fedora is currently shipping version 2020.3 (released July 10, 2020)
> > > of the Thread Building Blocks library. The current upstream version is
> > > 2021.8 (released December 22, 2022). The Fedora community has
> > > expressed [https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036372
> > > interest] in moving the TBB package to track a more modern version of
> > > the upstream.
> > >
> > > == Owner ==
> > > * Name: [[User:trodgers| Thomas Rodgers]]
> > > * Email: trodg...@redhat.com
> > >
> > >
> > > == Detailed Description ==
> > > Fedora has shipped with version 2020.3 of the Thread Building Blocks
> > > library since Fedora 33. The
> > > upstream project made a decision to break backward compatibility after
> > > that version was released.
> > > As packages move to match the upstream's changes it becomes more
> > > difficult to defer updating the
> > > Fedora packaging for TBB. The situation is further complicated as
> > > there are currently a majority
> > > of TBB dependent packages which have not been updated to track a new
> > > upstream release, as detailed in this
> > > [https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036372#c1 analysis] on
> > > the tracking issue.
> > >
>
> Hi,
>
> sorry for picking up this thread so late…
>
> > > ** A compat package based on the current 2020.3 version of the
> > > existing TBB package will be created.
>
> A reminder: you don't need a new review, a compat package can be
> created without any fuss [1].
>
> [1]
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/ReviewGuidelines/#_package_review_process
>
>
True, but changing rpms/tbb is a system wide change, yes? And I can't
really execute that change without
also having the compat package, which most of the existing TBB dependent
packages will need to move to, with
a small subset able to remain on the packaging for a newer oneTBB.

The change proposal seemed at the time to be a place to capture all of that.

> > This proposal aims to provide a way to modernize the TBB packge
> > > version for Fedora while providing stability for those packages which
> > > continue to depend on the older TBB library version.
> > >
> > > It will be possible to install both devel and runtime versions of both
> > > TBB packages, however the devel compat package for version 2020.3 will
> > > require clients to point to a new include path where the legacy
> > > headers will be found.
>
> Parallel runtime installation is obviously required.
> But is it necessary to have parallel installation of devel headers?
> It might be less work to have conflicting -devel packages and just
> BuildRequire one or the other.
>

It might not be necessary. I don't expect to start the actual work on this
for another 3-4 weeks, we have time to work
through that discussion before committing to it.


>
> Zbyszek
> ___
> 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, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
>
___
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, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Some boost breakage in Fedora Rawhide

[Thomas Rodgers]

Yes.

On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 12:51 AM Vít Ondruch  wrote:

>
> Dne 26. 02. 23 v 17:07 Jonathan Wakely napsal(a):
> > On Thu, 23 Feb 2023 at 18:23, Vít Ondruch  wrote:
> >>
> >> Dne 23. 02. 23 v 12:41 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek napsal(a):
> >>> On Thu, Feb 23, 2023 at 12:28:48PM +0100, Kalev Lember wrote:
>  On Thu, Feb 23, 2023 at 12:17 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <
>  zbys...@in.waw.pl> wrote:
>  I think you got something wrong with your repoquery. Perhaps it
> picked up
>  older packages from a published rawhide compose that were still
> linked with
>  older boost?
> >>> It seems so. I thought the compose would have already happened.
> >>
> >> Compose is broken due to Boost:
> >>
> >> https://pagure.io/releng/failed-composes/issue/4654
> > Strictly speaking, it's broken because of libreoffice.
>
>
> Which should have been rebuild with other packages, but the build was
> kicked off much later for some reason. When I checked the compose, there
> has been no build attempt yet.
>
>
> Vít
>
> ___
> 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, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
>
___
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, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Some boost breakage in Fedora Rawhide

[Thomas Rodgers]

Which has a successful build
 in rawhide
now.

On Sun, Feb 26, 2023 at 8:08 AM Jonathan Wakely  wrote:

> On Thu, 23 Feb 2023 at 18:23, Vít Ondruch  wrote:
> >
> >
> > Dne 23. 02. 23 v 12:41 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek napsal(a):
> > > On Thu, Feb 23, 2023 at 12:28:48PM +0100, Kalev Lember wrote:
> > >> On Thu, Feb 23, 2023 at 12:17 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <
> > >> zbys...@in.waw.pl> wrote:
> > >> I think you got something wrong with your repoquery. Perhaps it
> picked up
> > >> older packages from a published rawhide compose that were still
> linked with
> > >> older boost?
> > > It seems so. I thought the compose would have already happened.
> >
> >
> > Compose is broken due to Boost:
> >
> > https://pagure.io/releng/failed-composes/issue/4654
>
> Strictly speaking, it's broken because of libreoffice.
> ___
> 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, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
>
___
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, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Some boost breakage in Fedora Rawhide

[Thomas Rodgers]

systemtap is FTBFS because dyninst is FTBFS, see PR2173030
 for dyninst.


