Re: F-18 Branched report: 20121204 changes
On 12/04/2012 08:38 AM, Fedora Branched Report wrote: Compose started at Tue Dec 4 09:15:31 UTC 2012 VICTORY! NO BROKEN DEPS in Fedora 18! Now, I ask you all, please, please. Help me keep it that way! ~tom == Fedora Project -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: F-18 Branched report: 20121204 changes
On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 9:07 AM, Tom Callaway tcall...@redhat.com wrote: On 12/04/2012 08:38 AM, Fedora Branched Report wrote: Compose started at Tue Dec 4 09:15:31 UTC 2012 VICTORY! NO BROKEN DEPS in Fedora 18! pops cork Now, I ask you all, please, please. Help me keep it that way! ~tom == Fedora Project -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel -- http://cecinestpasunefromage.wordpress.com/ in your fear, seek only peace in your fear, seek only love -d. bowie -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: F-18 Branched report: 20121204 changes
On Tue, Dec 04, 2012 at 10:07:15 -0500, Tom Callaway tcall...@redhat.com wrote: On 12/04/2012 08:38 AM, Fedora Branched Report wrote: Compose started at Tue Dec 4 09:15:31 UTC 2012 VICTORY! NO BROKEN DEPS in Fedora 18! Thanks for your work with this. You inspired me to try to fix up some of the broken deps in rawhide that looked easy to fix and had been sitting around for a while. Now I need to help Martin with getting stuff rebuilt for the latest Ogre. P.S. There is still some texlive brokenness in F18. If you have the latest texlive stuff installed and try to install db-latex it pulls in some old texlive stuff (that I think should be removed) that has file conflicts with the corresponding new texlive packages. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: F-18 Branched report: 20121204 changes
On 12/04/2012 10:21 AM, Bruno Wolff III wrote: P.S. There is still some texlive brokenness in F18. If you have the latest texlive stuff installed and try to install db-latex it pulls in some old texlive stuff (that I think should be removed) that has file conflicts with the corresponding new texlive packages. If you can identify that, we'll go ahead and block those packages. Jindrich has been working hard to identify any remaining cases like you describe, and I'm happy to help. ~tom == Fedora Project -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: F-18 Branched report: 20121204 changes
On 12/04/2012 07:07 AM, Tom Callaway wrote: On 12/04/2012 08:38 AM, Fedora Branched Report wrote: Compose started at Tue Dec 4 09:15:31 UTC 2012 VICTORY! NO BROKEN DEPS in Fedora 18! Now, I ask you all, please, please. Help me keep it that way! Congratulations! Thank you, Tom! This merits an award! As part of your acceptance speech, please summmarize, point to, and/or provide gentle instruction on what package maintainers should do (and not do), and how to diagnose and recover from mistakes. I believe that this will help preserve your victory. -- -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: F-18 Branched report: 20121204 changes
On Tue, Dec 04, 2012 at 10:44:11 -0500, Tom Callaway tcall...@redhat.com wrote: On 12/04/2012 10:21 AM, Bruno Wolff III wrote: P.S. There is still some texlive brokenness in F18. If you have the latest texlive stuff installed and try to install db-latex it pulls in some old texlive stuff (that I think should be removed) that has file conflicts with the corresponding new texlive packages. If you can identify that, we'll go ahead and block those packages. Jindrich has been working hard to identify any remaining cases like you describe, and I'm happy to help. I've been meaning to file bugs for the three affected packages. I'll get to it today. I don't think dblatex has a texlive varient yet, but maybe I can copy him on that one. For the two packages that appear to be obsolete, I'll file the bugs against the texlive variants so they are more likely to be seen by the right person. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: F-18 Branched report: 20121204 changes
On 12/04/2012 10:58 AM, John Reiser wrote: On 12/04/2012 07:07 AM, Tom Callaway wrote: On 12/04/2012 08:38 AM, Fedora Branched Report wrote: Compose started at Tue Dec 4 09:15:31 UTC 2012 VICTORY! NO BROKEN DEPS in Fedora 18! Now, I ask you all, please, please. Help me keep it that way! Congratulations! Thank you, Tom! This merits an award! As part of your acceptance speech, please summmarize, point to, and/or provide gentle instruction on what package maintainers should do (and not do), and how to diagnose and recover from mistakes. I believe that this will help preserve your victory. An excellent suggestion. I will attempt this! If you're building an update for Fedora, and it has shared libraries or versioned provides, look to see if any of the shared library versions have changed (or if the versioned provides have changed). Then, use repoquery to see if any other packages will be affected. If the answer is yes, consider holding on pushing that update until you can either rebuild those dependent packages or coordinate with their maintainers to accomplish this. Bodhi will let you temporarily tag your package as an override to get these builds done. (As an aside, the plan for Bodhi 2 is to not permit updates to push into the repo when it would result in broken deps.) Listen to koji. If one of your packages has a broken dependency, koji will send you an email like this: Subject: Broken dependencies: gambas3 gambas3 has broken dependencies in the F-18 tree: On x86_64: gambas3-3.3.3-1.fc18 requires libkitchen_sink.so.8()(64bit) On i386: gambas3-3.3.3-1.fc18 requires libkitchen_sink.so.8 * Now, what that usually means is that kitchen_sink has been upgraded in the Fedora 18 branch, and your package is linked against the old version. In 9 out of 10 cases, simply incrementing the Release, adding a new %changelog entry, and rebuilding your package will resolve the issue. Sometimes, you'll see a version appear here, this happens if your package has a hardcoded version Requires and the version no longer matches. You'll need to check to see if the new version is also supported, and if so, adjust the versioned Requires, increment Release, add a new %changelog entry, and rebuild. Rarely, this occurs when one of your dependencies has been retired or blocked for some reason. You can check to see if a package has been blocked by running: koji list-pkgs --package $PACKAGENAME --show-blocked (where $PACKAGENAME is the name of the dependent package) In case that happens, you either need to unretire (and claim ownership) of the dependency, rebuild your code without it (may not be possible), or retire your package. Documentation for these choices are here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Orphaned_package_that_need_new_maintainers#Claiming_Ownership_of_an_Orphaned_Package_Procedure https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_remove_a_package_at_end_of_life I strongly encourage testing new package builds locally first (either in mock or with fedpkg local). I keep VMs for all active Fedora branches so that I can quickly test a build and troubleshoot failures. Don't be afraid to ask for help, either here on this mailing list, or on IRC (#fedora-devel). Lots of provenpackagers exist and we're usually happy to help. Also, be sure to ensure that any change you make in a released (or branched) Fedora, you also reflect in rawhide (and kick off a new rawhide build). Finally, keep rawhide up to date with the latest bits from upstream! We're a lot more forgiving of broken deps (in the short term) in rawhide. hth, ~tom == Fedora Project -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
