Re: JPEGXL SONAME Bump
Hi Bob, On 19/03/2023 10:18, Robert-André Mauchin via rpmfusion-developers wrote: RPMFusion side, the following packages are affected: xine-lib xine-lib has been moved to Fedora. Regards, Xavier ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: JPEGXL SONAME Bump
On Sun, 2023-03-19 at 23:53 +, Sérgio Basto via rpmfusion- developers wrote: > On Sun, 2023-03-19 at 19:43 +0100, Robert-André Mauchin via > rpmfusion- > developers wrote: > > On 3/19/23 12:56, Sérgio Basto wrote: > > > BTW add me (sergiomb) as co-maintainer (admin) for built libjxl > > > for > > > EPEL 8 > > > > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2170821 > > > > > > > > > > Added you. > > Thank you > > we also need update highway-0.12.2-1.el8 on el8 [1] so please also > add > meas maintainer of highway https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/highway > > I will check the impact of update highway on epel 8 , I'm proven > packager but I feel more comfortable be added , at least I will > receive > Bugzilla reports too ... > > Best regards, > using find_unblocked_orphans.py ( https://pagure.io/releng/blob/main/f/scripts/find_unblocked_orphans.py ) find_unblocked_orphans.py --max_deps 1 --skip-orphans --release epel8 highway Got info for highway on epel8, todo: 0 0 packages depend on highway ... I'm going update it > [1] > Warning: HWY_SVE, HWY_SVE2, HWY_SVE_256, HWY_SVE2_128 and HWY_RVV CPU > targets are disabled > -- Could NOT find HWY: Found unsuitable version "0.12.2", but > required > is at least "0.15.0" (found /usr/lib64/libhwy.a) > CMake Error at third_party/CMakeLists.txt:35 (message): > Highway library (hwy) not found. Install libhwy-dev or download it > to > third_party/highway from https://github.com/google/highway . Highway > is > required to build JPEG XL. You can run > /builddir/build/BUILD/libjxl-0.7.0/deps.sh to download this > dependency. > > > > > ___ > > rpmfusion-developers mailing list -- > > rpmfusion-develop...@lists.rpmfusion.org > > To unsubscribe send an email to > > rpmfusion-developers-le...@lists.rpmfusion.org > > -- > Sérgio M. B. > ___ > rpmfusion-developers mailing list -- > rpmfusion-develop...@lists.rpmfusion.org > To unsubscribe send an email to > rpmfusion-developers-le...@lists.rpmfusion.org -- Sérgio M. B. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: JPEGXL SONAME Bump
On Sun, 2023-03-19 at 19:43 +0100, Robert-André Mauchin via rpmfusion- developers wrote: > On 3/19/23 12:56, Sérgio Basto wrote: > > BTW add me (sergiomb) as co-maintainer (admin) for built libjxl for > > EPEL 8 > > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2170821 > > > > > > Added you. Thank you we also need update highway-0.12.2-1.el8 on el8 [1] so please also add meas maintainer of highway https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/highway I will check the impact of update highway on epel 8 , I'm proven packager but I feel more comfortable be added , at least I will receive Bugzilla reports too ... Best regards, [1] Warning: HWY_SVE, HWY_SVE2, HWY_SVE_256, HWY_SVE2_128 and HWY_RVV CPU targets are disabled -- Could NOT find HWY: Found unsuitable version "0.12.2", but required is at least "0.15.0" (found /usr/lib64/libhwy.a) CMake Error at third_party/CMakeLists.txt:35 (message): Highway library (hwy) not found. Install libhwy-dev or download it to third_party/highway from https://github.com/google/highway . Highway is required to build JPEG XL. You can run /builddir/build/BUILD/libjxl-0.7.0/deps.sh to download this dependency. > ___ > rpmfusion-developers mailing list -- > rpmfusion-develop...@lists.rpmfusion.org > To unsubscribe send an email to > rpmfusion-developers-le...@lists.rpmfusion.org -- Sérgio M. B. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: JPEGXL SONAME Bump
On Sun, Mar 19, 2023 at 5:28 PM Sandro wrote: > > On 19-03-2023 10:39, Leigh Scott wrote: > >> RPMFusion side, the following packages are affected: > >> > >> libheif > >> xine-lib > >> > > xine-lib and libheif are both fedora packages. > > Regarding libheif, the change from RPMFusion to Fedora is very recent. > The query might have been carried out before that happened. > > I'll be happy to take care of rebuilding libheif after jpegxl has been > bumped. Are you using a side-tag for the soname bump? > libheif doesn't link to libjxl at all, so it shouldn't be factored into this. -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: JPEGXL SONAME Bump
On 19-03-2023 10:39, Leigh Scott wrote: RPMFusion side, the following packages are affected: libheif xine-lib xine-lib and libheif are both fedora packages. Regarding libheif, the change from RPMFusion to Fedora is very recent. The query might have been carried out before that happened. I'll be happy to take care of rebuilding libheif after jpegxl has been bumped. Are you using a side-tag for the soname bump? -- Sandro ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: JPEGXL SONAME Bump
On 3/19/23 12:56, Sérgio Basto wrote: BTW add me (sergiomb) as co-maintainer (admin) for built libjxl for EPEL 8 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2170821 Added you. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: JPEGXL SONAME Bump
BTW add me (sergiomb) as co-maintainer (admin) for built libjxl for EPEL 8 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2170821 On Sun, 2023-03-19 at 10:18 +0100, Robert-André Mauchin via rpmfusion- developers wrote: > Hello everyone, > > I am planning a soname bump of jpegxl to 0.8.1 next week Saturday the > 25th. > > Some of you will be affected by these changes. > > Fedora side we have: > > geeqie > gthumb > seamonkey > vips > > I can take care of these one as a PP in a side tag > > RPMFusion side, the following packages are affected: > > libheif > xine-lib > > I would like to have RPMFusion maintainers help to be able to update > them in a RPMFusion > side tag too. I will specify to you when the Fedora side tag has been > merged. > > Hopefully, with your cooperation, everything will go smoothly. > > Please send any question you may have regarding this change. > > Thanks to everyone! > > Best regards, > > Robert-André (eclipseo) > ___ > rpmfusion-developers mailing list -- > rpmfusion-develop...@lists.rpmfusion.org > To unsubscribe send an email to > rpmfusion-developers-le...@lists.rpmfusion.org -- Sérgio M. B. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: JPEGXL SONAME Bump
> xine-lib and libheif are both fedora packages. https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/YMOLJESUIIFK5RZYPGWTE362CKZH7JXV/ ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: JPEGXL SONAME Bump
Il 19/03/23 10:18, Robert-André Mauchin ha scritto: > Hello everyone, > > I am planning a soname bump of jpegxl to 0.8.1 next week Saturday the 25th. > > Some of you will be affected by these changes. > > Fedora side we have: > > geeqie > gthumb > seamonkey > vips > > I can take care of these one as a PP in a side tag > > RPMFusion side, the following packages are affected: > > libheif > xine-lib > > I would like to have RPMFusion maintainers help to be able to update them in > a RPMFusion > side tag too. I will specify to you when the Fedora side tag has been merged. > > Hopefully, with your cooperation, everything will go smoothly. > > Please send any question you may have regarding this change. > > Thanks to everyone! > > Best regards, > > Robert-André (eclipseo) The list of affected packages seems incomplete: $ fedrq whatrequires-src jpegxl -F source -b rawhide ImageMagick SDL2_image aom darktable ffmpeg geeqie gimp gthumb jpegxl kf5-kimageformats seamonkey vips xine-lib Mattia___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: JPEGXL SONAME Bump
> Hello everyone, > > I am planning a soname bump of jpegxl to 0.8.1 next week Saturday the 25th. > > Some of you will be affected by these changes. > RPMFusion side, the following packages are affected: > > libheif > xine-lib > xine-lib and libheif are both fedora packages. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: jpegxl soname bump
Le ven. 3 déc. 2021 à 17:17, Sérgio Basto a écrit : > > On Fri, 2021-12-03 at 15:36 +, Michael J Gruber wrote: > > F35 updates has libaom-3.2.0-2 and libjxl-0.6.1-6 already - so did > > the buildroot go through? > > (This conflicts with heif from rpmfusion, which I can't complain > > about here, of course.) > > yes , buildroot go through , rpmfusion packages are fixed just need to > be published in repos Problem was not only about rpmfusion packages rebuilt, but also a lot of missing fedora rebuilt. To this date, there are still missing rebuilds, so was my -1 for this update. @besser Can you clarify why you have pushed this update to stable despite my notice ? This is not the first time this problem occurs with aom and some fedora rebuilds are not done. Someone will have to fix the missing piece... ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: jpegxl soname bump
On Fri, 2021-12-03 at 15:36 +, Michael J Gruber wrote: > F35 updates has libaom-3.2.0-2 and libjxl-0.6.1-6 already - so did > the buildroot go through? > (This conflicts with heif from rpmfusion, which I can't complain > about here, of course.) yes , buildroot go through , rpmfusion packages are fixed just need to be published in repos -- Sérgio M. B. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: jpegxl soname bump
F35 updates has libaom-3.2.0-2 and libjxl-0.6.1-6 already - so did the buildroot go through? (This conflicts with heif from rpmfusion, which I can't complain about here, of course.) ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: jpegxl soname bump
Am Sonntag, dem 21.11.2021 um 15:40 -0500 schrieb Scott Talbert: > Hi @eclipseo, > > Looks like jpegxl soname was bumped, breaking a bunch of stuff: > > 2021-11-21 20:20:51 > Package resolution failed > > Problem: package gd-2.3.3-3.fc36.x86_64 requires > libavif.so.12()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed > - package graphviz-2.49.3-2.fc36.x86_64 requires > libgd.so.3()(64bit), > but none of the providers can be installed > - package libavif-0.9.2-2.fc35.x86_64 requires > libaom.so.3()(64bit), > but none of the providers can be installed > - conflicting requests > - nothing provides libjxl.so.0()(64bit) needed by > libaom-3.1.2-1.fc35.x86_64 > - nothing provides libjxl.so.0(JXL_0)(64bit) needed by > libaom-3.1.2-1.fc35.x86_64 > Problem: package graphviz-2.49.3-2.fc36.x86_64 requires > libgd.so.3()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed > - package gd-2.3.3-3.fc36.x86_64 requires libavif.so.12()(64bit), > but > none of the providers can be installed > - package doxygen-2:1.9.1-12.fc36.x86_64 requires graphviz, but > none > of the providers can be installed > - package libavif-0.9.2-2.fc35.x86_64 requires > libaom.so.3()(64bit), > but none of the providers can be installed > - conflicting requests > - nothing provides libjxl.so.0()(64bit) needed by > libaom-3.1.2-1.fc35.x86_64 > - nothing provides libjxl.so.0(JXL_0)(64bit) needed by > libaom-3.1.2-1.fc35.x86_64 libaom is not rebuildable, as it requires the doxygen package for being built. I've requested the new jpegxl build to be untagged from Rawhide [1], and expired the buildroot-overrides for F35 and F34. This needs proper preparation and coordination for the rebuilds. I will take of that in a side-tag as soon as Rawhide is back to a usable state. Björn [1] https://pagure.io/releng/issue/10397 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: jpegxl soname bump
yikes On Sun, 21 Nov 2021, 20:40 Scott Talbert, wrote: > Hi @eclipseo, > > Looks like jpegxl soname was bumped, breaking a bunch of stuff: > > 2021-11-21 20:20:51 > Package resolution failed > > Problem: package gd-2.3.3-3.fc36.x86_64 requires > libavif.so.12()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed > - package graphviz-2.49.3-2.fc36.x86_64 requires libgd.so.3()(64bit), > but none of the providers can be installed > - package libavif-0.9.2-2.fc35.x86_64 requires libaom.so.3()(64bit), > but none of the providers can be installed > - conflicting requests > - nothing provides libjxl.so.0()(64bit) needed by > libaom-3.1.2-1.fc35.x86_64 > - nothing provides libjxl.so.0(JXL_0)(64bit) needed by > libaom-3.1.2-1.fc35.x86_64 > Problem: package graphviz-2.49.3-2.fc36.x86_64 requires > libgd.so.3()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed > - package gd-2.3.3-3.fc36.x86_64 requires libavif.so.12()(64bit), but > none of the providers can be installed > - package doxygen-2:1.9.1-12.fc36.x86_64 requires graphviz, but none > of the providers can be installed > - package libavif-0.9.2-2.fc35.x86_64 requires libaom.so.3()(64bit), > but none of the providers can be installed > - conflicting requests > - nothing provides libjxl.so.0()(64bit) needed by > libaom-3.1.2-1.fc35.x86_64 > - nothing provides libjxl.so.0(JXL_0)(64bit) needed by > libaom-3.1.2-1.fc35.x86_64 > > Thanks, > Scott > ___ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > 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@lists.fedoraproject.org > Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure > ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
