Re: rawhide missed an implicit dependency for #!python
On 06/11/2011 12:14 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Fri, 10 Jun 2011 13:59:18 +0300 > Panu Matilainen wrote: > >> On 06/10/2011 02:28 AM, Josh Stone wrote: >>> On 06/02/2011 01:26 PM, Josh Stone wrote: Our dtrace script in systemtap-sdt-devel starts "#!/usr/bin/python". Usually this leads to an implicit "Requires: /usr/bin/python", but for some reason our rawhide build did not get this. The F15, F14, and F13 builds from the same spec required python as expected. >>> [...] Is this a bug? Or must we now explicitly require python? >>> >>> An output change in file-5.07 appears to have broken find-requires: >>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=712251 >>> >>> And since file-5.07-2.fc15 is now in updates, I would expect this to >>> cause even more problems going forward. >> >> Fixed now in rawhide rpm and an update for F15 is here: >> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/rpm-4.9.0-9.fc15 >> >> Please help testing to get this nasty regression fixed ASAP. >> >> ALL packages containing scripts which have been built while file-5.07 >> has been in rawhide (since May 11th)& F15 (in updates-testing since >> May 23rd) are affected and will have missing dependencies because of >> this, requiring rebuilds to correct the situation. >> >> Thanks Josh for reporting this, and also apologies for missing your >> initial mail on the subject, reacting then would've saved a week's >> worth of broken builds :-/ > > Is there a way we can generate a list of builds affected? > Is it everything? Or things that only have a specific type of requires? ...and here's a list of packages that are built using external dependency generator that MIGHT be affected. This is based on very crude heuristics (built in the bug window, contains executable files) to try to eliminate cases that cannot possibly be affected, but there's not much data to go on here. So certainly there will be false positives here, manual checking by maintainers needed: alex-2.3.5-3.fc16.src.rpm bind-9.8.0-6.P2.fc16.src.rpm bluetile-0.5.3-10.fc16.src.rpm cabal-install-0.10.2-2.fc16.src.rpm darcs-2.5.2-3.fc16.src.rpm dhcp-4.2.1-10.P1.fc16.src.rpm gcc-4.6.0-10.fc16.src.rpm gdal-1.7.3-10.fc16.src.rpm ghc-GLUT-2.1.2.1-10.fc16.src.rpm ghc-HTTP-4000.1.1-6.fc16.src.rpm ghc-HUnit-1.2.2.3-5.fc16.src.rpm ghc-OpenGL-2.2.3.0-8.fc16.src.rpm ghc-QuickCheck-2.4.0.1-6.fc16.src.rpm ghc-attempt-0.3.0-7.fc16.src.rpm ghc-attoparsec-0.8.6.1-1.fc16.src.rpm ghc-base64-bytestring-0.1.0.2-5.fc16.src.rpm ghc-bytestring-nums-0.3.2-6.fc16.src.rpm ghc-bytestring-trie-0.2.3-4.fc16.src.rpm ghc-cgi-3001.1.7.4-7.fc16.src.rpm ghc-citeproc-hs-0.3.2-3.fc16.src.rpm ghc-cmdargs-0.7-2.fc16.src.rpm ghc-colour-2.3.1-8.fc16.src.rpm ghc-csv-0.1.2-9.fc16.src.rpm ghc-deepseq-1.1.0.2-5.fc16.src.rpm ghc-digest-0.0.0.9-1.fc16.src.rpm ghc-dlist-0.5-3.fc16.src.rpm ghc-enumerator-0.4.10-2.fc16.src.rpm ghc-failure-0.1.0.1-5.fc16.src.rpm ghc-fgl-5.4.2.3-6.fc16.src.rpm ghc-hashed-storage-0.5.7-1.fc16.src.rpm