On Thu, Feb 23, 2023 at 2:49 AM Richard W.M. Jones 
wrote:

> boost 1.81.0 (side tag f39-boost) was merged into Fedora earlier this week:
>
>   https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=1074
>
> These are the builds in the side tag:
>
>
> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/builds?inherited=0=63053=-build_id=1
>
> However I think some packages didn't get rebuilt.  Definitely
> systemtap, which causes this problem with qemu:
>
>   https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/package/qemu?collection=f39
>
>   - nothing provides libboost_system.so.1.78.0()(64bit) needed by
> systemtap-devel-4.8-2.fc38.x86_64
>
> Possibly ceph, causing:
>
>   https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/package/virt-v2v?collection=f39
>   https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/package/libguestfs?collection=f39
>
>   - nothing provides libboost_thread.so.1.78.0()(64bit) needed by
> librados2-2:17.2.5-11.fc39.x86_64
>   - nothing provides libboost_iostreams.so.1.78.0()(64bit) needed by
> librados2-2:17.2.5-11.fc39.x86_64
>
> There's a comment in the current ceph package saying that it's
> incompatible with boost 1.81 so they've switched back to the bundled
> copy.  However we still don't have an installable package.
>
> I think systemtap needs to be added to the list of packages that
> depend on boost for next time.  The systemtap spec file is a maze of
> twisty RPM macros all alike, so perhaps whatever script is used to
> check for things requiring boost got confused:
>
>
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/systemtap/blob/rawhide/f/systemtap.spec
>
> Rich.
>
> --
> Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat
> http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
> Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com
> virt-top is 'top' for virtual machines.  Tiny program with many
> powerful monitoring features, net stats, disk stats, logging, etc.
> http://people.redhat.com/~rjones/virt-top
>
>
___
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, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Some boost breakage in Fedora Rawhide

[Thomas Rodgers]

PR2173019 <https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2173019> has been
created. The file in question was updated within the last three days, but
not to fix this issue.

On Thu, Feb 23, 2023 at 7:47 AM Thomas Rodgers  wrote:

> ceph is FTBFS due to a change in Boost Asio. I'll file a PR this morning.
>
> usr/include/boost/asio/async_result.hpp:651:9: error: no type named 
> 'completion_handler_type' in 'class 
> boost::asio::async_result,
>  void(boost::system::error_code, ceph::buffer::v15_2_0::list)>'
>   651 | completion_handler_type;
>   | ^~~
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 23, 2023 at 6:04 AM Kaleb Keithley 
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 23, 2023 at 8:19 AM Jakub Jelinek  wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 23, 2023 at 01:11:13PM +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>>> > On Thu, 23 Feb 2023 at 13:03, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>>> > > Do you know anything about what's happening with Ceph?
>>> >
>>> > No idea, sorry.
>>>
>>> Ceph is likely #2169364 aka https://gcc.gnu.org/PR108773 , still
>>> unresolved
>>> GCC bug.
>>>
>>
>> Doubtful. That's from building early snapshots of what will become
>> ceph-18.  Thus far ceph-17 hasn't hit the ICE.
>>
>> right now the issue is with the bundled boost building with Python-3.11.
>> There are a lot of moving parts.
>>
>> --
>>
>> Kaleb
>>
>
___
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, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: [HEADS UP] Fedora 39 Boost 1.81 rebuilds starting Monday 2022-02-20

[Thomas Rodgers]

On Thu, Feb 23, 2023 at 5:14 AM Jonathan Wakely  wrote:

> On Wed, 22 Feb 2023 at 20:52, Thomas Rodgers wrote:
> >
> > The f39-boost side tag builds have finished.
> >
> > The following packages are new FTBFS likely due to the Boost update -
> [...]
> > - usd [[
> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/5975/97845975/build.log][build.log
> ]]
>
> The correct log for usd is
> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/2081/97882081/build.log
> and it shows errors related to hash_value. Probably related to this
> item in the Boost 1.81.0 release notes:
>
> Container Hash:
>
> Major update.
> The specializations of boost::hash have been removed; it now always
> calls hash_value.
>
> https://www.boost.org/users/history/version_1_81_0.html
>
>
And I noted in the associated PR that there is significant churn in the
upstream related to fixing that.
___
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, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Some boost breakage in Fedora Rawhide

