From qboosh at pld-linux.org Sun Oct 4 15:24:21 2020 From: qboosh at pld-linux.org (Jakub Bogusz) Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2020 15:24:21 +0200 Subject: Strange multilib `poldek -i` behaviour [Re: OK: COMMAND] In-Reply-To: References: <279fbf7f-56a8-4a88-ad88-65a9727ecff4@pld.src.builder> Message-ID: <20201004132421.GA12843@mail> I tried to execute: `poldek -iv openssl-devel-1.1.1g-1.x86_64 zlib-devel-1.2.11-2.x86_64` And why it refused with "equal version installed"? `rpm -q openssl-devel zlib-devel` returned: openssl-devel-1.1.1g-1.x32 zlib-devel-1.2.11-2.x32 Adding `--force` helped (but only -devel packages were installed, I must have installed openssl.x86_64 manually). On Sun, Oct 04, 2020 at 12:23:09PM +0000, PLD th-x32 builder wrote: > COMMAND (): OK > > --- COMMAND:: > Build-Time: user:2.00s sys:0.18s real:2.22s (faults io:0 non-io:30899) > > > > *** buildlog for COMMAND > Loading [pndir]th-x86_64... > Loading [pndir]th-x86_64-ready... > Loading [pndir]th-x86_64-test... > 22166 packages read > openssl-devel-1.1.1g-1.x86_64: equal version installed, skipped > zlib-devel-1.2.11-2.x86_64: equal version installed, skipped > Nothing to do > Begin-PLD-Builder-Info > Build-Time: user:2.00s sys:0.18s real:2.22s (faults io:0 non-io:30899) > > End-PLD-Builder-Info > -- Jakub Bogusz http://qboosh.pl/ From baggins at pld-linux.org Mon Oct 5 01:12:44 2020 From: baggins at pld-linux.org (Jan =?utf-8?Q?R=C4=99korajski?=) Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2020 01:12:44 +0200 Subject: OK: rust.spec In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201004231244.GB2263@starbug> On Sun, 04 Oct 2020, PLD th-x32 builder wrote: > rust.spec (auto/th/rust-1.44.1-2): OK > > --- rust.spec:auto/th/rust-1.44.1-2: > upgrading packages > Build-Time: user:22480.24s sys:327.35s real:7031.10s (faults io:17 non-io:47582180) > > Files queued for ftp: > 13348158 rust-debuginfo-1.44.1-2.x32.rpm > 10224 zsh-completion-cargo-1.44.1-2.x32.rpm > 8428 bash-completion-cargo-1.44.1-2.x32.rpm > 4034573 cargo-1.44.1-2.x32.rpm > 14821218 rust-doc-1.44.1-2.noarch.rpm > 8969 rust-lldb-1.44.1-2.noarch.rpm > 10439 rust-gdb-1.44.1-2.noarch.rpm > 9304 rust-debugger-common-1.44.1-2.noarch.rpm > 56994390 rust-1.44.1-2.x32.rpm > 410 rust-1.44.1-2.src.rpm.uploadinfo Unfortunately this build does not produce x32 output. Sample from building librsvg on x32: libtool: link: x86_64-pld-linux-gnux32-gcc -shared -fPIC -DPIC -pthread -O2 -fstack-protector-strong -mtune=generic -march=x86-64 -Wl,-Bsymbolic-functions -Wl,--as-needed +-Wl,--no-copy-dt-needed-entries -Wl,-z -Wl,relro -Wl,-z -Wl,combreloc -pthread librsvg/.libs/2_la-librsvg-features.o librsvg/.libs/2_la-rsvg-base.o librsvg/.libs/2_la-rsvg-handle.o +librsvg/.libs/2_la-rsvg-pixbuf.o -Wl,--whole-archive ./.libs/librsvg_c_api.a -Wl,--no-whole-archive -lcairo-gobject -lgdk_pixbuf-2.0 -lgio-2.0 /usr/libx32/libxml2.so -L/usr/libx32 +/usr/libx32/liblzma.so -lpthread -lpangocairo-1.0 -lcairo -lpangoft2-1.0 -lpango-1.0 -lgobject-2.0 -lglib-2.0 /usr/libx32/libfontconfig.so /usr/libx32/libexpat.so /usr/libx32/libuuid.so +/usr/libx32/libfreetype.so /usr/libx32/libbz2.so /usr/libx32/libpng16.so -lz -lharfbuzz /usr/libx32/libbrotlidec.so /usr/libx32/libbrotlicommon.so -lm -ldl -Wl,-soname -Wl,librsvg-2.so.2 +-Wl,-version-script -Wl,.libs/librsvg-2.ver -o .libs/librsvg-2.so.2.47.0 /usr/bin/ld: i386:x86-64 architecture of input file `./.libs/librsvg_c_api.a(rsvg_c_api-1bb89e3c1c21f1fa.rsvg_c_api.28lfa0sz-cgu.0.rcgu.o)' is incompatible with i386:x64-32 output /usr/bin/ld: i386:x86-64 architecture of input file `./.libs/librsvg_c_api.a(rsvg_c_api-1bb89e3c1c21f1fa.rsvg_c_api.28lfa0sz-cgu.1.rcgu.o)' is incompatible with i386:x64-32 output /usr/bin/ld: i386:x86-64 architecture of input file `./.libs/librsvg_c_api.a(rsvg_c_api-1bb89e3c1c21f1fa.rsvg_c_api.28lfa0sz-cgu.10.rcgu.o)' is incompatible with i386:x64-32 output [... and so on for all files ...] -- Jan R?korajski | PLD/Linux SysAdm | bagginspld-linux.org | http://www.pld-linux.org/ From baggins at pld-linux.org Mon Oct 5 08:25:48 2020 From: baggins at pld-linux.org (Jan =?utf-8?Q?R=C4=99korajski?=) Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2020 08:25:48 +0200 Subject: [packages/rpm-pld-macros] - version 1.752: "noarchpackage" macro to cut down boilerplate In-Reply-To: <0b4ebb8c0a63e29ec47b0e6d4f78c9f2759a5a9c_refs_heads_master@pld-linux.org> References: <16bd8442fe57fefc97f90f772cdfbfdd6274ba9a_refs_heads_master@pld-linux.org> <0b4ebb8c0a63e29ec47b0e6d4f78c9f2759a5a9c_refs_heads_master@pld-linux.org> Message-ID: <20201005062548.GC2263@starbug> On Fri, 02 Oct 2020, qboosh wrote: > commit 0b4ebb8c0a63e29ec47b0e6d4f78c9f2759a5a9c > Author: Jakub Bogusz > Date: Fri Oct 2 17:11:47 2020 +0200 > > - version 1.752: "noarchpackage" macro to cut down boilerplate > > macros.pld | 8 ++++++++ > rpm-pld-macros.spec | 2 +- > 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > --- > diff --git a/rpm-pld-macros.spec b/rpm-pld-macros.spec > index 4bb0e55..0aa5cf4 100644 > --- a/rpm-pld-macros.spec > +++ b/rpm-pld-macros.spec > @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ > -%define rpm_macros_rev 1.751 > +%define rpm_macros_rev 1.752 > %define find_lang_rev 1.40 > # split into individual X_prov_ver if there is a reason to desync > %define prov_ver 4.15 > diff --git a/macros.pld b/macros.pld > index ed5a896..93386d5 100644 > --- a/macros.pld > +++ b/macros.pld > @@ -521,6 +521,14 @@ Provides: %{1} = %{?epoch:%{epoch}:}%{?version:%{version}}%{?release:-%{release} > %_ver_lt() %(test $(rpmvercmp "%{1}" "%{2}" >/dev/null 2>&1; echo $?) -ne 2; echo $?) > %_ver_ge() %(test $(rpmvercmp "%{1}" "%{2}" >/dev/null 2>&1; echo $?) -eq 2; echo $?) > > +# noarch subpackage helper > +# BuildRequires: rpmbuild(macros) >= 1.752 > +%noarchpackage \ > +%if %{_ver_ge '%{_rpmversion}' '4.6'} \ > +BuildArch: noarch \ > +%endif \ > +%{nil} > + > %apache_modules_api %{expand:%%global apache_modules_api %(awk '/#define MODULE_MAGIC_NUMBER_MAJOR/ {print $3}' /usr/include/apache/ap_mmn.h 2>/dev/null || echo ERROR)}%apache_modules_api > > # sgml macros Wht do we even have this junk? Is *anyone* running such an ancient rpm that does not understand noarch subpackages? We should just remove the condition instead of trying to make it prettier. -- Jan R?korajski | PLD/Linux SysAdm | bagginspld-linux.org | http://www.pld-linux.org/ From qboosh at pld-linux.org Mon Oct 5 20:55:56 2020 From: qboosh at pld-linux.org (Jakub Bogusz) Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2020 20:55:56 +0200 Subject: OK: rust.spec In-Reply-To: <20201004231244.GB2263@starbug> References: <20201004231244.GB2263@starbug> Message-ID: <20201005185556.GA5456@mail> On Mon, Oct 05, 2020 at 01:12:44AM +0200, Jan R?korajski wrote: > On Sun, 04 Oct 2020, PLD th-x32 builder wrote: > > > rust.spec (auto/th/rust-1.44.1-2): OK > > > > --- rust.spec:auto/th/rust-1.44.1-2: > > upgrading packages > > Build-Time: user:22480.24s sys:327.35s real:7031.10s (faults io:17 non-io:47582180) > > > > Files queued for ftp: > > 13348158 rust-debuginfo-1.44.1-2.x32.rpm > > 10224 zsh-completion-cargo-1.44.1-2.x32.rpm > > 8428 bash-completion-cargo-1.44.1-2.x32.rpm > > 4034573 cargo-1.44.1-2.x32.rpm > > 14821218 rust-doc-1.44.1-2.noarch.rpm > > 8969 rust-lldb-1.44.1-2.noarch.rpm > > 10439 rust-gdb-1.44.1-2.noarch.rpm > > 9304 rust-debugger-common-1.44.1-2.noarch.rpm > > 56994390 rust-1.44.1-2.x32.rpm > > 410 rust-1.44.1-2.src.rpm.uploadinfo > > Unfortunately this build does not produce x32 output. It appeared that gnux32 ABI is not default for this compiler, one must add --target=x86_64-unknown-linux-gnux32 to rustc or cargo. With few hacks (simulating crosscompilation in rust part) and fixing one vendored package librsvg built as x32. ow I'm trying with mozjs78, which blocks more packages (e.g. current polkit or gnome-shell). -- Jakub Bogusz http://qboosh.pl/ From qboosh at pld-linux.org Tue Oct 6 15:14:45 2020 From: qboosh at pld-linux.org (Jakub Bogusz) Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2020 15:14:45 +0200 Subject: rust on carme-x32? Message-ID: <20201006131445.GA22110@mail> Can we have rust and cargo installed on carme-x32? It requires a few x86_64 libraries, so I cannot install with accessible poldek commands. -- Jakub Bogusz http://qboosh.pl/ From qboosh at pld-linux.org Tue Oct 6 18:21:38 2020 From: qboosh at pld-linux.org (Jakub Bogusz) Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2020 18:21:38 +0200 Subject: [packages/mpdecimal] - up to 2.5.0 In-Reply-To: References: <9905bfbfc1d056ae49f6eb2e665ceef977af3f29_refs_heads_master@pld-linux.org> Message-ID: <20201006162138.GA24781@mail> On Tue, Oct 06, 2020 at 04:26:50PM +0200, arekm wrote: > commit bede0ed9de64c316b06ae86643a2df9422faf130 > Author: Arkadiusz Mi?kiewicz > Date: Tue Oct 6 16:26:44 2020 +0200 > > - up to 2.5.0 > > mpdecimal-cpython.patch | 113 ------------------------------------------------ > mpdecimal.spec | 15 ++++--- > 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 118 deletions(-) > --- [...] > -# Source0-md5: aa63cab5d06a96855a44da2db90a29d9 > -Patch0: %{name}-cpython.patch > +# Source0-md5: 3cacb882f59f795f4ed6822d80bd2f7d > +Patch0: build.patch "build.patch" is missing in git. -- Jakub Bogusz http://qboosh.pl/ From arekm at maven.pl Tue Oct 6 21:47:36 2020 From: arekm at maven.pl (=?UTF-8?Q?Arkadiusz_Mi=c5=9bkiewicz?=) Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2020 21:47:36 +0200 Subject: rust on carme-x32? In-Reply-To: <20201006131445.GA22110@mail> References: <20201006131445.GA22110@mail> Message-ID: W dniu 06.10.2020 o?15:14, Jakub Bogusz via pld-devel-en pisze: > Can we have rust and cargo installed on carme-x32? > It requires a few x86_64 libraries, so I cannot install with accessible > poldek commands. > > > poldek:/all-avail> install cargo-1.44.1-2.x32 rust-1.44.1-2.x32 > Loading [pndir]th... > Loading [pndir]th... > Loading [pndir]th-ready... > Loading [pndir]th-ready... > Loading [pndir]th-test... > Loading [pndir]th-test... > Loading [pndir]th-x86_64... > Loading [pndir]th-x86_64-ready... > Loading [pndir]th-x86_64-test... > 53339 packages read > Removed 9 duplicate packages from available set > Processing dependencies... > rust-1.44.1-2.x32 marks llvm-libs-10.0.1-1.x86_64 (cap libLLVM-10.so()(64bit)) > llvm-libs-10.0.1-1.x86_64 marks libedit-3.1-1.20190324.1.x86_64 (cap libedit.so.0()(64bit)) > libedit-3.1-1.20190324.1.x86_64 marks ncurses-6.2.20200822-1.x86_64 (cap libncursesw.so.6()(64bit)) > llvm-libs-10.0.1-1.x86_64 marks libxml2-2.9.10-2.x86_64 (cap libxml2.so.2()(64bit)) > libxml2-2.9.10-2.x86_64 marks xz-libs-5.2.5-1.x86_64 (cap liblzma.so.5()(64bit)) > libxml2-2.9.10-2.x86_64 marks zlib-1.2.11-2.x86_64 (cap libz.so.1()(64bit)) > llvm-libs-10.0.1-1.x86_64 marks z3-4.8.7-1.x86_64 (cap libz3.so.4.8()(64bit)) > z3-4.8.7-1.x86_64 marks gmp-6.2.0-1.x86_64 (cap libgmp.so.10()(64bit)) > rust-1.44.1-2.x32 marks openssl-1.1.1g-1.x86_64 (cap libcrypto.so.1.1()(64bit)) > rust-1.44.1-2.x32 marks curl-libs-7.72.0-1.x86_64 (cap libcurl.so.4()(64bit)) > curl-libs-7.72.0-1.x86_64 marks libbrotli-1.0.9-2.x86_64 (cap libbrotlidec.so.1()(64bit)) > curl-libs-7.72.0-1.x86_64 marks c-ares-1.16.1-1.x86_64 (cap libcares.so.2()(64bit)) > curl-libs-7.72.0-1.x86_64 marks heimdal-libs-7.7.0-2.x86_64 (cap libgssapi.so.3()(64bit)) > heimdal-libs-7.7.0-2.x86_64 marks libcom_err-1.45.6-1.x86_64 (cap libcom_err.so.2()(64bit)) > heimdal-libs-7.7.0-2.x86_64 marks sqlite3-libs-3.33.0-1.x86_64 (cap libsqlite3.so.0()(64bit)) > curl-libs-7.72.0-1.x86_64 marks libidn2-2.3.0-1.x86_64 (cap libidn2.so.0()(64bit)) > libidn2-2.3.0-1.x86_64 marks libunistring-0.9.10-1.x86_64 (cap libunistring.so.2()(64bit)) > curl-libs-7.72.0-1.x86_64 marks openldap-libs-2.4.49-1.x86_64 (cap liblber-2.4.so.2()(64bit)) > openldap-libs-2.4.49-1.x86_64 marks cyrus-sasl-libs-2.1.27-1.x86_64 (cap libsasl2.so.3()(64bit)) > curl-libs-7.72.0-1.x86_64 marks nghttp2-libs-1.41.0-1.x86_64 (cap libnghttp2.so.14()(64bit)) > curl-libs-7.72.0-1.x86_64 marks libpsl-0.21.0-1.x86_64 (cap libpsl.so.5()(64bit)) > curl-libs-7.72.0-1.x86_64 marks librtmp-2.4-1.20190331.2.x86_64 (cap librtmp.so.0()(64bit)) > librtmp-2.4-1.20190331.2.x86_64 marks gnutls-libs-3.6.15-2.x86_64 (cap libgnutls.so.30()(64bit)) > gnutls-libs-3.6.15-2.x86_64 marks nettle-3.6-1.x86_64 (cap libhogweed.so.6()(64bit)) > gnutls-libs-3.6.15-2.x86_64 marks p11-kit-0.23.21-1.x86_64 (cap libp11-kit.so.0()(64bit)) > p11-kit-0.23.21-1.x86_64 marks libffi-3.3-1.x86_64 (cap libffi.so.7()(64bit)) > p11-kit-0.23.21-1.x86_64 marks systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 (cap libsystemd.so.0()(64bit)) > systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks acl-2.2.53-1.x86_64 (cap libacl.so.1()(64bit)) > systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks libblkid-2.36-1.x86_64 (cap libblkid.so.1()(64bit)) > systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks libcap-libs-2.43-1.x86_64 (cap libcap.so.2()(64bit)) > systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks cryptsetup-2.3.4-1.x86_64 (cap libcryptsetup.so.12()(64bit)) > cryptsetup-2.3.4-1.x86_64 marks libargon2-20190702-1.x86_64 (cap libargon2.so.1()(64bit)) > cryptsetup-2.3.4-1.x86_64 marks device-mapper-libs-2.03.10-1.x86_64 (cap libdevmapper.so.1.02()(64bit)) > device-mapper-libs-2.03.10-1.x86_64 marks libaio-0.3.112-1.x86_64 (cap libaio.so.1()(64bit)) > device-mapper-libs-2.03.10-1.x86_64 marks libselinux-2.9-4.x86_64 (cap libselinux.so.1()(64bit)) > libselinux-2.9-4.x86_64 marks pcre-8.44-1.x86_64 (cap libpcre.so.1()(64bit)) > device-mapper-libs-2.03.10-1.x86_64 marks udev-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 (cap libudev.so.1()(64bit)) > cryptsetup-2.3.4-1.x86_64 marks json-c-0.14-1.x86_64 (cap libjson-c.so.5()(64bit)) > cryptsetup-2.3.4-1.x86_64 marks popt-1.17-3.x86_64 (cap libpopt.so.0()(64bit)) > cryptsetup-2.3.4-1.x86_64 marks libuuid-2.36-1.x86_64 (cap libuuid.so.1()(64bit)) > systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks libgcrypt-1.8.6-1.x86_64 (cap libgcrypt.so.20()(64bit)) > libgcrypt-1.8.6-1.x86_64 marks libgpg-error-1.39-1.x86_64 (cap libgpg-error.so.0()(64bit)) > systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64: required "libip4tc.so.2()(64bit)" is provided by the following packages: > a) iptables-libs-1.8.5-1.x86_64 > b) iptables-vserver-libs-1.8.5-1.x86_64 > Which one do you want to install ('Q' to abort)? [iptables-libs-1.8.5-1.x86_64] > systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks iptables-libs-1.8.5-1.x86_64 (cap libip4tc.so.2()(64bit)) > systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks kmod-libs-27-1.x86_64 (cap libkmod.so.2()(64bit)) > systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks lz4-libs-1.9.2-1.x86_64 (cap liblz4.so.1()(64bit)) > systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks libmount-2.36-1.x86_64 (cap libmount.so.1()(64bit)) > systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks pam-libs-1.4.0-1.x86_64 (cap libpam.so.0()(64bit)) > pam-libs-1.4.0-1.x86_64 marks audit-libs-2.8.5-1.x86_64 (cap libaudit.so.1()(64bit)) > audit-libs-2.8.5-1.x86_64 marks libcap-ng-0.7.10-2.x86_64 (cap libcap-ng.so.0()(64bit)) > systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks libseccomp-2.5.0-1.x86_64 (cap libseccomp.so.2()(64bit)) > systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks zstd-1.4.5-1.x86_64 (cap libzstd.so.1()(64bit)) > p11-kit-0.23.21-1.x86_64 marks libtasn1-4.16.0-1.x86_64 (cap libtasn1.so.6()(64bit)) > curl-libs-7.72.0-1.x86_64 marks libssh2-1.9.0-1.x86_64 (cap libssh2.so.1()(64bit)) > rust-1.44.1-2.x32 marks libgit2-1.0.0-1.x86_64 (cap libgit2.so.1.0()(64bit)) > There are 55 packages to install (54 marked by dependencies): > A acl-2.2.53-1.x86_64 audit-libs-2.8.5-1.x86_64 c-ares-1.16.1-1.x86_64 cryptsetup-2.3.4-1.x86_64 curl-libs-7.72.0-1.x86_64 cyrus-sasl-libs-2.1.27-1.x86_64 device-mapper-libs-2.03.10-1.x86_64 gmp-6.2.0-1.x86_64 > A gnutls-libs-3.6.15-2.x86_64 heimdal-libs-7.7.0-2.x86_64 iptables-libs-1.8.5-1.x86_64 json-c-0.14-1.x86_64 kmod-libs-27-1.x86_64 libaio-0.3.112-1.x86_64 libargon2-20190702-1.x86_64 libblkid-2.36-1.x86_64 > A libbrotli-1.0.9-2.x86_64 libcap-libs-2.43-1.x86_64 libcap-ng-0.7.10-2.x86_64 libcom_err-1.45.6-1.x86_64 libedit-3.1-1.20190324.1.x86_64 libffi-3.3-1.x86_64 libgcrypt-1.8.6-1.x86_64 libgit2-1.0.0-1.x86_64 > A libgpg-error-1.39-1.x86_64 libidn2-2.3.0-1.x86_64 libmount-2.36-1.x86_64 libpsl-0.21.0-1.x86_64 librtmp-2.4-1.20190331.2.x86_64 libseccomp-2.5.0-1.x86_64 libselinux-2.9-4.x86_64 libssh2-1.9.0-1.x86_64 > A libtasn1-4.16.0-1.x86_64 libunistring-0.9.10-1.x86_64 libuuid-2.36-1.x86_64 libxml2-2.9.10-2.x86_64 llvm-libs-10.0.1-1.x86_64 lz4-libs-1.9.2-1.x86_64 ncurses-6.2.20200822-1.x86_64 nettle-3.6-1.x86_64 > A nghttp2-libs-1.41.0-1.x86_64 openldap-libs-2.4.49-1.x86_64 openssl-1.1.1g-1.x86_64 p11-kit-0.23.21-1.x86_64 pam-libs-1.4.0-1.x86_64 pcre-8.44-1.x86_64 popt-1.17-3.x86_64 rust-1.44.1-2.x32 sqlite3-libs-3.33.0-1.x86_64 > A systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 udev-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 xz-libs-5.2.5-1.x86_64 z3-4.8.7-1.x86_64 zlib-1.2.11-2.x86_64 zstd-1.4.5-1.x86_64 > This operation will use 471.5MB of disk space. > Need to get 109.3MB of archives. > Executing pm-command.sh --upgrade -vh --root / --define _check_dirname_deps 1... > Preparing... ########################################### [100%] > error: Install/Erase problems: > package libcap-ng-0.8-1.x32 (which is newer than libcap-ng-0.7.10-2.x86_64) is already installed > package libedit-3.1-1.20191231.1.x32 (which is newer than libedit-3.1-1.20190324.1.x86_64) is already installed > package libpsl-0.21.1-1.x32 (which is newer than libpsl-0.21.0-1.x86_64) is already installed > file /usr/share/doc/libedit-3.1/ChangeLog.gz from install of libedit-3.1-1.20190324.1.x86_64 conflicts with file from package libedit-3.1-1.20191231.1.x32 > Installing set #2 > Processing dependencies... > cargo-1.44.1-2.x32 marks openssl-1.1.1g-1.x86_64 (cap libcrypto.so.1.1()(64bit)) > openssl-1.1.1g-1.x86_64 marks zlib-1.2.11-2.x86_64 (cap libz.so.1()(64bit)) > cargo-1.44.1-2.x32 marks curl-libs-7.72.0-1.x86_64 (cap libcurl.so.4()(64bit)) > curl-libs-7.72.0-1.x86_64 marks libbrotli-1.0.9-2.x86_64 (cap libbrotlidec.so.1()(64bit)) > curl-libs-7.72.0-1.x86_64 marks c-ares-1.16.1-1.x86_64 (cap libcares.so.2()(64bit)) > curl-libs-7.72.0-1.x86_64 marks heimdal-libs-7.7.0-2.x86_64 (cap libgssapi.so.3()(64bit)) > heimdal-libs-7.7.0-2.x86_64 marks libcom_err-1.45.6-1.x86_64 (cap libcom_err.so.2()(64bit)) > heimdal-libs-7.7.0-2.x86_64 marks sqlite3-libs-3.33.0-1.x86_64 (cap libsqlite3.so.0()(64bit)) > curl-libs-7.72.0-1.x86_64 marks libidn2-2.3.0-1.x86_64 (cap libidn2.so.0()(64bit)) > libidn2-2.3.0-1.x86_64 marks libunistring-0.9.10-1.x86_64 (cap libunistring.so.2()(64bit)) > curl-libs-7.72.0-1.x86_64 marks openldap-libs-2.4.49-1.x86_64 (cap liblber-2.4.so.2()(64bit)) > openldap-libs-2.4.49-1.x86_64 marks cyrus-sasl-libs-2.1.27-1.x86_64 (cap libsasl2.so.3()(64bit)) > curl-libs-7.72.0-1.x86_64 marks nghttp2-libs-1.41.0-1.x86_64 (cap libnghttp2.so.14()(64bit)) > curl-libs-7.72.0-1.x86_64 marks libpsl-0.21.0-1.x86_64 (cap libpsl.so.5()(64bit)) > curl-libs-7.72.0-1.x86_64 marks librtmp-2.4-1.20190331.2.x86_64 (cap librtmp.so.0()(64bit)) > librtmp-2.4-1.20190331.2.x86_64 marks gmp-6.2.0-1.x86_64 (cap libgmp.so.10()(64bit)) > librtmp-2.4-1.20190331.2.x86_64 marks gnutls-libs-3.6.15-2.x86_64 (cap libgnutls.so.30()(64bit)) > gnutls-libs-3.6.15-2.x86_64 marks nettle-3.6-1.x86_64 (cap libhogweed.so.6()(64bit)) > gnutls-libs-3.6.15-2.x86_64 marks p11-kit-0.23.21-1.x86_64 (cap libp11-kit.so.0()(64bit)) > p11-kit-0.23.21-1.x86_64 marks libffi-3.3-1.x86_64 (cap libffi.so.7()(64bit)) > p11-kit-0.23.21-1.x86_64 marks systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 (cap libsystemd.so.0()(64bit)) > systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks acl-2.2.53-1.x86_64 (cap libacl.so.1()(64bit)) > systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks libblkid-2.36-1.x86_64 (cap libblkid.so.1()(64bit)) > systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks libcap-libs-2.43-1.x86_64 (cap libcap.so.2()(64bit)) > systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks cryptsetup-2.3.4-1.x86_64 (cap libcryptsetup.so.12()(64bit)) > cryptsetup-2.3.4-1.x86_64 marks libargon2-20190702-1.x86_64 (cap libargon2.so.1()(64bit)) > cryptsetup-2.3.4-1.x86_64 marks device-mapper-libs-2.03.10-1.x86_64 (cap libdevmapper.so.1.02()(64bit)) > device-mapper-libs-2.03.10-1.x86_64 marks libaio-0.3.112-1.x86_64 (cap libaio.so.1()(64bit)) > device-mapper-libs-2.03.10-1.x86_64 marks libselinux-2.9-4.x86_64 (cap libselinux.so.1()(64bit)) > libselinux-2.9-4.x86_64 marks pcre-8.44-1.x86_64 (cap libpcre.so.1()(64bit)) > device-mapper-libs-2.03.10-1.x86_64 marks udev-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 (cap libudev.so.1()(64bit)) > cryptsetup-2.3.4-1.x86_64 marks json-c-0.14-1.x86_64 (cap libjson-c.so.5()(64bit)) > cryptsetup-2.3.4-1.x86_64 marks popt-1.17-3.x86_64 (cap libpopt.so.0()(64bit)) > cryptsetup-2.3.4-1.x86_64 marks libuuid-2.36-1.x86_64 (cap libuuid.so.1()(64bit)) > systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks libgcrypt-1.8.6-1.x86_64 (cap libgcrypt.so.20()(64bit)) > libgcrypt-1.8.6-1.x86_64 marks libgpg-error-1.39-1.x86_64 (cap libgpg-error.so.0()(64bit)) > systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64: required "libip4tc.so.2()(64bit)" is provided by the following packages: > a) iptables-libs-1.8.5-1.x86_64 > b) iptables-vserver-libs-1.8.5-1.x86_64 > Which one do you want to install ('Q' to abort)? [iptables-libs-1.8.5-1.x86_64] > systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks iptables-libs-1.8.5-1.x86_64 (cap libip4tc.so.2()(64bit)) > systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks kmod-libs-27-1.x86_64 (cap libkmod.so.2()(64bit)) > kmod-libs-27-1.x86_64 marks xz-libs-5.2.5-1.x86_64 (cap liblzma.so.5()(64bit)) > systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks lz4-libs-1.9.2-1.x86_64 (cap liblz4.so.1()(64bit)) > systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks libmount-2.36-1.x86_64 (cap libmount.so.1()(64bit)) > systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks pam-libs-1.4.0-1.x86_64 (cap libpam.so.0()(64bit)) > pam-libs-1.4.0-1.x86_64 marks audit-libs-2.8.5-1.x86_64 (cap libaudit.so.1()(64bit)) > audit-libs-2.8.5-1.x86_64 marks libcap-ng-0.7.10-2.x86_64 (cap libcap-ng.so.0()(64bit)) > systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks libseccomp-2.5.0-1.x86_64 (cap libseccomp.so.2()(64bit)) > systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks zstd-1.4.5-1.x86_64 (cap libzstd.so.1()(64bit)) > p11-kit-0.23.21-1.x86_64 marks libtasn1-4.16.0-1.x86_64 (cap libtasn1.so.6()(64bit)) > curl-libs-7.72.0-1.x86_64 marks libssh2-1.9.0-1.x86_64 (cap libssh2.so.1()(64bit)) > cargo-1.44.1-2.x32 marks libgit2-1.0.0-1.x86_64 (cap libgit2.so.1.0()(64bit)) > cargo-1.44.1-2.x32 marks rust-1.44.1-2.x32 (cap librustc_driver-645e70beafd7d08d.so()(64bit)) > rust-1.44.1-2.x32 marks llvm-libs-10.0.1-1.x86_64 (cap libLLVM-10.so()(64bit)) > llvm-libs-10.0.1-1.x86_64 marks libedit-3.1-1.20190324.1.x86_64 (cap libedit.so.0()(64bit)) > libedit-3.1-1.20190324.1.x86_64 marks ncurses-6.2.20200822-1.x86_64 (cap libncursesw.so.6()(64bit)) > llvm-libs-10.0.1-1.x86_64 marks libxml2-2.9.10-2.x86_64 (cap libxml2.so.2()(64bit)) > llvm-libs-10.0.1-1.x86_64 marks z3-4.8.7-1.x86_64 (cap libz3.so.4.8()(64bit)) > There are 56 packages to install (55 marked by dependencies): > A acl-2.2.53-1.x86_64 audit-libs-2.8.5-1.x86_64 c-ares-1.16.1-1.x86_64 cargo-1.44.1-2.x32 cryptsetup-2.3.4-1.x86_64 curl-libs-7.72.0-1.x86_64 cyrus-sasl-libs-2.1.27-1.x86_64 device-mapper-libs-2.03.10-1.x86_64 > A gmp-6.2.0-1.x86_64 gnutls-libs-3.6.15-2.x86_64 heimdal-libs-7.7.0-2.x86_64 iptables-libs-1.8.5-1.x86_64 json-c-0.14-1.x86_64 kmod-libs-27-1.x86_64 libaio-0.3.112-1.x86_64 libargon2-20190702-1.x86_64 > A libblkid-2.36-1.x86_64 libbrotli-1.0.9-2.x86_64 libcap-libs-2.43-1.x86_64 libcap-ng-0.7.10-2.x86_64 libcom_err-1.45.6-1.x86_64 libedit-3.1-1.20190324.1.x86_64 libffi-3.3-1.x86_64 libgcrypt-1.8.6-1.x86_64 > A libgit2-1.0.0-1.x86_64 libgpg-error-1.39-1.x86_64 libidn2-2.3.0-1.x86_64 libmount-2.36-1.x86_64 libpsl-0.21.0-1.x86_64 librtmp-2.4-1.20190331.2.x86_64 libseccomp-2.5.0-1.x86_64 libselinux-2.9-4.x86_64 > A libssh2-1.9.0-1.x86_64 libtasn1-4.16.0-1.x86_64 libunistring-0.9.10-1.x86_64 libuuid-2.36-1.x86_64 libxml2-2.9.10-2.x86_64 llvm-libs-10.0.1-1.x86_64 lz4-libs-1.9.2-1.x86_64 ncurses-6.2.20200822-1.x86_64 > A nettle-3.6-1.x86_64 nghttp2-libs-1.41.0-1.x86_64 openldap-libs-2.4.49-1.x86_64 openssl-1.1.1g-1.x86_64 p11-kit-0.23.21-1.x86_64 pam-libs-1.4.0-1.x86_64 pcre-8.44-1.x86_64 popt-1.17-3.x86_64 rust-1.44.1-2.x32 > A sqlite3-libs-3.33.0-1.x86_64 systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 udev-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 xz-libs-5.2.5-1.x86_64 z3-4.8.7-1.x86_64 zlib-1.2.11-2.x86_64 zstd-1.4.5-1.x86_64 > This operation will use 488.2MB of disk space. > Need to get 113.2MB of archives. > Executing pm-command.sh --upgrade -vh --root / --define _check_dirname_deps 1... > Preparing... ########################################### [100%] > error: Install/Erase problems: > package libcap-ng-0.8-1.x32 (which is newer than libcap-ng-0.7.10-2.x86_64) is already installed > package libedit-3.1-1.20191231.1.x32 (which is newer than libedit-3.1-1.20190324.1.x86_64) is already installed > package libpsl-0.21.1-1.x32 (which is newer than libpsl-0.21.0-1.x86_64) is already installed > file /usr/share/doc/libedit-3.1/ChangeLog.gz from install of libedit-3.1-1.20190324.1.x86_64 conflicts with file from package libedit-3.1-1.20191231.1.x32 > There were errors > poldek:/all-avail> -- Arkadiusz Mi?kiewicz, arekm / ( maven.pl | pld-linux.org ) From qboosh at pld-linux.org Tue Oct 6 22:29:35 2020 From: qboosh at pld-linux.org (Jakub Bogusz) Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2020 22:29:35 +0200 Subject: rust on carme-x32? In-Reply-To: References: <20201006131445.GA22110@mail> Message-ID: <20201006202935.GA29248@mail> On Tue, Oct 06, 2020 at 09:47:36PM +0200, Arkadiusz Mi?kiewicz wrote: > W dniu 06.10.2020 o?15:14, Jakub Bogusz via pld-devel-en pisze: > > Can we have rust and cargo installed on carme-x32? > > It requires a few x86_64 libraries, so I cannot install with accessible > > poldek commands. > > > > > > > poldek:/all-avail> install cargo-1.44.1-2.x32 rust-1.44.1-2.x32 [...] > > curl-libs-7.72.0-1.x86_64 marks libbrotli-1.0.9-2.x86_64 (cap libbrotlidec.so.1()(64bit)) > > curl-libs-7.72.0-1.x86_64 marks c-ares-1.16.1-1.x86_64 (cap libcares.so.2()(64bit)) > > curl-libs-7.72.0-1.x86_64 marks heimdal-libs-7.7.0-2.x86_64 (cap libgssapi.so.3()(64bit)) > > heimdal-libs-7.7.0-2.x86_64 marks libcom_err-1.45.6-1.x86_64 (cap libcom_err.so.2()(64bit)) > > heimdal-libs-7.7.0-2.x86_64 marks sqlite3-libs-3.33.0-1.x86_64 (cap libsqlite3.so.0()(64bit)) > > curl-libs-7.72.0-1.x86_64 marks libidn2-2.3.0-1.x86_64 (cap libidn2.so.0()(64bit)) > > libidn2-2.3.0-1.x86_64 marks libunistring-0.9.10-1.x86_64 (cap libunistring.so.2()(64bit)) > > curl-libs-7.72.0-1.x86_64 marks openldap-libs-2.4.49-1.x86_64 (cap liblber-2.4.so.2()(64bit)) > > openldap-libs-2.4.49-1.x86_64 marks cyrus-sasl-libs-2.1.27-1.x86_64 (cap libsasl2.so.3()(64bit)) > > curl-libs-7.72.0-1.x86_64 marks nghttp2-libs-1.41.0-1.x86_64 (cap libnghttp2.so.14()(64bit)) > > curl-libs-7.72.0-1.x86_64 marks libpsl-0.21.0-1.x86_64 (cap libpsl.so.5()(64bit)) > > curl-libs-7.72.0-1.x86_64 marks librtmp-2.4-1.20190331.2.x86_64 (cap librtmp.so.0()(64bit)) > > librtmp-2.4-1.20190331.2.x86_64 marks gnutls-libs-3.6.15-2.x86_64 (cap libgnutls.so.30()(64bit)) > > gnutls-libs-3.6.15-2.x86_64 marks nettle-3.6-1.x86_64 (cap libhogweed.so.6()(64bit)) > > gnutls-libs-3.6.15-2.x86_64 marks p11-kit-0.23.21-1.x86_64 (cap libp11-kit.so.0()(64bit)) > > p11-kit-0.23.21-1.x86_64 marks libffi-3.3-1.x86_64 (cap libffi.so.7()(64bit)) > > p11-kit-0.23.21-1.x86_64 marks systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 (cap libsystemd.so.0()(64bit)) > > systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks acl-2.2.53-1.x86_64 (cap libacl.so.1()(64bit)) > > systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks libblkid-2.36-1.x86_64 (cap libblkid.so.1()(64bit)) > > systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks libcap-libs-2.43-1.x86_64 (cap libcap.so.2()(64bit)) > > systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks cryptsetup-2.3.4-1.x86_64 (cap libcryptsetup.so.12()(64bit)) > > cryptsetup-2.3.4-1.x86_64 marks libargon2-20190702-1.x86_64 (cap libargon2.so.1()(64bit)) > > cryptsetup-2.3.4-1.x86_64 marks device-mapper-libs-2.03.10-1.x86_64 (cap libdevmapper.so.1.02()(64bit)) > > device-mapper-libs-2.03.10-1.x86_64 marks libaio-0.3.112-1.x86_64 (cap libaio.so.1()(64bit)) > > device-mapper-libs-2.03.10-1.x86_64 marks libselinux-2.9-4.x86_64 (cap libselinux.so.1()(64bit)) > > libselinux-2.9-4.x86_64 marks pcre-8.44-1.x86_64 (cap libpcre.so.1()(64bit)) > > device-mapper-libs-2.03.10-1.x86_64 marks udev-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 (cap libudev.so.1()(64bit)) > > cryptsetup-2.3.4-1.x86_64 marks json-c-0.14-1.x86_64 (cap libjson-c.so.5()(64bit)) > > cryptsetup-2.3.4-1.x86_64 marks popt-1.17-3.x86_64 (cap libpopt.so.0()(64bit)) > > cryptsetup-2.3.4-1.x86_64 marks libuuid-2.36-1.x86_64 (cap libuuid.so.1()(64bit)) > > systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks libgcrypt-1.8.6-1.x86_64 (cap libgcrypt.so.20()(64bit)) > > libgcrypt-1.8.6-1.x86_64 marks libgpg-error-1.39-1.x86_64 (cap libgpg-error.so.0()(64bit)) > > systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64: required "libip4tc.so.2()(64bit)" is provided by the following packages: > > a) iptables-libs-1.8.5-1.x86_64 > > b) iptables-vserver-libs-1.8.5-1.x86_64 > > Which one do you want to install ('Q' to abort)? [iptables-libs-1.8.5-1.x86_64] > > systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks iptables-libs-1.8.5-1.x86_64 (cap libip4tc.so.2()(64bit)) > > systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks kmod-libs-27-1.x86_64 (cap