Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Sat, Mar 14, 2020 at 11:54:54PM +0100, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: >>> Known issue? >> >> The above was with gcc-10.0.1-0.9.fc32 and annobin-9.06-1.fc32. >> >> Looks like it was fixed in the meantime as another build gets >> gcc-10.0.1-0.8.fc32 and the same annobin now. > > One either needs gcc-10.0.1-0.9.fc32 and annobin-9.06-4.fc32 or > gcc-10.0.1-0.8.fc32 and annobin-9.06-1.fc32. > gcc-10.0.1-0.9.fc32 has been briefly as a buildroot override in order > to rebuild annobin, but later on somebody asked for the override again > without asking for an annobin override too. > Right now both older packages should be in the buildroots, and the > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-d927e07eb1 > errata needs some karma before it can be tagged in. What's a good way to test that gcc build so we can give karma? I'm pretty sure it addresses the git build issue on s390x (as it does in rawhide), but I'd like to do an s390x build on f32 to confirm that before I provide karma. It feels wrong to provide karma based on an "it worked in rawhide" test. :) I could probably run it in mock with the s390x emulation if I'm willing to wait a day for the results. (I'm not sure that's much of an exaggeration if my memory of the last time I tried it to run a full git build is accurate.) -- Todd _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