[Thomas Rodgers]

ceph is FTBFS due to a change in Boost Asio. I'll file a PR this morning.

usr/include/boost/asio/async_result.hpp:651:9: error: no type named
'completion_handler_type' in 'class
boost::asio::async_result,
void(boost::system::error_code, ceph::buffer::v15_2_0::list)>'
  651 | completion_handler_type;
  | ^~~


On Thu, Feb 23, 2023 at 6:04 AM Kaleb Keithley  wrote:

>
>
> On Thu, Feb 23, 2023 at 8:19 AM Jakub Jelinek  wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Feb 23, 2023 at 01:11:13PM +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>> > On Thu, 23 Feb 2023 at 13:03, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>> > > Do you know anything about what's happening with Ceph?
>> >
>> > No idea, sorry.
>>
>> Ceph is likely #2169364 aka https://gcc.gnu.org/PR108773 , still
>> unresolved
>> GCC bug.
>>
>
> Doubtful. That's from building early snapshots of what will become
> ceph-18.  Thus far ceph-17 hasn't hit the ICE.
>
> right now the issue is with the bundled boost building with Python-3.11.
> There are a lot of moving parts.
>
> --
>
> Kaleb
>
___
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, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: [HEADS UP] Fedora 39 Boost 1.81 rebuilds starting Monday 2022-02-20

[Thomas Rodgers]

On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 12:51 PM Thomas Rodgers  wrote:

> The f39-boost side tag builds have finished.
>
> The following packages are new FTBFS likely due to the Boost update -
> - mapnik [[https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2172635][PR2172635]]
> Boost.Phoenix related
> - credentials-fetcher  [[
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2172636][PR217636]]
> Boost.Filesystem related
> - vsomeip3  [[
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2172639][PR2172639]]
> Boost.Asio related
>
> The following packages are still FTBFS from the f38 mass rebuild -
> - 0ad [[https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2171424][PR2171424]]
> - cryfs [[https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2171464][PR2171464]]
> - folly [[https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165219][PR2165219]]
> - fbthrift [[
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2171488][PR2171488]]
> - fast-netmon  [[
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2171487][PR2171487]]
> - nextpnr  [[
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2171618][PR2171618]]
> - rstudio [[https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2171710][PR2171710
> ]]
> - widelands [[
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2171759][PR2171759]]
>
> The following packages are new FTBFS not apparently related to Boost
> 1.81.0 -
> - condor [[https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2172630][PR2172630
> ]]
> - galera  [[https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2172633][PR2172633
> ]]
> - gnu-cash  [[
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2172637][PR2172637]]
> - inkscape  [[
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2172638][PR2172638]]
> - sourcextractor++ [[
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2172642][PR2172642]]
> - wesnoth [[https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2172627][PR2172627
> ]]
>
> The following packages FTBFS but the build logs provide no useful
> information -
> - blender [[
> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/1240/97841240/build.log][build.log
> ]]
> - hugin  [[
> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/5732/97785732/build.log][build.log
> ]]
>
Missed transitive boost dependency on openexr, built now.

> - libyui-mga-gtk  [[
> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/3208/97843208/build.log][build.log
> ]]
>
Built now.

> - luxcorerender [[
> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/3851/97843851/build.log][build.log
> ]]
> - mcrouter  [[
> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/7420/97847420/build.log][build.log
> ]]
>
FTBFS # folly dependency

> - openshadinglanguage [[
> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/4938/97844938/build.log][build.log
> ]]
> - OpenImageIO  [[
> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/3952/97793952/build.log][build.log
> ]]
> - usd [[
> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/5975/97845975/build.log][build.log
> ]]
>
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 9:16 AM Thomas Rodgers 
> wrote:
>
>> Builds are starting now.
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 9:54 AM Thomas Rodgers 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> We expect to start rebuilds for
>>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/F39Boost181
>>> in the f39-boost side tag Monday 2022-02-20.
>>>
>>> If your package depends on Boost, or just if you see a "Rebuilt for
>>> Boost 1.81" commit pushed to your package's dist-git repo, please
>>> coordinate with me about any updates to the package. If you need
>>> to push other changes to rawhide then you will need to build in the
>>> side tag, or we'll have to rebuild it multiple times.
>>>
>>> I expect to complete the builds and request the merge of the f39-boost
>>> side tag by Friday 2022-02-24.
>>>
>>>
>>>
___
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, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: [HEADS UP] Fedora 39 Boost 1.81 rebuilds starting Monday 2022-02-20

