https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
Neal Gompa changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version||bcachefs-tools-1.3.4-3.fc40
Resolu
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
--- Comment #46 from Fedora Admin user for bugzilla script actions
---
The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/bcachefs-tools
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You a
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
--- Comment #45 from Kent Overstreet ---
> While I see no evidence of LTO breaking bcachefs-tools, I can disable it for
> now until I've gotten more of a chance to poke at it and see that it's fine.
Thanks. Actually, a more likely source of
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
Davide Cavalca changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
|need
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
--- Comment #43 from Fedora Review Service
---
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/6671124
(succeeded)
Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2247350-bcachefs-to
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
--- Comment #42 from Fedora Review Service
---
Created attachment 2000572
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=2000572&action=edit
The .spec file difference from Copr build 6663352 to 6671124
--
You are receiving this mail b
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
Neal Gompa changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||needinfo?(dav...@cavalca.na
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
--- Comment #40 from Eric Sandeen ---
Neal, I believe this is the signing key you can use:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/docs/kernel/pgpkeys.git/plain/keys/13AB336D8DCA6E76.asc
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notifie
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
--- Comment #39 from Neal Gompa ---
Spec URL: https://ngompa.fedorapeople.org/for-review/bcachefs-tools.spec
SRPM URL:
https://ngompa.fedorapeople.org/for-review/bcachefs-tools-1.3.4-2.fc39.src.rpm
This temporarily disables LTO, as requested
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
--- Comment #38 from Neal Gompa ---
(In reply to Kent Overstreet from comment #34)
> Here, I've opened one: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/118018
Thank you for that.
(In reply to Kent Overstreet from comment #37)
> > I'm sorry, but
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
--- Comment #37 from Kent Overstreet ---
> I'm sorry, but I really don't understand this argument. I assume we don't
> even use the same C / Rust compilers (or the same versions) - I really hope
> you don't want us to ship and use the same v
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
--- Comment #36 from Fabio Valentini ---
(In reply to Kent Overstreet from comment #35)
For context: I am a member of the Fedora Packaging Committee, the Rust SIG (and
the developer and maintainer of the current version of the Rust packaging
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
--- Comment #35 from Kent Overstreet ---
So in conversation with Eric a few other things came up - LTO builds, for one.
Besides swapping out/devendoring dependencies, I need to ask that packagers be
restrained in what else they change about h
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
--- Comment #32 from Fedora Review Service
---
Created attachment 266
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=266&action=edit
The .spec file difference from Copr build 6614237 to 6663352
--
You are receiving this mail b
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
--- Comment #33 from Fedora Review Service
---
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/6663352
(succeeded)
Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2247350-bcachefs-to
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
--- Comment #31 from Neal Gompa ---
(In reply to Kent Overstreet from comment #28)
> The forked bindgen is going to be a necessity for a good while; the patch
> that bcachefs requires is a hack that would not be acceptable to upstream,
> and a
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
--- Comment #30 from Neal Gompa ---
Spec URL: https://ngompa.fedorapeople.org/for-review/bcachefs-tools.spec
SRPM URL:
https://ngompa.fedorapeople.org/for-review/bcachefs-tools-1.3.4-1.fc39.src.rpm
This updates to 1.3.4 and attempts to addres
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
--- Comment #29 from Kent Overstreet ---
I've just tagged 1.3.4, which includes COPYING.rust-dependencies.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
--- Comment #28 from Kent Overstreet ---
The forked bindgen is going to be a necessity for a good while; the patch that
bcachefs requires is a hack that would not be acceptable to upstream, and a
proper fix is going to require digging into rus
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
--- Comment #27 from Eric Sandeen ---
I think there are 2 issues here related to the vendoring business. (with the
caveat that I'm a complete rust n00b, and know very little about how Fedora is
approaching it.)
The first issue is the forked b
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
--- Comment #26 from Neal Gompa ---
(In reply to Kent Overstreet from comment #25)
> I'm not going to be de-vendoring the dependencies; sorry, but that would be
> adding far too much maintenance burden on myself.
