Re: libvpx got soname bump and no one noticed?
W dniu 28.05.2015 o 07:28, Robin Lee pisze: Sorry guys, my fault. (insert local idiom about elephant in a store here). Sorted out with help of spot and kalev. You should update rpmfusion-free-relase. And run 'dnf downgrade ffmpeg-libs'. There is no 'branched' repos in RPMFusion. And before f22 is released, you are actually using the 'rawhide' repos of RPMFusion. But After f22 released, RPMFusion f22 repos is then finally branched and the yum repo configs are updated in new version of rpmfusion-free-release. So, if you run a global 'dnf upgrade' before upgrade rpmfusion-free-release, you will pull in some 'rawhide' packages from RPMFusion. I rebuilt that part of rpmfusion I use (vlc, mplayer and deps). Problem was with VirtualBox... so for some time I will have to deal without winxp vm (used from time to time for tools which are not wine friendly). -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: libvpx got soname bump and no one noticed?
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 9:16 AM, Marcin Juszkiewicz mjuszkiew...@redhat.com wrote: W dniu 28.05.2015 o 07:28, Robin Lee pisze: Sorry guys, my fault. (insert local idiom about elephant in a store here). Sorted out with help of spot and kalev. You should update rpmfusion-free-relase. And run 'dnf downgrade ffmpeg-libs'. There is no 'branched' repos in RPMFusion. And before f22 is released, you are actually using the 'rawhide' repos of RPMFusion. But After f22 released, RPMFusion f22 repos is then finally branched and the yum repo configs are updated in new version of rpmfusion-free-release. So, if you run a global 'dnf upgrade' before upgrade rpmfusion-free-release, you will pull in some 'rawhide' packages from RPMFusion. I rebuilt that part of rpmfusion I use (vlc, mplayer and deps). Problem was with VirtualBox... so for some time I will have to deal without winxp vm (used from time to time for tools which are not wine friendly). You could use Boxes / virt-manager ... ships in the Fedora repo and should be good enough for cases where you do not need hardware accelerated 3D in the guest. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: libvpx got soname bump and no one noticed?
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 12:44 AM, Marcin Juszkiewicz mjuszkiew...@redhat.com wrote: W dniu 28.05.2015 o 09:27, drago01 pisze: Problem was with VirtualBox... so for some time I will have to deal without winxp vm (used from time to time for tools which are not wine friendly). You could use Boxes / virt-manager ... ships in the Fedora repo and should be good enough for cases where you do not need hardware accelerated 3D in the guest. I am fully aware of it. Just this VM is about 7 years old and recreation of it from scratch would take too much time probably as I forgot what exactly is installed/added there etc. Tools to play with phones, flashing tools, devboards stuff, taxes etc. -- You can open the old .vdi file using virt-manager. Alternativly you could build VirtualBox from source and configure it without libvpx. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: libvpx got soname bump and no one noticed?
W dniu 28.05.2015 o 09:27, drago01 pisze: Problem was with VirtualBox... so for some time I will have to deal without winxp vm (used from time to time for tools which are not wine friendly). You could use Boxes / virt-manager ... ships in the Fedora repo and should be good enough for cases where you do not need hardware accelerated 3D in the guest. I am fully aware of it. Just this VM is about 7 years old and recreation of it from scratch would take too much time probably as I forgot what exactly is installed/added there etc. Tools to play with phones, flashing tools, devboards stuff, taxes etc. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
libvpx got soname bump and no one noticed?
F22 got released so I upgraded my machine from F22 to rawhide. But as usual it meant rebuilding rpmfusion packages (as they do not support rawhide). All went quite good. Except installing: Error: package ffmpeg-libs-2.6.2-3.fc23.x86_64 requires libvpx.so.2()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed. Why's that? libvpx 1.4.0 bumped libvpx.so.1 - libvpx.so.2 and I did not found any mail about it on fedora-devel ML (maybe such mails are not required, no idea - many such were sent). Most of rawhide is built against libvpx 1.3.0 so old soname is required. Simple 'dnf remove libvpx.so.1()(64bit)' on my rawhide shows 512 packages including wine, kde, gstreamer plugins and lot of other stuff. How to solve it? I am afraid that answer would be wait 2 months, we will slowly solve it by new uploads ;( -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: libvpx got soname bump and no one noticed?
On Wed, 27 May 2015 22:39:30 +0200, Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote: F22 got released so I upgraded my machine from F22 to rawhide. But as usual it meant rebuilding rpmfusion packages (as they do not support rawhide). All went quite good. Except installing: Error: package ffmpeg-libs-2.6.2-3.fc23.x86_64 requires libvpx.so.2()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed. Why's that? libvpx 1.4.0 bumped libvpx.so.1 - libvpx.so.2 and I did not found any mail about it on fedora-devel ML (maybe such mails are not required, no idea - many such were sent). Most of rawhide is built against libvpx 1.3.0 so old soname is required. spot did the upgrade and rebuilds. See e.g. the %changelog entry in package pcb from early April. Simple 'dnf remove libvpx.so.1()(64bit)' on my rawhide shows 512 packages including wine, kde, gstreamer plugins and lot of other stuff. A lot less than 512: $ repoquery --whatrequires libvpx|grep -v i686|wc -l 54 And that's with the default --alldeps already. Yet the daily rawhide report does not list any broken dep related to libvpx. It seems to me all deps have been rebuilt. How to solve it? I am afraid that answer would be wait 2 months, we will slowly solve it by new uploads ;( Get rpmfusion to rebuild, too. http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org if necessary. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: libvpx got soname bump and no one noticed?
Marcin: Oh. You said you upgraed to Rawhide. But you seems not actually using Rawhide repos. -robin On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 1:28 PM, Robin Lee cheese...@fedoraproject.org wrote: Marcin: You should update rpmfusion-free-relase. And run 'dnf downgrade ffmpeg-libs'. There is no 'branched' repos in RPMFusion. And before f22 is released, you are actually using the 'rawhide' repos of RPMFusion. But After f22 released, RPMFusion f22 repos is then finally branched and the yum repo configs are updated in new version of rpmfusion-free-release. So, if you run a global 'dnf upgrade' before upgrade rpmfusion-free-release, you will pull in some 'rawhide' packages from RPMFusion. -roibn On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 4:39 AM, Marcin Juszkiewicz mjuszkiew...@redhat.com wrote: F22 got released so I upgraded my machine from F22 to rawhide. But as usual it meant rebuilding rpmfusion packages (as they do not support rawhide). All went quite good. Except installing: Error: package ffmpeg-libs-2.6.2-3.fc23.x86_64 requires libvpx.so.2()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed. Why's that? libvpx 1.4.0 bumped libvpx.so.1 - libvpx.so.2 and I did not found any mail about it on fedora-devel ML (maybe such mails are not required, no idea - many such were sent). Most of rawhide is built against libvpx 1.3.0 so old soname is required. Simple 'dnf remove libvpx.so.1()(64bit)' on my rawhide shows 512 packages including wine, kde, gstreamer plugins and lot of other stuff. How to solve it? I am afraid that answer would be wait 2 months, we will slowly solve it by new uploads ;( -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: libvpx got soname bump and no one noticed?
Marcin: You should update rpmfusion-free-relase. And run 'dnf downgrade ffmpeg-libs'. There is no 'branched' repos in RPMFusion. And before f22 is released, you are actually using the 'rawhide' repos of RPMFusion. But After f22 released, RPMFusion f22 repos is then finally branched and the yum repo configs are updated in new version of rpmfusion-free-release. So, if you run a global 'dnf upgrade' before upgrade rpmfusion-free-release, you will pull in some 'rawhide' packages from RPMFusion. -roibn On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 4:39 AM, Marcin Juszkiewicz mjuszkiew...@redhat.com wrote: F22 got released so I upgraded my machine from F22 to rawhide. But as usual it meant rebuilding rpmfusion packages (as they do not support rawhide). All went quite good. Except installing: Error: package ffmpeg-libs-2.6.2-3.fc23.x86_64 requires libvpx.so.2()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed. Why's that? libvpx 1.4.0 bumped libvpx.so.1 - libvpx.so.2 and I did not found any mail about it on fedora-devel ML (maybe such mails are not required, no idea - many such were sent). Most of rawhide is built against libvpx 1.3.0 so old soname is required. Simple 'dnf remove libvpx.so.1()(64bit)' on my rawhide shows 512 packages including wine, kde, gstreamer plugins and lot of other stuff. How to solve it? I am afraid that answer would be wait 2 months, we will slowly solve it by new uploads ;( -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
