On Tue, 4 Aug 2009, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Sat, 2009-08-01 at 03:21 +0100, Sergio Monteiro Basto wrote:
On Sun, 2009-07-19 at 10:57 +0100, Sergio Monteiro Basto wrote:
That's the log I can get for wormux.
So you exclude wormux but not wormux-data?
yes, to just exclude wormux, I think just appears wormux in duplicates
and also is enough to solve the duplicated.
Hi, updating the information :
I build pungi-2.0.16 reverting this commit :
http://git.fedorahosted.org/git/pungi.git?p=pungi.git;a=commitdiff_plain;h=44c4028447884828e01ff3769962011bc53c428d
and can confirm this commit is the one which breaks my "builds" .
About seeing logs, I just found extend logs recently and if you want see
it too: http://sergiomb.no-ip.org/f11/logs/i386.log
Analyzing logs:
wormux-data is repeated and not detect by checkduplicated because one
is .i586 and other is .noarch (for example in 64 bits I can have same
package in .i586 and in .x86_64 and they aren't duplicated)
Pungi.INFO: Checking deps of wormux.i586
yum.verbose.YumBase.DEBUG: Matched wormux-data-0.8.2-5.fc11.i586 to require for
wormux-data
yum.verbose.YumBase.DEBUG: Matched wormux-data-0.8.3-1.fc11.noarch to require
for wormux-data
Pungi.INFO: Added wormux-data.noarch for wormux.i586
Pungi.INFO: Added wormux-data.i586 for wormux.i586
this looks (to me) wrong.
hope that can help
Thanks,
Ah, that's interesting. Since the arch changed, using the yum API call
to find the best matches by arch means we'll get both matches. I'll
need to look into that and work with seth to find a better API call to
use here.
If you add a version-specific dep for wormux-data to the wormux package
does the problem go away?
and why do we have 2 wormux-data's in the tree?
-sv
--
Fedora-buildsys-list mailing list
Fedora-buildsys-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-buildsys-list