ghc-haskell-src-1.0.1.4-6.fc16.src.rpm ghc-html-1.0.1.2-10.fc16.src.rpm ghc-json-0.4.4-2.fc16.src.rpm ghc-ltk-0.10.0.4-2.fc16.src.rpm ghc-mtl-2.0.1.0-6.fc16.src.rpm ghc-mtlparse-0.1.1-6.fc16.src.rpm ghc-network-2.3.0.2-3.fc16.src.rpm ghc-pandoc-types-1.8.0.2-1.fc16.src.rpm ghc-parallel-3.1.0.1-5.fc16.src.rpm ghc-parsec-3.1.1-3.fc16.src.rpm ghc-regex-base-0.93.2-6.fc16.src.rpm ghc-regex-compat-0.93.1-7.fc16.src.rpm ghc-regex-posix-0.94.4-5.fc16.src.rpm ghc-stm-2.2.0.1-5.fc16.src.rpm ghc-syb-0.3-5.fc16.src.rpm ghc-texmath-0.5.0.1-1.fc16.src.rpm ghc-text-0.11.0.5-3.fc16.src.rpm ghc-transformers-0.2.2.0-8.fc16.src.rpm ghc-xhtml-3000.2.0.1-10.fc16.src.rpm ghc-xml-1.3.8-1.fc16.src.rpm ghc-zip-archive-0.1.1.7-3.fc16.src.rpm ghc-zlib-0.5.3.1-3.fc16.src.rpm happy-1.18.6-5.fc16.src.rpm highlight-3.5-1.fc16.src.rpm libao-1.1.0-1.fc16.src.rpm m2crypto-0.21.1-5.fc16.src.rpm mingw-antlr-2.7.7-5.fc16.src.rpm mingw-gdb-7.2-2.fc16.src.rpm mingw-wxWidgets-2.8.12-4.fc16.src.rpm mingw32-OpenSceneGraph-2.8.3-4.fc16.src.rpm mingw32-SDL_image-1.2.10-3.fc16.src.rpm mingw32-boost-1.46.0-0.3.beta1.fc16.src.rpm mingw32-cairomm-1.9.8-2.fc16.src.rpm mingw32-gdk-pixbuf-2.23.3-2.fc16.src.rpm mingw32-jasper-1.900.1-13.fc16.src.rpm mingw32-libltdl-2.4-3.fc16.src.rpm mingw32-libtiff-3.9.5-2.fc16.src.rpm mingw32-libxml2-2.7.8-1.fc16.src.rpm mingw32-opensc-0.12.1-1.fc16.src.rpm mingw32-pango-1.28.4-2.fc16.src.rpm mingw32-pthreads-2.8.0-15.20110511cvs.fc16.src.rpm mingw32-qt-4.7.1-6.fc16.src.rpm mingw32-webkitgtk-1.4.0-4.fc16.src.rpm pandoc-1.8.1.1-1.fc16.src.rpm perl-App-cpanminus-1.4007-1.fc16.src.rpm perl-Bio-SamTools-1.28-2.fc16.src.rpm perl-Compress-Raw-Lzma-2.035-2.fc16.src.rpm perl-DBD-MySQL-4.019-2.fc16.src.rpm perl-DBD-SQLite-1.33-1.fc16.src.rpm perl-Data-OptList-0.107-1.fc16.src.rpm perl-DateTime-0.7000-1.fc16.src.rpm perl-DateTime-Format-Natural-0.96-1.fc16.src.rpm perl-Devel-Cover-0.78-1.fc16.src.rpm perl-Devel-PatchPerl-0.40-1.fc16.src.rpm perl-Dist-Zilla-4.27-1.fc16.src.rpm perl-Event-1.15-1.fc
Re: rawhide missed an implicit dependency for #!python
On 06/11/2011 12:14 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Fri, 10 Jun 2011 13:59:18 +0300 > Panu Matilainen wrote: > >> On 06/10/2011 02:28 AM, Josh Stone wrote: >>> On 06/02/2011 01:26 PM, Josh Stone wrote: Our dtrace script in systemtap-sdt-devel starts "#!/usr/bin/python". Usually this leads to an implicit "Requires: /usr/bin/python", but for some reason our rawhide build did not get this. The F15, F14, and F13 builds from the same spec required python as expected. >>> [...] Is this a bug? Or must we now explicitly require python? >>> >>> An output change in file-5.07 appears to have broken find-requires: >>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=712251 >>> >>> And since file-5.07-2.fc15 is now in updates, I would expect this to >>> cause even more problems going forward. >> >> Fixed now in rawhide rpm and an update for F15 is here: >> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/rpm-4.9.0-9.fc15 >> >> Please help testing to