>
I'm confused by this state
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
Kent Overstreet changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kent.overstr...@gmail.com
--- Comme
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
--- Comment #24 from Fedora Review Service
---
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/6614237
(succeeded)
Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2247350-bcachefs-to
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
--- Comment #23 from Fedora Review Service
---
Created attachment 1997969
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1997969&action=edit
The .spec file difference from Copr build 6611419 to 6614237
--
You are receiving this mail b
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
--- Comment #22 from Neal Gompa ---
Spec URL: https://ngompa.fedorapeople.org/for-review/bcachefs-tools.spec
SRPM URL:
https://ngompa.fedorapeople.org/for-review/bcachefs-tools-1.3.3-1.fc39.src.rpm
This updates to 1.3.3 and attempts to addres
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
--- Comment #21 from Eric Sandeen ---
The version at
https://evilpiepirate.org/bcachefs-tools/bcachefs-tools-vendored-1.3.3.tar.zst
now seems to build properly on all arches (the i686 build is fixed)
--
You are receiving this mail because
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
--- Comment #20 from Eric Sandeen ---
Per Kent, the tests in tests/ are not useful. Designed for the fuse stuff, and
"should probably be deleted"
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
--- Comment #19 from Davide Cavalca ---
Some more notes:
- there's a manpage and an "operating manual" under doc/ you should get
included in the package
- there are tests provided under tests/ that we should at least attempt to run
in %check
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
--- Comment #18 from Davide Cavalca ---
- The License field must be a valid SPDX expression.
Note: Not a valid SPDX expression 'GPL-2.0-only and (Apache-2.0 and
(Apache-2.0 or MIT) and (Apache-2.0 with LLVM-exception or Apache-2.0 or
MIT
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
--- Comment #17 from Davide Cavalca ---
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
- The License field must be a valid SPDX expression.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
--- Comment #16 from Fedora Review Service
---
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/6611419
(succeeded)
Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2247350-bcachefs-to
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
--- Comment #15 from Fedora Review Service
---
Created attachment 1997779
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1997779&action=edit
The .spec file difference from Copr build 6599195 to 6611419
--
You are receiving this mail b
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
Neal Gompa changed:
What|Removed |Added
Whiteboard|NotReady|
--- Comment #14 from Neal Gompa ---
Sp
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
Davide Cavalca changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-review?
Assignee|nob.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
--- Comment #12 from Eric Sandeen ---
I talked w/ Kent about this and I think the quickest path forward to getting a
working build is for him to "vendor" the dependencies in his release tarballs.
That's been done at
https://evilpiepirate.org/
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
--- Comment #11 from Fedora Review Service
---
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/6599195
(succeeded)
Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2247350-bcachefs-to
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
--- Comment #10 from Fedora Review Service
---
Created attachment 1997177
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1997177&action=edit
The .spec file difference from Copr build 6586498 to 6599195
--
You are receiving this mail b
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
--- Comment #9 from Neal Gompa ---
I figured that much out when the fuse stuff didn't compile. :)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and componen
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
--- Comment #8 from Eric Sandeen ---
Also, from Kent: "fuse is incomplete and broken, don't need that"
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
You are on the CC list for th
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
--- Comment #7 from Eric Sandeen ---
(In reply to Tony Asleson from comment #3)
> FYI: I was able to build a rpm using the spec file included in the git repo
> itself, ref.
> https://evilpiepirate.org/git/bcachefs-tools.git/tree/packaging/bcac
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
Eric Sandeen changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||esand...@redhat.com
--- Comment #6 fro
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
--- Comment #5 from Neal Gompa ---
Spec URL: https://ngompa.fedorapeople.org/for-review/bcachefs-tools.spec
SRPM URL:
https://ngompa.fedorapeople.org/for-review/bcachefs-tools-1.3.1-1.fc39.src.rpm
This updates to 1.3.1 and turns off both fuse
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
--- Comment #4 from Neal Gompa ---
(In reply to Tony Asleson from comment #3)
> FYI: I was able to build a rpm using the spec file included in the git repo
> itself, ref.
> https://evilpiepirate.org/git/bcachefs-tools.git/tree/packaging/bcache
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
--- Comment #3 from Tony Asleson ---
FYI: I was able to build a rpm using the spec file included in the git repo
itself, ref.
https://evilpiepirate.org/git/bcachefs-tools.git/tree/packaging/bcachefs-tools.spec
--
You are receiving this mail
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
Fedora Review Service changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||https://bcachefs.org/
--- Com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
--- Comment #1 from Neal Gompa ---
FYI, this does not yet build properly. I am working on getting it into shape.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
You are on the CC l
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247350
Neal Gompa changed:
What|Removed |Added
Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
Whiteb
47 matches
Mail list logo
