I just merged the side tag as:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-7d2ef14400
As soon as the builds from the side tag are available in f42-build, I
will kick off a ceph rebuild directly in Rawhide.
I was not able to rebuild libcamera due to GCC 15 incompatibilities. I
tried patching in
https://git.libcamera.org/libcamera/libcamera.git/commit/?id=91de550243121056984e5b9b693b486860655d31
and that got me past the first error, but then I hit:
../src/ipa/libipa/colours.cpp: In function ‘uint32_t
libcamera::ipa::estimateCCT(RGB<double>&)’:
../src/ipa/libipa/colours.cpp:71:41: error: no match for
‘operator*’ (operand types are ‘const libcamera::Matrix<double, 3, 3>’
and ‘libcamera::ipa::RGB<double>’ {aka ‘const
libcamera::ipa::Vector<double, 3, 0>’})
71 | Vector<double, 3> xyz = rgb2xyz * rgb;
| ~~~~~~~ ^ ~~~
| | |
| |
libcamera::ipa::RGB<double> {aka const libcamera::ipa::Vector<double, 3, 0>}
| const
libcamera::Matrix<double, 3, 3>
which I think is something a regular libcamera maintainer is going to
have to deal with.
I don’t think I missed anything else.
On 1/22/25 2:28 PM, Ben Beasley wrote:
I understand the suggestion to build directly in Rawhide since things
are already broken. On the other hand, I’ve already started building
in f42-build-side-104083. I’ll compromise as follows: I will finish
building everything but ceph, merge the side tag, and then rebuild
ceph directly in rawhide, since ceph is by far the slowest rebuild
involved. That should speed things up by many hours.
On 1/22/25 2:22 PM, Sérgio Basto wrote:
On Wed, 2025-01-22 at 13:35 -0500, Ben Beasley wrote:
Correction: the breaking update was built into side tag
f42-build-side-99460 soon after it was committed, but the side tag
was
never merged. And it’s possible that the update was coordinated three
months ago, and I just don’t remember.
The sidetag f42-build-side-99460 was deleted.
Since gtest 1.15.2 is already in rawhide , we don't need build the
other package in a sidetag (IMHO)
Best regards and thank you .
On 1/22/25 1:31 PM, Ben Beasley wrote:
It looks like the breaking update in question was committed three
months ago,
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/gtest/c/24e4a26153b73a97db5c86109363662636235452?branch=rawhide
but never announced, coordinated, or built until the mass rebuild
came
along.
I’m going to do a quick COPR test in
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/music/gtest1.15/ to see if
there are API compatibility issues (which, if serious, might imply
the
new gtest/gmock might need to be untagged), or whether simply
rebuilding dependent packages will resolve the issues.
If just rebuilding everything in a new side tag turns out to be
workable, then I’m happy to take care of it. I maintain or co-
maintain
several of the impacted packages anyway.
On 1/22/25 11:47 AM, Sérgio Basto wrote:
On Wed, 2025-01-22 at 16:21 +0000, Sérgio Basto wrote:
On Wed, 2025-01-22 at 08:11 +0100, Milan Crha wrote:
On Tue, 2025-01-21 at 19:18 +0100, Samyak Jain via devel-
announce
wrote:
there are 1875 failed builds
that need to be addressed by the package maintainers.
Hi,
am I trying to rebuild my packages too early, maybe in some
middle
time
of the merge of the rebuild tag into the rawhide? The build
[1]
fails
on package dependencies involving libphonenumber, abseil-cpp-
devel,
libgtest and libgmock. I do not recall when I saw any such
package
dependency problem on rawhide the last time.
Bye,
Milan
[1]
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=128295398
we need rebuild these package:
dnf repoquery --repo=rawhide --whatrequires "libgtest.so*" --
sourcerpm
-q | pkgname
abseil-cpp
ceph
davix
gfal2
gtest
libcamera
mir
pkcs11test
python-steps
wlcs
dnf repoquery --repo=rawhide --whatrequires "libgmock.so*" --
sourcerpm
-q | pkgname
abseil-cpp
ceph
gtest
mir
wlcs
--
_______________________________________________
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