libkmod.so.2()(64bit)) > > systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks lz4-libs-1.9.2-1.x86_64 (cap liblz4.so.1()(64bit)) > > systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks libmount-2.36-1.x86_64 (cap libmount.so.1()(64bit)) > > systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks pam-libs-1.4.0-1.x86_64 (cap libpam.so.0()(64bit)) > > pam-libs-1.4.0-1.x86_64 marks audit-libs-2.8.5-1.x86_64 (cap libaudit.so.1()(64bit)) > > audit-libs-2.8.5-1.x86_64 marks libcap-ng-0.7.10-2.x86_64 (cap libcap-ng.so.0()(64bit)) > > systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks libseccomp-2.5.0-1.x86_64 (cap libseccomp.so.2()(64bit)) > > systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks zstd-1.4.5-1.x86_64 (cap libzstd.so.1()(64bit)) > > p11-kit-0.23.21-1.x86_64 marks libtasn1-4.16.0-1.x86_64 (cap libtasn1.so.6()(64bit)) > > curl-libs-7.72.0-1.x86_64 marks libssh2-1.9.0-1.x86_64 (cap libssh2.so.1()(64bit)) Yup, curl dependencies are quite nasty... [...] > > Preparing... ########################################### [100%] > > error: Install/Erase problems: > > package libcap-ng-0.8-1.x32 (which is newer than libcap-ng-0.7.10-2.x86_64) is already installed > > package libedit-3.1-1.20191231.1.x32 (which is newer than libedit-3.1-1.20190324.1.x86_64) is already installed > > package libpsl-0.21.1-1.x32 (which is newer than libpsl-0.21.0-1.x86_64) is already installed > > file /usr/share/doc/libedit-3.1/ChangeLog.gz from install of libedit-3.1-1.20190324.1.x86_64 conflicts with file from package libedit-3.1-1.20191231.1.x32 When installing on builders, I needed to specify newer versions of some x86_64 packages manually (e.g. `install libcap-ng-0.8-1.x86_64`, `install libedit-3.1-1.20191231.1.x86_64` etc.). poldek failed to choose newest dependencies in some cases. -- Jakub Bogusz http://qboosh.pl/ From arekm at maven.pl Wed Oct 7 08:14:01 2020 From: arekm at maven.pl (=?UTF-8?Q?Arkadiusz_Mi=c5=9bkiewicz?=) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2020 08:14:01 +0200 Subject: rust on carme-x32? In-Reply-To: <20201006202935.GA29248@mail> References: <20201006131445.GA22110@mail> <20201006202935.GA29248@mail> Message-ID: <5ce08a5d-8e47-ca87-ff11-3f01243902d2@maven.pl> W dniu 06.10.2020 o?22:29, Jakub Bogusz pisze: > On Tue, Oct 06, 2020 at 09:47:36PM +0200, Arkadiusz Mi?kiewicz wrote: >> W dniu 06.10.2020 o?15:14, Jakub Bogusz via pld-devel-en pisze: >>> Can we have rust and cargo installed on carme-x32? >>> It requires a few x86_64 libraries, so I cannot install with accessible >>> poldek commands. >>> >>> >> >>> poldek:/all-avail> install cargo-1.44.1-2.x32 rust-1.44.1-2.x32 > [...] >>> curl-libs-7.72.0-1.x86_64 marks libbrotli-1.0.9-2.x86_64 (cap libbrotlidec.so.1()(64bit)) >>> curl-libs-7.72.0-1.x86_64 marks c-ares-1.16.1-1.x86_64 (cap libcares.so.2()(64bit)) >>> curl-libs-7.72.0-1.x86_64 marks heimdal-libs-7.7.0-2.x86_64 (cap libgssapi.so.3()(64bit)) >>> heimdal-libs-7.7.0-2.x86_64 marks libcom_err-1.45.6-1.x86_64 (cap libcom_err.so.2()(64bit)) >>> heimdal-libs-7.7.0-2.x86_64 marks sqlite3-libs-3.33.0-1.x86_64 (cap libsqlite3.so.0()(64bit)) >>> curl-libs-7.72.0-1.x86_64 marks libidn2-2.3.0-1.x86_64 (cap libidn2.so.0()(64bit)) >>> libidn2-2.3.0-1.x86_64 marks libunistring-0.9.10-1.x86_64 (cap libunistring.so.2()(64bit)) >>> curl-libs-7.72.0-1.x86_64 marks openldap-libs-2.4.49-1.x86_64 (cap liblber-2.4.so.2()(64bit)) >>> openldap-libs-2.4.49-1.x86_64 marks cyrus-sasl-libs-2.1.27-1.x86_64 (cap libsasl2.so.3()(64bit)) >>> curl-libs-7.72.0-1.x86_64 marks nghttp2-libs-1.41.0-1.x86_64 (cap libnghttp2.so.14()(64bit)) >>> curl-libs-7.72.0-1.x86_64 marks libpsl-0.21.0-1.x86_64 (cap libpsl.so.5()(64bit)) >>> curl-libs-7.72.0-1.x86_64 marks librtmp-2.4-1.20190331.2.x86_64 (cap librtmp.so.0()(64bit)) >>> librtmp-2.4-1.20190331.2.x86_64 marks gnutls-libs-3.6.15-2.x86_64 (cap libgnutls.so.30()(64bit)) >>> gnutls-libs-3.6.15-2.x86_64 marks nettle-3.6-1.x86_64 (cap libhogweed.so.6()(64bit)) >>> gnutls-libs-3.6.15-2.x86_64 marks p11-kit-0.23.21-1.x86_64 (cap libp11-kit.so.0()(64bit)) >>> p11-kit-0.23.21-1.x86_64 marks libffi-3.3-1.x86_64 (cap libffi.so.7()(64bit)) >>> p11-kit-0.23.21-1.x86_64 marks systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 (cap libsystemd.so.0()(64bit)) >>> systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks acl-2.2.53-1.x86_64 (cap libacl.so.1()(64bit)) >>> systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks libblkid-2.36-1.x86_64 (cap libblkid.so.1()(64bit)) >>> systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks libcap-libs-2.43-1.x86_64 (cap libcap.so.2()(64bit)) >>> systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks cryptsetup-2.3.4-1.x86_64 (cap libcryptsetup.so.12()(64bit)) >>> cryptsetup-2.3.4-1.x86_64 marks libargon2-20190702-1.x86_64 (cap libargon2.so.1()(64bit)) >>> cryptsetup-2.3.4-1.x86_64 marks device-mapper-libs-2.03.10-1.x86_64 (cap libdevmapper.so.1.02()(64bit)) >>> device-mapper-libs-2.03.10-1.x86_64 marks libaio-0.3.112-1.x86_64 (cap libaio.so.1()(64bit)) >>> device-mapper-libs-2.03.10-1.x86_64 marks libselinux-2.9-4.x86_64 (cap libselinux.so.1()(64bit)) >>> libselinux-2.9-4.x86_64 marks pcre-8.44-1.x86_64 (cap libpcre.so.1()(64bit)) >>> device-mapper-libs-2.03.10-1.x86_64 marks udev-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 (cap libudev.so.1()(64bit)) >>> cryptsetup-2.3.4-1.x86_64 marks json-c-0.14-1.x86_64 (cap libjson-c.so.5()(64bit)) >>> cryptsetup-2.3.4-1.x86_64 marks popt-1.17-3.x86_64 (cap libpopt.so.0()(64bit)) >>> cryptsetup-2.3.4-1.x86_64 marks libuuid-2.36-1.x86_64 (cap libuuid.so.1()(64bit)) >>> systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks libgcrypt-1.8.6-1.x86_64 (cap libgcrypt.so.20()(64bit)) >>> libgcrypt-1.8.6-1.x86_64 marks libgpg-error-1.39-1.x86_64 (cap libgpg-error.so.0()(64bit)) >>> systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64: required "libip4tc.so.2()(64bit)" is provided by the following packages: >>> a) iptables-libs-1.8.5-1.x86_64 >>> b) iptables-vserver-libs-1.8.5-1.x86_64 >>> Which one do you want to install ('Q' to abort)? [iptables-libs-1.8.5-1.x86_64] >>> systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks iptables-libs-1.8.5-1.x86_64 (cap libip4tc.so.2()(64bit)) >>> systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks kmod-libs-27-1.x86_64 (cap libkmod.so.2()(64bit)) >>> systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks lz4-libs-1.9.2-1.x86_64 (cap liblz4.so.1()(64bit)) >>> systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks libmount-2.36-1.x86_64 (cap libmount.so.1()(64bit)) >>> systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks pam-libs-1.4.0-1.x86_64 (cap libpam.so.0()(64bit)) >>> pam-libs-1.4.0-1.x86_64 marks audit-libs-2.8.5-1.x86_64 (cap libaudit.so.1()(64bit)) >>> audit-libs-2.8.5-1.x86_64 marks libcap-ng-0.7.10-2.x86_64 (cap libcap-ng.so.0()(64bit)) >>> systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks libseccomp-2.5.0-1.x86_64 (cap libseccomp.so.2()(64bit)) >>> systemd-libs-246.6-1.x86_64 marks zstd-1.4.5-1.x86_64 (cap libzstd.so.1()(64bit)) >>> p11-kit-0.23.21-1.x86_64 marks libtasn1-4.16.0-1.x86_64 (cap libtasn1.so.6()(64bit)) >>> curl-libs-7.72.0-1.x86_64 marks libssh2-1.9.0-1.x86_64 (cap libssh2.so.1()(64bit)) > > Yup, curl dependencies are quite nasty... > > [...] >>> Preparing... ########################################### [100%] >>> error: Install/Erase problems: >>> package libcap-ng-0.8-1.x32 (which is newer than libcap-ng-0.7.10-2.x86_64) is already installed >>> package libedit-3.1-1.20191231.1.x32 (which is newer than libedit-3.1-1.20190324.1.x86_64) is already installed >>> package libpsl-0.21.1-1.x32 (which is newer than libpsl-0.21.0-1.x86_64) is already installed >>> file /usr/share/doc/libedit-3.1/ChangeLog.gz from install of libedit-3.1-1.20190324.1.x86_64 conflicts with file from package libedit-3.1-1.20191231.1.x32 > > When installing on builders, I needed to specify newer versions of some > x86_64 packages manually (e.g. `install libcap-ng-0.8-1.x86_64`, `install > libedit-3.1-1.20191231.1.x86_64` etc.). That worked. > poldek failed to choose newest dependencies in some cases. -- Arkadiusz Mi?kiewicz, arekm / ( maven.pl | pld-linux.org ) From glen at pld-linux.org Wed Oct 14 13:14:49 2020 From: glen at pld-linux.org (=?UTF-8?Q?Elan_Ruusam=c3=a4e?=) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 14:14:49 +0300 Subject: x32 builder Message-ID: <694153e8-50cf-4d66-e6c7-4a4ffc93b1e2@pld-linux.org> please fix x32: There are 7 packages to install (6 marked by dependencies): A php-packagexml2cl-0.1-4.noarch php73-cli-7.3.18-3.x32 A php73-common-7.3.18-3.x32 php73-pcre-7.3.18-3.x32 A php73-program-7.3.18-3.x32 php73-simplexml-7.3.18-3.x32 A php73-spl-7.3.18-3.x32 This operation will use 3.8MB of disk space. Need to get 1.4MB of archives. error: /spools/ready/php73-common-7.3.18-3.x32.rpm: No such file or directory error: /spools/ready/php73-cli-7.3.18-3.x32.rpm: No such file or directory error: /spools/ready/php73-program-7.3.18-3.x32.rpm: No such file or directory error: /spools/ready/php73-pcre-7.3.18-3.x32.rpm: No such file or directory error: /spools/ready/php73-spl-7.3.18-3.x32.rpm: No such file or directory error: /spools/ready/php73-simplexml-7.3.18-3.x32.rpm: No such file or directory error: BR installation failed http://buildlogs.pld-linux.org//index.php?dist=th&arch=x32&ok=0&name=php-pecl-solr&id=190f5895-e617-4136-8f32-927b6fd08326&action=tail reproducer: $ make-request.sh -n php-pecl-solr -b th-x32 -D "php_suffix 73" From glen at pld-linux.org Sun Oct 18 14:46:10 2020 From: glen at pld-linux.org (=?UTF-8?Q?Elan_Ruusam=c3=a4e?=) Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2020 15:46:10 +0300 Subject: [packages/mozo] noarch package In-Reply-To: <50b4f89f788b129197effd3899c8ef61e3fcb7d7_refs_heads_master@pld-linux.org> References: <44bf6bcdd5899958d41946fb97284c0925f7865f_refs_heads_master@pld-linux.org> <50b4f89f788b129197effd3899c8ef61e3fcb7d7_refs_heads_master@pld-linux.org> Message-ID: <75e20473-0a2b-357a-972b-300f7f6dff54@pld-linux.org> On 10/18/20 1:37 PM, atler wrote: > Obsoletes: mate-menu-editor > +%{?noarchpackage} > BuildRoot: %{tmpdir}/%{name}-%{version}-root-%(id -u -n) well. here's what you go it wrong. for main package noarch should be always written out. and therefore perhaps the macro should be renamed to noarchsubpackage to prevent mis-use. From qboosh at pld-linux.org Sun Oct 18 14:51:08 2020 From: qboosh at pld-linux.org (Jakub Bogusz) Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2020 14:51:08 +0200 Subject: th-i686 builder dead? Message-ID: <20201018125108.GA9427@stranger.qboosh.pl> It doesn't report builds, neither via mail nor queue.html. -- Jakub Bogusz http://qboosh.pl/ From baggins at pld-linux.org Sun Oct 18 17:10:28 2020 From: baggins at pld-linux.org (Jan =?utf-8?Q?R=C4=99korajski?=) Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2020 17:10:28 +0200 Subject: [packages/mozo] noarch package In-Reply-To: <75e20473-0a2b-357a-972b-300f7f6dff54@pld-linux.org> References: <44bf6bcdd5899958d41946fb97284c0925f7865f_refs_heads_master@pld-linux.org> <50b4f89f788b129197effd3899c8ef61e3fcb7d7_refs_heads_master@pld-linux.org> <75e20473-0a2b-357a-972b-300f7f6dff54@pld-linux.org> Message-ID: <20201018151028.GB2044@starbug> On Sun, 18 Oct 2020, Elan Ruusam?e wrote: > On 10/18/20 1:37 PM, atler wrote: > > > Obsoletes: mate-menu-editor > > +%{?noarchpackage} > > BuildRoot: %{tmpdir}/%{name}-%{version}-root-%(id -u -n) > > well. here's what you go it wrong. for main package noarch should be > always written out. > > and therefore perhaps the macro should be renamed to noarchsubpackage to > prevent mis-use. Why do we have this macro in the first place? It's only needed for ancient rpm 4.4. We should just get rid of it and stop doing this. -- Jan R?korajski | PLD/Linux SysAdm | bagginspld-linux.org | http://www.pld-linux.org/ From glen at pld-linux.org Mon Oct 19 09:45:07 2020 From: glen at pld-linux.org (=?UTF-8?Q?Elan_Ruusam=c3=a4e?=) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 10:45:07 +0300 Subject: [packages/mozo] noarch package In-Reply-To: <20201018151028.GB2044@starbug> References: <44bf6bcdd5899958d41946fb97284c0925f7865f_refs_heads_master@pld-linux.org> <50b4f89f788b129197effd3899c8ef61e3fcb7d7_refs_heads_master@pld-linux.org> <75e20473-0a2b-357a-972b-300f7f6dff54@pld-linux.org> <20201018151028.GB2044@starbug> Message-ID: On 10/18/20 6:10 PM, Jan R?korajski via pld-devel-en wrote: > On Sun, 18 Oct 2020, Elan Ruusam?e wrote: > >> On 10/18/20 1:37 PM, atler wrote: >> >>> Obsoletes: mate-menu-editor >>> +%{?noarchpackage} >>> BuildRoot: %{tmpdir}/%{name}-%{version}-root-%(id -u -n) >> well. here's what you go it wrong. for main package noarch should be >> always written out. >> >> and therefore perhaps the macro should be renamed to noarchsubpackage to >> prevent mis-use. > Why do we have this macro in the first place? > > It's only needed for ancient rpm 4.4. We should just get rid of it and > stop doing this. you're barking at the wrong tree. i only pointed out that it was mis-used for main package. apparently qboosh is maintaining somewhere such support. (that is not pld-th). also, i think it's needed for rpm 4.5 as well (used in pld ac) maybe it's easier to back-port the support to 4.5 branch then? how big the changeset was anyway? From glen at pld-linux.org Mon Oct 19 12:18:55 2020 From: glen at pld-linux.org (=?UTF-8?Q?Elan_Ruusam=c3=a4e?=) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 13:18:55 +0300 Subject: [packages/rpm-specdump] - define rpm version from pkg-config - drop support for antiquated rpm In-Reply-To: <74900489aa4de2877e4e4828393ec513aa27c1c9_refs_heads_master@pld-linux.org> References: <705123125a8de28aed054fdc320be7482f714449_refs_heads_master@pld-linux.org> <74900489aa4de2877e4e4828393ec513aa27c1c9_refs_heads_master@pld-linux.org> Message-ID: <136d9d07-faec-50be-e270-f51f7e6e806e@pld-linux.org> On 10/19/20 1:24 AM, baggins wrote: > +RPM_FORMAT_VERSION := `pkg-config --modversion rpm | cut -d . -f 1` > +RPM_MAJOR_VERSION := `pkg-config --modversion rpm | cut -d . -f 1` > +RPM_MINOR_VERSION := `pkg-config --modversion rpm | cut -d . -f 1` > these three are all the same, or I'm not seeing something? From glen at pld-linux.org Mon Oct 19 12:29:11 2020 From: glen at pld-linux.org (=?UTF-8?Q?Elan_Ruusam=c3=a4e?=) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 13:29:11 +0300 Subject: [packages/glibc] - added hye to the list of wanted locales In-Reply-To: References: <372462db45c0270b8a593a90225b516fcee30df3_refs_heads_master@pld-linux.org> Message-ID: On 10/19/20 7:18 AM, qboosh wrote: > commit d18d7763aef2b08dc8474c8894b2f2923e8723ea > Author: Jakub Bogusz > Date: Mon Oct 19 06:18:22 2020 +0200 > > - added hye to the list of wanted locales > > glibc.spec | 7 +++---- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > --- > diff --git a/glibc.spec b/glibc.spec > index a0e49d1..a8f860c 100644 > --- a/glibc.spec > +++ b/glibc.spec > @@ -114,7 +114,7 @@ BuildRequires: perl-base > BuildRequires: python3 >= 1:3.4 > BuildRequires: python3-modules >= 1:3.4 > BuildRequires: rpm-build >= 4.3-0.20030610.28 > -BuildRequires: rpmbuild(macros) >= 1.567 > +BuildRequires: rpmbuild(macros) >= 1.752 > BuildRequires: sed >= 4.0.5 > BuildRequires: texinfo >= 4.7 > Requires: %{name}-ld = %{epoch}:%{version}-%{release} > @@ -648,9 +648,7 @@ Summary: Documentation needed for development using standard C libraries > Summary(pl.UTF-8): Dokumentacja do tworzenia program?w przy u?yciu standardowych bibliotek C > Group: Documentation > Conflicts: man-pages < 4.09 > -%if "%{_rpmversion}" >= "4.6" > -BuildArch: noarch > -%endif > +%{?noarchpackage} > > %description devel-doc > The glibc-devel-doc package contains info and manual pages necessary > @@ -1144,6 +1142,7 @@ done > # guc (gtk-vnc) > # haw (iso-codes, stellarium) > # hrx (stellarium) > +# hye (tumbler) > # ie (xfce, cinnamon) > # ilo (kudzu, libosinfo, libreport) > # io (alacarte, gtk+2, gnome, iso-codes) > ================================================================ > > ---- gitweb: > > http://git.pld-linux.org/gitweb.cgi/packages/glibc.git/commitdiff/d18d7763aef2b08dc8474c8894b2f2923e8723ea this has bothered me for a long time already, so I'm saying it out: could we please get commits to our repos atomic? - https://www.freshconsulting.com/atomic-commits/ atomic, so that: 1. changes are self-standing and can be reverted individually (or similarly cherry-picked to other branch) 2. all changes are documented, not "included" into some other commit. in this case the second change is not even mentioned in commit message. in this specific commit, it's even uncertain, is the rpm macros bump needed for locale change, or for the macro change. this should have been two commits. hints: 1. "git add -p"? is your friend for staging changes by line, don't use "git commit -a" 2. review your commits before pushing, use "git rebase -i origin/master" 3. use git interactive rebase tool, making rebase even more smoother 4. use git aliases (git up, git sq), mine shared below 5. git fixup and git fixup tool are also useful if your changes are a bit bigger than release bump - https://github.com/MitMaro/git-interactive-rebase-tool - https://github.com/keis/git-fixup ``` [alias] ??? st = status ??? ci = commit -v ??? co = checkout ??? up = pull --rebase ??? pushf = push --force-with-lease ??? ## git config merge.upstream upstream/master ??? upstream = "!f() { echo ${1:-$(git config --get rebase.upstream || echo origin/master)}; }; f" ??? autosquash = !sh -c 'git rebase -i --autosquash $(git upstream ${1:-})' "$@" ??? sq = autosquash ??? sw = switch ??? lsf = ls-files ``` From baggins at pld-linux.org Mon Oct 19 14:33:07 2020 From: baggins at pld-linux.org (Jan =?utf-8?Q?R=C4=99korajski?=) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 14:33:07 +0200 Subject: [packages/rpm-specdump] - define rpm version from pkg-config - drop support for antiquated rpm In-Reply-To: <136d9d07-faec-50be-e270-f51f7e6e806e@pld-linux.org> References: <705123125a8de28aed054fdc320be7482f714449_refs_heads_master@pld-linux.org> <74900489aa4de2877e4e4828393ec513aa27c1c9_refs_heads_master@pld-linux.org> <136d9d07-faec-50be-e270-f51f7e6e806e@pld-linux.org> Message-ID: <20201019123307.GC2044@starbug> On Mon, 19 Oct 2020, Elan Ruusam?e wrote: > On 10/19/20 1:24 AM, baggins wrote: > > > +RPM_FORMAT_VERSION := `pkg-config --modversion rpm | cut -d . -f 1` > > +RPM_MAJOR_VERSION := `pkg-config --modversion rpm | cut -d . -f 1` > > +RPM_MINOR_VERSION := `pkg-config --modversion rpm | cut -d . -f 1` > > > > these three are all the same, or I'm not seeing something? thanks, bad copy paste -- Jan R?korajski | PLD/Linux SysAdm | bagginspld-linux.org | http://www.pld-linux.org/ From baggins at pld-linux.org Mon Oct 19 14:35:58 2020 From: baggins at pld-linux.org (Jan =?utf-8?Q?R=C4=99korajski?=) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 14:35:58 +0200 Subject: PHP4 and PHP 5.2 are going away Message-ID: <20201019123558.GD2044@starbug> PHP4 and PHP 5.2 do not build anymore and are so old that keeping them around makes little sense. I will removed them and everything that depends on them in the following weeks. -- Jan R?korajski | PLD/Linux SysAdm | bagginspld-linux.org | http://www.pld-linux.org/ From arekm at maven.pl Mon Oct 19 14:41:23 2020 From: arekm at maven.pl (=?UTF-8?Q?Arkadiusz_Mi=c5=9bkiewicz?=) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 14:41:23 +0200 Subject: PHP4 and PHP 5.2 are going away In-Reply-To: <20201019123558.GD2044@starbug> References: <20201019123558.GD2044@starbug> Message-ID: <99ca8cfa-9b83-d583-5fc6-f705d63fe728@maven.pl> W dniu 19.10.2020 o?14:35, Jan R?korajski pisze: > PHP4 and PHP 5.2 do not build anymore and are so old that keeping them > around makes little sense. I will removed them and everything that > depends on them in the following weeks. > I'll look at these (still using both). -- Arkadiusz Mi?kiewicz, arekm / ( maven.pl | pld-linux.org ) From glen at pld-linux.org Wed Oct 21 09:51:48 2020 From: glen at pld-linux.org (=?UTF-8?Q?Elan_Ruusam=c3=a4e?=) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 10:51:48 +0300 Subject: rsync@pld broken Message-ID: <2621f46a-4e28-8ccc-4af2-74b2368083f4@pld-linux.org> (from previously whitelisted ip) ``` $ rsync rsync://rsync.pld-linux.org/pld/dists/ @ERROR: invalid uid nobody rsync error: error starting client-server protocol (code 5) at main.c(1648) [Receiver=3.1.2] ``` From baggins at pld-linux.org Wed Oct 21 10:06:14 2020 From: baggins at pld-linux.org (Jan =?utf-8?Q?R=C4=99korajski?=) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 10:06:14 +0200 Subject: rsync@pld broken In-Reply-To: <2621f46a-4e28-8ccc-4af2-74b2368083f4@pld-linux.org> References: <2621f46a-4e28-8ccc-4af2-74b2368083f4@pld-linux.org> Message-ID: <20201021080614.GE2044@starbug> On Wed, 21 Oct 2020, Elan Ruusam?e wrote: > (from previously whitelisted ip) > > ``` > > $ rsync rsync://rsync.pld-linux.org/pld/dists/ > > @ERROR: invalid uid nobody > rsync error: error starting client-server protocol (code 5) at > main.c(1648) [Receiver=3.1.2] > ``` Client problem? Works for me on FreeBSD: rsync version 3.1.3 protocol version 31 -- Jan R?korajski | PLD/Linux SysAdm | bagginspld-linux.org | http://www.pld-linux.org/ From arekm at maven.pl Wed Oct 21 10:11:24 2020 From: arekm at maven.pl (=?UTF-8?Q?Arkadiusz_Mi=c5=9bkiewicz?=) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 10:11:24 +0200 Subject: rsync@pld broken In-Reply-To: <2621f46a-4e28-8ccc-4af2-74b2368083f4@pld-linux.org> References: <2621f46a-4e28-8ccc-4af2-74b2368083f4@pld-linux.org> Message-ID: <4b3eb21d-f488-727b-fbd4-8844008cb805@maven.pl> W dniu 21.10.2020 o?09:51, Elan Ruusam?e pisze: > (from previously whitelisted ip) > > ``` > > $ rsync rsync://rsync.pld-linux.org/pld/dists/ > > @ERROR: invalid uid nobody > rsync error: error starting client-server protocol (code 5) at > main.c(1648) [Receiver=3.1.2] > ``` Looks like it needed restart after glibc upgrade. -- Arkadiusz Mi?kiewicz, arekm / ( maven.pl | pld-linux.org ) From baggins at pld-linux.org Fri Oct 23 14:16:31 2020 From: baggins at pld-linux.org (Jan =?utf-8?Q?R=C4=99korajski?=) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 14:16:31 +0200 Subject: [packages/libupnp1.6] compatibility package for legacy, unmaintained apps In-Reply-To: <6e87a2d1330eca8358a494c62b4e85986b95a50b_refs_heads_master@pld-linux.org> References: <9c3c3c938e2e4eea5a54fb37f62c0845105ecf86_refs_heads_master@pld-linux.org> <6e87a2d1330eca8358a494c62b4e85986b95a50b_refs_heads_master@pld-linux.org> Message-ID: <20201023121631.GA36047@tachikoma> On Thu, 27 Aug 2020, atler wrote: > commit 6e87a2d1330eca8358a494c62b4e85986b95a50b > Author: Jan Palus > Date: Thu Aug 27 18:35:24 2020 +0200 > > compatibility package for legacy, unmaintained apps > > libupnp.spec => libupnp1.6.spec | 32 ++++++++++++++++++-------------- > 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) Please try to avoid creating packages like these. Especially for just 3 other packages. Fixing those dependant packages seems quite easy, and it's better than keeping outdated libs. -- Jan R?korajski | PLD/Linux SysAdm | bagginspld-linux.org | http://www.pld-linux.org/ From atler at pld-linux.org Fri Oct 23 15:05:25 2020 From: atler at pld-linux.org (Jan Palus) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 15:05:25 +0200 Subject: [packages/libupnp1.6] compatibility package for legacy, unmaintained apps In-Reply-To: <20201023121631.GA36047@tachikoma> References: <9c3c3c938e2e4eea5a54fb37f62c0845105ecf86_refs_heads_master@pld-linux.org> <6e87a2d1330eca8358a494c62b4e85986b95a50b_refs_heads_master@pld-linux.org> <20201023121631.GA36047@tachikoma> Message-ID: <20201023130525.okaqemutwwec6cnv@kalarepa> On 23.10.2020 14:16, Jan R?korajski via pld-devel-en wrote: > On Thu, 27 Aug 2020, atler wrote: > > > commit 6e87a2d1330eca8358a494c62b4e85986b95a50b > > Author: Jan Palus > > Date: Thu Aug 27 18:35:24 2020 +0200 > > > > compatibility package for legacy, unmaintained apps > > > > libupnp.spec => libupnp1.6.spec | 32 ++++++++++++++++++-------------- > > 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) > > Please try to avoid creating packages like these. Especially for just 3 > other packages. Fixing those dependant packages seems quite easy, and > it's better than keeping outdated libs. Respectfully disagreed. I had a quick look into porting effort back than and it turned out it would take way more time than I'm willing to spend on ancient packages I don't care about. Maintenance-effort-wise I'd say either of: * drop ancient packages * keep ancient versions of dependencies is the way to go. With patches in place we have to maintain them with every new libupnp release. From baggins at pld-linux.org Sat Oct 24 10:08:41 2020 From: baggins at pld-linux.org (Jan =?utf-8?Q?R=C4=99korajski?=) Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2020 10:08:41 +0200 Subject: [packages/libupnp1.6] compatibility package for legacy, unmaintained apps In-Reply-To: <20201023130525.okaqemutwwec6cnv@kalarepa> References: <9c3c3c938e2e4eea5a54fb37f62c0845105ecf86_refs_heads_master@pld-linux.org> <6e87a2d1330eca8358a494c62b4e85986b95a50b_refs_heads_master@pld-linux.org> <20201023121631.GA36047@tachikoma> <20201023130525.okaqemutwwec6cnv@kalarepa> Message-ID: <20201024080841.GA2270@starbug> On Fri, 23 Oct 2020, Jan Palus wrote: > On 23.10.2020 14:16, Jan R?korajski via pld-devel-en wrote: > > On Thu, 27 Aug 2020, atler wrote: > > > > > commit 6e87a2d1330eca8358a494c62b4e85986b95a50b > > > Author: Jan Palus > > > Date: Thu Aug 27 18:35:24 2020 +0200 > > > > > > compatibility package for legacy, unmaintained apps > > > > > > libupnp.spec => libupnp1.6.spec | 32 ++++++++++++++++++-------------- > > > 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) > > > > Please try to avoid creating packages like these. Especially for just 3 > > other packages. Fixing those dependant packages seems quite easy, and > > it's better than keeping outdated libs. > > Respectfully disagreed. I had a quick look into porting effort back than > and it turned out it would take way more time than I'm willing to spend > on ancient packages I don't care about. Maintenance-effort-wise I'd say > either of: > > * drop ancient packages > * keep ancient versions of dependencies > > is the way to go. With patches in place we have to maintain them with > every new libupnp release. Dropping such stuff or disabling broken functionality is my preferred solution :) A short email to the list would suffice with a note that packages X Y Z are too old and if anyone cares they should update them. -- Jan R?korajski | PLD/Linux SysAdm | bagginspld-linux.org | http://www.pld-linux.org/ From baggins at pld-linux.org Sat Oct 24 17:15:09 2020 From: baggins at pld-linux.org (Jan =?utf-8?Q?R=C4=99korajski?=) Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2020 17:15:09 +0200 Subject: rpm.org's rpm 4.16.0 ready for testing Message-ID: <20201024151509.GB2270@starbug> I have prepared rpm 4.16, poldek and support packages, they are available on http://ftp1.pld-linux.org/people/baggins/rpm.org/ I would appreciate if you could test the uprade path, functionality and tell me if anything is missing / broken. -- Jan R?korajski | PLD/Linux SysAdm | bagginspld-linux.org | http://www.pld-linux.org/ From ngompa13 at gmail.com Sat Oct 24 17:17:46 2020 From: ngompa13 at gmail.com (Neal Gompa) Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2020 11:17:46 -0400 Subject: rpm.org's rpm 4.16.0 ready for testing In-Reply-To: <20201024151509.GB2270@starbug> References: <20201024151509.GB2270@starbug> Message-ID: On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 11:16 AM Jan R?korajski via pld-devel-en wrote: > > I have prepared rpm 4.16, poldek and support packages, they are > available on http://ftp1.pld-linux.org/people/baggins/rpm.org/ > > I would appreciate if you could test the uprade path, functionality > and tell me if anything is missing / broken. > Is there a set of git repos with the packaging and patches somewhere? Also, as an FYI: rpm-specdump can be retired for rpm's built-in rpmspec(8) tool. -- ?????????/ Always, there's only one truth! From ngompa13 at gmail.com Sat Oct 24 17:18:58 2020 From: ngompa13 at gmail.com (Neal Gompa) Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2020 11:18:58 -0400 Subject: rpm.org's rpm 4.16.0 ready for testing In-Reply-To: References: <20201024151509.GB2270@starbug> Message-ID: On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 11:17 AM Neal Gompa wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 11:16 AM Jan R?korajski via pld-devel-en > wrote: > > > > I have prepared rpm 4.16, poldek and support packages, they are > > available on http://ftp1.pld-linux.org/people/baggins/rpm.org/ > > > > I would appreciate if you could test the uprade path, functionality > > and tell me if anything is missing / broken. > > > > Is there a set of git repos with the packaging and patches somewhere? > > Also, as an FYI: rpm-specdump can be retired for rpm's built-in rpmspec(8) tool. > And the same goes for rpm-getdeps, I think. -- ?????????/ Always, there's only one truth! From atler at pld-linux.org Sat Oct 24 17:34:04 2020 From: atler at pld-linux.org (Jan Palus) Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2020 17:34:04 +0200 Subject: [packages/rpm/rpm.org] - drop lua hacks and look for default lua version - don't obsolete rpm-getdeps, this rpm does not su In-Reply-To: References: <56b257d37fdc0fc47edc11d3db8abd38239a0cef_refs_heads_rpm.org@pld-linux.org> Message-ID: <20201024153404.h2svmopef4tnequ5@kalarepa> On 24.10.2020 16:12, baggins wrote: > commit be07e71c8acd92e61d42ccb1c92200f92ed152c9 > Author: Jan R?korajski > Date: Sat Oct 24 15:50:57 2020 +0200 > > - drop lua hacks and look for default lua version > -BuildRequires: lua53-devel >= 5.3.5 > +BuildRequires: lua-devel >= 5.1 lua51-devel provides lua-devel however it does not have lua.pc expected by rpm. Perhaps replace with? BuildRequires: pkgconfig(lua) >= 5.1 From baggins at pld-linux.org Sat Oct 24 18:26:47 2020 From: baggins at pld-linux.org (Jan =?utf-8?Q?R=C4=99korajski?=) Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2020 18:26:47 +0200 Subject: rpm.org's rpm 4.16.0 ready for testing In-Reply-To: References: <20201024151509.GB2270@starbug> Message-ID: <20201024162647.GC2270@starbug> On Sat, 24 Oct 2020, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 11:16 AM Jan R?korajski via pld-devel-en > wrote: > > > > I have prepared rpm 4.16, poldek and support packages, they are > > available on http://ftp1.pld-linux.org/people/baggins/rpm.org/ > > > > I would appreciate if you could test the uprade path, functionality > > and tell me if anything is missing / broken. > > > > Is there a set of git repos with the packaging and patches somewhere? Eveything is in PLD git repo, rpm and rpm-pld-macros on branch rpm.org http://git.pld-linux.org/gitweb.cgi/packages/rpm.git/ http://git.pld-linux.org/gitweb.cgi/packages/rpm-pld-macros.git/ Everythong else on master (you need with rpm4 for poldek) http://git.pld-linux.org/gitweb.cgi/packages/poldek.git/ > Also, as an FYI: rpm-specdump can be retired for rpm's built-in rpmspec(8) tool. Thanks, but I'll stick with rpm-specdump and rpm-getdeps for now, switching to rpmspec may require rewriting build tools. I don't want tp make too many, possible breaking, changes at once. There is also added bonus of forced PY2 -> PY3 transition for other tools. rpm5 can't do PY3, rpm.org can't do PY2 :/ -- Jan R?korajski | PLD/Linux SysAdm | bagginspld-linux.org | http://www.pld-linux.org/ From baggins at pld-linux.org Sat Oct 24 18:30:02 2020 From: baggins at pld-linux.org (Jan =?utf-8?Q?R=C4=99korajski?=) Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2020 18:30:02 +0200 Subject: [packages/rpm/rpm.org] - drop lua hacks and look for default lua version - don't obsolete rpm-getdeps, this rpm does not su In-Reply-To: <20201024153404.h2svmopef4tnequ5@kalarepa> References: <56b257d37fdc0fc47edc11d3db8abd38239a0cef_refs_heads_rpm.org@pld-linux.org> <20201024153404.h2svmopef4tnequ5@kalarepa> Message-ID: <20201024163002.GD2270@starbug> On Sat, 24 Oct 2020, Jan Palus wrote: > On 24.10.2020 16:12, baggins wrote: > > commit be07e71c8acd92e61d42ccb1c92200f92ed152c9 > > Author: Jan R?korajski > > Date: Sat Oct 24 15:50:57 2020 +0200 > > > > - drop lua hacks and look for default lua version > > -BuildRequires: lua53-devel >= 5.3.5 > > +BuildRequires: lua-devel >= 5.1 > > lua51-devel provides lua-devel however it does not have lua.pc expected > by rpm. Perhaps replace with? > > BuildRequires: pkgconfig(lua) >= 5.1 Done. Thanks. TBH lua packaging in PLD is a mess. I'm going to drasticly simplify it by gradually getting rid of all versioned luaXX packages. -- Jan R?korajski | PLD/Linux SysAdm | bagginspld-linux.org | http://www.pld-linux.org/ From ngompa13 at gmail.com Sat Oct 24 18:30:47 2020 From: ngompa13 at gmail.com (Neal Gompa) Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2020 12:30:47 -0400 Subject: rpm.org's rpm 4.16.0 ready for testing In-Reply-To: <20201024162647.GC2270@starbug> References: <20201024151509.GB2270@starbug> <20201024162647.GC2270@starbug> Message-ID: On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 12:27 PM Jan R?korajski via pld-devel-en wrote: > > On Sat, 24 Oct 2020, Neal Gompa wrote: > > > On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 11:16 AM Jan R?korajski via pld-devel-en > > wrote: > > > > > > I have prepared rpm 4.16, poldek and support packages, they are > > > available on http://ftp1.pld-linux.org/people/baggins/rpm.org/ > > > > > > I would appreciate if you could test the uprade path, functionality > > > and tell me if anything is missing / broken. > > > > > > > Is there a set of git repos with the packaging and patches somewhere? > > Eveything is in PLD git repo, rpm and rpm-pld-macros on branch rpm.org > > http://git.pld-linux.org/gitweb.cgi/packages/rpm.git/ > http://git.pld-linux.org/gitweb.cgi/packages/rpm-pld-macros.git/ > > Everythong else on master (you need with rpm4 for poldek) > > http://git.pld-linux.org/gitweb.cgi/packages/poldek.git/ > > > Also, as an FYI: rpm-specdump can be retired for rpm's built-in rpmspec(8) tool. > > Thanks, but I'll stick with rpm-specdump and rpm-getdeps for now, switching to > rpmspec may require rewriting build tools. I don't want tp make too > many, possible breaking, changes at once. > That's fair, but I would suggest making a bug or something for everything using those to switch over. > There is also added bonus of forced PY2 -> PY3 transition for other > tools. rpm5 can't do PY3, rpm.org can't do PY2 :/ > What stuff still uses RPM Python bindings that are Python 2 only in PLD? Most of the RPM ecosystem tools I know of have Python 3 ports now... -- ?????????/ Always, there's only one truth! From baggins at pld-linux.org Sat Oct 24 20:39:28 2020 From: baggins at pld-linux.org (Jan =?utf-8?Q?R=C4=99korajski?=) Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2020 20:39:28 +0200 Subject: LUA Message-ID: <20201024183928.GE2270@starbug> If you are (re)building packages that require lua, please try to build them with unversioned lua first, before falling back to a specific version. It would be healthier for the distro to have a single lua, rather than a bunch of incompatible, random, packages. Thanks -- Jan R?korajski | PLD/Linux SysAdm | bagginspld-linux.org | http://www.pld-linux.org/ From atler at pld-linux.org Sat Oct 24 23:36:59 2020 From: atler at pld-linux.org (Jan Palus) Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2020 23:36:59 +0200 Subject: rpm.org's rpm 4.16.0 ready for testing In-Reply-To: <20201024151509.GB2270@starbug> References: <20201024151509.GB2270@starbug> Message-ID: <20201024213659.odur7wi2visoribk@kalarepa> On 24.10.2020 17:15, Jan R?korajski via pld-devel-en wrote: > I have prepared rpm 4.16, poldek and support packages, they are > available on http://ftp1.pld-linux.org/people/baggins/rpm.org/ > > I would appreciate if you could test the uprade path, functionality > and tell me if anything is missing / broken. First of all great work, thanks! FWIW I did a build on aarch64 with few minor fixes and looks like it all works fine. Some funky things that I've noticed so far: * after build with -bb --short-circuit package has weird dependency: error: Failed dependencies: rpmlib(ShortCircuited) <= 4.9.0-1 is needed by poldek-libs-0.42.2-3.aarch64 rpmlib(ShortCircuited) <= 4.9.0-1 is needed by poldek-0.42.2-3.aarch64 if you're not doing %prep, %build or %install then you're... cheating and end up with this dep? build/build.c: int didBuild = (what & (RPMBUILD_PREP|RPMBUILD_BUILD|RPMBUILD_INSTALL)); ... packageBinaries(spec, cookie, (didBuild == 0)) build/pack.c: rpmRC packageBinaries(rpmSpec spec, const char *cookie, int cheating) ... if (cheating) { (void) rpmlibNeedsFeature(pkg, "ShortCircuited", "4.9.0-1"); } * libraries have build id symlinks, not sure what's that for: $ rpm -ql rpm-lib /lib64/librpm.so.9 /lib64/librpm.so.9.1.0 /lib64/librpmbuild.so.9 /lib64/librpmbuild.so.9.1.0 /lib64/librpmio.so.9 /lib64/librpmio.so.9.1.0 /lib64/librpmsign.so.9 /lib64/librpmsign.so.9.1.0 /usr/lib/.build-id /usr/lib/.build-id/2f /usr/lib/.build-id/2f/fc726b33e23f339fb4140cb2a858800f92f245 /usr/lib/.build-id/72 /usr/lib/.build-id/72/65fcdb96f521c1953560d780a5f82fa2017c2a /usr/lib/.build-id/73 /usr/lib/.build-id/73/5b7b1130a7b6a74436438fb3fc02cad816224d /usr/lib/.build-id/e6 /usr/lib/.build-id/e6/7a230d27a1b3fceb891aa2df1bfa5e1e980f50 /usr/lib64/rpm-plugins * are we sticking to new patch fuzz level (0) or go back to patch default (2)? From ngompa13 at gmail.com Sat Oct 24 23:42:41 2020 From: ngompa13 at gmail.com (Neal Gompa) Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2020 17:42:41 -0400 Subject: rpm.org's rpm 4.16.0 ready for testing In-Reply-To: <20201024213659.odur7wi2visoribk@kalarepa> References: <20201024151509.GB2270@starbug> <20201024213659.odur7wi2visoribk@kalarepa> Message-ID: On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 5:37 PM Jan Palus wrote: > > On 24.10.2020 17:15, Jan R?korajski via pld-devel-en wrote: > > I have prepared rpm 4.16, poldek and support packages, they are > > available on http://ftp1.pld-linux.org/people/baggins/rpm.org/ > > > > I would appreciate if you could test the uprade path, functionality > > and tell me if anything is missing / broken. > > First of all great work, thanks! > > FWIW I did a build on aarch64 with few minor fixes and looks like it > all works fine. Some funky things that I've noticed so far: > > * after build with -bb --short-circuit package has weird dependency: > > error: Failed dependencies: > rpmlib(ShortCircuited) <= 4.9.0-1 is needed by poldek-libs-0.42.2-3.aarch64 > rpmlib(ShortCircuited) <= 4.9.0-1 is needed by poldek-0.42.2-3.aarch64 > > if you're not doing %prep, %build or %install then you're... cheating > and end up with this dep? > > build/build.c: > > int didBuild = (what & (RPMBUILD_PREP|RPMBUILD_BUILD|RPMBUILD_INSTALL)); > ... > packageBinaries(spec, cookie, (didBuild == 0)) > > > build/pack.c: > > rpmRC packageBinaries(rpmSpec spec, const char *cookie, int cheating) > ... > if (cheating) { > (void) rpmlibNeedsFeature(pkg, "ShortCircuited", "4.9.0-1"); > } > This is intentional. Short-circuit builds are not sane for production builds, because it violates the integrity and consistency of the build process. > * libraries have build id symlinks, not sure what's that for: > > $ rpm -ql rpm-lib > /lib64/librpm.so.9 > /lib64/librpm.so.9.1.0 > /lib64/librpmbuild.so.9 > /lib64/librpmbuild.so.9.1.0 > /lib64/librpmio.so.9 > /lib64/librpmio.so.9.1.0 > /lib64/librpmsign.so.9 > /lib64/librpmsign.so.9.1.0 > /usr/lib/.build-id > /usr/lib/.build-id/2f > /usr/lib/.build-id/2f/fc726b33e23f339fb4140cb2a858800f92f245 > /usr/lib/.build-id/72 > /usr/lib/.build-id/72/65fcdb96f521c1953560d780a5f82fa2017c2a > /usr/lib/.build-id/73 > /usr/lib/.build-id/73/5b7b1130a7b6a74436438fb3fc02cad816224d > /usr/lib/.build-id/e6 > /usr/lib/.build-id/e6/7a230d27a1b3fceb891aa2df1bfa5e1e980f50 > /usr/lib64/rpm-plugins > That's part of the improved debuginfo package handling[1][2]. [1]: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ParallelInstallableDebuginfo [2]: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/SubpackageAndSourceDebuginfo > * are we sticking to new patch fuzz level (0) or go back to patch > default (2)? I hope you'd keep the fuzz at 0 by default. -- ?????????