get this nasty regression fixed ASAP. >> >> ALL packages containing scripts which have been built while file-5.07 >> has been in rawhide (since May 11th)& F15 (in updates-testing since >> May 23rd) are affected and will have missing dependencies because of >> this, requiring rebuilds to correct the situation. >> >> Thanks Josh for reporting this, and also apologies for missing your >> initial mail on the subject, reacting then would've saved a week's >> worth of broken builds :-/ > > Is there a way we can generate a list of builds affected? > Is it everything? Or things that only have a specific type of requires? Here's the list of "almost certainly affected" packages generated from a rawhide mirror from today'ish, sorted by their SRPM names. I didn't go through each and every one so it's /possible/ there are false positives but I didn't find any obvious ones on the random sampling I did. If you've done a newer build than what's listed here then feel free to ignore, otherwise you should consider rebuilding due to bug #712251. Like Ville pointed out, in many cases the missing dependency is dragged in through other means (such as python(abi) etc dependencies) but better safe than sorry and for correctness sake... Note that the list below only includes packages built with rpm's "internal" dependency generator enabled, for others its not possible to accurately get this data. 389-ds-base-1.2.9-0.1.a1.fc16.src.rpm BibTool-2.51-1.fc16.src.rpm NetworkManager-0.8.9997-1.git20110531.fc16.src.rpm OpenLP-1.9.5-4.fc16.src.rpm PackageKit-0.6.15-2.fc16.src.rpm PyQt4-4.8.4-2.fc16.src.rpm QuantLib-1.1-1.fc16.src.rpm abrt-2.0.2-5.fc16.src.rpm acpid-2.0.10-1.fc16.src.rpm amanda-3.3.0-1.fc16.src.rpm amtterm-1.3-1.fc16.src.rpm anaconda-16.10-1.fc16.src.rpm animal-sniffer-1.6-8.fc16.src.rpm apr-1.4.5-1.fc16.src.rpm apr-util-1.3.12-1.fc16.src.rpm aqsis-1.6.0-11.fc16.src.rpm asterisk-1.8.4.2-1.fc16.src.rpm asymptote-2.10-1.fc16.src.rpm authconfig-6.1.14-2.fc16.src.rpm avant-window-navigator-0.4.1-0.2.bzr830.fc16.src.rpm awn-extras-applets-0.4.2-0.1.bzr1523.fc16.src.rpm ayttm-0.6.3-1.fc16.src.rpm babel-0.9.6-1.fc16.src.rpm banshee-2.0.1-2.fc16.src.rpm bash-4.2.10-3.fc16.src.rpm bfast-0.6.5a-1.fc16.src.rpm bird-1.3.1-2.fc16.src.rpm blender-2.57b-4.fc16.src.rpm bodhi-0.8.0-1.fc16.src.rpm bucardo-4.4.4-1.fc16.src.rpm buildbot-0.7.12-6.fc16.src.rpm bzr-2.4-0.3.b3.fc16.src.rpm cabal2spec-0.23-1.fc16.src.rpm calibre-0.8.4-1.fc16.src.rpm callweaver-1.2.1-10.fc16.src.rpm cdrkit-1.1.11-8.fc16.src.rpm childsplay-1.6-1.fc16.src.rpm cim-schema-2.29.0-1.fc16.src.rpm cinepaint-0.25.0-0.2.fc16.src.rpm clamav-0.97.1-1600.fc16.src.rpm clamsmtp-1.10-3.fc16.src.rpm clive-2.3.0.3-1.fc16.src.rpm clustershell-1.5.1-1.fc16.src.rpm cmake-2.8.5-0.1.rc1.fc16.src.rpm cmake-fedora-0.5.991-1.fc16.src.rpm collectl-3.5.1-1.fc16.src.rpm colorgcc-1.3.2-2.fc16.src.rpm condor-7.7.0-0.4.fc16.src.rpm couchdb-1.0.3-0.1.fc16.src.rpm cscope-15.7a-5.fc16.src.rpm csound-5.13.0-5.fc16.src.rpm curl-7.21.6-2.fc16.src.rpm cvs-1.11.23-19.fc16.src.rpm cyphesis-0.5.26-1.fc16.src.rpm cyrus-sasl-2.1.23-22.fc16.src.rpm dbus-1.4.10-1.fc16.src.rpm dbusmenu-qt-0.8.2-1.fc16.src.rpm debootstrap-1.0.31-1.fc16.src.rpm deltacloud-core-0.3.0-9.fc16.src.rpm deluge-1.3.2-1.fc16.src.rpm dovecot-2.0.13-1.fc16.src.rpm dracut-011-0.1.git9b30d47.fc16.src.rpm dracut-modules-olpc-0.5.11-1.fc16.src.rpm drbdlinks-1.19-1.fc16.src.rpm drupal6-6.22-1.fc16.src.rpm drupal7-7.2-1.fc16.src.rpm dspam-3.9.0-20.fc16.src.rpm ebnetd-1.0-10.fc16.src.rpm eclipse-3.7.0-0.4.RC4.fc16.src.rpm ecryptfs-utils-87-4.fc16.src.rpm eekboard-0.90.7-2.fc16.src.rpm ejabberd-2.1.8-1.fc16.src.rpm ekiga-3.3.0-9.fc16.src.rpm emacs-23.3-6.fc16.src.rpm ember-0.6.1.1-2.fc16.src.rpm esniper-2.25.0-1.fc16.src.rpm etckeeper-0.54-1.fc16.src.rpm facter-1.5.9-1.fc16.src.rpm fastx_toolkit-0.0.13-4.fc16.src.rpm fcoe-utils-1.0.19-1.fc16.src.rpm fedora-packager-0.5.9.2-1.fc16.src.rpm fence-agents-3.1.4-1.fc16.src.rpm fife-0.3.2-5.r2.fc16.src.rpm fio-1.55-1.fc16.src.rpm fltk-1.3.0-0.2.
Re: rawhide missed an implicit dependency for #!python
On 06/11/2011 10:15 AM, Panu Matilainen wrote: > In the meanwhile if you know your package contains executable scripts > and was built within the last month (for rawhide), it will need a rebuild. I suppose there are many cases where the missing script dependency does not actually matter, because the interpreter ends up being installed through other dependencies. For example python packages that have a dependency on python(abi) or some of their dependencies have it, similar perl cases, /bin/sh is often pulled in by package scriptlets etc. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: rawhide missed an implicit dependency for #!python
On 06/11/2011 10:15 AM, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> On 06/11/2011 12:14 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>> On Fri, 10 Jun 2011 13:59:18 +0300
>> Panu Matilainen wrote:
>>
>>> On 06/10/2011 02:28 AM, Josh Stone wrote:
On 06/02/2011 01:26 PM, Josh Stone wrote:
> Our dtrace script in systemtap-sdt-devel starts
> "#!/usr/bin/python". Usually this leads to an implicit
> "Requires: /usr/bin/python", but for some reason our rawhide build
> did not get this. The F15, F14, and F13 builds from the same spec
> required python as expected.
[...]
> Is this a bug? Or must we now explicitly require python?
An output change in file-5.07 appears to have broken find-requires:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=712251
And since file-5.07-2.fc15 is now in updates, I would expect this to
cause even more problems going forward.
>>>
>>> Fixed now in rawhide rpm and an update for F15 is here:
>>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/rpm-4.9.0-9.fc15
>>>
>>> Please help testing to get this nasty regression fixed ASAP.
>>>
>>> ALL packages containing scripts which have been built while file-5.07
>>> has been in rawhide (since May 11th)& F15 (in updates-testing since
>>> May 23rd) are affected and will have missing dependencies because of
>>> this, requiring rebuilds to correct the situation.
