Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On Sun, Mar 4, 2018 at 4:09 AM, Jerry James wrote: > On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 10:09 AM, Igor Gnatenko > wrote: >> If you fixed package(s), found false positive, found missing packages in list >> or anything else -- please let me know. > Fixed: avahi, bird, biosdevname, mlocate Michal ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On 2018-02-18 11:09, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > Over this weekend I've performed scratch-mass-rebuild without having gcc and > gcc-c++ in buildroot of all Fedora packages, many of which failed due to > random > reasons and I grepped all logs for some common errors found by analyzing > hundreds of build logs. > > Some packages might be missed due to short koji outage, broken dependencies > and > so on, but majority of real failures is below. > > If you fixed package(s), found false positive, found missing packages in list > or anything else -- please let me know. Fixed: lame latex2rtf libpsl notification-daemon ttfautohint xcf-pixbuf-loader -- Yaakov Selkowitz Software Engineer - Platform Enablement Group Red Hat, Inc. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On 2018-02-18 09:09 AM, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > Over this weekend I've performed scratch-mass-rebuild without having > gcc and > gcc-c++ in buildroot of all Fedora packages, many of which failed due > to random > reasons and I grepped all logs for some common errors found by analyzing > hundreds of build logs. > > Guidelines: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:C_and_C%2B%2B#BuildRequire > s_and_Requies > > The grep output is located here: > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal.txt > > Some packages might be missed due to short koji outage, broken > dependencies and > so on, but majority of real failures is below. > > If you fixed package(s), found false positive, found missing packages > in list > or anything else -- please let me know. Fixed for ETL, alembic, gimp-dbp, radeontop False positive for both synfig, synfigtudio which depends of ETL and python-lcms2 openvdb fails to build with gcc 8.x for some odd reasons despite the BuildRequires. https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=25736367 However, openvdb successfully compiled with gcc 7.x as seen on scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/watchlogs?taskID=25736527 > -- Luya Tshimbalanga Graphic & Web Designer E: l...@fedoraproject.org W: http://www.coolest-storm.net signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 7:08 AM, Jan Rybar wrote: > done: procps-ng, psmisc, psacct > > > On 02/18/2018 06:09 PM, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- >> Hash: SHA256 >> >> Over this weekend I've performed scratch-mass-rebuild without having gcc >> and >> gcc-c++ in buildroot of all Fedora packages, many of which failed due to >> random >> reasons and I grepped all logs for some common errors found by analyzing >> hundreds of build logs. >> >> Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:C_and_C%2B%2B#Build >> Require >> s_and_Requies >> >> The grep output is located here: >> https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal.txt >> >> Some packages might be missed due to short koji outage, broken >> dependencies and >> so on, but majority of real failures is below. >> >> If you fixed package(s), found false positive, found missing packages in >> list >> or anything else -- please let me know. >> >> Note to packages which use CMake buildsystem. When you have project(xxx) >> in >> CMakeLists.txt it checks both for C and CXX compilers. So you might >> encounter >> packages where you have BuildRequires: gcc and it fails on CXX compiler >> (even >> you think you don't need it). Solution for this is to send patch to >> upstream >> switching to something like project(xxx C), or if problem is opposite to >> project(xxx CXX). >> >> List of packages and respective maintainers: >> https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal-pkgs.txt >> >> Forgot to email the list, but I took care of bwm-ng (which was FTBFS as well) and pystatgrab. For the others next to my name I am not a primary or even secondary maintainer, so I am a little bit hesitant to make the changes. I do wonder if libstatgrab needs the fix or the fact that it depends on autotools has already indirectly taken care of it such that it is not on your list? Happy to add it if needed/wanted/desired. FAS: ttorling - -- - -Igor Gnatenko >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- >> >> iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEhLFO09aHZVqO+CM6aVcUvRu8X0wFAlqJs1QACgkQaVcUvRu8 >> X0xxkRAAj56QZYSxzDXiMyvM9eLdVS0Qrt9jiNa66rasIbDVciTym7WQoV2CXxM+ >> ZxaOCYU8eyxOhE1rx36KITJ7SgU6ugLu2dVZlG/QR8vH3RTqJPV/GWhM/WUAgaon >> f/SPwTIMk31qvEuKwlqLgNH1rwpRH2NfWVelZChwi1zXOglMvIHakV7sSedYy2i9 >> bmVvf/1ylj/NbaI6FaLUqg81UQhUulD8RYeZi1cyxSpit/4aysP7ixCb4MLizmwH >> uNUO0y//xxL0hMSShmfTlsPXowU+NpkzV+lFQ/k2X4KcCZWMabfCt69TdyTbYlj5 >> ai8oFGNI94Tv6rrzR/Rirfl/eODtdaaeNqyg/MBze6hYpS2w2oezOEmdYvlpJ7Xo >> z0fN/vIus1SeeyIKWo4KYHZYRX6g2nTCUeGYJqvCIRVxS9UJsy45C/HlnIWTtedn >> Dyp9O/0aSDhY+ErPQi64+HloZrY7p+KsCzPNc9HdzLbhnfM5IUn2TmO+qHngBSlY >> zGNfpOsBmmllSuBftWDfiayh8C9sBUpGT9693iyQYXPIwjZkQSHAclDZa7naN3Oy >> NKQaqVOsDmgDDP9xVOyr/Aue3jQk/8QHraM5DgO05L6lXHwdm+rjIdbb7CU2rFF7 >> Gl14+kSFP7yufRQiS6Gt96eN4ePxSuD7XjiT/9GicztDXypNeX8= >> =KRiO >> -END PGP SIGNATURE- >> ___ >> devel-announce mailing list -- devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org >> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-announce-le...@lists.fed >> oraproject.org >> ___ >> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org >> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org >> >> ___ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
done: procps-ng, psmisc, psacct On 02/18/2018 06:09 PM, Igor Gnatenko wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Over this weekend I've performed scratch-mass-rebuild without having gcc and gcc-c++ in buildroot of all Fedora packages, many of which failed due to random reasons and I grepped all logs for some common errors found by analyzing hundreds of build logs. Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:C_and_C%2B%2B#BuildRequire s_and_Requies The grep output is located here: https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal.txt Some packages might be missed due to short koji outage, broken dependencies and so on, but majority of real failures is below. If you fixed package(s), found false positive, found missing packages in list or anything else -- please let me know. Note to packages which use CMake buildsystem. When you have project(xxx) in CMakeLists.txt it checks both for C and CXX compilers. So you might encounter packages where you have BuildRequires: gcc and it fails on CXX compiler (even you think you don't need it). Solution for this is to send patch to upstream switching to something like project(xxx C), or if problem is opposite to project(xxx CXX). List of packages and respective maintainers: https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal-pkgs.txt - -- - -Igor Gnatenko -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEhLFO09aHZVqO+CM6aVcUvRu8X0wFAlqJs1QACgkQaVcUvRu8 X0xxkRAAj56QZYSxzDXiMyvM9eLdVS0Qrt9jiNa66rasIbDVciTym7WQoV2CXxM+ ZxaOCYU8eyxOhE1rx36KITJ7SgU6ugLu2dVZlG/QR8vH3RTqJPV/GWhM/WUAgaon f/SPwTIMk31qvEuKwlqLgNH1rwpRH2NfWVelZChwi1zXOglMvIHakV7sSedYy2i9 bmVvf/1ylj/NbaI6FaLUqg81UQhUulD8RYeZi1cyxSpit/4aysP7ixCb4MLizmwH uNUO0y//xxL0hMSShmfTlsPXowU+NpkzV+lFQ/k2X4KcCZWMabfCt69TdyTbYlj5 ai8oFGNI94Tv6rrzR/Rirfl/eODtdaaeNqyg/MBze6hYpS2w2oezOEmdYvlpJ7Xo z0fN/vIus1SeeyIKWo4KYHZYRX6g2nTCUeGYJqvCIRVxS9UJsy45C/HlnIWTtedn Dyp9O/0aSDhY+ErPQi64+HloZrY7p+KsCzPNc9HdzLbhnfM5IUn2TmO+qHngBSlY zGNfpOsBmmllSuBftWDfiayh8C9sBUpGT9693iyQYXPIwjZkQSHAclDZa7naN3Oy NKQaqVOsDmgDDP9xVOyr/Aue3jQk/8QHraM5DgO05L6lXHwdm+rjIdbb7CU2rFF7 Gl14+kSFP7yufRQiS6Gt96eN4ePxSuD7XjiT/9GicztDXypNeX8= =KRiO -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ devel-announce mailing list -- devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-announce-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
Hi, I fixed all my packages. my package list: google-noto-emoji-fonts ibus-libpinyin ibus-libzhuyin ibus-pinyin ibus-rime libpinyin librime libthai opencc pyzy scim scim-bridge scim-fcitx scim-pinyin scim-thai sunpinyin zinnia Thanks, Peng Wu On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 1:09 AM, Igor Gnatenko < ignatenkobr...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA256 > > Over this weekend I've performed scratch-mass-rebuild without having gcc > and > gcc-c++ in buildroot of all Fedora packages, many of which failed due to > random > reasons and I grepped all logs for some common errors found by analyzing > hundreds of build logs. > > Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:C_and_C%2B%2B# > BuildRequire > s_and_Requies > > The grep output is located here: > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal.txt > > Some packages might be missed due to short koji outage, broken > dependencies and > so on, but majority of real failures is below. > > If you fixed package(s), found false positive, found missing packages in > list > or anything else -- please let me know. > > Note to packages which use CMake buildsystem. When you have project(xxx) in > CMakeLists.txt it checks both for C and CXX compilers. So you might > encounter > packages where you have BuildRequires: gcc and it fails on CXX compiler > (even > you think you don't need it). Solution for this is to send patch to > upstream > switching to something like project(xxx C), or if problem is opposite to > project(xxx CXX). > > List of packages and respective maintainers: > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal-pkgs.txt > > - -- > - -Igor Gnatenko > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- > > iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEhLFO09aHZVqO+CM6aVcUvRu8X0wFAlqJs1QACgkQaVcUvRu8 > X0xxkRAAj56QZYSxzDXiMyvM9eLdVS0Qrt9jiNa66rasIbDVciTym7WQoV2CXxM+ > ZxaOCYU8eyxOhE1rx36KITJ7SgU6ugLu2dVZlG/QR8vH3RTqJPV/GWhM/WUAgaon > f/SPwTIMk31qvEuKwlqLgNH1rwpRH2NfWVelZChwi1zXOglMvIHakV7sSedYy2i9 > bmVvf/1ylj/NbaI6FaLUqg81UQhUulD8RYeZi1cyxSpit/4aysP7ixCb4MLizmwH > uNUO0y//xxL0hMSShmfTlsPXowU+NpkzV+lFQ/k2X4KcCZWMabfCt69TdyTbYlj5 > ai8oFGNI94Tv6rrzR/Rirfl/eODtdaaeNqyg/MBze6hYpS2w2oezOEmdYvlpJ7Xo > z0fN/vIus1SeeyIKWo4KYHZYRX6g2nTCUeGYJqvCIRVxS9UJsy45C/HlnIWTtedn > Dyp9O/0aSDhY+ErPQi64+HloZrY7p+KsCzPNc9HdzLbhnfM5IUn2TmO+qHngBSlY > zGNfpOsBmmllSuBftWDfiayh8C9sBUpGT9693iyQYXPIwjZkQSHAclDZa7naN3Oy > NKQaqVOsDmgDDP9xVOyr/Aue3jQk/8QHraM5DgO05L6lXHwdm+rjIdbb7CU2rFF7 > Gl14+kSFP7yufRQiS6Gt96eN4ePxSuD7XjiT/9GicztDXypNeX8= > =KRiO > -END PGP SIGNATURE- > ___ > devel-announce mailing list -- devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-announce-leave@lists. > fedoraproject.org > ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
- Original Message - > From: "Igor Gnatenko" > To: devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2018 6:09:40 PM > Subject: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++ > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA256 > > Over this weekend I've performed scratch-mass-rebuild without having gcc and > gcc-c++ in buildroot of all Fedora packages, many of which failed due to > random > reasons and I grepped all logs for some common errors found by analyzing > hundreds of build logs. > > Guidelines: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:C_and_C%2B%2B#BuildRequire > s_and_Requies > > The grep output is located here: > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal.txt > > Some packages might be missed due to short koji outage, broken dependencies > and > so on, but majority of real failures is below. > > If you fixed package(s), found false positive, found missing packages in list > or anything else -- please let me know. > > Note to packages which use CMake buildsystem. When you have project(xxx) in > CMakeLists.txt it checks both for C and CXX compilers. So you might encounter > packages where you have BuildRequires: gcc and it fails on CXX compiler (even > you think you don't need it). Solution for this is to send patch to upstream > switching to something like project(xxx C), or if problem is opposite to > project(xxx CXX). > > List of packages and respective maintainers: > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal-pkgs.txt > > - -- > - -Igor Gnatenko > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- > > iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEhLFO09aHZVqO+CM6aVcUvRu8X0wFAlqJs1QACgkQaVcUvRu8 > X0xxkRAAj56QZYSxzDXiMyvM9eLdVS0Qrt9jiNa66rasIbDVciTym7WQoV2CXxM+ > ZxaOCYU8eyxOhE1rx36KITJ7SgU6ugLu2dVZlG/QR8vH3RTqJPV/GWhM/WUAgaon > f/SPwTIMk31qvEuKwlqLgNH1rwpRH2NfWVelZChwi1zXOglMvIHakV7sSedYy2i9 > bmVvf/1ylj/NbaI6FaLUqg81UQhUulD8RYeZi1cyxSpit/4aysP7ixCb4MLizmwH > uNUO0y//xxL0hMSShmfTlsPXowU+NpkzV+lFQ/k2X4KcCZWMabfCt69TdyTbYlj5 > ai8oFGNI94Tv6rrzR/Rirfl/eODtdaaeNqyg/MBze6hYpS2w2oezOEmdYvlpJ7Xo > z0fN/vIus1SeeyIKWo4KYHZYRX6g2nTCUeGYJqvCIRVxS9UJsy45C/HlnIWTtedn > Dyp9O/0aSDhY+ErPQi64+HloZrY7p+KsCzPNc9HdzLbhnfM5IUn2TmO+qHngBSlY > zGNfpOsBmmllSuBftWDfiayh8C9sBUpGT9693iyQYXPIwjZkQSHAclDZa7naN3Oy > NKQaqVOsDmgDDP9xVOyr/Aue3jQk/8QHraM5DgO05L6lXHwdm+rjIdbb7CU2rFF7 > Gl14+kSFP7yufRQiS6Gt96eN4ePxSuD7XjiT/9GicztDXypNeX8= > =KRiO > -END PGP SIGNATURE- > ___ > devel-announce mailing list -- devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-announce-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > ___ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fixed for python-ethtool, python-peewee, python-protocols, qbittorrent python35 seems to be a false positive as it has gcc-c++ BR's (but it may be redundant and only require gcc). -- Regards, Charalampos Stratakis Software Engineer Python Maintenance Team, Red Hat ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 10:09 AM, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > If you fixed package(s), found false positive, found missing packages in list > or anything else -- please let me know. Fixed: abc, gnofract4d, libedit, lrslib. The abe package does not actually need a C++ compiler for building on Linux. The configure script does check for a C++ compiler, for use with XCode on OS X. But only a C compiler is ever invoked on non-OS X platforms. This should be considered a false positive. The flocq and gappalib-coq packages share build-related files with several other projects by the same upstream. These two packages contain no C or C++ code, only coq proof files and a bit of ocaml code. One could argue that upstream should not bother checking for a C++ compiler in projects that contain no C++ code, but I will bet that upstream's response will be that it keeps things simpler to share configure scripts, etc., across all of the projects he maintains. I don't know why I am listed as being associated with the perl-Text-Aspell package. I haven't been a maintainer since 2011. In fact, I retired that package once Regards, -- Jerry James http://www.jamezone.org/ ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
fixed in sox, passwd, and usermode ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
Le mercredi 28 février 2018 à 21:11 -0500, Orcan Ogetbil a écrit : > On 28 February 2018 at 10:03, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > > Le 2018-02-28 15:28, Orcan Ogetbil a écrit : > > > > > > On 28 February 2018 at 09:19, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > > > > > > > These are all _very_ edge use-cases. > > > > > > Those are *not* edge-cases. > > We have a few thousand build failures. If you cannot find as many (or > at least in the same magnitude) such use case examples these will stay > as edge cases. > > Please start counting. Apart from being a totally unfriendly attitude (I have more packages that you, so I can piss on your builds) I *do* have more than 570 Go specs that would be negatively affected by pulling gcc in the buildroot for no good reason just to avoid fixing the specs that actually need this. And I'm just one packager. -- Nicolas Mailhot ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On 28 February 2018 at 11:37, Björn Persson wrote: > Orcan Ogetbil wrote: >> Shouldn't we consider having -devel packages Require gcc or gcc-c++? >> What good is a header package without a compiler anyway? >> This would also (indirectly) pull in the compiler and fix most of >> these failed builds. > > Do you mean that maintainers should add those dependencies manually? > How much less manual work would that be compared to adding build-time > dependencies? > > Or do you mean that RPMbuild should automatically add "gcc" as a > dependency to every subpackage whose name ends with "-devel"? That would > be no help at all for Ada, C++, Fortran, Go or Objective C, which need > gcc-gnat, gcc-c++, gcc-gfortran, gcc-go and gcc-objc, respectively. It > would be plainly wrong for Pascal for example, according to the > dependencies of the package fpc which requires binutils but not gcc. > > Or do you mean that RPMbuild should automatically detect which > programming languages are present in each -devel subpackage, and add > dependencies accordingly? > > Björn Persson > Hi Bjorn, thank you for the brainstorm. Of course the last option would be ideal. However I don't think we have the tools to collect the necessary information (it would indeed be useful information), maybe we could concentrate on adding capability to collect such statistics to the builder. What I meant was the first option (from experience). How much less manual work would that be? Well, add the requires to some top level devel files, e.g. glibc-devel, zlib-devel, libxcb-devel, alsa-lib-devel etc; and a decent amount of the build failures above will clear. Then one can deal with the remaining libraries/applications, again starting from the top level ones. I am guessing all related build failures will clear after no more than a few hundred added requires, compared to thousands of BuildRequires. Regards, Orcan ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Re: Re: Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On 28 February 2018 at 10:03, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > Le 2018-02-28 15:28, Orcan Ogetbil a écrit : >> >> On 28 February 2018 at 09:19, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > > >> These are all _very_ edge use-cases. > > > Those are *not* edge-cases. We have a few thousand build failures. If you cannot find as many (or at least in the same magnitude) such use case examples these will stay as edge cases. Please start counting. Best, Orcan ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
> "OO" == Orcan Ogetbil writes: OO> Shouldn't we consider having -devel packages Require gcc or gcc-c++? OO> What good is a header package without a compiler anyway? You could argue whether they're useful without a compiler, but they are certainly useful without gcc. Because that's not the only compiler. - J< ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On Wed, 2018-02-28 at 16:51 +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote: > > Dne 18.2.2018 v 18:09 Igor Gnatenko napsal(a): > > > > List of packages and respective maintainers: > > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal-pkgs.txt > > Igor, you will fix my packages isn't it ? Thanks, -- Sérgio M. B. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
Orcan Ogetbil wrote: > Shouldn't we consider having -devel packages Require gcc or gcc-c++? > What good is a header package without a compiler anyway? > This would also (indirectly) pull in the compiler and fix most of > these failed builds. Do you mean that maintainers should add those dependencies manually? How much less manual work would that be compared to adding build-time dependencies? Or do you mean that RPMbuild should automatically add "gcc" as a dependency to every subpackage whose name ends with "-devel"? That would be no help at all for Ada, C++, Fortran, Go or Objective C, which need gcc-gnat, gcc-c++, gcc-gfortran, gcc-go and gcc-objc, respectively. It would be plainly wrong for Pascal for example, according to the dependencies of the package fpc which requires binutils but not gcc. Or do you mean that RPMbuild should automatically detect which programming languages are present in each -devel subpackage, and add dependencies accordingly? Björn Persson pgpMNj_KbQBL0.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signatur ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
Dne 18.2.2018 v 18:09 Igor Gnatenko napsal(a): > > List of packages and respective maintainers: > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal-pkgs.txt > xchat-ruby was retired. ruby and rubygem-bcrypt are fixed (at least in git). Vít signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Re: Re: Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
Le 2018-02-28 16:03, Nicolas Mailhot a écrit : Most system libraries are written in C/C++ so pretty much all the language toolchains we ship (except for toy languages not intended to produce complex apps) will read C/C++ header files from their compilers to use those system libraries, and will BuildRequires the corresponding C/C++ package to do so. the corresponding C/C++ -devel package that is Even forgetting about clang a C/C++ -devel package is *not* used solely to build C/C++ code with a C/C++ compiler. -- Nicolas Mailhot ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Re: Re: Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
Le 2018-02-28 15:28, Orcan Ogetbil a écrit : On 28 February 2018 at 09:19, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: These are all _very_ edge use-cases. Those are *not* edge-cases. Most system libraries are written in C/C++ so pretty much all the language toolchains we ship (except for toy languages not intended to produce complex apps) will read C/C++ header files from their compilers to use those system libraries, and will BuildRequires the corresponding C/C++ package to do so. -- Nicolas Mailhot ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On 02/18/2018 07:09 PM, Igor Gnatenko wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Over this weekend I've performed scratch-mass-rebuild without having gcc and gcc-c++ in buildroot of all Fedora packages, many of which failed due to random reasons and I grepped all logs for some common errors found by analyzing hundreds of build logs. Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:C_and_C%2B%2B#BuildRequire s_and_Requies The grep output is located here: https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal.txt jussilehtola IQmol OpenMesh PyQuante QMsgBox QsLog agedu cppcheck dd_rescue ddrescue epson-inkjet-printer-escpr epstool ergo gle gsl libint multitail octave packmol pcc potrace I've taken care of all of these. -- Susi Lehtola Fedora Project Contributor jussileht...@fedoraproject.org ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Re: Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On 02/28/2018 04:28 PM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote: On 28 February 2018 at 09:19, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: My point was *non-C-compilers* can read *C/C++* header files because they need to read the ABI definitions to use it from their non C/C++ code. That makes a C/C++ header file consumable by pretty much any kind of compiler, so it's *completely useless* to try to make C/C++ devel packages pull in a compiler, via virtual provides or not. Hello, These are all _very_ edge use-cases. The primary use is to build the software. Hence pulling in a compiler will not be quite harmful; it is certainly not *completely useless*. On the other hand it will clear up vast majority of the build failures. I was trying to come up with the least intrusive solution. The headers don't *require* any damn thing, except perhaps other headers (from other -devel packages). They are generally *used by* C/C++ compilers, but there are all sorts of other users (including humans just looking at it) too as has been pointed out. Point being, "used by" and "requires" are two very different kind of dependencies. - Panu - ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On 02/28/2018 11:28 AM, Rafal Luzynski wrote: 28.02.2018 09:33 Nicolas Mailhot wrote: Le mercredi 28 février 2018 à 00:11 -0500, Orcan Ogetbil a écrit : Shouldn't we consider having -devel packages Require gcc or gcc-c++? What good is a header package without a compiler anyway? This would also (indirectly) pull in the compiler and fix most of these failed builds. gcc is not the only compiler that reads header files Also, do the header files actually *require* gcc to be present? No. C headers never require *GCC*. Packages wanting to use them need an arbitrary C compiler. Ralf ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Re: Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On 28 February 2018 at 09:19, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > My point was *non-C-compilers* can read *C/C++* header files because they > need to read the ABI definitions to use it from their non C/C++ code. > > That makes a C/C++ header file consumable by pretty much any kind of > compiler, so it's *completely useless* to try to make C/C++ devel packages > pull in a compiler, via virtual provides or not. Hello, These are all _very_ edge use-cases. The primary use is to build the software. Hence pulling in a compiler will not be quite harmful; it is certainly not *completely useless*. On the other hand it will clear up vast majority of the build failures. I was trying to come up with the least intrusive solution. Best, Orcan ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Re: Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
My point was *non-C-compilers* can read *C/C++* header files because they need to read the ABI definitions to use it from their non C/C++ code. That makes a C/C++ header file consumable by pretty much any kind of compiler, so it's *completely useless* to try to make C/C++ devel packages pull in a compiler, via virtual provides or not. Only the packager knows the compiler he intends to use to consume the devel packages of other projects. -- Nicolas Mailhot ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On 28 February 2018 at 05:28, Rafal Luzynski wrote: > 28.02.2018 09:33 Nicolas Mailhot wrote: >> >> Le mercredi 28 février 2018 à 00:11 -0500, Orcan Ogetbil a écrit : >> > >> > Shouldn't we consider having -devel packages Require gcc or gcc-c++? >> > What good is a header package without a compiler anyway? >> > This would also (indirectly) pull in the compiler and fix most of >> > these failed builds. >> > >> >> gcc is not the only compiler that reads header files > > Also, do the header files actually *require* gcc to be present? > I know it makes sense to have both installed but there are potential > use cases where a user may need only the devel packages but not gcc: > > - abrt may need devel packages to generate readable stack traces, > - a user may use a different compiler than gcc (e.g., compat-gcc-34). Hi, All of these use cases can be handled by some virtual provides. My suggestion didn't intend to be specific to gcc. I guess I should have said something like Requires: . Best, Orcan ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
28.02.2018 09:33 Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > > Le mercredi 28 février 2018 à 00:11 -0500, Orcan Ogetbil a écrit : > > > > Shouldn't we consider having -devel packages Require gcc or gcc-c++? > > What good is a header package without a compiler anyway? > > This would also (indirectly) pull in the compiler and fix most of > > these failed builds. > > > > gcc is not the only compiler that reads header files Also, do the header files actually *require* gcc to be present? I know it makes sense to have both installed but there are potential use cases where a user may need only the devel packages but not gcc: - abrt may need devel packages to generate readable stack traces, - a user may use a different compiler than gcc (e.g., compat-gcc-34). Regards, Rafal ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
Le mercredi 28 février 2018 à 00:11 -0500, Orcan Ogetbil a écrit : > > Shouldn't we consider having -devel packages Require gcc or gcc-c++? > What good is a header package without a compiler anyway? > This would also (indirectly) pull in the compiler and fix most of > these failed builds. > gcc is not the only compiler that reads header files Regards, -- Nicolas Mailhot ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On 18 February 2018 at 12:09, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > Over this weekend I've performed scratch-mass-rebuild without having gcc and > gcc-c++ in buildroot of all Fedora packages, many of which failed due to > random > reasons and I grepped all logs for some common errors found by analyzing > hundreds of build logs. > > Guidelines: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:C_and_C%2B%2B#BuildRequire > s_and_Requies Shouldn't we consider having -devel packages Require gcc or gcc-c++? What good is a header package without a compiler anyway? This would also (indirectly) pull in the compiler and fix most of these failed builds. Best, Orcan ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
Better late then never, vsqlite++ updated and rebuilt On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 6:12 PM, Nathanael D. Noblet wrote: > On Mon, 2018-02-26 at 11:09 +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > On Mon, 2018-02-26 at 10:47 +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote: > > > Will you be doing such rebuild every weekend to track the progress? > > > ;) > > > > My plan is to do this bi-weekly ;) So this weekend then. > > Hello, > > So I made a fix for clamsmtp, and pushed it to master. However its in > your list with the error: > > clamsmtp:/mnt/koji/work/tasks/4870/64870/build.log:checking for cc... > no > > Here's the latest change (minus release bump and changelog) I had made > to the spec file: > > diff --git a/clamsmtp.spec b/clamsmtp.spec > index 4ed326e..776b0d8 100644 > -BuildRequires: clamav-devel > -BuildRequires: systemd-units > +BuildRequires: clamav-devel gcc gcc-c++ systemd-units > + > Requires(pre): shadow-utils > Requires(post): systemd-sysv > > > What did I do wrong/miss? > > -- > Nathanael > > > ___ > > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > ___ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On Mon, 2018-02-26 at 11:09 +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > On Mon, 2018-02-26 at 10:47 +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote: > > Will you be doing such rebuild every weekend to track the progress? > > ;) > > My plan is to do this bi-weekly ;) So this weekend then. Hello, So I made a fix for clamsmtp, and pushed it to master. However its in your list with the error: clamsmtp:/mnt/koji/work/tasks/4870/64870/build.log:checking for cc... no Here's the latest change (minus release bump and changelog) I had made to the spec file: diff --git a/clamsmtp.spec b/clamsmtp.spec index 4ed326e..776b0d8 100644 -BuildRequires: clamav-devel -BuildRequires: systemd-units +BuildRequires: clamav-devel gcc gcc-c++ systemd-units + Requires(pre): shadow-utils Requires(post): systemd-sysv What did I do wrong/miss? -- Nathanael > ___ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
Fixed smaclient. Att. -- Rafael Fonseca ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
Hi, Le 18/02/2018 à 18:09, Igor Gnatenko a écrit : If you fixed package(s), found false positive, found missing packages in list or anything else -- please let me know. I've fixed : nsca openalchemist perl-Encode-EUCJPASCII perl-Linux-Pid perl-Unicode-LineBreak toppler Regards, Xavier ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
Hi, Le 18/02/2018 à 18:09, Igor Gnatenko a écrit : If you fixed package(s), found false positive, found missing packages in list or anything else -- please let me know. I fixed : nsca openalchemist perl-Encode-EUCJPASCII perl-Linux-Pid perl-Unicode-LineBreak toppler Regards, Xavier ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Mon, 2018-02-26 at 10:47 +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote: > Will you be doing such rebuild every weekend to track the progress? > ;) My plan is to do this bi-weekly ;) So this weekend then. - -- - -Igor Gnatenko -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEhLFO09aHZVqO+CM6aVcUvRu8X0wFAlqT3OkACgkQaVcUvRu8 X0xg4w/+LzcLBqe3eEhfWMK6pALA41hAuurh9i9Q3sF8A3KAj5p69aCESdRka10E E7U+S1h3fjAzsnhb2aOpgm6y5qCzd2CsnV4J+7gTJtX5+jPxc75NMd9jd9XFC8QF 1Knq1ORdKguDJkuny8MfZwg3NKOtMyVIZFbVexRDyGy9lYJp9QvANEYj51vTcTRA gMps0w4thxTgaVxfB0VYhSyUeXjfIvCCfRCfZ1ihhogLN3bRMwNSMhRG41fRlO+I BfulxnqTsRFMWzch9CJhpSJl4Tp3tBWjpeCqvmBholANyBlRQdWG3MqmnGjIYZ1N ww51l/fJXQ6R62OigevTPCTiLRiu6hKJSOmxOrOuVS4yHLBgtFqKlR04zWQY73pu oNb8W04bOOkVXCfsQke0oHxLXy9XAONuRXLOzhggmKtR364HRSUmeP07KwvQ4qxo dG1kqXQ+KXHYOjx5AYQ+1QZJ8HHWnvU1XchwfGluXmwPE7VcfwPL3j3zgzjd8ngO DhUrvJpGmBfKH6z+XsIs88Z9WsHnttyTlDoKHcFk72hAIV/4owCJ04NrdPgBeT2s 2XKCrwD3n+eBDcSjaR8TDFyfqRb74+sRTOcsRZCPaKwoBIqi4GagCe9VQFSPUlW4 ELIMgxLK9DrCxG0GgevEE9E9OpYFKwoS+N8O4lmGRtHUBLzcObA= =pfKh -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
Will you be doing such rebuild every weekend to track the progress? ;) V. Dne 18.2.2018 v 18:09 Igor Gnatenko napsal(a): > Over this weekend I've performed scratch-mass-rebuild without having > gcc and > gcc-c++ in buildroot of all Fedora packages, many of which failed due > to random > reasons and I grepped all logs for some common errors found by analyzing > hundreds of build logs. > > Guidelines: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:C_and_C%2B%2B#BuildRequire > s_and_Requies > > The grep output is located here: > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal.txt > > Some packages might be missed due to short koji outage, broken > dependencies and > so on, but majority of real failures is below. > > If you fixed package(s), found false positive, found missing packages > in list > or anything else -- please let me know. > > Note to packages which use CMake buildsystem. When you have > project(xxx) in > CMakeLists.txt it checks both for C and CXX compilers. So you might > encounter > packages where you have BuildRequires: gcc and it fails on CXX > compiler (even > you think you don't need it). Solution for this is to send patch to > upstream > switching to something like project(xxx C), or if problem is opposite to > project(xxx CXX). > > List of packages and respective maintainers: > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal-pkgs.txt > > ___ > devel-announce mailing list > -- devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-announce-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > ___ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 10:09 AM, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA256 > > Over this weekend I've performed scratch-mass-rebuild without having gcc and > gcc-c++ in buildroot of all Fedora packages, many of which failed due to > random > reasons and I grepped all logs for some common errors found by analyzing > hundreds of build logs. > > Guidelines: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:C_and_C%2B%2B#BuildRequire > s_and_Requies > > The grep output is located here: > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal.txt > > Some packages might be missed due to short koji outage, broken dependencies > and > so on, but majority of real failures is below. > > If you fixed package(s), found false positive, found missing packages in list > or anything else -- please let me know. > > Note to packages which use CMake buildsystem. When you have project(xxx) in > CMakeLists.txt it checks both for C and CXX compilers. So you might encounter > packages where you have BuildRequires: gcc and it fails on CXX compiler (even > you think you don't need it). Solution for this is to send patch to upstream > switching to something like project(xxx C), or if problem is opposite to > project(xxx CXX). > > List of packages and respective maintainers: > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal-pkgs.txt I just fixed espresso exodusii gasnet libaec tng votca-csg votca-tools! gromacs and votca-xtp have the fix, but they fail to build for a different reason. > > - -- > - -Igor Gnatenko > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- > > iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEhLFO09aHZVqO+CM6aVcUvRu8X0wFAlqJs1QACgkQaVcUvRu8 > X0xxkRAAj56QZYSxzDXiMyvM9eLdVS0Qrt9jiNa66rasIbDVciTym7WQoV2CXxM+ > ZxaOCYU8eyxOhE1rx36KITJ7SgU6ugLu2dVZlG/QR8vH3RTqJPV/GWhM/WUAgaon > f/SPwTIMk31qvEuKwlqLgNH1rwpRH2NfWVelZChwi1zXOglMvIHakV7sSedYy2i9 > bmVvf/1ylj/NbaI6FaLUqg81UQhUulD8RYeZi1cyxSpit/4aysP7ixCb4MLizmwH > uNUO0y//xxL0hMSShmfTlsPXowU+NpkzV+lFQ/k2X4KcCZWMabfCt69TdyTbYlj5 > ai8oFGNI94Tv6rrzR/Rirfl/eODtdaaeNqyg/MBze6hYpS2w2oezOEmdYvlpJ7Xo > z0fN/vIus1SeeyIKWo4KYHZYRX6g2nTCUeGYJqvCIRVxS9UJsy45C/HlnIWTtedn > Dyp9O/0aSDhY+ErPQi64+HloZrY7p+KsCzPNc9HdzLbhnfM5IUn2TmO+qHngBSlY > zGNfpOsBmmllSuBftWDfiayh8C9sBUpGT9693iyQYXPIwjZkQSHAclDZa7naN3Oy > NKQaqVOsDmgDDP9xVOyr/Aue3jQk/8QHraM5DgO05L6lXHwdm+rjIdbb7CU2rFF7 > Gl14+kSFP7yufRQiS6Gt96eN4ePxSuD7XjiT/9GicztDXypNeX8= > =KRiO > -END PGP SIGNATURE- > ___ > devel-announce mailing list -- devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-announce-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org -- Christoph Junghans Web: http://www.compphys.de ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On Sat, 2018-02-24 at 16:40 +0100, Andrea Musuruane wrote: > Hi > > On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 6:09 PM, Igor Gnatenko project.org> wrote: > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > > Hash: SHA256 > > > > Over this weekend I've performed scratch-mass-rebuild without > > having gcc and > > gcc-c++ in buildroot of all Fedora packages, many of which failed > > due to random > > reasons and I grepped all logs for some common errors found by > > analyzing > > hundreds of build logs. > > > > [...] > > > > List of packages and respective maintainers: > > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal-pkgs.txt I fixed cups-bjnp while I released a new version earlier this week. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
I've fixed disktype, ncdu, and whowatch in rawhide. Thanks for generating the list! Regards, Rich -- Richard Fearn richardfe...@gmail.com ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
I fixed ipvsadm and keepalived. I will also fix foghorn, but I am strongly considering retiring this package. Did this need fixed in the 'f28' branch or is master (Rawhide) sufficient? Thanks. Ryan On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 11:09 AM, Igor Gnatenko < ignatenkobr...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA256 > > Over this weekend I've performed scratch-mass-rebuild without having gcc > and > gcc-c++ in buildroot of all Fedora packages, many of which failed due to > random > reasons and I grepped all logs for some common errors found by analyzing > hundreds of build logs. > > Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:C_and_C%2B%2B# > BuildRequire > s_and_Requies > > The grep output is located here: > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal.txt > > Some packages might be missed due to short koji outage, broken > dependencies and > so on, but majority of real failures is below. > > If you fixed package(s), found false positive, found missing packages in > list > or anything else -- please let me know. > > Note to packages which use CMake buildsystem. When you have project(xxx) in > CMakeLists.txt it checks both for C and CXX compilers. So you might > encounter > packages where you have BuildRequires: gcc and it fails on CXX compiler > (even > you think you don't need it). Solution for this is to send patch to > upstream > switching to something like project(xxx C), or if problem is opposite to > project(xxx CXX). > > List of packages and respective maintainers: > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal-pkgs.txt > > - -- > - -Igor Gnatenko > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- > > iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEhLFO09aHZVqO+CM6aVcUvRu8X0wFAlqJs1QACgkQaVcUvRu8 > X0xxkRAAj56QZYSxzDXiMyvM9eLdVS0Qrt9jiNa66rasIbDVciTym7WQoV2CXxM+ > ZxaOCYU8eyxOhE1rx36KITJ7SgU6ugLu2dVZlG/QR8vH3RTqJPV/GWhM/WUAgaon > f/SPwTIMk31qvEuKwlqLgNH1rwpRH2NfWVelZChwi1zXOglMvIHakV7sSedYy2i9 > bmVvf/1ylj/NbaI6FaLUqg81UQhUulD8RYeZi1cyxSpit/4aysP7ixCb4MLizmwH > uNUO0y//xxL0hMSShmfTlsPXowU+NpkzV+lFQ/k2X4KcCZWMabfCt69TdyTbYlj5 > ai8oFGNI94Tv6rrzR/Rirfl/eODtdaaeNqyg/MBze6hYpS2w2oezOEmdYvlpJ7Xo > z0fN/vIus1SeeyIKWo4KYHZYRX6g2nTCUeGYJqvCIRVxS9UJsy45C/HlnIWTtedn > Dyp9O/0aSDhY+ErPQi64+HloZrY7p+KsCzPNc9HdzLbhnfM5IUn2TmO+qHngBSlY > zGNfpOsBmmllSuBftWDfiayh8C9sBUpGT9693iyQYXPIwjZkQSHAclDZa7naN3Oy > NKQaqVOsDmgDDP9xVOyr/Aue3jQk/8QHraM5DgO05L6lXHwdm+rjIdbb7CU2rFF7 > Gl14+kSFP7yufRQiS6Gt96eN4ePxSuD7XjiT/9GicztDXypNeX8= > =KRiO > -END PGP SIGNATURE- > ___ > devel-announce mailing list -- devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-announce-leave@lists. > fedoraproject.org > ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On 02/21/2018 04:51 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: OK I understand that, but where is the cutoff. Where as a packager should I stop adding things and expect that libsolv is going to do its job? Do I need to put in BuildRequires: kernel BuildRequires: systemd BuildRequires: bash BuildRequires: glibc ... kernel and systemd do not actually have to be in the buildroot. systemd is needed only by some packages, I think, and the kernel probably never. It's like mock or dnf—just because it's used to drive the build, it doesn't necessarily have to be in the buildroot. bash and glibc are what Debian would call essential or build-essential. (I don't think we have a precise definition of that, though.) Thanks, Florian ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
Hi On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 6:09 PM, Igor Gnatenko < ignatenkobr...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA256 > > Over this weekend I've performed scratch-mass-rebuild without having gcc > and > gcc-c++ in buildroot of all Fedora packages, many of which failed due to > random > reasons and I grepped all logs for some common errors found by analyzing > hundreds of build logs. > > [...] > > List of packages and respective maintainers: > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal-pkgs.txt > I fixed mine: musuruan abbayedesmorts-gpl ballerburg edgar fbzx flobopuyo hatari libicns osmctools pinta pipepanic tecnoballz zaz Bye, Andrea ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
fixed g2clib and pyproj. Jos On 02/18/2018 06:09 PM, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > Over this weekend I've performed scratch-mass-rebuild without having gcc and > gcc-c++ in buildroot of all Fedora packages, many of which failed due to > random > reasons and I grepped all logs for some common errors found by analyzing > hundreds of build logs. > > Guidelines: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:C_and_C%2B%2B#BuildRequire > s_and_Requies > > The grep output is located here: > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal.txt > > Some packages might be missed due to short koji outage, broken dependencies > and > so on, but majority of real failures is below. > > If you fixed package(s), found false positive, found missing packages in list > or anything else -- please let me know. > > Note to packages which use CMake buildsystem. When you have project(xxx) in > CMakeLists.txt it checks both for C and CXX compilers. So you might encounter > packages where you have BuildRequires: gcc and it fails on CXX compiler (even > you think you don't need it). Solution for this is to send patch to upstream > switching to something like project(xxx C), or if problem is opposite to > project(xxx CXX). > > List of packages and respective maintainers: > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal-pkgs.txt > > ___ > devel-announce mailing list -- devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-announce-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
Hey, On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 6:09 PM, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > List of packages and respective maintainers: > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal-pkgs.txt Done: gnome-session gnome-shell-extensions(*) Cheers, Florian (*) accidentally, by changing build systems to meson which insists less on a cc dependency ... ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 06:09:40PM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > List of packages and respective maintainers: > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal-pkgs.txt > > adeltonmod_auth_openidc mod_authnz_pam mod_intercept_form_submit > mod_lookup_identity perl-Cache-Mmap perl-Crypt-DES perl-Sys-CPU I've updated and built mod_authnz_pam mod_intercept_form_submit mod_lookup_identity perl-Cache-Mmap perl-Crypt-DES I'm leaving mod_auth_openidc to John and perl-Sys-CPU to Emmanuel, as I don't want to step on their toes. -- Jan Pazdziora Senior Principal Software Engineer, OpenShift Security Team, Red Hat ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On 02/18/2018 06:09 PM, Igor Gnatenko wrote: The grep output is located here: https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal.txt fbset should be taken care of because I had to touch the package anyway, and it has seen few actual changes over the years. Thanks, Florian ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
> "SJS" == Stephen John Smoogen writes: SJS> OK this is a problem on my part. I have taken sections which have SJS> MUST/WILL/SHOULD in them to be done and I have taken ones without SJS> that as general guidance. Unfortunately the guidelines simply do not consistently capitalize SHOULD/MUST (and MAY, in the few places where it appears). New things should have the yelling legalese but older sections probably won't. I fix them when I come across them but it's sadly not as simple as running sed across the whole thing. I did fix up the specific example mentioned here. - J< ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On 22 February 2018 at 10:47, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 09:53:25AM -0500, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: >> I am trying to figure out the special cases here. Why are some >> packages more equal than others. >> >> In the end, I am just trying to figure out what the new "Fedora >> Project Packagers License" is. Something like: >> >> A packager MUST know every build requirement that their package uses >> to build itself. A packager MUST list each of these as a >> BuildRequires. A packager MUST not depend on dependencies to pull in >> those packages. > > "It is important that your package list all necessary build > dependencies using the BuildRequires: tag. You may assume that enough > of an environment exists for RPM to function, to build packages and > execute basic shell scripts, but you should not assume any other > packages are present as RPM dependencies and anything brought into the > buildroot by the build system may change over time." [1] > > This is not _too_ precise, but I think that's OK. It's pretty clear > that a compiler is not necessary "for RPM to function, to build packages > and execute basic shell scripts". > OK this is a problem on my part. I have taken sections which have MUST/WILL/SHOULD in them to be done and I have taken ones without that as general guidance. To me that section said it was ok to not list gcc-cc if you knew it had to be there gcc-c++ would have to pull it in. It is a should not a SHOULD and not a must or MUST. I will correct my reading of this from now on. > [1] > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Build-Time_Dependencies_.28BuildRequires.29 > > Zbyszek > ___ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org -- Stephen J Smoogen. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On Sun, 18 Feb 2018 18:09:40 +0100 Igor Gnatenko wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA256 > > Over this weekend I've performed scratch-mass-rebuild without having > gcc and gcc-c++ in buildroot of all Fedora packages, many of which > failed due to random reasons and I grepped all logs for some common > errors found by analyzing hundreds of build logs. > > Guidelines: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:C_and_C%2B%2B#BuildRequire > s_and_Requies > > The grep output is located here: > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal.txt > > Some packages might be missed due to short koji outage, broken > dependencies and so on, but majority of real failures is below. > > If you fixed package(s), found false positive, found missing packages > in list or anything else -- please let me know. Fixed: curl gtkwave gtorrentviewer mod_fcgid perl-B-Hooks-OP-Check perl-Crypt-IDEA perl-Date-Simple perl-Digest-MD4 perl-JSON-XS perl-MooseX-Role-WithOverloading perl-Readonly-XS perl-Variable-Magic perl-perl5i perl-true Won't need fixing if perl-ExtUtils-CBuilder grows a dependency on gcc (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1547165): perl-ExtUtils-CChecker perl-File-LibMagic perl-Hash-StoredIterator perl-Module-Build-XSUtil perl-Time-y2038 Paul. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 09:53:25AM -0500, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > I am trying to figure out the special cases here. Why are some > packages more equal than others. > > In the end, I am just trying to figure out what the new "Fedora > Project Packagers License" is. Something like: > > A packager MUST know every build requirement that their package uses > to build itself. A packager MUST list each of these as a > BuildRequires. A packager MUST not depend on dependencies to pull in > those packages. "It is important that your package list all necessary build dependencies using the BuildRequires: tag. You may assume that enough of an environment exists for RPM to function, to build packages and execute basic shell scripts, but you should not assume any other packages are present as RPM dependencies and anything brought into the buildroot by the build system may change over time." [1] This is not _too_ precise, but I think that's OK. It's pretty clear that a compiler is not necessary "for RPM to function, to build packages and execute basic shell scripts". [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Build-Time_Dependencies_.28BuildRequires.29 Zbyszek ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On 22 February 2018 at 02:41, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA256 > > On Wed, 2018-02-21 at 10:51 -0500, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: >> On 21 February 2018 at 09:53, Reindl Harald >> wrote: >> > >> > >> > it's pretty easy: >> > >> > when you don't list your BuildRequires properly you depend on luck >> > that they >> > are pulled by something else in the buildroot >> > >> >> OK I understand that, but where is the cutoff. Where as a packager >> should I stop adding things and expect that libsolv is going to do >> its >> job? Do I need to put in >> >> BuildRequires: kernel >> BuildRequires: systemd >> BuildRequires: bash >> BuildRequires: glibc >> ... >> >> I am depending on luck to get all of those in the environment in a >> working variant. I can understand where defining all that would be >> useful. I just don't want to spend the next year doing this one by >> one >> like a death by a thousand papercuts. It would also be a better use >> of >> the time to have a tool which generated all N dozen items. > > No, you don't need kernel/systemd/glibc for build. You do need bash, > but this is special case without which RPM wouldn't work. So you are > not expected to list those in any case. I am trying to figure out the special cases here. Why are some packages more equal than others. In the end, I am just trying to figure out what the new "Fedora Project Packagers License" is. Something like: A packager MUST know every build requirement that their package uses to build itself. A packager MUST list each of these as a BuildRequires. A packager MUST not depend on dependencies to pull in those packages. That would have made this a lot clearer to me earlier on. -- Stephen J Smoogen. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Wed, 2018-02-21 at 10:51 -0500, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > On 21 February 2018 at 09:53, Reindl Harald > wrote: > > > > > > it's pretty easy: > > > > when you don't list your BuildRequires properly you depend on luck > > that they > > are pulled by something else in the buildroot > > > > OK I understand that, but where is the cutoff. Where as a packager > should I stop adding things and expect that libsolv is going to do > its > job? Do I need to put in > > BuildRequires: kernel > BuildRequires: systemd > BuildRequires: bash > BuildRequires: glibc > ... > > I am depending on luck to get all of those in the environment in a > working variant. I can understand where defining all that would be > useful. I just don't want to spend the next year doing this one by > one > like a death by a thousand papercuts. It would also be a better use > of > the time to have a tool which generated all N dozen items. No, you don't need kernel/systemd/glibc for build. You do need bash, but this is special case without which RPM wouldn't work. So you are not expected to list those in any case. > > on the other hand there is no point to have GCC in the buildroot > > when you as > > exmaple build phpMyAdmin which is just a bunch of textfiles > > I understand that clearly. What I don't understand is if if gcc-c++ > always pulls in gcc-cc.. why do I need to add that to my manifest? > What is the point of having a libsolver if I have to define what > those > things must depend upon to work? Ask yourself following questions: Do I use g++ myself? Do I use gcc myself? If answer is yes and yes, then list both. If your tool uses just g++, but there is something else inside using gcc, you just list gcc-c++. - -- Igor Gnatenko -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEhLFO09aHZVqO+CM6aVcUvRu8X0wFAlqOdDQACgkQaVcUvRu8 X0w9/A/+ONHdx5yTYpVC+kgUHwHSaCv1mfDCZXgoCTQ8kHM8EQvUx2zzsfxmernm kp4xsSHomVmDQ+ftWNV3Qm/ULK7ReQRvjf0JMdtnoK0iLGGOSH1fp8tEtUq3Xnn4 HoWT4pPwIQun+fF3fnd2oJoudCOu9Yrb9o9s3TQhHRSdYxOpCn8Wmv70sum8ulon V0y8g+BqTM5izl/bg/a9bSo7hXlJEk6ohYQgag0eKA1vBIqGE8WaqiopDXEJMLBz 0C1wQEjogsnqfbVZVj4+9ZN6x9rvcyz6OMxy5z6oObnLlMvPfmfq3DfA/bu1ABcq O01eMoio5EYKmRKd1XBhbqZ7+43tot32OTOEwTaUcs3a6XR+BUnzaSDN1EnTWTh5 sCgo/men1psu+og0hqaJkf8UqcWyPzvv01f5WMQxAZyzC3yCNfeCm5P0AGaUcMnp qesi8kNUkTWkB3YNtoWNoslDLexAbMO/yEXpq4Co+eVkKECsZRvBd3AHS5QH+Ot/ 4C1jjR8HbFq59Ki8nNTouk17Nup1WwNp7iSrPAjsUxkpXWOLFIlfidnzXByvqq0i tjaBagqrk22bKaxlroZpF2y2fxmPHypXIUeCiyPllkDIWGgpuXK5CYUzJpykRtzK E6DxHV6jYHqeMX7/H6KrvlcC1dwhE6M7r32f20U3HDqs6SPnLuw= =gLQH -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On 21 February 2018 at 09:53, Reindl Harald wrote: > > > it's pretty easy: > > when you don't list your BuildRequires properly you depend on luck that they > are pulled by something else in the buildroot > OK I understand that, but where is the cutoff. Where as a packager should I stop adding things and expect that libsolv is going to do its job? Do I need to put in BuildRequires: kernel BuildRequires: systemd BuildRequires: bash BuildRequires: glibc ... I am depending on luck to get all of those in the environment in a working variant. I can understand where defining all that would be useful. I just don't want to spend the next year doing this one by one like a death by a thousand papercuts. It would also be a better use of the time to have a tool which generated all N dozen items. > on the other hand there is no point to have GCC in the buildroot when you as > exmaple build phpMyAdmin which is just a bunch of textfiles I understand that clearly. What I don't understand is if if gcc-c++ always pulls in gcc-cc.. why do I need to add that to my manifest? What is the point of having a libsolver if I have to define what those things must depend upon to work? -- Stephen J Smoogen. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
Le 2018-02-21 15:28, Stephen John Smoogen a écrit : I guess the problem I am having is I have no idea what we are "fixing". It all seems like needless form filling for no benefit. If XYZ-a is always going to pull in ABC.. why are we are explicitely saying we need ABC. Is the end goal to have every package that could be in the build root at the time of building be explicitely there? [AKA get rid of the build root?] The aim is to have a minimal build root, which is sufficient to interpret spec files and pull in language-specific compilers as need, not to have every compiler Fedora ships in the default build root just in case it is needed. As you may have noticed, Fedora includes more and more language stacks, many of them not gcc based, most of them with heavy language-specific tooling. The gcc BR is kind of a special case, it would be more interesting to have a "I am a C program that uses gcc" macro that does more things than just pulling in the gcc compiler (replace C with every language gcc is used with) A lighter default build root means saving time and resources in koji, copr or mock, which translates in savings days during mass rebuilds, which means problems are identified earlier, and fixing them is less time-constrained, rushed, exhausting and risky. -- Nicolas Mailhot ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On 21 February 2018 at 02:08, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 07:21:43PM -0500, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: >> > List of packages and respective maintainers: >> > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal-pkgs.txt >> So this may not be all the packages which would need a >> BuildRequires:gcc in them. I had two packages without >> Buildrequires:gcc not on the list but definitely using a gcc compiler. >> I am guessing something else in the buildrequires is pulling them in >> as a dependency. >> >> I don't know if that will be a problem later on but wanted to mention it. > > The same as with any other missing dependency: if the package that > your package depends on at some point loses *its* dependency, your > package will FTBFS. Not a problem now, but something to fix in the > long term. > I guess the problem I am having is I have no idea what we are "fixing". It all seems like needless form filling for no benefit. If XYZ-a is always going to pull in ABC.. why are we are explicitely saying we need ABC. Is the end goal to have every package that could be in the build root at the time of building be explicitely there? [AKA get rid of the build root?] Is the end goal to fix this "one thing" that I am not seeing? > Zbyszek > ___ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org -- Stephen J Smoogen. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On 02/18/2018 06:09 PM, Igor Gnatenko wrote: If you fixed package(s), found false positive, found missing packages in list or anything else -- please let me know. libbytesize fixed in rawhide ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 06:09:40PM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > If you fixed package(s) -- please let me know. Fixed: util-linux-2.32-0.2.fc29 -- Karel Zak http://karelzak.blogspot.com ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
Hi, On Sun, 2018-02-18 at 18:09 +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > If you fixed package(s), found false positive, found missing packages > in list > or anything else -- please let me know. Done: boost-gdb-printers cppunit libabw libcdr libcmis libcss libe-book libeot libepubgen libetonyek libexttextcat libfreehand libgltf libhubbub libixion libmspub libmwaw libodfgen liborcus libpagemaker libparserutils libqxp librevenge librvngabw libstaroffice libvisio libwapcaplet libwpd libwpg libwps libzmf mdds writerperfect D. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 07:21:43PM -0500, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > > List of packages and respective maintainers: > > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal-pkgs.txt > So this may not be all the packages which would need a > BuildRequires:gcc in them. I had two packages without > Buildrequires:gcc not on the list but definitely using a gcc compiler. > I am guessing something else in the buildrequires is pulling them in > as a dependency. > > I don't know if that will be a problem later on but wanted to mention it. The same as with any other missing dependency: if the package that your package depends on at some point loses *its* dependency, your package will FTBFS. Not a problem now, but something to fix in the long term. Zbyszek ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On 18 February 2018 at 12:09, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA256 > > Over this weekend I've performed scratch-mass-rebuild without having gcc and > gcc-c++ in buildroot of all Fedora packages, many of which failed due to > random > reasons and I grepped all logs for some common errors found by analyzing > hundreds of build logs. > > Guidelines: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:C_and_C%2B%2B#BuildRequire > s_and_Requies > > The grep output is located here: > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal.txt > > Some packages might be missed due to short koji outage, broken dependencies > and > so on, but majority of real failures is below. > > If you fixed package(s), found false positive, found missing packages in list > or anything else -- please let me know. > > Note to packages which use CMake buildsystem. When you have project(xxx) in > CMakeLists.txt it checks both for C and CXX compilers. So you might encounter > packages where you have BuildRequires: gcc and it fails on CXX compiler (even > you think you don't need it). Solution for this is to send patch to upstream > switching to something like project(xxx C), or if problem is opposite to > project(xxx CXX). > > List of packages and respective maintainers: > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal-pkgs.txt > So this may not be all the packages which would need a BuildRequires:gcc in them. I had two packages without Buildrequires:gcc not on the list but definitely using a gcc compiler. I am guessing something else in the buildrequires is pulling them in as a dependency. I don't know if that will be a problem later on but wanted to mention it. -- Stephen J Smoogen. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On Wed, 2018-02-21 at 00:03 +0100, Nils Philippsen wrote: > On Sun, 2018-02-18 at 18:09 +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > List of packages and respective maintainers: > > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal-pkgs.txt > > nphilipp babl dcraw gegl gimp gpsdrive gtick gtkimageview > > hydrogen beanstalkd and clamsmtp are done ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 06:09:40PM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > If you fixed package(s) -- please let me know. Fixed: util-linux-2.32-0.2.fc29 Karel -- Karel Zak http://karelzak.blogspot.com ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On Sun, 2018-02-18 at 18:09 +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > List of packages and respective maintainers: > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal-pkgs.txt > nphilipp babl dcraw gegl gimp gpsdrive gtick gtkimageview hydrogen jaaa lensfun libgnomecanvasmm26 libiec61883 liblo liblrdf libltc libraw1394 libsamplerate pngcrush python-sqlalchemy sane-backends sane- frontends suitesparse ufraw uucp widelands xsane Done where others didn't beat me to it. Nils -- Nils Philippsen"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to Software Engineer purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Red Hat Liberty nor Safety." -- Benjamin Franklin, 1759 PGP fingerprint:C4A8 9474 5C4C ADE3 2B8F 656D 47D8 9B65 6951 3011 ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 12:09 PM, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > If you fixed package(s), found false positive, found missing packages in list > or anything else -- please let me know. I've added the missing BuildRequires to the following packages: elog gfm hyperrogue ocaml-mccs spasm-ng tfdocgen tilp2 Ben Rosser ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On Sun, 2018-02-18 at 18:09 +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > If you fixed package(s), found false positive, found missing packages in list > or anything else -- please let me know. Fixed in rawhide: aspell exempi gpxsee groff joe jpilot libcgroup libpng12 libpng15 libtiff man-db pilot-link Also fixed the following unlisted packages: libjpeg-turbo libpipeline libpng mailx uClibc Thanks, Nikola ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On 02/20/2018 01:02 PM, Zdenek Dohnal wrote: On 02/18/2018 06:09 PM, Igor Gnatenko wrote: List of packages and respective maintainers: https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal-pkgs.txt Done in packages where I am admin. TY! J. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On 02/18/2018 06:09 PM, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > List of packages and respective maintainers: > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal-pkgs.txt > zdohnalc2esp cups cups-filters enscript foomatic hplip jbigkit mgetty > openobex pnm2ppa ptouch-driver python-cups python-smbc qpdf sane-backends > sane-frontends splix system-config-printer vim xsane Done in packages where I am the main admin. -- Zdenek Dohnal Associate Software Engineer Red Hat Czech - Brno TPB-C signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On Sun, 18 Feb 2018, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > If you fixed package(s), found false positive, found missing packages in list > or anything else -- please let me know. > Fixed ascii, hardlink, netmask, pam_usb, and reptyr. -- Francisco Javier Tsao Santín http://gattaca.es 1024D/71CF4D62 42 F1 53 35 EF 98 98 8A FC 6C 56 B3 4C A7 7D FB___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
Am Sonntag, den 18.02.2018, 18:09 +0100 schrieb Igor Gnatenko: > Over this weekend I've performed scratch-mass-rebuild without having > gcc and > gcc-c++ in buildroot of all Fedora packages, many of which failed due > to random > reasons and I grepped all logs for some common errors found by > analyzing > hundreds of build logs. > > Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:C_and_C%2B%2B#Bu > ildRequire > s_and_Requies > > The grep output is located here: > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal.txt > > Some packages might be missed due to short koji outage, broken > dependencies and > so on, but majority of real failures is below. > > If you fixed package(s), found false positive, found missing packages > in list > or anything else -- please let me know. > Fixed astyle, aeskulap, codeblocks, dvdbackup and pcsc-cyberjack in Rawhide. Rebuild aeskulap in Rawhide, because it failed in f28-mass-rebuild. Many thanks for your ongoing effort, Jens > Note to packages which use CMake buildsystem. When you have > project(xxx) in > CMakeLists.txt it checks both for C and CXX compilers. So you might > encounter > packages where you have BuildRequires: gcc and it fails on CXX > compiler (even > you think you don't need it). Solution for this is to send patch to > upstream > switching to something like project(xxx C), or if problem is opposite > to > project(xxx CXX). > > List of packages and respective maintainers: > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal-pkgs.txt > > ___ > devel-announce mailing list -- devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-announce-leave@lists.fedoraproj > ect.org -- Jens Lody 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
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On Sun, 2018-02-18 at 18:09 +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > Over this weekend I've performed scratch-mass-rebuild without having > gcc and > gcc-c++ in buildroot of all Fedora packages, many of which failed due > to random > reasons and I grepped all logs for some common errors found by > analyzing > hundreds of build logs. > > Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:C_and_C%2B%2B#Bu > ildRequire > s_and_Requies > > The grep output is located here: > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal.txt > > Some packages might be missed due to short koji outage, broken > dependencies and > so on, but majority of real failures is below. > > If you fixed package(s), found false positive, found missing packages > in list > or anything else -- please let me know. fixed shairport-sync > > Note to packages which use CMake buildsystem. When you have > project(xxx) in > CMakeLists.txt it checks both for C and CXX compilers. So you might > encounter > packages where you have BuildRequires: gcc and it fails on CXX > compiler (even > you think you don't need it). Solution for this is to send patch to > upstream > switching to something like project(xxx C), or if problem is opposite > to > project(xxx CXX). > > List of packages and respective maintainers: > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal-pkgs.txt > > ___ > devel-announce mailing list -- devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-announce-leave@lists.fedoraproj > ect.org > ___ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
Il 18/02/2018 18:09, Igor Gnatenko ha scritto: If you fixed package(s), found false positive, found missing packages in list or anything else -- please let me know. I've fixed libpasastro, rawtherapee and wcstools. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 11:09 AM, Igor Gnatenko < ignatenkobr...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA256 > > Over this weekend I've performed scratch-mass-rebuild without having gcc > and > gcc-c++ in buildroot of all Fedora packages, many of which failed due to > random > reasons and I grepped all logs for some common errors found by analyzing > hundreds of build logs. > > Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:C_and_C%2B%2B# > BuildRequire > s_and_Requies > > The grep output is located here: > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal.txt > > Some packages might be missed due to short koji outage, broken > dependencies and > so on, but majority of real failures is below. > > If you fixed package(s), found false positive, found missing packages in > list > or anything else -- please let me know. Fixed BackupPC Coin3 LibRaw LinLog OCE OpenColorIO SIMVoleon SoQt apiextractor aprsdigi atop ax25-tools codec2 dvdauthor f2c fdupes flamp fldigi fllog flrig fltk flxmlrpc freecad freedv generatorrunner hamlib hedgewars iguanaIR lcms2 libdxfrw librecad libspnav lirc nec2c openCOLLADA pmount pysdm pyside-tools python-pivy python-pyside qastools qodem shiboken shiny soxr spacenavd splat spnavcfg trustedqsl unittest-cpp vtable-dumper xnec2c yaml-cpp03 Thanks, Richard ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 12:09 PM, Igor Gnatenko < ignatenkobr...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > Over this weekend I've performed scratch-mass-rebuild without having gcc > and > gcc-c++ in buildroot of all Fedora packages, many of which failed due to > random > reasons and I grepped all logs for some common errors found by analyzing > hundreds of build logs. > > I have added the missing BuildRequires to the following packages: jsmith asterisk jansson libpri libresample pjproject -- Jared Smith ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
> On 18/02/18 18:09, Igor Gnatenko wrote: >> Some packages might be missed due to short koji outage, >> broken dependencies and so on, but majority of real failures >> is below. >> >> If you fixed package(s), found false positive, found missing >> packages in list or anything else -- please let me know. Also fixed gnuchess and leafnode. Matěj -- https://matej.ceplovi.cz/blog/, Jabber: mc...@ceplovi.cz GPG Finger: 3C76 A027 CA45 AD70 98B5 BC1D 7920 5802 880B C9D8 Because dwm is customized through editing its source code, it’s pointless to make binary packages of it. This keeps its userbase small and elitist. No novices asking stupid questions. -- http://dwm.suckless.org/ ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
>> On Sun, 2018-02-18 at 18:09 +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: >> > Over this weekend I've performed scratch-mass-rebuild >> > without having gcc and gcc-c++ in buildroot of all Fedora >> > packages, many of which failed due to random reasons and >> > I grepped all logs for some common errors found by >> > analyzing hundreds of build logs. Fixed: * ldapvi * lout * slrn * sl * oneko With the two most important packages (the last ones) fixed, the most difficult work is done, I believe! Matěj -- https://matej.ceplovi.cz/blog/, Jabber: mc...@ceplovi.cz GPG Finger: 3C76 A027 CA45 AD70 98B5 BC1D 7920 5802 880B C9D8 Find the dependencies -- and eliminate them. -- according to http://is.gd/oeYpcI the motto of the MS Excel team ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On 18/02/18 18:09, Igor Gnatenko wrote: Some packages might be missed due to short koji outage, broken dependencies and so on, but majority of real failures is below. If you fixed package(s), found false positive, found missing packages in list or anything else -- please let me know. I fixed patchelf in patchelf-0.9-7.fc28. Thanks Jeremy. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 10:39 PM, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA256 > > Over this weekend I've performed scratch-mass-rebuild without having gcc and > gcc-c++ in buildroot of all Fedora packages, many of which failed due to > random > reasons and I grepped all logs for some common errors found by analyzing > hundreds of build logs. > > Guidelines: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:C_and_C%2B%2B#BuildRequire > s_and_Requies > > The grep output is located here: > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal.txt > > Some packages might be missed due to short koji outage, broken dependencies > and > so on, but majority of real failures is below. > > If you fixed package(s), found false positive, found missing packages in list > or anything else -- please let me know. > > Note to packages which use CMake buildsystem. When you have project(xxx) in > CMakeLists.txt it checks both for C and CXX compilers. So you might encounter > packages where you have BuildRequires: gcc and it fails on CXX compiler (even > you think you don't need it). Solution for this is to send patch to upstream > switching to something like project(xxx C), or if problem is opposite to > project(xxx CXX). > > List of packages and respective maintainers: > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal-pkgs.txt Thanks Igor for all this work. I have fixed my packages now in rawhide only. Parag ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
Dne 18.2.2018 v 18:09 Igor Gnatenko napsal(a): > List of packages and respective maintainers: > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal-pkgs.txt > msuchy PyPAM imvirt obs-signd perl-Filesys-Df perl-Math-FFT rhnsd rhnsd - sent PR to upstream everything else fixed in rawhide. Thank you for this list. Mirek signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
Hi, I fixed: bibutils eb emacspeak hugs98 scim-hangul wmctrl Jens ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
2018-02-19 9:30 GMT+01:00 Igor Gnatenko : >> amsynth has been fixed in all supported branches. > > It should have both gcc and gcc-c++. Done, BR for both. Ciao Guido Aulisi fas account: tartina ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Mon, 2018-02-19 at 11:47 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On 02/19/2018 11:27 AM, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > > Hash: SHA256 > > > > On Mon, 2018-02-19 at 09:02 +, Tom Hughes wrote: > > > On 19/02/18 08:30, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > > > > > > On Mon, 2018-02-19 at 09:12 +0100, Guido Aulisi wrote: > > > > > > > > > amsynth has been fixed in all supported branches. > > > > > > > > It should have both gcc and gcc-c++. > > > > > > I don't think you ever need both - the guidelines say "gcc, gcc-c++ or > > > clang" and gcc-c++ has to require gcc anyway. > > > > If your code needs both, better to be explicit and write both. > > Wrong. g++ requires gcc for technical reasons. So what? I didn't say that gcc-c++ doesn't require gcc, I said that if your package wants both it's better to write both explicitly. - -- - -Igor Gnatenko -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEhLFO09aHZVqO+CM6aVcUvRu8X0wFAlqKsJEACgkQaVcUvRu8 X0y2qQ//XvwpQ4yx1AMnYy/97nPqLqXRbUhXCY/++Q9wv+1f5vn/kfbjTkyvwH9O 0DuDN8ue/YaJDJpcLPRs+IUoUGm8jE6cFjo9GRGur3XfR2o/TBs3APqKdog4Og5H dvJTwSFufYmg74LxtH1YcUhfGzY9bYiWvU86wcTVc/MTCGTpn7pbTCjLv+eQBJRH ClQ+8pELQl6/pgpSe4fM/fj7xMoNxIIGh4RMrU+vUeenQbSQh1JKs1PnxJnSHfjf sjxWoV2lReUDmnOkbSK+Uy6SIjaHBjb3DNio8txfZjRrMUMeDhX//GmE/vSaW260 z4mGGUIiatee4yc/0tGTKv8g6OSXU9QmNYIoM9Wug5IbZheMB43xDD+NwoDVFaJ5 1XmLwOVNCwM5s3wsGwvK9yM6QYilG0ilXyF0i6rVpH9sMaXxxrn04CYI8RX6b1IO 8rLjFeWVcK6nenrKwo9oL34j0SOtiDyJrTTzIP2cKYI9Lia/3WpQYEWFD5HHJdA8 uTFqCNd2KBZ+gok3+1ZgaZPv+xBfN5oPZ3RAOXb4BZY8duWwjSAc+LYs34aLPCmj m8N7taXUoAKrSvv5/wfz4kEKX9aPvJqwxvNEebyjQVM+BUMSiEQLSJoJvDIKFjJQ 6WsQ4ugfYCiQKZT9eXVHznRS8/YFzOlfkgSWhwkaqIAHMh2NiGo= =Mzzr -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On 02/19/2018 11:27 AM, Igor Gnatenko wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Mon, 2018-02-19 at 09:02 +, Tom Hughes wrote: On 19/02/18 08:30, Igor Gnatenko wrote: On Mon, 2018-02-19 at 09:12 +0100, Guido Aulisi wrote: amsynth has been fixed in all supported branches. It should have both gcc and gcc-c++. I don't think you ever need both - the guidelines say "gcc, gcc-c++ or clang" and gcc-c++ has to require gcc anyway. If your code needs both, better to be explicit and write both. Wrong. g++ requires gcc for technical reasons. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Mon, 2018-02-19 at 11:15 +0100, Guido Aulisi wrote: > 2018-02-19 9:30 GMT+01:00 Igor Gnatenko : > > On Mon, 2018-02-19 at 09:12 +0100, Guido Aulisi wrote: > > > Hi Igor > > > > > > > 2018-02-18 18:09 GMT+01:00 Igor Gnatenko > > > org> > > > > : > > > > Over this weekend I've performed scratch-mass-rebuild without having > > > > gcc > > > > and > > > > gcc-c++ in buildroot of all Fedora packages, many of which failed due > > > > to > > > > random > > > > reasons and I grepped all logs for some common errors found by > > > > analyzing > > > > hundreds of build logs. > > > > > > > > Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:C_and_C%2B%2B#Buil > > > > dReq > > > > uire > > > > s_and_Requies > > > > > > > > The grep output is located here: > > > > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal.txt > > > > > > amsynth has been fixed in all supported branches. > > > > It should have both gcc and gcc-c++. > > Sorry, I thought gcc-c++ implied gcc. When I tested the new buildroot > gcc was installed as a dependency. > If so, I have to fix other packages too. Well, it imples but better to be explicit. - -- - -Igor Gnatenko -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEhLFO09aHZVqO+CM6aVcUvRu8X0wFAlqKpxEACgkQaVcUvRu8 X0w37w/9GmdfwMqPUZ5wM+0Omn5I6vKTdhFmHgafNMGYNe5p+XXbghaFfy9mBHx8 aJdgRWj0QqEpsVxGTsY8fIOBshccL3FATbnel6woKvgqFUwpiLGPjDDicPoALFbl DKVOc4ZCiG1Zc+jGbGtltN6XhplXtDVtBt/8pWhAGWrWFpPImnWuaPwiORTfHNv/ l+vWddtb5wK6l+2970z2zwGa4rttk128iknbVF6IyZbrVgUL4chIAb/TuMvVLrvq 0ukbhQuPQKUHM/VZBet6RUEbMipIE4XTOeMXCjTfT2YbjHJitxkJqbEHC9xFD5HP 2iMHMXyBDwUo4EkCzh9x/ooufrxqoAdbUBGuScqk0tWtTh3RcgOfb31BO/0NSekZ XLHpgoTNWNZBSTEhrcw0RQ2GbKmjNKcuyXq8wrQ3FEnaLLrkypNSqeI4XDz9LoXb sMLkuHHKE2bu4Kpd92mxkHnIKKSj9gr8cpglViZDiGhp7oP+y4erpZt31JZnYw+X GvZkQ+qKOa3Ov0fJ2K4AfaMCqgNCT4TYRel+cjtSwYyuCZcoe7M9L+j7j5xVsj9e ztL8IfgZfWNfWlW9+DO+PTEz6f3Bnmpg8e574qaCLVW2w6ucQuCFGU2h2s52OSCg qrY9OYYNijPJeP8JK9dIyc7wGrNyOO3KzAgUOcDWlCjXXlNZf6E= =BAkq -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Mon, 2018-02-19 at 09:02 +, Tom Hughes wrote: > On 19/02/18 08:30, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > > On Mon, 2018-02-19 at 09:12 +0100, Guido Aulisi wrote: > > > > > amsynth has been fixed in all supported branches. > > > > It should have both gcc and gcc-c++. > > I don't think you ever need both - the guidelines say "gcc, gcc-c++ or > clang" and gcc-c++ has to require gcc anyway. If your code needs both, better to be explicit and write both. - -- - -Igor Gnatenko -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEhLFO09aHZVqO+CM6aVcUvRu8X0wFAlqKppMACgkQaVcUvRu8 X0zSvg/5AbCXN8xJcfy3pthYcZHD8TbYql1R1M3eTVSWPBjHnMSmu8Pui024V76G 8nixjdI59pf5RZA1S4m83gMJAs6pZNfSN8rE2WcLcnE/Ye/azGWMfnoY7/oiNyJM BAtUznhZKIKrIRYUc873JdAX3yM9G7WSFlgeh1s8E4p++qQl/4n1ZzCMCHJImXUl X7xdjPN4Gk0xNbGQAwVFJUU1RTMlt6rYSzQd49wIT4gg4kV5QsRN/oZCLdveDvDv HbqqwOSciR9o9IgNd/Qp5adWxiWeMyczKd9sKnSaNEyfG+iIQ5++sppCqO/3OWWS 77MJEzDnXjPxAAwJnWQTT9XsTT4aRG4NPX8kFJF1I57/HurTV5EkKtUjGecmxKZQ Ku8NWgZn7Q4HugyaK7pzyz1KWNFZXmMbBefgR7zHBukiY9KC1IynNvB2w8m4XLte qA4MqxqwV7OzADkg6kYVMPdUVhTmL0P61SQae2XNqZdDH6dNKQMKu6s6Qv9Cw+Cz XcHZ5jQ4KE3U3up/Tg35KPX0hBWKxG14shpOzpbPTHStVxlqzbx6zFefKO9ELS27 AC1p73CG5c46DosXTxM3kadik7XHRgJ/G+0I2tcLDySl8Gz3yyn98piL3fQ3CzMA rbt99tD8spzVYwzGNVI+va6JXuW/uEqYQRs0VpsOUwRXOpoVmT8= =P0X8 -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
2018-02-19 9:30 GMT+01:00 Igor Gnatenko : > On Mon, 2018-02-19 at 09:12 +0100, Guido Aulisi wrote: >> Hi Igor >> >> > 2018-02-18 18:09 GMT+01:00 Igor Gnatenko >> > : >> > Over this weekend I've performed scratch-mass-rebuild without having gcc >> > and >> > gcc-c++ in buildroot of all Fedora packages, many of which failed due to >> > random >> > reasons and I grepped all logs for some common errors found by analyzing >> > hundreds of build logs. >> > >> > Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:C_and_C%2B%2B#BuildReq >> > uire >> > s_and_Requies >> > >> > The grep output is located here: >> > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal.txt >> >> amsynth has been fixed in all supported branches. > > It should have both gcc and gcc-c++. Sorry, I thought gcc-c++ implied gcc. When I tested the new buildroot gcc was installed as a dependency. If so, I have to fix other packages too. Guido Aulisi fas account: tartina ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
psabatatinyfugue wmname xssstate All three fixed in Rawhide. Also added other missing build deps when I was at it :) Also tinyfugue could do with some more love. I wonder if anybody is using it in Fedora, though. P signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 09:02:34AM +, Tom Hughes wrote: > and gcc-c++ has to require gcc anyway. It does. Jakub ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On 19/02/18 08:30, Igor Gnatenko wrote: On Mon, 2018-02-19 at 09:12 +0100, Guido Aulisi wrote: amsynth has been fixed in all supported branches. It should have both gcc and gcc-c++. I don't think you ever need both - the guidelines say "gcc, gcc-c++ or clang" and gcc-c++ has to require gcc anyway. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Mon, 2018-02-19 at 09:12 +0100, Guido Aulisi wrote: > Hi Igor > > > 2018-02-18 18:09 GMT+01:00 Igor Gnatenko > > : > > Over this weekend I've performed scratch-mass-rebuild without having gcc > > and > > gcc-c++ in buildroot of all Fedora packages, many of which failed due to > > random > > reasons and I grepped all logs for some common errors found by analyzing > > hundreds of build logs. > > > > Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:C_and_C%2B%2B#BuildReq > > uire > > s_and_Requies > > > > The grep output is located here: > > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal.txt > > amsynth has been fixed in all supported branches. It should have both gcc and gcc-c++. - -- - -Igor Gnatenko -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEhLFO09aHZVqO+CM6aVcUvRu8X0wFAlqKixAACgkQaVcUvRu8 X0xm7A//RfTB2ErIatpg7LTBeQOeo0yhKyGfpCtpcWOK7rvP1hH7mN67D9Tx1I99 5P/bkF4jAd8i06N/s6lXP/s26bdSYZBzvqYPMA1Fr0eJ33rcGq6QArda0W33c8KR G/g9irl8drpH9d38ggaNrXefoSOfEYHglSNHftuUWkez1yaeJx0roUd9BHvsduC+ 26u+n6YuCumedsS9EkHQXn62iO5e6wULXv6VsW1/M311uPYXd5lL6/bUN5cvb803 +y0CHLybI8C2Kg75PTOchIBcCB2yDX6gT81dfaVV1lOIBjM6nf76ShuQvNZmUeD1 iZRYomh2KPlJkZdU1Kg+9wIqeu/WQEjnNtkAETJbRS1/YNvNwCNxZcbvOIOqw2qj 4G5X+7akV5oCFk5IxftslQgaao4VJUB+3ouVi2ighdyYfFgzHhCNVFMOI/vAPjMD 8tpZghZeE+/zQ3PbB+Mx+ZPubpLtP4YuykiK6koA6SFlzYSzzbjILvWxv/Tvth35 6RIUk318snDQCZZr0VAjnQYu4z9qPChWWscy9/w1XRoTT+ySfV1oPmN6hsdsj5cJ fvm7wxL4m5x8odyN7gkkcw5L3VtGN/i7fLIcnr6cuRKeQU9vQBPIiML+hWa8bAUK CSYgxkShEnhAr9dZGvOSHTrTIdQZ3NI6r+ajX9MhfXs1niaZGiQ= =D/jX -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
Hi Igor > 2018-02-18 18:09 GMT+01:00 Igor Gnatenko : > Over this weekend I've performed scratch-mass-rebuild without having gcc and > gcc-c++ in buildroot of all Fedora packages, many of which failed due to > random > reasons and I grepped all logs for some common errors found by analyzing > hundreds of build logs. > > Guidelines: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:C_and_C%2B%2B#BuildRequire > s_and_Requies > > The grep output is located here: > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal.txt amsynth has been fixed in all supported branches. Thanks for your work. Guido Aulisi fas account: tartina ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
Le 18/02/2018 à 18:09, Igor Gnatenko a écrit : > If you fixed package(s), found false positive, found missing packages in list > or anything else -- please let me know. All php-* packages (C extensions) should already be ok, BR on php-devel should be enough. Remi ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 06:09:40PM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal-pkgs.txt These are fixed: flac123 fping fxload ocp perl-HTML-Strip sedutil I retired msed because sedutil replaced it. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On 19/02/18 00:30, Hedayat Vatankhah wrote: I've fixed all my packages except simspark & rcssserver3d, which seem to crash on i686 when generating docs using pdflatex, which will probably needs a fix in TeXLive. Yes that's the crash that is blocking me as well... It is new since the texlive rebuild last week for poppler and has caused the gdal rebuild to fail. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
Hi, I've fixed all my packages except simspark & rcssserver3d, which seem to crash on i686 when generating docs using pdflatex, which will probably needs a fix in TeXLive. Regards, Hedayat /*Igor Gnatenko*/ wrote on Sun, 18 Feb 2018 18:09:40 +0100: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Over this weekend I've performed scratch-mass-rebuild without having gcc and gcc-c++ in buildroot of all Fedora packages, many of which failed due to random reasons and I grepped all logs for some common errors found by analyzing hundreds of build logs. Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:C_and_C%2B%2B#BuildRequire s_and_Requies The grep output is located here: https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal.txt Some packages might be missed due to short koji outage, broken dependencies and so on, but majority of real failures is below. If you fixed package(s), found false positive, found missing packages in list or anything else -- please let me know. Note to packages which use CMake buildsystem. When you have project(xxx) in CMakeLists.txt it checks both for C and CXX compilers. So you might encounter packages where you have BuildRequires: gcc and it fails on CXX compiler (even you think you don't need it). Solution for this is to send patch to upstream switching to something like project(xxx C), or if problem is opposite to project(xxx CXX). List of packages and respective maintainers: https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal-pkgs.txt - -- - -Igor Gnatenko -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEhLFO09aHZVqO+CM6aVcUvRu8X0wFAlqJs1QACgkQaVcUvRu8 X0xxkRAAj56QZYSxzDXiMyvM9eLdVS0Qrt9jiNa66rasIbDVciTym7WQoV2CXxM+ ZxaOCYU8eyxOhE1rx36KITJ7SgU6ugLu2dVZlG/QR8vH3RTqJPV/GWhM/WUAgaon f/SPwTIMk31qvEuKwlqLgNH1rwpRH2NfWVelZChwi1zXOglMvIHakV7sSedYy2i9 bmVvf/1ylj/NbaI6FaLUqg81UQhUulD8RYeZi1cyxSpit/4aysP7ixCb4MLizmwH uNUO0y//xxL0hMSShmfTlsPXowU+NpkzV+lFQ/k2X4KcCZWMabfCt69TdyTbYlj5 ai8oFGNI94Tv6rrzR/Rirfl/eODtdaaeNqyg/MBze6hYpS2w2oezOEmdYvlpJ7Xo z0fN/vIus1SeeyIKWo4KYHZYRX6g2nTCUeGYJqvCIRVxS9UJsy45C/HlnIWTtedn Dyp9O/0aSDhY+ErPQi64+HloZrY7p+KsCzPNc9HdzLbhnfM5IUn2TmO+qHngBSlY zGNfpOsBmmllSuBftWDfiayh8C9sBUpGT9693iyQYXPIwjZkQSHAclDZa7naN3Oy NKQaqVOsDmgDDP9xVOyr/Aue3jQk/8QHraM5DgO05L6lXHwdm+rjIdbb7CU2rFF7 Gl14+kSFP7yufRQiS6Gt96eN4ePxSuD7XjiT/9GicztDXypNeX8= =KRiO -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ devel-announce mailing list -- devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-announce-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On 18 February 2018 at 20:52, Igor Gnatenko wrote: [..] >> Yesterday I've replayed on your proposal but I've not realized that my >> reply was held by the moderator. >> You started introducing changes only after less than 24h after >> publishing proposal. >> It does not make any sense sending any proposals if you will be not >> waiting for feedback at least few days :-/ > > I didn't introduce any changes, I just made mass rebuild and asked people to > fix their packages. Gosh .. you are right. Really sorry :-/ After spotting +1k new emails notifications I did not check who made those changes and I've been thinking that it was some mass change introduced by one of the proven packagers. It does not look good if people before finishing discussion on *proposal* will be making changes :-/ Or maybe everything has been triggered not by the proposal but by this thread which has in the Subject "[ACTION NEEDED]" ? [..] >> Q: does it really needs to be gcc? What about clang? >> A: theoretically it does not need to be gcc .. especially as macros >> like %cmake, %configure are injecting over CC, CXX and other variables >> exact commands. > > Yes, theoretically. I think the real reason is because we want explicitly to > use GCC and nothing else. Looks like this intention has not been verbalised in the proposal. Here few questions related to such intention. If Fedora provides more than one C/C++ compilers and both are in the main part of the distribution -> Why Fedora packages must be glued statically to gcc/gcc-c++ as C/C++ compilers? Maybe there are more unverbalised intentions related to such assumption? Or maybe it is something wrong with clang? I'm asking because I don't know anything about such issues. FreeBSD is using now clang/llvm to compile everything so it would be a real surprise if it is already some known big issue. [..] > Are you willing to work on Guidelines Draft for FPC on this? Right now I just > want to get rid out of gcc/gcc-c++ in buildroot and I chose following > **existing guidelines** as a base for this while what you are proposing > requires coordination with FPC. I've drafted only some idea which was not complete. Have no idea where did you get this that I'm willing anything. > I'm not against this idea at all, but this is totally outside of scope of this > change. In any case, once we will have necessary BuildRequires all over the > place we can easily replace them with whatever we will decide is correct. This is not about arrogance. If you will be just stopping reading after the first sentence you are exposing yourself to miss something. In this first sentence literally was that what is below is out of the scope of the proposal. In reply where only a few humble question and asking for few seconds to consider modify original scope to open some new possibilities. Now looks like it is to late and changes already started :-( kloczek PS. If you really don't like my comments just add my email to spam filters and let me know about this in prv email. I promise that I'll never reply to any of your emails. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On dimanche 18 février 2018 18:09:40 CET Igor Gnatenko wrote: > Over this weekend I've performed scratch-mass-rebuild without having gcc > and gcc-c++ in buildroot of all Fedora packages, many of which failed due > to random reasons and I grepped all logs for some common errors found by > analyzing hundreds of build logs. > > Guidelines: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:C_and_C%2B%2B#BuildRequire > s_and_Requies > > The grep output is located here: > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal.txt > > Some packages might be missed due to short koji outage, broken dependencies > and so on, but majority of real failures is below. > > If you fixed package(s), found false positive, found missing packages in > list or anything else -- please let me know. > Fixed: eclipseo cmrt libva-intel-hybrid-driver qdirstat zegrapher Best regards, Robert-André ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Sun, 2018-02-18 at 20:45 +, Philip Kovacs wrote: > Ok, my configure.ac initializes libtool with both c and c++ : > LT_INIT()LT_LANG([C])LT_LANG([C++]) > where only C is needed. There are no ill-effects other than producing some > noise in the configureoutput, but I will patch out the LT_LANG([C++]) line to > trim the noise. Yeah, either you need to add BuildRequires: gcc-c++ or remove this LT_LANG([C++]). If you won't do any of this, it will stop building 😉 Thanks for fixing! - -- - -Igor Gnatenko -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEhLFO09aHZVqO+CM6aVcUvRu8X0wFAlqJ6DUACgkQaVcUvRu8 X0wHBhAAiVfDEOBkaS7MYEsRNglSLRq1i0s9PUe5LTjFN2+5ORO7++CHzUo9tQXx Ca3RYMD9F8hMG0lyqcVmqElWJsnBhnZkytyXxH295ZrUffD2ZPs1cpK6eN+8bcIh BzWKJqHLlWSBGZqX6xRqSDXq36H8yZL5+IpsyDFkkqC6zfXn/9H8e1yoq+NMzAyr iHWfHjkvcZgnLz5h/RSpTWCsjGhoCP8vuG0993VXDn/AEX7wAPWNCuS2RITUzfiD TiekSEn9vOUiFIHPmpUYdfHhVVGt06PCnmTJVNrZnuQ94Yu9FKR+1Lg+BavzyHz7 BjZvvH5iOggrlTAsjCrVgKj5VCiS/LAQchnxkDSPh1iZJsBJ3AsdaIqzNZwKdkGa qBUDJVmwFwavpzqSHzmEJo9XSBgIJJ/8HT/E5oEEOLZ+eZrAZWLjGMSOmYC4JN7I atE1LfkFZhLytHMMy1jnXEgBiSHDptZdMNtNpJpYMLgpAJPwLC5XlSQdInp0yZ8A /MlqPwGRcthpD0LGpnFPWJtiaAmHad2s6jq6vTIvV1RkPjjzze4xwup8Aw7R2P55 8W+SbE9+mVQiZbUKNRZS82C44go/8qEvRfxXpVeFPDBdTcgWxIdHWOgnv6DvUJXC IkmzL03cS2aqC/IngeFvUCUgZuFp3ko/jenuT5yHKkt1QC5qh/I= =3gzd -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Sun, 2018-02-18 at 20:36 +, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > On 18 February 2018 at 17:09, Igor Gnatenko > wrote: > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > > Hash: SHA256 > > > > Over this weekend I've performed scratch-mass-rebuild without having gcc > > and > > gcc-c++ in buildroot of all Fedora packages, many of which failed due to > > random > > reasons and I grepped all logs for some common errors found by analyzing > > hundreds of build logs. > > Yesterday I've replayed on your proposal but I've not realized that my > reply was held by the moderator. > You started introducing changes only after less than 24h after > publishing proposal. > It does not make any sense sending any proposals if you will be not > waiting for feedback at least few days :-/ I didn't introduce any changes, I just made mass rebuild and asked people to fix their packages. > Here is the copy of my yesterday reply: I have seen it, but as usual with your messages (which are very long and mix different things) I stopped reading after second paragraph.. > Q: does it really needs to be gcc? What about clang? > A: theoretically it does not need to be gcc .. especially as macros > like %cmake, %configure are injecting over CC, CXX and other variables > exact commands. Yes, theoretically. I think the real reason is because we want explicitly to use GCC and nothing else. > As long as none of the macros like %cmake or %cobfigure has straight > dependency and are not forcing to use gcc (those macros are using > other macros like %{__cc}) already it possible to test build package > written in C using C++ compiler to for example expose some set of > compile warnings generated by C++ compiler or .. use clang. > Build the whole package with using some C code security scanners? No > problem. It is possible to do this without touching spec file. Actually csmock already can do that. Probably not in very nice way, but it works. > Now by default %/{__cc} is provided by gcc but if here it will be > introduced small flexible it should be possible to control which > the compiler should be used even if in packagers build system will be > installed both gcc and clang by simple few changes in ~.rpmrc or on > Fedora build systems in ~mock/.rpmrc file. > > So maybe instead: > > BuildRequires: gcc > > better would be to use: > > BuildRequires: %{__cc} > > or: > > BuildRequires: c-compiler > > ?? > if both gcc and clang will have: > > Provides: c-compiler > > still it will be possible installed gcc and clang without conflicts. > I'm sure that above it is not complete idea and few small bits still > are missing. > > I think that we should hold for few seconds and consider change a bit > this proposal to pen those possibilities. Are you willing to work on Guidelines Draft for FPC on this? Right now I just want to get rid out of gcc/gcc-c++ in buildroot and I chose following **existing guidelines** as a base for this while what you are proposing requires coordination with FPC. I'm not against this idea at all, but this is totally outside of scope of this change. In any case, once we will have necessary BuildRequires all over the place we can easily replace them with whatever we will decide is correct. - -- - -Igor Gnatenko -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEhLFO09aHZVqO+CM6aVcUvRu8X0wFAlqJ54AACgkQaVcUvRu8 X0zGLBAAuOA1jXfXJFdOaqhsTDBeANpTpS7zwFOZmbBpuAAq6cVpWyAcaGiJwNiE EBYvpUJKZsSoVAMP4E2rneKnjgje9TAA8/ccpcrmv8b8iBf4qyx/uwEJIo3skFpB qcOonXZamMm4v/afb1rVWbG6ogKS+1TPZ3YN/N8iaie8XHt4s/jcla/Miv3Yz6Gv Y9NwzOQ8kkYr5Z6hVwWs07kjZHbkccaAa7u218Gho2hlhPLrhguKXm3SvcfQETit F5wBeyxDPgAdNLhsDwXeeIYeClJsj91Z7YDCyfPZaB9vKMuap/dHsz/GWtT7kLNW RaLlci0K0ElCx/Y/Ogdjk64su3//TkIjVRVG3fcPfqAu7bO7C7rvO3VFEAeYcqeP K/ZQ39rbqs7vADPu5FgWnWE+Wryddh843Y7m7Qo1yj+G+/JXrX0dkl6a++mtiz/E OVaq+sGiwnQOYtygRoLQ3a9jKduLOwAx8V7ghnUFnuZqOUy3XmHPJfAM9Htb0XWt jpNBHo5BL/vM66QcNFrSPO/OiVwYnCrCMkKYPgPhWK7RGR1dmB+5lk2B8GTeuhwt 525iOfu2ivfU84oOoZXiXKbJPufRtWeg9cAwWJ3bGoKEEz9KLVBlQXilOWwTSBkb faTPfcn9dD3LL4oH78ladalsb0f7qAZGgozsm2lBTR+9bTqJQT8= =Ll0I -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
Ok, my configure.ac initializes libtool with both c and c++ : LT_INIT()LT_LANG([C])LT_LANG([C++]) where only C is needed. There are no ill-effects other than producing some noise in the configureoutput, but I will patch out the LT_LANG([C++]) line to trim the noise. On Sunday, February 18, 2018 3:37 PM, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: On 18 February 2018 at 17:09, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA256 > > Over this weekend I've performed scratch-mass-rebuild without having gcc and > gcc-c++ in buildroot of all Fedora packages, many of which failed due to > random > reasons and I grepped all logs for some common errors found by analyzing > hundreds of build logs. Yesterday I've replayed on your proposal but I've not realized that my reply was held by the moderator. You started introducing changes only after less than 24h after publishing proposal. It does not make any sense sending any proposals if you will be not waiting for feedback at least few days :-/ Here is the copy of my yesterday reply: As definitely proposed change will create the whole wave of small changes adding at least one new BuildRequires I just started thinking about going slightly deeper (but only a bit deeper ;) ). When gcc or other compilers are no longer part of the core build env suit/env as you mention it is necessary to add it straight in BuildRequires for example gcc. That is OK. Q: does it really needs to be gcc? What about clang? A: theoretically it does not need to be gcc .. especially as macros like %cmake, %configure are injecting over CC, CXX and other variables exact commands. As long as none of the macros like %cmake or %cobfigure has straight dependency and are not forcing to use gcc (those macros are using other macros like %{__cc}) already it possible to test build package written in C using C++ compiler to for example expose some set of compile warnings generated by C++ compiler or .. use clang. Build the whole package with using some C code security scanners? No problem. It is possible to do this without touching spec file. OK, so .. at the moment macros like: %__cc gcc %__cpp gcc -E %__cxx g++ are defined in /usr/lib/macros which is part of the rpm. If those macros will be removed from this file and moved to /usr/lib/macros.d/macros.{gcc,clang} it should be possible to provide the platform which will open the whole spectrum of completely new possibilities with some minimal changes in whole build env and no other changes in all specs. Only weak point in above is how to force use gcc if both gcc and clang will be installed (which will be quite typical in case all packages private build envs). However, I think that even this is a very small obstacle which can be easily handled. Now by default %/{__cc} is provided by gcc but if here it will be introduced small flexible it should be possible to control which the compiler should be used even if in packagers build system will be installed both gcc and clang by simple few changes in ~.rpmrc or on Fedora build systems in ~mock/.rpmrc file. So maybe instead: BuildRequires: gcc better would be to use: BuildRequires: %{__cc} or: BuildRequires: c-compiler ?? if both gcc and clang will have: Provides: c-compiler still it will be possible installed gcc and clang without conflicts. I'm sure that above it is not complete idea and few small bits still are missing. I think that we should hold for few seconds and consider change a bit this proposal to pen those possibilities. Comments? kloczek -- Tomasz Kłoczko | LinkedIn: http://lnkd.in/FXPWxH ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 11:09 AM, Igor Gnatenko < ignatenkobr...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA256 > > If you fixed package(s), found false positive, found missing packages in > list > or anything else -- please let me know. python-compreffor rats Fixed in rawhide -- Athos Ribeiro http://www.ime.usp.br/~athoscr ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
On 18 February 2018 at 17:09, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA256 > > Over this weekend I've performed scratch-mass-rebuild without having gcc and > gcc-c++ in buildroot of all Fedora packages, many of which failed due to > random > reasons and I grepped all logs for some common errors found by analyzing > hundreds of build logs. Yesterday I've replayed on your proposal but I've not realized that my reply was held by the moderator. You started introducing changes only after less than 24h after publishing proposal. It does not make any sense sending any proposals if you will be not waiting for feedback at least few days :-/ Here is the copy of my yesterday reply: As definitely proposed change will create the whole wave of small changes adding at least one new BuildRequires I just started thinking about going slightly deeper (but only a bit deeper ;) ). When gcc or other compilers are no longer part of the core build env suit/env as you mention it is necessary to add it straight in BuildRequires for example gcc. That is OK. Q: does it really needs to be gcc? What about clang? A: theoretically it does not need to be gcc .. especially as macros like %cmake, %configure are injecting over CC, CXX and other variables exact commands. As long as none of the macros like %cmake or %cobfigure has straight dependency and are not forcing to use gcc (those macros are using other macros like %{__cc}) already it possible to test build package written in C using C++ compiler to for example expose some set of compile warnings generated by C++ compiler or .. use clang. Build the whole package with using some C code security scanners? No problem. It is possible to do this without touching spec file. OK, so .. at the moment macros like: %__cc gcc %__cpp gcc -E %__cxx g++ are defined in /usr/lib/macros which is part of the rpm. If those macros will be removed from this file and moved to /usr/lib/macros.d/macros.{gcc,clang} it should be possible to provide the platform which will open the whole spectrum of completely new possibilities with some minimal changes in whole build env and no other changes in all specs. Only weak point in above is how to force use gcc if both gcc and clang will be installed (which will be quite typical in case all packages private build envs). However, I think that even this is a very small obstacle which can be easily handled. Now by default %/{__cc} is provided by gcc but if here it will be introduced small flexible it should be possible to control which the compiler should be used even if in packagers build system will be installed both gcc and clang by simple few changes in ~.rpmrc or on Fedora build systems in ~mock/.rpmrc file. So maybe instead: BuildRequires: gcc better would be to use: BuildRequires: %{__cc} or: BuildRequires: c-compiler ?? if both gcc and clang will have: Provides: c-compiler still it will be possible installed gcc and clang without conflicts. I'm sure that above it is not complete idea and few small bits still are missing. I think that we should hold for few seconds and consider change a bit this proposal to pen those possibilities. Comments? kloczek -- Tomasz Kłoczko | LinkedIn: http://lnkd.in/FXPWxH ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Sun, 2018-02-18 at 14:18 -0600, Greg Hellings wrote: > Igor > > On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 11:09 AM, Igor Gnatenko < > ignatenkobr...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > > Hash: SHA256 > > > > If you fixed package(s), found false positive, found missing packages in > > list > > or anything else -- please let me know. > > > > > > biblesync Doesn't seem that it should have BuildRequires: gcc, because based on grep it wants only CXX compiler. > mingw-nspr Looks good. > Fixed Thanks! - -- - -Igor Gnatenko -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEhLFO09aHZVqO+CM6aVcUvRu8X0wFAlqJ4rMACgkQaVcUvRu8 X0wh7g/+LntjNx+M/8zkY/bTAFC7GhNB3lljvp/1rBH/IdUYJvDUcqeObuTXY9nG 3WZmmAKe5mRbepxiR2CIRHzdKu8fIXdsRPSQ1zFPlRPOsczqRsOhW/HWH1p2XTS/ To9CHHige6Nq8BGmIzjLZ43u1LpNfrzhmadcCiK2UEERJWGLX64mbrY9281XsPjw t65+40ygnXlzzQ0LFziiOFBCVmcOowsbWrmV/IYl8FWFpI4ouepQRdv/dUljm9J5 3H9sEC+1Bvmr08f2Sh+edxYFv4vqAacTqdEAvEu5zuAqts1Dk+TyDImeOwCQkTFn VAbaS5oTU0CYd5EWa+ec93B3BsJr6EhttkKFYSi2XDUPkwJCa+8YmWjWY0s/Yoop HNlKxQl8b7Ch56NwWTbSOEQc4/a0k97WChQIlW6U5/IFmhRDy2vCjmRJdmzxOeRo opSpXnfY4scym53VLg/bpWNXqKnE5wu0evK9CcfAcgnBgsaQeQpn8JDp/+faCYZV tOrtSvlnFq/vyn3IqhWedpgUAkHf4GmrubjtU6rTQtVEIWRKsOO4sJKF2Qcpc3U9 /ZIVNHfmEaUgGQAgQFMtWTHZFEtKNw1aPXH1pBxBvQWqOvph+vMTYW22IoYkPuYP W1RLkOvXMgTO6gUCY2S6NtyDvw781F5Kh7QJBxjuw0lA26lYTIs= =f07h -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org