On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 7:52 PM, Igor Gnatenko <ignatenko@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 8:38 PM, Peter Robinson <pbrobinson@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 6:21 PM, Igor Gnatenko <ignatenko@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 2:10 PM, Igor Gnatenko <ignatenko@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> I'm working on getting new luajit version for Rawhide. Affected packages:
>>>>
>>>> $ sudo dnf -q repoquery --alldeps --whatrequires luajit --srpm
>>>> --queryformat="%{name}"
>>>> cantor
>>> Definitely bug in FindLuaJIT.cmake
>>> -- Could NOT find LuaJIT (missing: LUAJIT_INCLUDE_DIR)
>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1371250
>>>> csound
>>> Same as above.
>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1371257
>>>> dnsdist
>>>> efl
>>>> hexchat
>>>> knot-resolver
>>>> love
>>>> lua-fun
>>> -> Failed due to:
>>> /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.vqvKQr: line 33: lua: command not found
>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1371238
>>>> luajit
>>>> minetest
>>> Same about CMake. I will take care about this as it's my package.
>>>> pdns-recursor
>>>>
>>>> I will try to rebuild this packages. Looks like there were no serious
>>>> API changes (if there were any except adding new functions).
>>>
>>> I should definitely think about writing proper file and include it
>>> into luajit, but unless this is done - just fix PATH_SUFFIXES in
>>> FindLuaJIT.cmake.
>>
>> Great so you actively go and break a bunch of packages and throw it
>> over the wall for others to fix. Why the sudden need to move to a beta
>> that's been sitting there with no real movement upstream for nearly 6
>> months?
> There are ongoing development in git repo. It's same if you would say
> why do we have 4.13-rc1 RPM in Fedora as it has been released 1 year
> ago (or even more). There are aarch64 support, couple of improvements
> in FFI and in JIT compiler.
>
> If you will read more carefully you will find that only 3 packages
> needs to be fixed. and fix is easy.
> /PATH_SUFFIXES/s/luajit-2.0/luajit-2.1/ FindLuaJIT.cmake.
> I'm not going to fix those packages myself as it's need to be sent to
> upstream as well.
>
> After all:
> * 1 of packages I will fix myself
> * 2 packages which are FTBFS, but easily fixable.
> * 1 package which has nothing to do with this update as it was broken
> even before
>>
>> Maybe you should have tested them _BEFORE_ you went and pushed it.
> I tested efl, pdns-recursor, dnsdist and hexchat as most important
> from this list and they worked. I don't see point why you complain.
Because you fixed half of them, leaving work for others where things
previously worked, you could at least attach patches to the other BZ
where fixes need to go to go upstream.
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