>>>
>>> Thanks Josh for reporting this, and also apologies for missing your
>>> initial mail on the subject, reacting then would've saved a week's
>>> worth of broken builds :-/
>>
>> Is there a way we can generate a list of builds affected?
>> Is it everything? Or things that only have a specific type of requires?
>
> Every package which contains one or more script files starting with
> #!/some/interpreter is affected (%pre etc scriptlets are not affected
> though). And all the missing dependencies are file-dependencies, eg
> /usr/bin/python, /bin/sh etc.
>
> This can't be detected from repodata, but the actual rpm headers carry
> enough data to fairly reliably spot these: executable files (from
> %{FILEMODES}) whose %{FILECLASS} contains "script" but does not have
> %{FILEREQUIRE} (to its interpreter) means the package is missing
> dependencies.
Oh and btw, the above is for detecting the exact condition for a missed
script interpreter dependency, but in this situation a simpler rule
could also be used (for packages built with the internal depgen): if it
contains any files whose %{FILECLASS} contains "script", and has a build
date within the last month, it almost certainly needs a rebuild.
- Panu -
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: rawhide missed an implicit dependency for #!python
On 06/11/2011 12:14 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Jun 2011 13:59:18 +0300
> Panu Matilainen wrote:
>
>> On 06/10/2011 02:28 AM, Josh Stone wrote:
>>> On 06/02/2011 01:26 PM, Josh Stone wrote:
Our dtrace script in systemtap-sdt-devel starts
"#!/usr/bin/python". Usually this leads to an implicit
"Requires: /usr/bin/python", but for some reason our rawhide build
did not get this. The F15, F14, and F13 builds from the same spec
required python as expected.
>>> [...]
Is this a bug? Or must we now explicitly require python?
>>>
>>> An output change in file-5.07 appears to have broken find-requires:
>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=712251
>>>
>>> And since file-5.07-2.fc15 is now in updates, I would expect this to
>>> cause even more problems going forward.
>>
>> Fixed now in rawhide rpm and an update for F15 is here:
>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/rpm-4.9.0-9.fc15
>>
>> Please help testing to get this nasty regression fixed ASAP.
>>
>> ALL packages containing scripts which have been built while file-5.07
>> has been in rawhide (since May 11th)& F15 (in updates-testing since
>> May 23rd) are affected and will have missing dependencies because of
>> this, requiring rebuilds to correct the situation.
>>
>> Thanks Josh for reporting this, and also apologies for missing your
>> initial mail on the subject, reacting then would've saved a week's
>> worth of broken builds :-/
>
> Is there a way we can generate a list of builds affected?
> Is it everything? Or things that only have a specific type of requires?
Every package which contains one or more script files starting with
#!/some/interpreter is affected (%pre etc scriptlets are not affected
though). And all the missing dependencies are file-dependencies, eg
/usr/bin/python, /bin/sh etc.
This can't be detected from repodata, but the actual rpm headers carry
enough data to fairly reliably spot these: executable files (from
%{FILEMODES}) whose %{FILECLASS} contains "script" but does not have
%{FILEREQUIRE} (to its interpreter) means the package is missing
dependencies.
The above works for packages built with the internal dependency
generator, for the others:
a) packages using the Fedora specific dependency filtering macros (large
percentage of perl-packages at least)
b) packages directly setting %_use_internal_dependency_generator to 0
...it can't be detected from the metadata alone and would require
unpacking the rpm and examining executable files. I'll be mostly AFK
through the rest of the weekend but I can try scripting it up for the
part that can be automated on Monday.
In the meanwhile if you know your package contains executable scripts
and was built within the last month (for rawhide), it will need a rebuild.
