Re: Fedora rawhide FTBFS status 2010-02-10 x86_64

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 02/15/2010 01:48 PM, Matt Domsch wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 11:49:47AM +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>> On 02/15/2010 11:00 AM, Jaroslav Skarvada wrote:
>>> Following the steps from deltarpm example
>>> (http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UnderstandingDSOLinkChange#Example_deltarpm)
>>> helps me to reproduce the DSO issue in local mock.
>
> This would have been necessary before the Feb 9, which is when the new
> linker made it into rawhide.  I specifically started my run on Feb 10
> after ensuring that the new linker was in rawhide, and that my copy of
> the tree was up-to-date, including that linker.
Which version of binutils exactly have you been using?


I noticed my rawhide mock caches contain
binutils-2.20.51.0.2-13.fc13.x86_64

while download.fedora.redhat.com carries
binutils-2.20.51.0.2-15.fc13.x86_64


For reasons I don't yet now, mock doesn't install this (latest) version, 
so I am ending up with the *13.binutils (likely a version predating the 
chains)

=> I am inclined to think something is broken with the repos, their 
mirrors or with mock.

Ralf
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux