Bug#1000336: Upgrading tbb
On 3/14/22 11:51 AM, Andreas Tille wrote: Hi, Am Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 12:13:50AM + schrieb Torrance, Douglas: On Sun 13 Mar 2022 04:50:32 PM EDT, M. Zhou wrote: Recently I'm not able to test the build of libtbb-dev's reverse dependencies as my build machine was out of access. That blocks my submission of the transition bug and hence I'm stalled at this point. According to some archlinux developers, this transition breaks a lot of reverse dependencies since some of the core APIs have been changed. Please expect a relatively negative rebuild result. Help is welcome. I've built both mathicgb and macaulay2 in unstable against TBB 2021 from experimental and they're both ready to go for the transition. If you ask me we should simply start the transition and see what needs fixing ... may be asking release team for temporary removal from testing. We are in a quite early [...] I just came to know a method to run salsa-CI for reverse-dependencies. Probably we can use it https://bzed.de/post/2021/01/building_reverse_build_dependencies_in_salsa_ci/ But since the reverse-deps might be large in number, we need to open an issue similar to this to ask the CI admins once about it https://salsa.debian.org/salsa/support/-/issues/291 Hope that helps. Regards, Nilesh OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#1000336: Upgrading tbb
Hi, Am Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 12:13:50AM + schrieb Torrance, Douglas: > On Sun 13 Mar 2022 04:50:32 PM EDT, M. Zhou wrote: > > Recently I'm not able to test the build of libtbb-dev's reverse dependencies > > as my build machine was out of access. That blocks my submission of the > > transition bug and hence I'm stalled at this point. > > According to some archlinux developers, this transition breaks a lot of > > reverse dependencies since some of the core APIs have been changed. > > Please expect a relatively negative rebuild result. > > > > Help is welcome. > > I've built both mathicgb and macaulay2 in unstable against TBB 2021 from > experimental and they're both ready to go for the transition. If you ask me we should simply start the transition and see what needs fixing ... may be asking release team for temporary removal from testing. We are in a quite early process of the release cycle. So we are not really in danger to loose any important package in the next stable release. Even if we are running any tests now the fact that something is broken will not increase forces to fix these breaks and we might wait for ages. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de
Bug#1000336: Upgrading tbb
On Sun 13 Mar 2022 04:50:32 PM EDT, M. Zhou wrote: Recently I'm not able to test the build of libtbb-dev's reverse dependencies as my build machine was out of access. That blocks my submission of the transition bug and hence I'm stalled at this point. According to some archlinux developers, this transition breaks a lot of reverse dependencies since some of the core APIs have been changed. Please expect a relatively negative rebuild result. Help is welcome. I've built both mathicgb and macaulay2 in unstable against TBB 2021 from experimental and they're both ready to go for the transition. Doug signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#1000336: Upgrading tbb
Hi, Recently I'm not able to test the build of libtbb-dev's reverse dependencies as my build machine was out of access. That blocks my submission of the transition bug and hence I'm stalled at this point. According to some archlinux developers, this transition breaks a lot of reverse dependencies since some of the core APIs have been changed. Please expect a relatively negative rebuild result. Help is welcome. On Mon, 2022-03-14 at 01:30 +0530, Nilesh Patra wrote: > Hi Mo, > > On 2/23/22 11:01 AM, M. Zhou wrote: > > Hello guys. Finally it's all green on our release architectures > > https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=onetbb=experimental > > > > I shall request the slot for transition once finished the rebuild > > of its reverse dependencies and filed FTBFS bugs if any. > > Did you get a chance to do this yet? > As we _really_ need numba at this point. > > Regards, > Nilesh > >
Bug#1000336: Upgrading tbb
Hi Mo, On 2/23/22 11:01 AM, M. Zhou wrote: Hello guys. Finally it's all green on our release architectures https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=onetbb=experimental I shall request the slot for transition once finished the rebuild of its reverse dependencies and filed FTBFS bugs if any. Did you get a chance to do this yet? As we _really_ need numba at this point. Regards, Nilesh OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#1000336: Upgrading tbb
On Wed, 2022-02-23 at 00:31 -0500, M. Zhou wrote: > Hello guys. Finally it's all green on our release architectures > https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=onetbb=experimental > > I shall request the slot for transition once finished the rebuild > of its reverse dependencies and filed FTBFS bugs if any. Wonderful! That is great news. Thank you! Diane
Bug#1000336: Upgrading tbb
Am Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 12:31:07AM -0500 schrieb M. Zhou: > Hello guys. Finally it's all green on our release architectures > https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=onetbb=experimental > > I shall request the slot for transition once finished the rebuild > of its reverse dependencies and filed FTBFS bugs if any. Sounds good - thanks a lot for your work on this Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de
Bug#1000336: Upgrading tbb
Hello guys. Finally it's all green on our release architectures https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=onetbb=experimental I shall request the slot for transition once finished the rebuild of its reverse dependencies and filed FTBFS bugs if any. On Tue, 2022-02-08 at 17:59 -0500, M. Zhou wrote: > Hi Diane, > > Thank you. I have added that patch in the git repository. > > On Tue, 2022-02-08 at 13:49 -0800, Diane Trout wrote: > > Hi, > > > > After Andreas pointed it out I looked through some of the build > > failures for onetbb and talked to upstream about the i386 failure. > > https://github.com/oneapi-src/oneTBB/issues/370#issuecomment-1030387116 > > > > They have a patch. > > https://github.com/oneapi-src/oneTBB/commit/542a27fa1cfafaf76772e793549d9f4d288d03a9 > > > > I've tested it against a checkout of the 2021.5.0-1 version of onetbb > > on i386 and it does build with it applied. Once there was a test > > failure, and once all tests ran successfully > > > > I see that you've made some more progress for the memory alignment > > bugs > > so I didn't commit "Detect 32 bit x86 systems while adding -mwaitpkg > > option" i386 patch but could if you want. > > > > Diane > > > > >
Bug#1000336: Upgrading tbb
Hi Diane, Thank you. I have added that patch in the git repository. On Tue, 2022-02-08 at 13:49 -0800, Diane Trout wrote: > Hi, > > After Andreas pointed it out I looked through some of the build > failures for onetbb and talked to upstream about the i386 failure. > https://github.com/oneapi-src/oneTBB/issues/370#issuecomment-1030387116 > > They have a patch. > https://github.com/oneapi-src/oneTBB/commit/542a27fa1cfafaf76772e793549d9f4d288d03a9 > > I've tested it against a checkout of the 2021.5.0-1 version of onetbb > on i386 and it does build with it applied. Once there was a test > failure, and once all tests ran successfully > > I see that you've made some more progress for the memory alignment > bugs > so I didn't commit "Detect 32 bit x86 systems while adding -mwaitpkg > option" i386 patch but could if you want. > > Diane > >
Bug#1000336: Upgrading tbb
Hi, After Andreas pointed it out I looked through some of the build failures for onetbb and talked to upstream about the i386 failure. https://github.com/oneapi-src/oneTBB/issues/370#issuecomment-1030387116 They have a patch. https://github.com/oneapi-src/oneTBB/commit/542a27fa1cfafaf76772e793549d9f4d288d03a9 I've tested it against a checkout of the 2021.5.0-1 version of onetbb on i386 and it does build with it applied. Once there was a test failure, and once all tests ran successfully I see that you've made some more progress for the memory alignment bugs so I didn't commit "Detect 32 bit x86 systems while adding -mwaitpkg option" i386 patch but could if you want. Diane
Bug#1000336: Upgrading tbb
Hi Mo, thanks a lot. I asked on IRC for priorisation of this package. Kind regards Andreas. Am Sat, Jan 08, 2022 at 08:30:57PM -0500 schrieb M. Zhou: > Hi all, > > The good news is that I managed to upgrade onetbb. It > is in the NEW queue now: > https://ftp-master.debian.org/new/onetbb_2021.4.0-1~exp1.html > All changes have been pushed onto salsa (master branch). > > SOVERSION was bumped from 2 to 12 so NEW is inevitable. > There are also some non-trivial API changes. So I guess the > transition won't be easy. > > On Wed, 2021-12-29 at 23:27 -0800, Diane Trout wrote: > On Thu, 2021-12-23 at 11:03 -0500, M. Zhou wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > I'm back. > > > > I've just finished my final exams so I could do something during > > the holiday. That TBB repository is still work-in-progress and > > FTBFS from the master branch is something expected. I will finalize > > it soon. Andreas said in previous posts that we prefer a faster > > NEW queue process. I understand that but we cannot bypass NEW > > process > > this time as upstream has bumped the SONAME. So I'm changing the > > source name as well following the upstream since NEW is inevitable. > > > > As for llvmlite, the latest upstream RC release v0.38.0rc1 seems > > to support python 3.10 . Should I upload the RC release? > > > > BTW, what else should I do? I've been out of sync from the mailing > > list for a long while. > > > Have you managed to make much progress? > > I fiddled with the packaging and got it to build and trying to run > the > autopkgtests with 2021.4.0-1 > > What'd help me is to have a package I could build locally and test > numba against. If you got it working could you commit what you have > to > a salsa branch and let me know where it is? > > Thanks, > Diane > > > > -- http://fam-tille.de
Bug#1000336: Upgrading tbb
Hi all, The good news is that I managed to upgrade onetbb. It is in the NEW queue now: https://ftp-master.debian.org/new/onetbb_2021.4.0-1~exp1.html All changes have been pushed onto salsa (master branch). SOVERSION was bumped from 2 to 12 so NEW is inevitable. There are also some non-trivial API changes. So I guess the transition won't be easy. On Wed, 2021-12-29 at 23:27 -0800, Diane Trout wrote: On Thu, 2021-12-23 at 11:03 -0500, M. Zhou wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm back. > > I've just finished my final exams so I could do something during > the holiday. That TBB repository is still work-in-progress and > FTBFS from the master branch is something expected. I will finalize > it soon. Andreas said in previous posts that we prefer a faster > NEW queue process. I understand that but we cannot bypass NEW > process > this time as upstream has bumped the SONAME. So I'm changing the > source name as well following the upstream since NEW is inevitable. > > As for llvmlite, the latest upstream RC release v0.38.0rc1 seems > to support python 3.10 . Should I upload the RC release? > > BTW, what else should I do? I've been out of sync from the mailing > list for a long while. Have you managed to make much progress? I fiddled with the packaging and got it to build and trying to run the autopkgtests with 2021.4.0-1 What'd help me is to have a package I could build locally and test numba against. If you got it working could you commit what you have to a salsa branch and let me know where it is? Thanks, Diane
Bug#1000336: Upgrading tbb
On Thu, 2021-12-23 at 11:03 -0500, M. Zhou wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm back. > > I've just finished my final exams so I could do something during > the holiday. That TBB repository is still work-in-progress and > FTBFS from the master branch is something expected. I will finalize > it soon. Andreas said in previous posts that we prefer a faster > NEW queue process. I understand that but we cannot bypass NEW process > this time as upstream has bumped the SONAME. So I'm changing the > source name as well following the upstream since NEW is inevitable. > > As for llvmlite, the latest upstream RC release v0.38.0rc1 seems > to support python 3.10 . Should I upload the RC release? > > BTW, what else should I do? I've been out of sync from the mailing > list for a long while. Have you managed to make much progress? I fiddled with the packaging and got it to build and trying to run the autopkgtests with 2021.4.0-1 What'd help me is to have a package I could build locally and test numba against. If you got it working could you commit what you have to a salsa branch and let me know where it is? Thanks, Diane
Bug#1000336: Upgrading tbb
Hi, Am Thu, Dec 23, 2021 at 11:03:56AM -0500 schrieb M. Zhou: > > I've just finished my final exams so I could do something during > the holiday. Great. Hope you finished the exams successfully. ;-) > That TBB repository is still work-in-progress and > FTBFS from the master branch is something expected. I will finalize > it soon. Andreas said in previous posts that we prefer a faster > NEW queue process. I understand that but we cannot bypass NEW process > this time as upstream has bumped the SONAME. So I'm changing the > source name as well following the upstream since NEW is inevitable. In this case for sure it sounds sensible to change name together with SONAME. > As for llvmlite, the latest upstream RC release v0.38.0rc1 seems > to support python 3.10 . Should I upload the RC release? I'm not very deeply involved in this but from my gut feeling I'd say go for it if it bears the chance to move away some blockers. > BTW, what else should I do? I've been out of sync from the mailing > list for a long while. May be python-sklearn could need some helping hands[1] which I did not managed despite I had put it on my agenda. Kind regards Andreas. [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-science/2021/12/msg6.html -- http://fam-tille.de
Bug#1000336: Upgrading tbb
