Re: Why libicu soname bump required harfbuzz package to be built twice?
Hi David, On Friday, 2014-02-14 17:48:42 +0100, David Tardon wrote: It was mainly a communication problem: I was prepared to handle the rebuilds, but when Eike did not ping me that he built new ICU, I assumed that he got hold of some other provenpackager :-( Ok, next time I'll explicitly ping you once the build is ready. Eike -- LibreOffice Calc developer. Number formatter stricken i18n transpositionizer. GPG key ID: 0x65632D3A - 2265 D7F3 A7B0 95CC 3918 630B 6A6C D5B7 6563 2D3A Support the FSFE, care about Free Software! https://fsfe.org/support/?erack pgpK8pMPDFmyc.pgp Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Why libicu soname bump required harfbuzz package to be built twice?
On Thu, 13 Feb 2014 21:44:12 -0800 Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com wrote: icu requires quite a large number of rebuilds, including some tricky ones (I just did tracker, which has to be bootstrapped, and libreoffice is another...), so I think it's reasonable to assume the icu maintainer isn't going to be doing them all, and help out with the rest. gnustep is being a PITA now. le sigh. I'll also note that the icu maintain is not a provenpackager. I should have offered to help when they announced the upgrade. Next time we should see if we can line up some folks to do rebuilds faster on it. kevin signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Why libicu soname bump required harfbuzz package to be built twice?
Hi, On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 08:47:25AM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: On Thu, 13 Feb 2014 21:44:12 -0800 Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com wrote: icu requires quite a large number of rebuilds, including some tricky ones (I just did tracker, which has to be bootstrapped, and libreoffice is another...), so I think it's reasonable to assume the icu maintainer isn't going to be doing them all, and help out with the rest. gnustep is being a PITA now. le sigh. I'll also note that the icu maintain is not a provenpackager. It was mainly a communication problem: I was prepared to handle the rebuilds, but when Eike did not ping me that he built new ICU, I assumed that he got hold of some other provenpackager :-( D. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Why libicu soname bump required harfbuzz package to be built twice?
Hi, On Wed, 2014-02-12 at 20:19 -0800, Dan Mashal wrote: On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 7:56 PM, Parag N(पराग़) panem...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, From the yesterday's pkgs git commit logs I see 3-4 people built few packages for libicu soname bump. I am not sure why a single person can't carry such a few package rebuilds for libicu soname bump. Whoever (people names) want to rebuild packages should announce on devel list first. Looks like harfbuzz package is picked twice for these rebuilds. Both rebuilds happened in within 30 minutes time period. Your guess is as good as mine. I asked on IRC in #fedora-devel after my package failed to build on Rawhide and was told that there was a soname bump for icu and was given an all clear to rebuild it. I then nphilipp rebuild it after me for whatever reason. I have no idea why they rebuilt again (maybe they had a reason). sorry for stepping on your toes -- it was late in the evening and there were three packages blocking my build, I simply overlooked that harfbuzz was rebuilt already (I checked the others in koji and no builds were underway). Nils -- Nils Philippsen Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase Red Hat a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty n...@redhat.com nor Safety. -- Benjamin Franklin, 1759 PGP fingerprint: C4A8 9474 5C4C ADE3 2B8F 656D 47D8 9B65 6951 3011 -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Why libicu soname bump required harfbuzz package to be built twice?
On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 4:49 AM, Nils Philippsen n...@redhat.com wrote: sorry for stepping on your toes -- it was late in the evening and there were three packages blocking my build, I simply overlooked that harfbuzz was rebuilt already (I checked the others in koji and no builds were underway). No problem. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Why libicu soname bump required harfbuzz package to be built twice?
On Thu, 2014-02-13 at 09:26 +0530, Parag N(पराग़) wrote: Hi, From the yesterday's pkgs git commit logs I see 3-4 people built few packages for libicu soname bump. I am not sure why a single person can't carry such a few package rebuilds for libicu soname bump. Whoever (people names) want to rebuild packages should announce on devel list first. Looks like harfbuzz package is picked twice for these rebuilds. Both rebuilds happened in within 30 minutes time period. It doesn't really cause any terrible pain for a double rebuild to happen. devel@ being flooded with I'm about to rebuild X! would certainly cause a lot more inconvenience. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Why libicu soname bump required harfbuzz package to be built twice?
Hi all, On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 5:18 AM, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.comwrote: On Thu, 2014-02-13 at 09:26 +0530, Parag N(पराग़) wrote: Hi, From the yesterday's pkgs git commit logs I see 3-4 people built few packages for libicu soname bump. I am not sure why a single person can't carry such a few package rebuilds for libicu soname bump. Whoever (people names) want to rebuild packages should announce on devel list first. Looks like harfbuzz package is picked twice for these rebuilds. Both rebuilds happened in within 30 minutes time period. It doesn't really cause any terrible pain for a double rebuild to happen. devel@ being flooded with I'm about to rebuild X! would certainly cause a lot more inconvenience. Right there is no harm. One can only bump the release and carry a rebuild without any change in spec. What I thought is that generally people whose packages gets soname bump used to carry package rebuilds for its dependent packages also. Same has already happened with libicu soname bump in the past. This time it was not clear if libicu maintainer is going for these package rebuilds or not. Anyway I assume libicu maintainer want to only push libicu update and let the dependent package owners to rebuild their packages. I have just rebuilt fontmatrix now. Thanks, Parag. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Why libicu soname bump required harfbuzz package to be built twice?
On Fri, 2014-02-14 at 09:27 +0530, Parag N(पराग़) wrote: Hi all, On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 5:18 AM, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com wrote: On Thu, 2014-02-13 at 09:26 +0530, Parag N(पराग़) wrote: Hi, From the yesterday's pkgs git commit logs I see 3-4 people built few packages for libicu soname bump. I am not sure why a single person can't carry such a few package rebuilds for libicu soname bump. Whoever (people names) want to rebuild packages should announce on devel list first. Looks like harfbuzz package is picked twice for these rebuilds. Both rebuilds happened in within 30 minutes time period. It doesn't really cause any terrible pain for a double rebuild to happen. devel@ being flooded with I'm about to rebuild X! would certainly cause a lot more inconvenience. Right there is no harm. One can only bump the release and carry a rebuild without any change in spec. What I thought is that generally people whose packages gets soname bump used to carry package rebuilds for its dependent packages also. Same has already happened with libicu soname bump in the past. This time it was not clear if libicu maintainer is going for these package rebuilds or not. Anyway I assume libicu maintainer want to only push libicu update and let the dependent package owners to rebuild their packages. I have just rebuilt fontmatrix now. icu requires quite a large number of rebuilds, including some tricky ones (I just did tracker, which has to be bootstrapped, and libreoffice is another...), so I think it's reasonable to assume the icu maintainer isn't going to be doing them all, and help out with the rest. gnustep is being a PITA now. le sigh. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Why libicu soname bump required harfbuzz package to be built twice?
On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 7:56 PM, Parag N(पराग़) panem...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, From the yesterday's pkgs git commit logs I see 3-4 people built few packages for libicu soname bump. I am not sure why a single person can't carry such a few package rebuilds for libicu soname bump. Whoever (people names) want to rebuild packages should announce on devel list first. Looks like harfbuzz package is picked twice for these rebuilds. Both rebuilds happened in within 30 minutes time period. Your guess is as good as mine. I asked on IRC in #fedora-devel after my package failed to build on Rawhide and was told that there was a soname bump for icu and was given an all clear to rebuild it. I then nphilipp rebuild it after me for whatever reason. I have no idea why they rebuilt again (maybe they had a reason). Ideally the person who did the soname bump for icu would have rebuilt harfbuzz with it (er...@redhat.com). This happens quite often and it's quite annoying. Dan -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