[Thomas Rodgers]

On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 8:33 PM Thomas Rodgers  wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 2:41 PM Mamoru TASAKA 
> wrote:
>
>> Thomas Rodgers wrote on 2023/02/23 5:51:
>> > The f39-boost side tag builds have finished.
>> >
>> > The following packages are new FTBFS likely due to the Boost update -
>> >
>> > The following packages FTBFS but the build logs provide no useful
>> > information -
>> > - blender [[
>> >
>> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/1240/97841240/build.log][build.log
>> > ]]
>>
>> This is because of fail_fast = True. Actually other arch shows this build
>> failed due
>> to unresolved dependency:
>> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=97841240
>> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/1240/97841240/root.log
>>
>> > - luxcorerender [[
>> >
>> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/3851/97843851/build.log][build.log
>> > ]]
>> > - openshadinglanguage [[
>> >
>> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/4938/97844938/build.log][build.log
>> > ]]
>> > - OpenImageIO  [[
>> >
>> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/3952/97793952/build.log][build.log
>> > ]]
>> > - usd [[
>> >
>> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/5975/97845975/build.log][build.log
>> > ]]
>> >
>>
>>
> OpenImageIO and openshadinglanguage are built in rawhide now.
> luxcorereder is FTBFS on bcd dependency.
>

I rebuilt bcd, but luxcorender is FTBFS see PR2172776
<https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2172776>

USD is FTBFS for a Boost related change PR2172762
> <https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2172762>
>
> The above 4 are all related to blender (I think), perhaps these all failed
>> due to
>> unresolved dependency, and perhaps these all needs some chainbuild (for
>> new boost).
>>
>> 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, report it:
>> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
>>
>
___
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, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Unannounced .so version bump (F38/F39): openexr2

[Thomas Rodgers]

I rebuilt bcd, luxcorender is failing on it.

On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 7:43 PM Ben Beasley  wrote:

> The openexr2 compat package was just updated from 2.5.7 to 2.5.8 in
> F39/Rawhide. This included a bump of the “imfsover,” the .so version for
> the libIlmImf-2_5 and libIlmImfUtil-2_5 libraries.
>
> The following packages will need to be rebuilt in F39/Rawhide.
>
> - CTL
> - aqsis
> - bcd
> - kde-runtime
> - kdebase3
> - kdelibs
> - luminance-hdr (I will take care of this one)
> - synfig
>
> There are other packages that link libraries from openexr2, but these
> should be the only ones that link the libraries affected by the .so version
> bump.
>
> The package was also updated in F38/Branched, but the build is still only
> tagged into f38-updates-candidate, and no Bodhi update has been created. If
> the maintainer proceeds with the update for F38, all of the above dependent
> packages will need to be rebuilt there, too, once the update reaches
> stable. Alternatively, maybe the F38 build could be tagged into a side tag.
> ___
> 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, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
>
___
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, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: [HEADS UP] Fedora 39 Boost 1.81 rebuilds starting Monday 2022-02-20

[Thomas Rodgers]

On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 2:41 PM Mamoru TASAKA 
wrote:

> Thomas Rodgers wrote on 2023/02/23 5:51:
> > The f39-boost side tag builds have finished.
> >
> > The following packages are new FTBFS likely due to the Boost update -
> >
> > The following packages FTBFS but the build logs provide no useful
> > information -
> > - blender [[
> >
> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/1240/97841240/build.log][build.log
> > ]]
>
> This is because of fail_fast = True. Actually other arch shows this build
> failed due
> to unresolved dependency:
> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=97841240
> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/1240/97841240/root.log
>
> > - luxcorerender [[
> >
> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/3851/97843851/build.log][build.log
> > ]]
> > - openshadinglanguage [[
> >
> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/4938/97844938/build.log][build.log
> > ]]
> > - OpenImageIO  [[
> >
> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/3952/97793952/build.log][build.log
> > ]]
> > - usd [[
> >
> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/5975/97845975/build.log][build.log
> > ]]
> >
>
>
OpenImageIO and openshadinglanguage are built in rawhide now.
luxcorereder is FTBFS on bcd dependency.
USD is FTBFS for a Boost related change PR2172762
<https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2172762>

The above 4 are all related to blender (I think), perhaps these all failed
> due to
> unresolved dependency, and perhaps these all needs some chainbuild (for
> new boost).
>
> 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, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
>
___
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, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: [HEADS UP] Fedora 39 Boost 1.81 rebuilds starting Monday 2022-02-20

[Thomas Rodgers]

imath is listed as a prerequisite for OpenImageIO, but not openvdb. Fixed
now.

On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 4:05 PM Miro Hrončok  wrote:

> On 23. 02. 23 0:56, Richard Shaw wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 2:52 PM Thomas Rodgers  > <mailto:trodg...@redhat.com>> wrote:
> >
> > The f39-boost side tag builds have finished.
> >
> > The following packages FTBFS but the build logs provide no useful
> information -
> > - OpenImageIO
> > [[
> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/3952/97793952/build.log][build.log
> <
> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/3952/97793952/build.log%5D%5Bbuild.log
> >]]
> >
> >
> > It may be true that the build logs weren't useful, but that's because
> the
> > problem was in root.log. Either deps need to be analyzed to determine
> rebuild
> > order, or after the initial build attempts have been done, they need to
> be
> > repeated.
> >
> > root.log shows the problem:
> > DEBUG util.py:443:  Error:
> > DEBUG util.py:443:   Problem: package openvdb-devel-10.0.1-1.fc38.x86_64
> > requires libopenvdb.so.10.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be
> installed
> > DEBUG util.py:443:- package openvdb-devel-10.0.1-1.fc38.x86_64
> requires
> > openvdb-libs(x86-64) = 10.0.1-1.fc38, but none of the providers can be
> installed
> > DEBUG util.py:443:- conflicting requests
> > DEBUG util.py:443:- nothing provides
> libboost_iostreams.so.1.78.0()(64bit)
> > needed by openvdb-libs-10.0.1-1.fc38.x86_64
> >
> > I'm rebuilding OpenImageIO now, assuming openvdb has been rebuilt at
> this point.
>
> It appears openvdb wasn't rebuilt because there was a missing dependency
> (imath). But is should be possible to build openvdb now.
>
> --
> Miro Hrončok
> --
> Phone: +420777974800
> IRC: mhroncok
>
>
___
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, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: [HEADS UP] Fedora 39 Boost 1.81 rebuilds starting Monday 2022-02-20

[Thomas Rodgers]

Looks like I missed capturing some dependencies in the Makefile that drives
these rebuilds. I'll adjust accordingly for the next time we update Boost.

On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 3:57 PM Richard Shaw  wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 2:52 PM Thomas Rodgers 
> wrote:
>
>> The f39-boost side tag builds have finished.
>>
>> The following packages FTBFS but the build logs provide no useful
>> information -
>> - OpenImageIO  [[
>> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/3952/97793952/build.log][build.log
>> ]]
>>
>
> It may be true that the build logs weren't useful, but that's because the
> problem was in root.log. Either deps need to be analyzed to determine
> rebuild order, or after the initial build attempts have been done, they
> need to be repeated.
>
> root.log shows the problem:
> DEBUG util.py:443:  Error:
> DEBUG util.py:443:   Problem: package openvdb-devel-10.0.1-1.fc38.x86_64
> requires libopenvdb.so.10.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be
> installed
> DEBUG util.py:443:- package openvdb-devel-10.0.1-1.fc38.x86_64
> requires openvdb-libs(x86-64) = 10.0.1-1.fc38, but none of the providers
> can be installed
> DEBUG util.py:443:- conflicting requests
> DEBUG util.py:443:- nothing provides
> libboost_iostreams.so.1.78.0()(64bit) needed by
> openvdb-libs-10.0.1-1.fc38.x86_64
>
> I'm rebuilding OpenImageIO now, assuming openvdb has been rebuilt at this
> point.
>
> Thanks,
> Richard
> ___
> 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, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
>
___
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, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: [HEADS UP] Fedora 39 Boost 1.81 rebuilds starting Monday 2022-02-20

[Thomas Rodgers]

The f39-boost side tag builds have finished.

