devel November 2008

devel@lists.stg.fedoraproject.org

288 participants
293 discussions

Heads up: waf 1.5
by Thomas Moschny 16 Jan '09

16 Jan '09

Hi! I'd like to update waf [1] to version 1.5.0 (which has been released only recently, and changes apis) for rawhide, and also as an update for f10. As far as I can see, only midori depends on it (although some more packages probably should, like kdissert). Any objections? Regards, Thomas [1] http://code.google.com/p/waf/ -- Thomas Moschny <thomas.moschny(a)gmail.com>

2 2

Non-responsive maintainer process for Damien Durand
by Debarshi Ray 14 Jan '09

14 Jan '09

I would like to initiate the non-responsive maintainer policy [1] against Damien Durand (CC'ed). Damien has not touched most of his packages [2] for the last one year. Significantly, Pessulus was not updated from 2.23.x to 2.24.x, while libgtksourceviewmm has also missed a few upstream releases. An effort was made to contact by filing a bug against 'gnubiff': https://bugzilla.redhat.com/464012 However there has been no response till now. Here is another bug pending response for a long time: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/257721 Happy hacking, Debarshi [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Policy/NonResponsiveMaint… [2] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/users/packages/splinux

6 24

Straw comaintainer needed
by subhodip biswas 13 Jan '09

13 Jan '09

hi ! A FTBFS bug is assigned against straw for quite a amount of time . I really didnt able to dedicate the time necessary to fix it . I will be grateful , if someone co maintains straw and help in fixing the bug . https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=465038 -- Regards Subhodip Biswas GPG key : FAEA34AB Server : pgp.mit.edu http://subhodipbiswas.wordpress.com http:/www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/SubhodipBiswas

3 2

mock 0.8.9 will not build anything
by Frank Büttner 04 Jan '09

04 Jan '09

Hello, when I try to build an package mock will fail with: ERROR: Command(/usr/sbin/groupadd -g 102 mockbuild) failed. See logs for output. At the root.log: 2008-01-18 09:48:01,860 - DEBUG trace_decorator.py, Line: 20: ENTER: doChroot((<mock.backend.Root object at 0xb7dc8e8c>, '/usr/sbin/grou padd -g 102 mockbuild', ''), {}) 2008-01-18 09:48:01,861 - DEBUG trace_decorator.py, Line: 20: ENTER: do(('/usr/sbin/groupadd -g 102 mockbuild', '/var/lib/mock/fedora-de velopment-i386/root', 0, True, 0, None, None, None, None), {}) 2008-01-18 09:48:01,862 - DEBUG util.py, Line: 212: Run cmd: /usr/sbin/groupadd -g 102 mockbuild 2008-01-18 09:48:01,862 - DEBUG util.py, Line: 218: Executing timeout(0): /usr/sbin/groupadd -g 102 mockbuild 2008-01-18 09:48:01,866 - DEBUG trace_decorator.py, Line: 20: ENTER: condPersonality((None,), {}) 2008-01-18 09:48:01,869 - DEBUG trace_decorator.py, Line: 30: LEAVE condPersonality --> None 2008-01-18 09:48:01,870 - DEBUG trace_decorator.py, Line: 20: ENTER: condChroot(('/var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386/root', None), {} ) 2008-01-18 09:48:01,871 - DEBUG trace_decorator.py, Line: 30: LEAVE condChroot --> None 2008-01-18 03:48:01,872 - DEBUG trace_decorator.py, Line: 20: ENTER: condDropPrivs((None, None, None), {}) 2008-01-18 03:48:01,873 - DEBUG trace_decorator.py, Line: 30: LEAVE condDropPrivs --> None 2008-01-18 09:48:01,973 - DEBUG util.py, Line: 234: groupadd: name mockbuild is not unique 2008-01-18 09:48:01,977 - DEBUG trace_decorator.py, Line: 27: EXCEPTION: Command(/usr/sbin/groupadd -g 102 mockbuild) failed. See logs f or output. Any ideas, what goes wrong?? Frank

4 26

Summary of the 2008-10-21 Packaging Committee meeting
by Jason L Tibbitts III 04 Jan '09

04 Jan '09

Meeting minutes and full logs of the 2008-10-21 FPC meeting are online: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Minutes http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Minutes/20081021 Issues pending FESCo ratification: * Eclipse plugin guideline modification ** Reported on-list; archive is at https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/2008-October/msg00121.html ** These tweak the guidelines to fix a few typos, clean the templates up a bit and accommodate changes in Eclipse 3.4. * Desktop File guideline modification ** https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/TomCallaway/DesktopFileVendor ** This removes language which many interpreted as requiring most desktop files to be installed with --vendor=fedora. Other discussions: * Cpack guidelines ** https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/CmakeCpack ** The committee was unclear as to how this applied to packaging guidelines at all, as it seems to contain tips for upstream developers instead of instructions for Fedora packagers. * Tweaks to the specfile template for fonts ** https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Fonts_spec_template_correcti… ** This alters the template for font packages to deal with issues surrounding the /etc/fonts/conf.avail directory. ** FPC agreed with the proposal but had some suggestions; these will be addressed and the issue will be raised later. * New guideline relating to generically named packages and files. ** Tough to actually write a guideline involving the use of common sense as applied to things like this. ** Jason will draft a proposal for consideration soon. - J<

5 7

Glade(2/3) and Anjuta in comps-f9.xml
by Debarshi Ray 22 Dec '08

22 Dec '08

Looking at http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewcvs/comps/comps-f9.xml.in?view=markup I find that Glade2 and Anjuta are marked as default and optional respectively. While Glade 3.4.1 (separate package from Glade2) is already there in the repositories, we are soon going to have a fresh new Anjuta package (atleast 2.2.3) in Fedora. However, the latest versions of Anjuta -- both 2.2.3 (stable) and 2.3.x (unstable) -- need Glade3 for its Glade plugin to work. So can we consider replacing Glade2 by Glade3 in the comps-f9.xml.in for Fedora 9? As far as I know, this would affect the Live Developer Spin and the non-live GNOME DVD. What do you think? Cheerio, Debarshi -- Free software for the Indian community: * ftp://fedora.glug-nith.org/ (Fedora) * http://gnu.glug-nith.org/ (GNU) * http://mirror.wbut.ac.in/ (CRAN, Fedora, Mozilla, TLDP)

