On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 10:07 AM, Honza Horak <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 01/13/2016 05:14 AM, Dave Johansen wrote: > >> On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 1:47 PM, Honza Horak <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> On 01/06/2016 05:41 PM, Dave Johansen wrote: >> >> On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 8:04 AM, Honza Horak <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]> >> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote: >> >> On 01/05/2016 04:35 PM, Dave Johansen wrote: >> >> On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 8:30 AM, Honza Horak >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>>> wrote: >> >> Interesting, you're first who asks for that. >> Currently, >> there is >> nobody working on it. >> >> >> We're working on moving to EL 7, but still need to >> support EL 6 >> installations. We'd also like to start allowing use of >> C++11 in >> our code >> base and using the same version of gcc on both EL 6 and >> 7 seemed >> like >> the best way to accomplish both of these goals. >> >> If you're willing to try that, I wouldn't be >> against, I >> just must >> warn you that rebuilding devtoolset is always a >> lot of fun >> (like >> >> https://www.redhat.com/archives/sclorg/2015-December/msg00050.html).. >> >> >> What's the best way to start this? >> Are there modifications that are required for source >> .rpm (removing >> RedHat naming, etc)? Or is it just start building it >> and dealing >> with >> the issues that pop up? >> >> >> There is no need to remove any naming, we usually take srpm >> from RH >> and rebuild. However, the bootstrapping is usually very >> challenging. >> I'd recommend first to try to rebuild at least basic packages >> yourself using mock (or copr), so you see how far you can >> get.. >> Then, if you'll see it is worth the work, we can create >> tags/targets >> in CBS and start with real rebuilds. >> >> >> I was just going to start playing around with this on COPR and I >> noticed >> that there appears to already be an existing build of >> devtoolset-2: >> https://copr.fedoraproject.org/coprs/rhscl/devtoolset/ >> >> It looks like it's not complete because only some of the packages >> succeeded, but would that serve as the best starting point? If so, >> what's the best way to move forward with that? >> >> >> Well, why not, I can add you as collaborator in this project -- what >> is your copr username? However, I'm afraid that whoever tried that, >> he got blocked on some non easy issues, which is the reason why it >> is not finished. >> >> >> My username is daveisfera. >> > > Well, I've realized the copr is not named devtoolset-2, but just > devtoolset, which is not ideal.. and renaming is not possible in copr.. > maybe it would be better if you'd create your own copr, which has correct > name.. > > Is there anything special that needs to be done to do these builds? >> > > Honestly, I don't know what is necessary to fix the builds, but since they > were failing, I expect something would need to be fixed. > > Is there an original location for the source rpms? And is this COPR use >> those or some modification of them? >> > > The sources are available here: > > http://ftp.redhat.com/redhat/linux/enterprise/6Server/en/RHDevToolset/SRPMS/ > It looks like the source .rpm for felix-gogo-parent is missing. What needs to happen for that to be added? Thanks, Dave
_______________________________________________ SCLorg mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/sclorg