The following packages are new FTBFS likely due to the Boost update -
- mapnik [[https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2172635][PR2172635]]
Boost.Phoenix related
- credentials-fetcher  [[
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2172636][PR217636]]
Boost.Filesystem related
- vsomeip3  [[https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2172639][PR2172639]]
Boost.Asio related

The following packages are still FTBFS from the f38 mass rebuild -
- 0ad [[https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2171424][PR2171424]]
- cryfs [[https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2171464][PR2171464]]
- folly [[https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165219][PR2165219]]
- fbthrift [[https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2171488][PR2171488
]]
- fast-netmon  [[
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2171487][PR2171487]]
- nextpnr  [[https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2171618][PR2171618
]]
- rstudio [[https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2171710][PR2171710]]
- widelands [[https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2171759][PR2171759
]]

The following packages are new FTBFS not apparently related to Boost 1.81.0
-
- condor [[https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2172630][PR2172630]]
- galera  [[https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2172633][PR2172633]]
- gnu-cash  [[https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2172637][PR2172637
]]
- inkscape  [[https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2172638][PR2172638
]]
- sourcextractor++ [[
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2172642][PR2172642]]
- wesnoth [[https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2172627][PR2172627]]

The following packages FTBFS but the build logs provide no useful
information -
- blender [[
https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/1240/97841240/build.log][build.log
]]
- hugin  [[
https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/5732/97785732/build.log][build.log
]]
- libyui-mga-gtk  [[
https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/3208/97843208/build.log][build.log
]]
- luxcorerender [[
https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/3851/97843851/build.log][build.log
]]
- mcrouter  [[
https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/7420/97847420/build.log][build.log
]]
- openshadinglanguage [[
https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/4938/97844938/build.log][build.log
]]
- OpenImageIO  [[
https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/3952/97793952/build.log][build.log
]]
- usd [[
https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/5975/97845975/build.log][build.log
]]

On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 9:16 AM Thomas Rodgers  wrote:

> Builds are starting now.
>
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 9:54 AM Thomas Rodgers 
> wrote:
>
>> We expect to start rebuilds for
>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/F39Boost181
>> in the f39-boost side tag Monday 2022-02-20.
>>
>> If your package depends on Boost, or just if you see a "Rebuilt for
>> Boost 1.81" commit pushed to your package's dist-git repo, please
>> coordinate with me about any updates to the package. If you need
>> to push other changes to rawhide then you will need to build in the
>> side tag, or we'll have to rebuild it multiple times.
>>
>> I expect to complete the builds and request the merge of the f39-boost
>> side tag by Friday 2022-02-24.
>>
>>
>>
___
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, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: [HEADS UP] Fedora 39 Boost 1.81 rebuilds starting Monday 2022-02-20

[Thomas Rodgers]

Builds are starting now.

On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 9:54 AM Thomas Rodgers  wrote:

> We expect to start rebuilds for
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/F39Boost181
> in the f39-boost side tag Monday 2022-02-20.
>
> If your package depends on Boost, or just if you see a "Rebuilt for
> Boost 1.81" commit pushed to your package's dist-git repo, please
> coordinate with me about any updates to the package. If you need
> to push other changes to rawhide then you will need to build in the
> side tag, or we'll have to rebuild it multiple times.
>
> I expect to complete the builds and request the merge of the f39-boost
> side tag by Friday 2022-02-24.
>
>
>
___
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, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[HEADS UP] Fedora 39 Boost 1.81 rebuilds starting Monday 2022-02-20

[Thomas Rodgers]

We expect to start rebuilds for
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/F39Boost181
in the f39-boost side tag Monday 2022-02-20.

If your package depends on Boost, or just if you see a "Rebuilt for
Boost 1.81" commit pushed to your package's dist-git repo, please
coordinate with me about any updates to the package. If you need
to push other changes to rawhide then you will need to build in the
side tag, or we'll have to rebuild it multiple times.

I expect to complete the builds and request the merge of the f39-boost
side tag by Friday 2022-02-24.
___
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, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[HEADS UP] Fedora 37 Boost 1.78 rebuilds starting in a side tag

[Thomas Rodgers]

We are starting the rebuilds
forhttps://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/F37Boost178
 in the f37-boost
side tag.

If your package depends on Boost, or just if you see a "Rebuilt for
Boost 1.78" commit pushed to your package's dist-git repo, please
co-ordinate with me about any updates to the
package. If you need to push other changes to rawhide then you will
need to build in the side tag, or we'll have to rebuild it multiple
times.

I hope we'll merge the side tag back to rawhide on Friday.
___
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

Re: Problem with cmake 3.23.0

[Thomas Rodgers]

One more package that FTBFS due to CMake issues -

grive2: FTBFS # Error:
/builddir/build/BUILD/grive2-0.5.1/redhat-linux-build is not a directory



On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 2:22 PM Thomas Rodgers  wrote:

>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 4:37 AM Jonathan Wakely 
> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 4 Mar 2022 at 14:26, Steven A. Falco 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > There is a new FTBFS for KiCad [1].  I filed an issue with KiCad [2]
>> and got a comment from the project leader:
>> >
>> >  This looks like cmake issue to me. For some reason cmake is
>> creating an incorrect build folder:
>> >
>> >  -- Build files have been written to:
>> /builddir/build/BUILD/kicad-6.0.2
>> >
>> >  so the build command:
>> >
>> >  + /usr/bin/cmake --build redhat-linux-build -j6 --verbose
>> >
>> >  cannot find the redhat-linux-build folder that was passed on the
>> cmake command line.
>> >
>> > In the last successful build, we have:
>
> >
>> >-- Build files have been written to:
>> /builddir/build/BUILD/kicad-6.0.2/redhat-linux-build
>> >+ /usr/bin/cmake --build redhat-linux-build -j6 --verbose
>> >
>> > For some reason, the build file directory has changed:
>> >
>> > Success case: /builddir/build/BUILD/kicad-6.0.2/redhat-linux-build
>> > Failure case: /builddir/build/BUILD/kicad-6.0.2
>> >
>> > Is this a bug in cmake or did something in RPM macros change?
>>
>> Whatever it is seems to have broken a number of packages, including
>>
>> FlightCrew, csdiff, libphonenumber, ledger, blas
>>
>> Those are just the ones that need to be rebuilt for a new Boost and so
>> were tested by Tom Rodgers, there are probably a lot more that he
>> didn't find.
>>
>> The ones I've checked all do "%cmake ." or "%cmake some_dir"
>>
>> Some fail during the %cmake step, and some fail during %cmake_build.
>>
>>
> These are the CMake related issues I've encountered thus far -
>
> FlightCrew: FTBFS #  CMake Error: The source directory
> "/builddir/build/BUILD/FlightCrew-0.9.1/build" does not appear to contain
> CMakeLists.txt.
> csdiff: FTBFS # Make Error: The source directory
> "/builddir/build/BUILD/csdiff-2.2.0/x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu" does not
> appear to contain CMakeLists.txt.
> ledger: FTBFS # Error:
> /builddir/build/BUILD/ledger-3.2.1/redhat-linux-build is not a directory
> liblas: FTBFS # Error:
> /builddir/build/BUILD/libLAS-d76a061f33a69a36ab116cd939c5d444b301efd8/redhat-linux-build
> is not a directory
>
>
___
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

Re: F37 Change: Boost 1.78 upgrade (System-Wide Change proposal)

[Thomas Rodgers]

I have completed mock builds of roughly 70% of the Boost dependent packages
in Fedora rawhide as of today. There have been no FTBFS issues related to
the upgrade to Boost 1.78.0.

Fesco approved the change proposal last week, I have confidence that this
version of Boost is stable enough to proceed with.

On Tue, Mar 8, 2022 at 6:12 PM Thomas Rodgers  wrote:

> I started on it in anger last week. I've been tracking down some breakage
> in the upstream's build build that was preventing me from getting a
> successful .rpm build, so I haven't even started to evaluate dependent
> package breakage. I expect to have a scratch build done by this time
> tomorrow.
>
> On Tue, Mar 8, 2022 at 1:02 PM Miro Hrončok  wrote:
>
>> On 23. 02. 22 17:48, Ben Cotton wrote:
>> > ** Request a "f37-boost"
>> > [https://docs.pagure.org/releng/sop_adding_side_build_targets.html
>> > build system tag]
>> > ([
>> http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2011-November/159908.html
>> > discussion]):
>> >
>> > ** Build boost into that tag
>>
>> Hey Thomas,
>>
>> when do you expect to do this? Is there an estimated schedule? I recall
>> some
>> side tag conflicts between Python and Boost in the past, so we better
>> coordinate. See our dates in:
>>
>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Python3.11#Important_dates_and_plan
>>
>> Thanks,
>> --
>> Miro Hrončok
>> --
>> Phone: +420777974800
>> IRC: mhroncok
>>
>>
___
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

Re: Problem with cmake 3.23.0

[Thomas Rodgers]

On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 4:37 AM Jonathan Wakely  wrote:

> On Fri, 4 Mar 2022 at 14:26, Steven A. Falco 
> wrote:
> >
> > There is a new FTBFS for KiCad [1].  I filed an issue with KiCad [2] and
> got a comment from the project leader:
> >
> >  This looks like cmake issue to me. For some reason cmake is
> creating an incorrect build folder:
> >
> >  -- Build files have been written to:
> /builddir/build/BUILD/kicad-6.0.2
> >
> >  so the build command:
> >
> >  + /usr/bin/cmake --build redhat-linux-build -j6 --verbose
> >
> >  cannot find the redhat-linux-build folder that was passed on the
> cmake command line.
> >
> > In the last successful build, we have:

>
> >-- Build files have been written to:
> /builddir/build/BUILD/kicad-6.0.2/redhat-linux-build
> >+ /usr/bin/cmake --build redhat-linux-build -j6 --verbose
> >
> > For some reason, the build file directory has changed:
> >
> > Success case: /builddir/build/BUILD/kicad-6.0.2/redhat-linux-build
> > Failure case: /builddir/build/BUILD/kicad-6.0.2
> >
> > Is this a bug in cmake or did something in RPM macros change?
>
> Whatever it is seems to have broken a number of packages, including
>
> FlightCrew, csdiff, libphonenumber, ledger, blas
>
> Those are just the ones that need to be rebuilt for a new Boost and so
> were tested by Tom Rodgers, there are probably a lot more that he
> didn't find.
>
> The ones I've checked all do "%cmake ." or "%cmake some_dir"
>
> Some fail during the %cmake step, and some fail during %cmake_build.
>
>
These are the CMake related issues I've encountered thus far -

FlightCrew: FTBFS #  CMake Error: The source directory
"/builddir/build/BUILD/FlightCrew-0.9.1/build" does not appear to contain
CMakeLists.txt.
csdiff: FTBFS # Make Error: The source directory
"/builddir/build/BUILD/csdiff-2.2.0/x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu" does not
appear to contain CMakeLists.txt.
ledger: FTBFS # Error:
/builddir/build/BUILD/ledger-3.2.1/redhat-linux-build is not a directory
liblas: FTBFS # Error:
/builddir/build/BUILD/libLAS-d76a061f33a69a36ab116cd939c5d444b301efd8/redhat-linux-build
is not a directory
___
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

Re: F37 Change: Boost 1.78 upgrade (System-Wide Change proposal)

[Thomas Rodgers]

I started on it in anger last week. I've been tracking down some breakage
in the upstream's build build that was preventing me from getting a
successful .rpm build, so I haven't even started to evaluate dependent
package breakage. I expect to have a scratch build done by this time
tomorrow.

On Tue, Mar 8, 2022 at 1:02 PM Miro Hrončok  wrote:

> On 23. 02. 22 17:48, Ben Cotton wrote:
> > ** Request a "f37-boost"
> > [https://docs.pagure.org/releng/sop_adding_side_build_targets.html
> > build system tag]
> > ([
> http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2011-November/159908.html
> > discussion]):
> >
> > ** Build boost into that tag
>
> Hey Thomas,
>
> when do you expect to do this? Is there an estimated schedule? I recall
> some
> side tag conflicts between Python and Boost in the past, so we better
> coordinate. See our dates in:
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Python3.11#Important_dates_and_plan
>
> Thanks,
> --
> Miro Hrončok
> --
> Phone: +420777974800
> IRC: mhroncok
>
>
___
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

Re: [HEADS UP] Fedora 35 Boost 1.76 rebuilds starting in a side tag

[Thomas Rodgers]

FTBFS issues inline -

On Wed, Aug 11, 2021 at 3:01 AM Jonathan Wakely  wrote:

> On Wed, 11 Aug 2021 at 10:21, Jonathan Wakely  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
 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 -- 

Unresponsive Maintainer request for package tbb (Thread Building Blocks)

[Thomas Rodgers]

I am the Red Hat maintainer for this package in RHEL and CentOS, it has
been requested that I also get added to the Fedora package maintainers so
that I can handle requests like -

https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/tbb/pull-request/5

As well as a current issue I am working with the upstream project regarding
some unintentional ABI breakage in this version.

I made a request  to be added to the mainteers list for TBB on May 04, but
have not heard back from the 'main admin' maintainer on that. request.

I have filed an unresponsive maintainer ticket as outlined in the
non-responsive maintainer process.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1961402
___
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