On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 16:36:05 +0100,
Kevin Kofler wrote:
Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
As discussed, this list isn't quite correct, but it's the best
I've got at the moment.
We need to rebuild kdeedu too, it links statically against ocaml-facile.
(And ocaml-facile needs to be in the buildroo
Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> All those packages should be in the buildroot overrides, unless I
> missed any.
>
> Strangely, the command at the end of this email shows only 67
> overrides, which can't be right because there are more packages than
> that.
>
> Yet:
>
> bodhi --buildroot-override=oca
On 12/14/2012 11:12 AM, Josh Stone wrote:
> On 12/14/2012 07:34 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>>> It's my understanding that when the update goes out, the build
>>> overrides are automatically expired, which is why I selected a very
>>> long expiry.
>>
>> AIUI, that's actuall
On 12/14/2012 07:34 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>> It's my understanding that when the update goes out, the build
>> overrides are automatically expired, which is why I selected a very
>> long expiry.
>
> AIUI, that's actually not the case. But you can expire the stuff manu
On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 04:36:05PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > As discussed, this list isn't quite correct, but it's the best
> > I've got at the moment.
>
> We need to rebuild kdeedu too, it links statically against ocaml-facile.
> (And ocaml-facile needs to be in
Kevin Kofler wrote:
> We need to rebuild kdeedu too, it links statically against ocaml-facile.
> (And ocaml-facile needs to be in the buildroot overrides for that.)
Oops, actually, make that kalzium. kdeedu is now a metapackage, the apps are
built separately.
I'll take care of it.
Kevin
Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> As discussed, this list isn't quite correct, but it's the best
> I've got at the moment.
We need to rebuild kdeedu too, it links statically against ocaml-facile.
(And ocaml-facile needs to be in the buildroot overrides for that.)
Kevin Kofler
--
devel mailin
Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> It's my understanding that when the update goes out, the build
> overrides are automatically expired, which is why I selected a very
> long expiry.
AIUI, that's actually not the case. But you can expire the stuff manually
when it's done.
Kevin Kofler
--
deve
On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 9:11 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 01:25:40PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>> > None of the Unison* packages.
>> > why
>
> Now I've done these too, so that's all the packages that I'm aware of.
>
> The mega-update is:
>
> https://admin.fedorapr
On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 01:25:40PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > None of the Unison* packages.
> > why
Now I've done these too, so that's all the packages that I'm aware of.
The mega-update is:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2012-20337
It's marked as [CRITPATH] for some r
On 12/14/2012 06:25 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
FTBFS:
plplot-5.9.9-10.svn12202.fc18.src.rpm
I'll take a look in a bit.
--
Orion Poplawski
Technical Manager 303-415-9701 x222
NWRA/CoRA DivisionFAX: 303-415-9702
3380 Mitchell Lane or
As discussed, this list isn't quite correct, but it's the best
I've got at the moment.
I following are DONE:
> ocaml-4.00.0-1.fc18.src.rpm
> ocaml-ancient-0.9.0-9.fc18.src.rpm
> ocaml-augeas-0.5-2.fc18.src.rpm
> ocaml-bin-prot-2.0.9-2.fc18.src.rpm
> ocaml-bisect-1.1-3.fc18.src.rpm
> ocaml-bitstri
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 10:28:41PM -0700, Jerry James wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 2:38 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > Assuming my repoquery command is correct, the full package list is
> > below:
>
> I rebuilt the following members of this list today:
>
> > alt-ergo-0.94-6.fc18.src.rpm
>
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 2:38 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> Assuming my repoquery command is correct, the full package list is
> below:
I rebuilt the following members of this list today:
> alt-ergo-0.94-6.fc18.src.rpm
> apron-0.9.10-8.fc18.src.rpm
> coq-8.4-1.fc18.src.rpm
> gappalib-coq-0.18.0
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 02:43:23PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-12-13 at 22:03 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>
> > I don't think any of the packages are going to be an issue. None of
> > them are critical path packages or anything especially important,
> > except possible llvm.
On Thu, 2012-12-13 at 22:03 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> I don't think any of the packages are going to be an issue. None of
> them are critical path packages or anything especially important,
> except possible llvm.
Also xen. We have a release criterion relating to it. Maybe not critpath
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 01:58:41PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-12-13 at 16:16 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > Unfortunately we found a bug in the code generator:
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=877128
> >
> > It seems likely (comment 20) that a patch which alr
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 11:50:21PM +0200, Susi Lehtola wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 21:38:26 +
> "Richard W.M. Jones" wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 09:19:54PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > > There will probably be about 70-80 packages in all. I'm planning
> > > to do the others
On Thu, 2012-12-13 at 16:16 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> Unfortunately we found a bug in the code generator:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=877128
>
> It seems likely (comment 20) that a patch which already went into
> OCaml 4.00.1 upstream some months ago fixes this. However
On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 21:38:26 +
"Richard W.M. Jones" wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 09:19:54PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > There will probably be about 70-80 packages in all. I'm planning
> > to do the others tomorrow.
>
> Assuming my repoquery command is correct, the full package
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 09:19:54PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> There will probably be about 70-80 packages in all. I'm planning
> to do the others tomorrow.
Assuming my repoquery command is correct, the full package list is
below:
$ repoquery -s --alldeps --recursive --whatrequires ocaml
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 09:19:54PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ocaml-findlib-1.3.3-3.fc18,ocaml-4.00.1-1.fc18
> (that link will probably go stale unfortunately ...)
Indeed. For now it is:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ocaml-camlidl-1.05-17
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 11:20:33AM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 16:16:12 +
> "Richard W.M. Jones" wrote:
>
> >
> > Unfortunately we found a bug in the code generator:
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=877128
> >
> > It seems likely (comment 20) that a patch
On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 16:16:12 +
"Richard W.M. Jones" wrote:
>
> Unfortunately we found a bug in the code generator:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=877128
>
> It seems likely (comment 20) that a patch which already went into
> OCaml 4.00.1 upstream some months ago fixes this.
Unfortunately we found a bug in the code generator:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=877128
It seems likely (comment 20) that a patch which already went into
OCaml 4.00.1 upstream some months ago fixes this. However it requires
that every OCaml package be rebuilt in Fedora 18 (since a
25 matches
Mail list logo