4 11

Automatic BuildRequires
by Richard W.M. Jones 22 Dec '08

22 Dec '08

[I'm sure this isn't the first time this has occurred to someone, or even been done -- but couldn't find anything for it in Google ...] http://et.redhat.com/~rjones/auto-buildrequires/ This tries to find the correct set of BuildRequires automatically when running 'rpmbuild'. Just replace the ordinary rpmbuild command with auto-br-rpmbuild, and it will print out a suggested set of BuildRequires lines at the end. For example: $ auto-br-rpmbuild -ba mingw32-iconv.spec [...] Checking for unpackaged file(s): /usr/lib/rpm/check-files /home/rjones/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/mingw32-iconv-1.12-5.fc10.x86_64 Wrote: /home/rjones/rpmbuild/SRPMS/mingw32-iconv-1.12-5.fc10.src.rpm Wrote: /home/rjones/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/mingw32-iconv-1.12-5.fc10.noarch.rpm Executing(%clean): /bin/sh -e /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.XpFhTF + umask 022 + cd /home/rjones/rpmbuild/BUILD + cd libiconv-1.12 + rm -rf /home/rjones/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/mingw32-iconv-1.12-5.fc10.x86_64 + exit 0 BuildRequires: bash = 3.2.29.fc10.x86_64 BuildRequires: binutils = 2.18.50.0.9.7.fc10.x86_64 BuildRequires: ccache = 2.4.13.fc9.x86_64 BuildRequires: coreutils = 6.12.16.fc10.x86_64 BuildRequires: diffutils = 2.8.1.21.fc9.x86_64 BuildRequires: file = 4.26.3.fc10.x86_64 BuildRequires: findutils = 1:4.4.0.1.fc10.x86_64 BuildRequires: gawk = 3.1.5.18.fc10.x86_64 BuildRequires: gcc-gfortran = 4.3.2.6.x86_64 BuildRequires: gettext = 0.17.8.fc10.x86_64 BuildRequires: glibc-common = 2.8.90.14.x86_64 BuildRequires: grep = 2.5.1a.61.fc10.x86_64 BuildRequires: gzip = 1.3.12.7.fc10.x86_64 BuildRequires: make = 1:3.81.14.fc10.x86_64 BuildRequires: mingw32-binutils = 2.18.50_20080109_2.8.fc9.x86_64 BuildRequires: mingw32-filesystem = 34.1.fc9.noarch BuildRequires: mingw32-gcc-c++ = 4.3.2.8.fc9.x86_64 BuildRequires: mingw32-gcc = 4.3.2.8.fc9.x86_64 BuildRequires: mingw32-gettext = 0.17.6.fc9.noarch BuildRequires: mingw32-iconv = 1.12.4.fc9.noarch BuildRequires: mingw32-runtime = 3.15.1.1.fc9.noarch BuildRequires: mingw32-w32api = 3.12.1.fc9.noarch BuildRequires: net-tools = 1.60.91.fc10.x86_64 BuildRequires: sed = 4.1.5.10.fc9.x86_64 BuildRequires: tar = 2:1.20.3.fc10.x86_64 As you can see it's not perfect. It doesn't ignore 'core' packages which are always expected in a mock/koji build. Also because autoconf scripts tend to touch the C++ and Fortran compilers, even when they are not used, it always suggests those packages. Also it doesn't exclude some tools like tar which are touched by rpmbuild itself. The implementation is a simple LD_PRELOAD script that analyzes open(2) and execve(2) system calls, a Perl script that does the analysis, and some shell scripts to hang it all together. Rich. -- Richard Jones, Emerging Technologies, Red Hat http://et.redhat.com/~rjones virt-top is 'top' for virtual machines. Tiny program with many powerful monitoring features, net stats, disk stats, logging, etc. http://et.redhat.com/~rjones/virt-top

10 18

Multiple packages from one tarball and spec file
by Trever L. Adams 21 Dec '08

21 Dec '08

My questions concerning projects which are from SVN and not tarballs hasn't yet been answered. Some projects don't release tarballs or haven't released recent ones (and may not). Are this acceptable in Fedora? Additionally, I have several packages I am thinking of doing (some of which I have spec files for already). However, I am displeased with a few of them that come from one tarball. There are several options (crm114, dspam, or mailing back-ends for example) for dovecot-antispam. The problem is, you cannot build one module for dovecot that does them all, so the module has to be rebuilt with slightly different options and must conflict with all other dovecot-antispam RPMs. Is possible from one spec file and tarball? This would require different setup, build, install and package setups. This is because the same module would be built for each area, need to be packaged, and then move onto the rest. Thank you for any help on the first paragraph or the second. Trever

4 6

Orphaning azureus
by Stefan Posdzich 19 Dec '08

19 Dec '08

I have tried now some days with this package and i cant get warm with it (+ java). I will orphan it again, i hope it will find someone who can handle this kind of apps! https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/packages/name/azureus https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=azureus best regards Stefan

7 11

f11 boost-1.37.0 upgrade: notice of intent, and best way to
by Benjamin De Kosnik 18 Dec '08

18 Dec '08

The boost maintainers are planning to update the boost versions to the current release (1.37.0) in rawhide for F11. There was an attempt to upgrade boost for F10, but the timing was off. Details on that attempt: https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-August/msg00464.html We have a tenative (local) srpm, and intend with this announcement to put the boost upgrade in the queue for F11. Consider yourself notified, devel-list reader. There is some general discussion of how changes with a lot of deps should be brought into rawhide: 1) making a koji tag, check in new boost, rebuild deps 2) mock chroot with the new boost, rebuild deps Suggestions? Actual instructions, written down somewhere? The other option is to: 3) check in the base boost package to devel, and immediately work on rebuilding the deps I don't want to jump the gun here, as I know F11 planning is ongoing, and that holiday scheduling is a concern. Thoughts, and suggestion on how to proceed are welcome. best, benjamin

3 3

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

devel November 2008