- Panu -
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: rawhide missed an implicit dependency for #!python
On Fri, 10 Jun 2011 13:59:18 +0300 Panu Matilainen wrote: > On 06/10/2011 02:28 AM, Josh Stone wrote: > > On 06/02/2011 01:26 PM, Josh Stone wrote: > >> Our dtrace script in systemtap-sdt-devel starts > >> "#!/usr/bin/python". Usually this leads to an implicit > >> "Requires: /usr/bin/python", but for some reason our rawhide build > >> did not get this. The F15, F14, and F13 builds from the same spec > >> required python as expected. > > [...] > >> Is this a bug? Or must we now explicitly require python? > > > > An output change in file-5.07 appears to have broken find-requires: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=712251 > > > > And since file-5.07-2.fc15 is now in updates, I would expect this to > > cause even more problems going forward. > > Fixed now in rawhide rpm and an update for F15 is here: > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/rpm-4.9.0-9.fc15 > > Please help testing to get this nasty regression fixed ASAP. > > ALL packages containing scripts which have been built while file-5.07 > has been in rawhide (since May 11th) & F15 (in updates-testing since > May 23rd) are affected and will have missing dependencies because of > this, requiring rebuilds to correct the situation. > > Thanks Josh for reporting this, and also apologies for missing your > initial mail on the subject, reacting then would've saved a week's > worth of broken builds :-/ Is there a way we can generate a list of builds affected? Is it everything? Or things that only have a specific type of requires? kevin signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: rawhide missed an implicit dependency for #!python
On 06/10/2011 02:28 AM, Josh Stone wrote: > On 06/02/2011 01:26 PM, Josh Stone wrote: >> Our dtrace script in systemtap-sdt-devel starts "#!/usr/bin/python". >> Usually this leads to an implicit "Requires: /usr/bin/python", but for >> some reason our rawhide build did not get this. The F15, F14, and F13 >> builds from the same spec required python as expected. > [...] >> Is this a bug? Or must we now explicitly require python? > > An output change in file-5.07 appears to have broken find-requires: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=712251 > > And since file-5.07-2.fc15 is now in updates, I would expect this to > cause even more problems going forward. Fixed now in rawhide rpm and an update for F15 is here: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/rpm-4.9.0-9.fc15 Please help testing to get this nasty regression fixed ASAP. ALL packages containing scripts which have been built while file-5.07 has been in rawhide (since May 11th) & F15 (in updates-testing since May 23rd) are affected and will have missing dependencies because of this, requiring rebuilds to correct the situation. Thanks Josh for reporting this, and also apologies for missing your initial mail on the subject, reacting then would've saved a week's worth of broken builds :-/ - Panu - -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: rawhide missed an implicit dependency for #!python
On 06/02/2011 01:26 PM, Josh Stone wrote: > Our dtrace script in systemtap-sdt-devel starts "#!/usr/bin/python". > Usually this leads to an implicit "Requires: /usr/bin/python", but for > some reason our rawhide build did not get this. The F15, F14, and F13 > builds from the same spec required python as expected. [...] > Is this a bug? Or must we now explicitly require python? An output change in file-5.07 appears to have broken find-requires: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=712251 And since file-5.07-2.fc15 is now in updates, I would expect this to cause even more problems going forward. Thanks, Josh -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: rawhide missed an implicit dependency for #!python
On 06/02/2011 01:34 PM, Peter Robinson wrote: > Is it set as executable? If not the department scan will ignore it. Yes, it is executable: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/fileinfo?rpmID=2556409&filename=/usr/bin/dtrace -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: rawhide missed an implicit dependency for #!python
On Jun 2, 2011 9:26 PM, "Josh Stone" wrote: > > Hi, > > Our dtrace script in systemtap-sdt-devel starts "#!/usr/bin/python". > Usually this leads to an implicit "Requires: /usr/bin/python", but for > some reason our rawhide build did not get this. The F15, F14, and F13 > builds from the same spec required python as expected. > > The rawhide build which missed the dependency: > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=244934 > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/rpminfo?rpmID=2556409 > > Compared to the F15 build which properly requires python: > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=244942 > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/rpminfo?rpmID=2556473 > > Is this a bug? Or must we now explicitly require python? Is it set as executable? If not the department scan will ignore it. Peter -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