Hi all, I'm back. I've just finished my final exams so I could do something during the holiday. That TBB repository is still work-in-progress and FTBFS from the master branch is something expected. I will finalize it soon. Andreas said in previous posts that we prefer a faster NEW queue process. I understand that but we cannot bypass NEW process this time as upstream has bumped the SONAME. So I'm changing the source name as well following the upstream since NEW is inevitable. As for llvmlite, the latest upstream RC release v0.38.0rc1 seems to support python 3.10 . Should I upload the RC release? BTW, what else should I do? I've been out of sync from the mailing list for a long while. On Thu, 2021-12-23 at 10:58 +0100, Drew Parsons wrote: > On 2021-12-23 10:24, Drew Parsons wrote: > > On 2021-12-23 06:57, Andreas Tille wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > Am Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 05:09:35PM -0800 schrieb Diane Trout: > > > > On Wed, 2021-12-22 at 22:24 +0530, Nilesh Patra wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Actually because of the current state of numba, several > > > > > reverse > > > > > depends are FTBFS so it's > > > > > bit urgent to push. Apologies for getting on your nerves, > > > > > though. > > > > > > > > I tried. but numba needs tbb version >= 2021. I tried to update > > > > tbb > > > > but > > > > ran into problems trying to build it. > > > > > > Diane is testing a python3.10-compatibility branch for us in numba. > > > > At the same time numba upstream has released 0.55.0rc1 which > > contains > > their python3.10 fix. Should we just jump straight to it (and not > > wait for the final 0.55 release)? I don't know how it goes with > > tbb > > though. > > Actually I guess 0.55.0rc1 won't help so easily. It needs llvmlite > 0.38.0rc1, and we've only just got 0.37 packaged. numba is a kind of > ouroboros, can never get to the end of it. > > Drew >
Bug#1000336: Upgrading tbb
On 2021-12-23 10:24, Drew Parsons wrote: On 2021-12-23 06:57, Andreas Tille wrote: Hi, Am Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 05:09:35PM -0800 schrieb Diane Trout: On Wed, 2021-12-22 at 22:24 +0530, Nilesh Patra wrote: > > Actually because of the current state of numba, several reverse > depends are FTBFS so it's > bit urgent to push. Apologies for getting on your nerves, though. I tried. but numba needs tbb version >= 2021. I tried to update tbb but ran into problems trying to build it. Diane is testing a python3.10-compatibility branch for us in numba. At the same time numba upstream has released 0.55.0rc1 which contains their python3.10 fix. Should we just jump straight to it (and not wait for the final 0.55 release)? I don't know how it goes with tbb though. Actually I guess 0.55.0rc1 won't help so easily. It needs llvmlite 0.38.0rc1, and we've only just got 0.37 packaged. numba is a kind of ouroboros, can never get to the end of it. Drew
Bug#1000336: Upgrading tbb
On 2021-12-23 06:57, Andreas Tille wrote: Hi, Am Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 05:09:35PM -0800 schrieb Diane Trout: On Wed, 2021-12-22 at 22:24 +0530, Nilesh Patra wrote: > > Actually because of the current state of numba, several reverse > depends are FTBFS so it's > bit urgent to push. Apologies for getting on your nerves, though. I tried. but numba needs tbb version >= 2021. I tried to update tbb but ran into problems trying to build it. Diane is testing a python3.10-compatibility branch for us in numba. At the same time numba upstream has released 0.55.0rc1 which contains their python3.10 fix. Should we just jump straight to it (and not wait for the final 0.55 release)? I don't know how it goes with tbb though. Drew
Bug#1000336: Upgrading tbb (Was: numba: FTBFS with Python 3.10)
Hi, Am Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 05:09:35PM -0800 schrieb Diane Trout: > On Wed, 2021-12-22 at 22:24 +0530, Nilesh Patra wrote: > > > > Actually because of the current state of numba, several reverse > > depends are FTBFS so it's > > bit urgent to push. Apologies for getting on your nerves, though. > > I tried. but numba needs tbb version >= 2021. I tried to update tbb but > ran into problems trying to build it. I've checked tbb Git and have read: onetbb (2021.4.0-1~exp1) UNRELEASED; urgency=medium * Source rename following upstream. The new upstream Git URL is https://github.com/oneapi-src/oneTBB -- Mo Zhou Mon, 29 Nov 2021 21:44:57 -0500 I admit I support following upstream names in general. However, the lesson that we just are waiting for some package with name changes in new for more than one month makes this name change a bit scary in the current situation, thought. Well, in case tbb 2021.x might bump SONAME (which I have not checked) we can't avoid this. However, if we might have a chance to get a recent tbb without name changes quickly and could do the name change later this would be helpful. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de
