On Thu, 10 Sep 2015 03:00:17 -0400 "Bryan Chan" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Dan Horák <[email protected]> wrote on 2015-09-08 01:56:54 PM: > > > Often those packages contain a "bootstrap" macro that can be set to > > 1 for an initial build with limited dependencies and to 0 for > > production build. And for building for EPEL there should be a older > > build (source rpm) available (because it had to bootstrapped also > > for regular EPEL), so first rebuild this, and then the latest, or > > next or whatever is necessary. The changelog in the spec files > > and/or history in dist-git will show the details about the versions. > > > > Do you have a list of those problematic builds? > > Hi Dan, thanks for the suggestion. My team mate has found a similar > bootstrap macro in the ghc packages and is trying it out now. for ghc specifically I would recommend to contact Jens Petersen (juhp on #fedora-devel IRC) directly, he is the ghc maintainer in Fedora and knows best all the weirdness in ghc packaging. > I asked the person who did the original runs back in June but he > doesn't remember where the circular dependencies came from. He > thought it might be some Python- or Perl-related dependencies in a % > test section of a package but he isn't sure. We will watch out for > the issue and report if we see it again. yeah, tests in perl-* are possible candidate, let us know and I guess we can help Dan _______________________________________________ epel-devel mailing list [email protected] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel
