On Tue, Jun 8, 2021 at 2:31 PM Michael Jeanson
wrote:
> I have started the process to update userspace-rcu to 0.13 in rawhide
> which implies a soname bump to 8.
>
Does that imply python3.10 too?
> From what I understand, the following packages will need to be rebuilt:
>
>
There have been no updates since 2018.
If someone else wants to take it over I'm happy to transfer it to them.
Otherwise I will retire it in one week's time.
--
Kaleb
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an
On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 10:09 AM Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 15. 06. 21 16:00, Kaleb Keithley wrote:
> >
> > There have been no updates since 2018.
> >
> > If someone else wants to take it over I'm happy to transfer it to them.
> >
> > Otherwise I will reti
Or, if I may be so bold—
Convince the developers to use versioned symbols when they break the
API/ABI.
This is the 21st Century, and we have solutions for this. It's not rocket
surgery.
On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 11:55 AM Richard Shaw wrote:
> I'm still trying to figure out the best way to
This update is now six days old, still hasn't reached stable.
Would someone please kick it?
thanks
On Sat, Feb 27, 2021 at 2:20 PM wrote:
> The following comment has been added to the ceph-16.1.0-0.4.snapshot.fc34
> update:
>
> bodhi - 2021-02-27 19:17:57.406291 (karma: 0)
> This update has
Hi,
My two most recent ceph builds on s390x have been oom killed.
As recently as four days ago they were building fine.
Any ideas?
--
Kaleb
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
Apparently so.
I don't see an announcement!
It broke the ceph install. :-(
--
Kaleb
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
in f35 leveldb-1.22's libleveldb.so.1.22 has, among others, the following:
# nm -D libleveldb.so.1.22 | grep Logger | grep leveldb
000367f0 T _ZN7leveldb6LoggerD0Ev
00036740 T _ZN7leveldb6LoggerD1Ev
00036740 T _ZN7leveldb6LoggerD2Ev
000557a0 D _ZTIN7leveldb6LoggerE
On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 11:50 AM Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Kaleb Keithley:
>
> > in f35 leveldb-1.22's libleveldb.so.1.22 has, among others, the
> following:
> >
> > # nm -D libleveldb.so.1.22 | grep Logger | grep leveldb
> > 000367f0 T _ZN7leveldb6
On Wed, Aug 4, 2021 at 8:22 AM Kaleb Keithley wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 1:54 PM Florian Weimer wrote:
>
>> * Kaleb Keithley:
>>
>> > ah, I missed that. I looked, but not hard enough apparently, and I
>> presumed it was related
>> > to changes in
On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 1:54 PM Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Kaleb Keithley:
>
> > ah, I missed that. I looked, but not hard enough apparently, and I
> presumed it was related
> > to changes in the code.
> >
> ><https://github.com/google/leveldb/issues/927&
On Mon, Aug 5, 2019 at 9:55 AM Ben Cotton wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 5, 2019 at 9:51 AM Kaleb Keithley wrote:
> >
> >
> > There is a proposal[1] in upstream GlusterFS to drop 32-bit arches.
> > ...
>
> Kaleb, when this is determined upstream, can you please file t
Out of all its dependencies, only one doesn't already exist in Fedora:
apache ORC.
I have a package review open at
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2005989; if someone would be so
kind as to pick it up so that I can keep this moving.
Thanks.
On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 10:26 AM Kaleb
On Wed, Nov 17, 2021 at 10:20 PM wrote:
> Notification time stamped 2021-11-18 01:07:11 UTC
>
> ceph's builds started to fail in Fedora 35
> https://apps.fedoraproject.org/koschei/package/ceph?collection=f35
>
>
Not sure what I'm supposed to see here. The ceph builds are all green.
But
On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 8:01 AM Daniel P. Berrangé
wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 07:36:30AM -0500, Kaleb Keithley wrote:
> > This seems to be happening on a semi-regular basis now. I run scratch
> > builds and they invariably work, but I have seen at least one of my
> scrat
This seems to be happening on a semi-regular basis now. I run scratch
builds and they invariably work, but I have seen at least one of my scratch
builds fail with the same error on f36/rawhide.
This makes no sense that gcc gets an internal error on random occastions.
Is it the machine (or vm)
On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 12:56 PM Richard W.M. Jones
wrote:
...
> libqemuutil.a.p/util_vfio-helpers.c.o -c ../util/vfio-helpers.c
> during RTL pass: mach
> ../util/vfio-helpers.c: In function 'qemu_vfio_open_pci':
> ../util/vfio-helpers.c:523:1: internal compiler error: in
>
On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 6:52 AM Richard W.M. Jones
wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 11:16:42AM -0400, Kaleb Keithley wrote:
> >
> > Perfect. Thank you Mamoru-san.
> >
> > armv7hl is now back in.
>
> glusterfs library is totally broken on armv7, aarch64, s390x
On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 8:42 AM Daniel P. Berrangé
wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 09:32:16PM +0900, Mamoru TASAKA wrote:
> > Daniel P. Berrangé wrote on 2021/10/29 21:15:
> > > On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 07:55:08AM -0400, Kaleb Keithley wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Oct 2
See
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/3MQ4ZRPS4MOIDG2RPAR6YX43VX2MCOLW/
I have not had a chance to follow through yet with a self contained
change...
On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 9:36 AM Richard W.M. Jones
wrote:
>
>
Perfect. Thank you Mamoru-san.
armv7hl is now back in.
Regards,
On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 10:31 AM Mamoru TASAKA
wrote:
> Kaleb Keithley wrote on 2021/10/28 22:41:
> >
> >
> > See
> >
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@l
I'm trying to do a scratch build but not getting python3-devel installed.
The .spec file has BR: python3-devel, and rpm -qp --requires on the
.src.rpm shows it has the needed Requires: python3-devel.
E.g. https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/6036/78546036/root.log
Regular builds of
On Tue, Nov 9, 2021 at 7:22 AM Mamoru TASAKA
wrote:
> Kaleb Keithley wrote on 2021/11/09 21:14:
> > I'm trying to do a scratch build but not getting python3-devel installed.
> >
> > The .spec file has BR: python3-devel, and rpm -qp --requires on the
> > .src.rpm shows
Hi,
Ceph is on the threshold of adding a dependency on Apache Arrow[1].
Ceph has had a long history of bundling dependencies so that they can be
built when the platform either doesn't have the dependency or the
dependency is too old. But this time, for a number of factors, the
preference is to
Hi,
I need https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2054708 reviewed please.
This is a pre-req dependency needed for new features in the next major
release of Ceph, i.e. Quincy.
Thanks
--
Kaleb
___
devel mailing list --
On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 4:50 AM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel <
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> On 27/01/2022 01:30, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > Kaleb tried a ceph build with ppc64le turned back on, but it's failed:
>
Only because I started the ceph build too soon and the new build of fmt
On Thu, Jan 20, 2022 at 7:50 AM Kaleb Keithley wrote:
>
> I thought I'd solved all my gcc-12-isms in ceph by running --scratch
> --arch-override=x86_64 builds, so I tried a full build and ran into this on
> aarch64. :-(
>
ppc64le and s390x as well.
I thought I'd solved all my gcc-12-isms in ceph by running --scratch
--arch-override=x86_64 builds, so I tried a full build and ran into this on
aarch64. :-(
/usr/bin/g++ -DBOOST_ASIO_DISABLE_THREAD_KEYWORD_EXTENSION
-DBOOST_ASIO_USE_TS_EXECUTOR_AS_DEFAULT -DHAVE_CONFIG_H
-D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64
On Sat, Jan 22, 2022 at 11:22 AM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 22, 2022 at 09:56:24AM -0500, Kaleb Keithley wrote:
> > I know you want FTBFS bugs now for gcc-12 issues, but let me run this by
> > you first and I will open a BZ if necessary.
> >
> > For ceph I
I know you want FTBFS bugs now for gcc-12 issues, but let me run this by
you first and I will open a BZ if necessary.
For ceph I've hacked up a fix for all the other gcc-12isms in ceph and now
it fails to build on ppc64le[1] with
...
/usr/bin/ld:
On Sun, Jan 23, 2022 at 4:58 AM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel <
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> On 22/01/2022 17:22, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > The long double change is an ABI change, so this is kind of expected.
>
> abidiff automatic test found no ABI changes between 8.0 and 8.1.
I think
On Sat, Jan 22, 2022 at 2:28 PM Kaleb Keithley wrote:
>
>> The long double change is an ABI change, so this is kind of expected.
>> Mass rebuild unfortunately doesn't go according to the dependency graph
>> (and
>> unfortunately it isn't a tree, there are cycles).
>
Ceph fails with gcc-12 too.
scratch build at
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=81280838
upstream ceph bug at https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/53896
--
Kaleb
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send
On Tue, Jul 5, 2022 at 9:07 AM Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 05, 2022 at 01:17:39PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > Hello,
> > forwarding this message to Fedora.
> >
> > Will know more by the end of this week -- we might need to consider
> > reverting back to Python 3.10 if we don't
On Tue, Jul 5, 2022 at 9:45 AM Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 05. 07. 22 15:20, Kaleb Keithley wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 5, 2022 at 9:07 AM Richard W.M. Jones > <mailto:rjo...@redhat.com>> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 05, 2022 at 01:17:39P
On Sun, Jul 17, 2022 at 3:56 PM wrote:
>
> Same for ceph. I tried unsucessfully to rebuild it. The bug is not yet
> upstream, only in Debian yet
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1014549
>
Do you have a link to the failed build?
--
Kaleb
On Sun, Jul 17, 2022 at 3:56 PM wrote:
>
> Same for ceph. I tried unsucessfully to rebuild it. The bug is not yet
> upstream, only in Debian yet
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1014549
I opened https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/56610
--
Kaleb
On Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 9:24 AM Richard W.M. Jones
wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 02:03:57PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > >
> > > ceph also uses rocksdb, so I think I'd want rocksdb to be rebuilt
> before ceph
> > > (i.e. before I rebuild ceph).
> >
> > AFAIK nothing should need to be
On Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 8:47 AM Richard W.M. Jones
wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 10:24:50AM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > - ceph
> > ...
> > - rocksdb
>
>
> I built ceph, qemu, samba & plocate with the new liburing 2.2 and
> there didn't seem to be any problem with liburing. Samba
E.g. my scratch build of ceph (
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=92955292) failsthusly:
...
DEBUG util.py:443: Error:
DEBUG util.py:443: Problem: package
perl-Archive-Tar-2.40-490.fc37.noarch requires
perl(IO::Uncompress::UnXz), but none of the providers can be installed
Hi,
Apache Arrow 9.0.0 has been released.
AFAIK nobody is using libarrow¹ except Ceph. (Which I am the maintainer of.)
I will be rebasing libarrow to 9.0.0 within the next few hours.
¹ E.g.:
$ sudo dnf repoquery --whatrequires libarrow
Last metadata expiration check: 1:36:14 ago on Wed 03
Hi,
Apache Arrow 10.0.0 has been released.
At present nobody is using libarrow except Ceph. (Which I am the maintainer
of.)
I will be rebasing libarrow to 10.0.0 within the next couple of days.
--
Kaleb
___
devel mailing list --
On Thu, Feb 23, 2023 at 8:19 AM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 23, 2023 at 01:11:13PM +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > On Thu, 23 Feb 2023 at 13:03, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > > Do you know anything about what's happening with Ceph?
> >
> > No idea, sorry.
>
> Ceph is likely #2169364 aka
On Thu, Feb 9, 2023 at 12:02 PM Kaleb Keithley wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 10:54 AM Kaleb Keithley
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Apache Arrow 10.0.0 has been released.
>>
>> At present nobody is using libarrow except Ceph. (Which I am the
>> m
On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 10:54 AM Kaleb Keithley wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Apache Arrow 10.0.0 has been released.
>
> At present nobody is using libarrow except Ceph. (Which I am the
> maintainer of.)
>
> I will be rebasing libarrow to 10.0.0 within the next couple of days.
>
On Mon, May 1, 2023 at 8:01 AM Kaleb Keithley wrote:
>
>
> Now Apache Arrow 12.0.0 has been released.
>
> Rebase landing soon in Rawhide.
>
Apache Arrow (libarrow) 13.0.0 has been released.
At least within Fedora, only Ceph (ceph-common, ceph-radosgw, ceph-test,
librgw2) d
Hi,
ceph-18 RC will likely be tagged in the next week or two, according to my
sources.
(Note: wrt rhbz#2193399, the submoduled/bundled boost that's currently in
ceph-18 is newer than the version in ceph-17 (quincy) and does support
kXXH3 cksum. Ceph, even ceph-18, hasn't caught up to boost-1.81,
The update to 13.0.0 is on hold due to FTBFS on s390x.
Waiting for a fix from the devs.
On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 10:06 AM Kaleb Keithley wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, May 1, 2023 at 8:01 AM Kaleb Keithley wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Now Apache Arrow 12.0.0 has been released.
>&g
Hi,
Apache ORC 1.9.0 has been released.
I believe it is the case that only libarrow (Apache Arrow) and by
extension, ceph consume liborc, and I am the maintainer of both libarrow
and ceph. (My repoqueries don't show anything using liborc or liborc-devel.)
I will be rebasing liborc to 1.9.0
Hi,
I don't see a specific epel working group list on lists.fpo.
I'd like to update rocksdb to a newer version for consumption by ceph.
(Ceph currently bundles rocksdb-7.9.2 IIRC for when the distribution's
version is too old.)
AFAIK, AFAICT, ceph is the only consumer of rocksdb in EPEL (or in
Is someone in contact with cstratak?
I started the non-responsive maintainer process [1], because I asked that
python-installer be branched and built for epel, or to add the EPEL
packagers SIG to the maintainers [2] on 14 Nov 2023 and added a NEEDINFO on
16 Nov.
Even after allowing for holidays,
Updating to Arrow 15.0.0.
Ceph is the only consumer–AFAIK–of libarrow.
(Both ceph and libarrow failed to build in the recent mass rebuild, but
have been built since then.)
--
Kaleb
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To
Coming soon.
Updating to Arrow 16.0.0
--
Kaleb
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
Coming soon to rawhide.
Updating to ORC 2.0.0 from 1.9.x
Currently ceph and gdal are the only packages with dependencies on Apache
ORC (liborc) and Apache Arrow (libarrow)
--
Kaleb
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To
Hi,
Anyone know why distriobuildsync-eln has started building liborc and
libarrow again?
They were stopped at one point, but now they have started again.
There are not needed for ceph in ELN.
--
Kaleb
--
___
devel mailing list --
There is a proposal[1] in upstream GlusterFS to drop 32-bit arches.
The original proposal was to drop 32-bit with GlusterFS-7. GlusterFS-7 will
land in Fedora 31/rawhide soon. More than likely though it will not be
official until GlusterFS-8, which will probably land, accordingly, after
Fedora 31
101 - 156 of 156 matches
Mail list logo
