[EPEL-devel] Re: openblas updates
On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 8:08 AM Antonio T. sagitter wrote: > > Hi all. > > Why openblas-0.3.5 is waiting for stable branch since 2 years? [1] > > Is it reasonable, taking into account the rebuilds of dependent > packages, to rebuild openblas on epel7 by using a more recent GCC > version like GCC-8 or GCC-9 ? > > > [1] https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-abb5b76382 > -- This is a very good question. I thought I had already gone through all the old open bodhi issues. But it looks like my search wasn't good enough. If I do a bodhi updates query --status testing --submitted-before 2019 There are 152 EPEL7 and EPEL8 packages. :( Actually, now that I look at it ... I did that cleanup about a year and a half ago and it looks like things have grown since then. Sorry, I'm not helping with openblas. That is up to the maintainer. It looks like it will install. My opinion is to move it to stable, and if you want a rebuild, rebuild it and have a seperate update. I'll probably do another round of cleanup, but that will be a different email, different subject. Troy ___ epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[EPEL-devel] Re: %generate_buildrequires
On Fri, 4 Dec 2020, Miro Hrončok wrote: On 12/3/20 10:06 PM, Andrew C Aitchison wrote: Is %generate_buildrequires suppose to work for packages which do not used python ? Yes, see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/DynamicBuildRequires Thanks. Now that I read that, this looks like a good plean. (I am also confused/suspicious of the point of a macro to automate build requires, except as a step on a path to somewhere else. If build requirements need to be stated explicitly, then automating their statement is a good way of hiding an issue that needs to be reviewed whenever changes are made. ) Indeed, things are less explicit when reading the spec file. OTOH When upstream requirements change, one does not need to update them manually. Certainly a very good step in this direction. Is there anything to save an upstream devel from having to know that, say, what Ubuntu calls "libX11-dev", CentOS calls libX11-devel ? No more obsolete buildrequires (they tend to happen, really). Yes; I have seen that. Thanks for the pointer to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/DynamicBuildRequires -- Andrew C. Aitchison Kendal, UK and...@aitchison.me.uk___ epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[EPEL-devel] openblas updates
Hi all. Why openblas-0.3.5 is waiting for stable branch since 2 years? [1] Is it reasonable, taking into account the rebuilds of dependent packages, to rebuild openblas on epel7 by using a more recent GCC version like GCC-8 or GCC-9 ? [1] https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-abb5b76382 -- --- Antonio Trande Fedora Project mailto: sagit...@fedoraproject.org GPG key: 0x29FBC85D7A51CC2F GPG key server: https://keys.gnupg.net/ ___ epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