/ Always, there's only one truth! From atler at pld-linux.org Sun Oct 25 00:07:54 2020 From: atler at pld-linux.org (Jan Palus) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2020 00:07:54 +0200 Subject: rpm.org's rpm 4.16.0 ready for testing In-Reply-To: <20201024151509.GB2270@starbug> References: <20201024151509.GB2270@starbug> Message-ID: <20201024220754.pafwf6gqgtki4gxg@kalarepa> On 24.10.2020 17:15, Jan R?korajski via pld-devel-en wrote: > I have prepared rpm 4.16, poldek and support packages, they are > available on http://ftp1.pld-linux.org/people/baggins/rpm.org/ > > I would appreciate if you could test the uprade path, functionality > and tell me if anything is missing / broken. On a related note -- once it gets to integer release can we consider doing mass rebuild of everything? Some of our packages were not rebuilt for a very very long time :) (...and those who need to build them anyway suffer alone) From glen at pld-linux.org Sun Oct 25 10:27:47 2020 From: glen at pld-linux.org (=?UTF-8?Q?Elan_Ruusam=c3=a4e?=) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2020 11:27:47 +0200 Subject: rpm.org's rpm 4.16.0 ready for testing In-Reply-To: <20201024151509.GB2270@starbug> References: <20201024151509.GB2270@starbug> Message-ID: <202f5783-9846-a49a-e1d3-b24c93c62f66@pld-linux.org> On 10/24/20 6:15 PM, Jan R?korajski via pld-devel-en wrote: > I have prepared rpm 4.16, poldek and support packages, they are > available onhttp://ftp1.pld-linux.org/people/baggins/rpm.org/ please add poldek indexes there, so one could install/upgrade without manually downloading files: $ poldek -s http://ftp1.pld-linux.org/people/baggins/rpm.org/ --up --upgrade-dist $ poldek -s http://ftp1.pld-linux.org/people/baggins/rpm.org/ --up -u rpm poldek From qboosh at pld-linux.org Sun Oct 25 12:58:35 2020 From: qboosh at pld-linux.org (Jakub Bogusz) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2020 12:58:35 +0100 Subject: [packages/util-linux] Fix typo in todo In-Reply-To: <79371f7655367e9072086b08b9ebc4836eed65bb_refs_heads_master@pld-linux.org> References: <79371f7655367e9072086b08b9ebc4836eed65bb_refs_heads_master@pld-linux.org> Message-ID: <20201025115835.GA15015@mail> On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 02:20:15PM +0200, glen wrote: > commit 79371f7655367e9072086b08b9ebc4836eed65bb > Author: Elan Ruusam?e > Date: Sat Oct 24 15:19:37 2020 +0300 > > Fix typo in todo > > util-linux.spec | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > --- > diff --git a/util-linux.spec b/util-linux.spec > index 37e4dd3..8be8c4f 100644 > --- a/util-linux.spec > +++ b/util-linux.spec > @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ > # TODO > -# - remote chfn/chsh (BR: libuser >= 0.58)? - but PLD uses pwdutils/shadow implementation currently > +# - remove chfn/chsh (BR: libuser >= 0.58)? - but PLD uses pwdutils/shadow implementation currently Not a typo. | AC_ARG_WITH([user], AS_HELP_STRING([--without-user], [compile without libuser (remote chsh)]), | [], [with_user=check] chfn and chsh from util-linux could have functionality of changing data in remotely managed passwd database (via libuser). -- Jakub Bogusz http://qboosh.pl/ From qboosh at pld-linux.org Sun Oct 25 19:30:59 2020 From: qboosh at pld-linux.org (Jakub Bogusz) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2020 19:30:59 +0100 Subject: tzdata 2020d vs syslog-ng tests In-Reply-To: <2571715fc93df9e82c9e7a06eb9c225e4196b713_refs_heads_master@pld-linux.org> References: <4abb370c6264b8137ce9723a9d6b9a256c23fea7_refs_heads_master@pld-linux.org> <2571715fc93df9e82c9e7a06eb9c225e4196b713_refs_heads_master@pld-linux.org> Message-ID: <20201025183059.GA20271@mail> On Sun, Oct 25, 2020 at 06:42:03PM +0100, qboosh wrote: > commit 2571715fc93df9e82c9e7a06eb9c225e4196b713 > Author: Jakub Bogusz > Date: Sun Oct 25 18:41:54 2020 +0100 > > - added tests-fixes patch (fixes test_python_ack_tracker test); new 4 tests failing (due to tzdata 2020d or todays DST change?) It seems the first cause (tzdata 2020d installed on carme), as syslog-ng built fine on builders. Either there are some issues in 2020d, or syslog-ng tests need update(?). The differences is not just 1h, so the cause aren't probably only DST adustments. FAIL: lib/rewrite/tests/test_rewrite ########################################################################### # # FAIL: ASSERTION FAILED; actual_length=25 expected_length=25, # actual= '1971-01-01T00:00:00+00:00', # expected= '1971-01-01T09:00:00+09:00' # ########################################################################### FAIL: lib/timeutils/tests/test_unixtime [^[[0;34m----^[[0m] ^[[0;1mlib/timeutils/tests/test_unixtime.c^[[0m:^[[0;31m236^[[0m: Assertion failed: The expression ut.ut_sec == 1572760800 - 1 is false. [^[[0;34m----^[[0m] ^[[0;1mlib/timeutils/tests/test_unixtime.c^[[0m:^[[0;31m304^[[0m: Assertion failed: The expression ut.ut_sec == 1572134400 - 1 is false. [^[[0;34m----^[[0m] ^[[0;1mlib/timeutils/tests/test_unixtime.c^[[0m:^[[0;31m115^[[0m: Assertion failed: The expression ut.ut_sec == 1552201200 - 1 is false. [^[[0;34m----^[[0m] ^[[0;1mlib/timeutils/tests/test_unixtime.c^[[0m:^[[0;31m175^[[0m: Assertion failed: The expression ut.ut_sec == 1553994000 - 1 is false. [^[[0;34m----^[[0m] ^[[0;1mlib/timeutils/tests/test_unixtime.c^[[0m:^[[0;31m380^[[0m: Assertion failed: The expression ut.ut_gmtoff == -5*3600 is false. [^[[0;34m----^[[0m] ^[[0;1mlib/timeutils/tests/test_unixtime.c^[[0m:^[[0;31m383^[[0m: Assertion failed: The expression ut.ut_gmtoff == -4*3600 is false. [^[[0;34m----^[[0m] ^[[0;1mlib/timeutils/tests/test_unixtime.c^[[0m:^[[0;31m391^[[0m: Assertion failed: The expression ut.ut_gmtoff == -4*3600 is false. [^[[0;34m----^[[0m] ^[[0;1mlib/timeutils/tests/test_unixtime.c^[[0m:^[[0;31m395^[[0m: Assertion failed: The expression ut.ut_gmtoff == -5*3600 is false. FAIL: modules/timestamp/tests/test_date [^[[0;34m----^[[0m] ^[[0;1mmodules/timestamp/tests/test_date.c^[[0m:^[[0;31m163^[[0m: Assertion failed: incorrect date parsed msg=Tue, 27 Jan 2015 11:48:46 format=%a, %d %b %Y %T, result=2015-01-27T11:48:46+00:00, expected=2015-01-27T11:48:46-07:00 FAIL: tests/unit/test_zone [^[[0;34m----^[[0m] ^[[0;1mtests/unit/test_zone.c^[[0m:^[[0;31m90^[[0m: Assertion failed: unixtimestamp: 1603647707 TimeZoneName (America/Louisville) localtime offset(-14400), timezone file offset(0) -- Jakub Bogusz http://qboosh.pl/ From glen at pld-linux.org Sun Oct 25 21:59:31 2020 From: glen at pld-linux.org (=?UTF-8?Q?Elan_Ruusam=c3=a4e?=) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2020 22:59:31 +0200 Subject: tzdata 2020d vs syslog-ng tests In-Reply-To: <20201025183059.GA20271@mail> References: <4abb370c6264b8137ce9723a9d6b9a256c23fea7_refs_heads_master@pld-linux.org> <2571715fc93df9e82c9e7a06eb9c225e4196b713_refs_heads_master@pld-linux.org> <20201025183059.GA20271@mail> Message-ID: <5fe414af-dd2d-ea33-8bd9-cd2703ca548b@pld-linux.org> On 10/25/20 8:30 PM, Jakub Bogusz wrote: > On Sun, Oct 25, 2020 at 06:42:03PM +0100, qboosh wrote: >> commit 2571715fc93df9e82c9e7a06eb9c225e4196b713 >> Author: Jakub Bogusz >> Date: Sun Oct 25 18:41:54 2020 +0100 >> >> - added tests-fixes patch (fixes test_python_ack_tracker test); new 4 tests failing (due to tzdata 2020d or todays DST change?) > It seems the first cause (tzdata 2020d installed on carme), as syslog-ng > built fine on builders. > > Either there are some issues in 2020d, or syslog-ng tests need > update(?). > The differences is not just 1h, so the cause aren't probably only DST adustments. the update to tzdata was created with atomic enough commits, try bisecting which commit broke. From baggins at pld-linux.org Sun Oct 25 23:37:22 2020 From: baggins at pld-linux.org (Jan =?utf-8?Q?R=C4=99korajski?=) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2020 23:37:22 +0100 Subject: rpm.org's rpm 4.16.0 ready for testing In-Reply-To: <202f5783-9846-a49a-e1d3-b24c93c62f66@pld-linux.org> References: <20201024151509.GB2270@starbug> <202f5783-9846-a49a-e1d3-b24c93c62f66@pld-linux.org> Message-ID: <20201025223722.GF2270@starbug> On Sun, 25 Oct 2020, Elan Ruusam?e wrote: > On 10/24/20 6:15 PM, Jan R?korajski via pld-devel-en wrote: > > > I have prepared rpm 4.16, poldek and support packages, they are > > available onhttp://ftp1.pld-linux.org/people/baggins/rpm.org/ > > please add poldek indexes there, so one could install/upgrade without > manually downloading files: > > > $ poldek -s http://ftp1.pld-linux.org/people/baggins/rpm.org/ --up > --upgrade-dist > > $ poldek -s http://ftp1.pld-linux.org/people/baggins/rpm.org/ --up -u > rpm poldek An ftp admin already did. -- Jan R?korajski | PLD/Linux SysAdm | bagginspld-linux.org | http://www.pld-linux.org/ From baggins at pld-linux.org Tue Oct 27 23:21:17 2020 From: baggins at pld-linux.org (Jan =?utf-8?Q?R=C4=99korajski?=) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 23:21:17 +0100 Subject: rpm4 on carme* Message-ID: <20201027222117.GA77656@tachikoma.lan> All carme machines are now running rpm 4.16.0. Please test and report any issues. -- Jan R?korajski | PLD/Linux SysAdm | bagginspld-linux.org | http://www.pld-linux.org/ From qboosh at pld-linux.org Wed Oct 28 06:31:41 2020 From: qboosh at pld-linux.org (Jakub Bogusz) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 06:31:41 +0100 Subject: rpm4 on carme* In-Reply-To: <20201027222117.GA77656@tachikoma.lan> References: <20201027222117.GA77656@tachikoma.lan> Message-ID: <20201028053141.GA4910@mail> On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 11:21:17PM +0100, Jan R?korajski wrote: > All carme machines are now running rpm 4.16.0. Please test and report > any issues. One so far (very short testing): rpm -qi prints summaries/decriptions in UTF-8 regardless of current locale encoding. (anyway, great work with bringing rpm.org!) -- Jakub Bogusz http://qboosh.pl/