[EPEL-devel] Re: Does EPEL 9 Koji have older c9s packages than local mock?
On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 7:38 AM Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 22. 04. 22 19:53, Miro Hrončok wrote: > > Hello, > > > > I've been trying to debug a segfault during %check that only occurs in > epel9 > > Koji, but not in mock. > > > > At the end, I compared the list of packages with: > > > > $ koji list-buildroot 34845388 | sort > koji > > $ mock -r centos-stream+epel-9-x86_64 shell -- rpm -qa | sort > mock > > $ diff -u koji mock | grep -v ' ' > > +acl-2.3.1-3.el9.x86_64 > > -audit-libs-3.0.7-101.el9.x86_64 > > ... > > > > This seems like my local mock has newer c9s packages than the Koji build > repo. > > Is that expected, or is pulling c9s packages into the build repo stuck > on Koji > > side? > > > > Actually, I got an idea that EPEL 9 Koji might already be using > (internal?) > > RHEL 9.0, possibly I have missed this switch... However, the > > centos-stream-release package contraditcs taht idea :/ > > > > I've checked with an EPEL 9 Next Koji scratchbuild and it got e.g. > > pyproject-rpm-macros-1.0.1-1.el9. > > > Thanks for all the answers -- I see them in the archives but never > received them :( > > Was this "freeze" ever announced somewhere? I might have missed that as > well, > considering I am clearly missing some email. > I know in the weekly council meeting it was announced. But now that I go through my emails I see that we announced we were going to do it, but we never actually sent out an email saying that the change had happened. Sorry about that. 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[EPEL-devel] Re: Does EPEL 9 Koji have older c9s packages than local mock?
On 22. 04. 22 19:53, Miro Hrončok wrote: Hello, I've been trying to debug a segfault during %check that only occurs in epel9 Koji, but not in mock. At the end, I compared the list of packages with: $ koji list-buildroot 34845388 | sort > koji $ mock -r centos-stream+epel-9-x86_64 shell -- rpm -qa | sort > mock $ diff -u koji mock | grep -v ' ' +acl-2.3.1-3.el9.x86_64 -audit-libs-3.0.7-101.el9.x86_64 ... This seems like my local mock has newer c9s packages than the Koji build repo. Is that expected, or is pulling c9s packages into the build repo stuck on Koji side? Actually, I got an idea that EPEL 9 Koji might already be using (internal?) RHEL 9.0, possibly I have missed this switch... However, the centos-stream-release package contraditcs taht idea :/ I've checked with an EPEL 9 Next Koji scratchbuild and it got e.g. pyproject-rpm-macros-1.0.1-1.el9. Thanks for all the answers -- I see them in the archives but never received them :( Was this "freeze" ever announced somewhere? I might have missed that as well, considering I am clearly missing some email. -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 IRC: mhroncok ___ 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[EPEL-devel] Re: Does EPEL 9 Koji have older c9s packages than local mock?
Short answer: Yes Longer Answer: epel9 currently has what is going to be in RHEL 9.0. CentOS Stream 9 (what you get with local mock) has several updated packages that will be in RHEL 9.1 If you find that your packages will only build on the current CentOS STream 9, then you should build them in epel9-next. epel9-next builds off the current CentOS Stream 9. Troy On Fri, Apr 22, 2022 at 11:22 AM Miro Hrončok wrote: > Hello, > > I've been trying to debug a segfault during %check that only occurs in > epel9 > Koji, but not in mock. > > At the end, I compared the list of packages with: > > $ koji list-buildroot 34845388 | sort > koji > $ mock -r centos-stream+epel-9-x86_64 shell -- rpm -qa | sort > mock > $ diff -u koji mock | grep -v ' ' > +acl-2.3.1-3.el9.x86_64 > -audit-libs-3.0.7-101.el9.x86_64 > +audit-libs-3.0.7-102.el9.x86_64 > -binutils-gold-2.35.2-17.el9.x86_64 > -binutils-2.35.2-17.el9.x86_64 > +binutils-gold-2.35.2-19.el9.x86_64 > +binutils-2.35.2-19.el9.x86_64 > -centos-gpg-keys-9.0-9.el9.noarch > -centos-stream-release-9.0-9.el9.noarch > -centos-stream-repos-9.0-9.el9.noarch > +centos-gpg-keys-9.0-12.el9.noarch > +centos-stream-release-9.0-12.el9.noarch > +centos-stream-repos-9.0-12.el9.noarch > -crypto-policies-20220203-1.gitf03e75e.el9.noarch > +crypto-policies-20220404-1.git845c0c1.el9.noarch > +cryptsetup-libs-2.4.3-4.el9.x86_64 > -cyrus-sasl-lib-2.1.27-19.el9.x86_64 > +cyrus-sasl-lib-2.1.27-20.el9.x86_64 > +dbus-broker-28-5.el9.x86_64 > +dbus-common-1.12.20-5.el9.noarch > +dbus-1.12.20-5.el9.x86_64 > +device-mapper-libs-1.02.183-4.el9.x86_64 > +device-mapper-1.02.183-4.el9.x86_64 > -elfutils-debuginfod-client-0.186-1.el9.x86_64 > -elfutils-default-yama-scope-0.186-1.el9.noarch > -elfutils-libelf-0.186-1.el9.x86_64 > -elfutils-libs-0.186-1.el9.x86_64 > -elfutils-0.186-1.el9.x86_64 > -epel-release-9-2.el9.noarch > +elfutils-debuginfod-client-0.186-3.el9.x86_64 > +elfutils-default-yama-scope-0.186-3.el9.noarch > +elfutils-libelf-0.186-3.el9.x86_64 > +elfutils-libs-0.186-3.el9.x86_64 > +elfutils-0.186-3.el9.x86_64 > -expat-2.2.10-9.el9.x86_64 > -fedpkg-minimal-1.2.0-4.el9.noarch > +expat-2.2.10-10.el9.x86_64 > -flexiblas-netlib-3.0.4-7.el9.x86_64 > -flexiblas-openblas-openmp-3.0.4-7.el9.x86_64 > -flexiblas-3.0.4-7.el9.x86_64 > +flexiblas-netlib-3.0.4-8.el9.x86_64 > +flexiblas-openblas-openmp-3.0.4-8.el9.x86_64 > +flexiblas-3.0.4-8.el9.x86_64 > -glibc-common-2.34-25.el9.x86_64 > -glibc-gconv-extra-2.34-25.el9.x86_64 > -glibc-minimal-langpack-2.34-25.el9.x86_64 > -glibc-2.34-25.el9.x86_64 > +glibc-common-2.34-29.el9.x86_64 > +glibc-gconv-extra-2.34-29.el9.x86_64 > +glibc-minimal-langpack-2.34-29.el9.x86_64 > +glibc-2.34-29.el9.x86_64 > -gnutls-3.7.3-6.el9.x86_64 > +gnutls-3.7.3-9.el9.x86_64 > +gpg-pubkey-3228467c-613798eb > +gpg-pubkey-8483c65d-5ccc5b19 > -krb5-libs-1.19.1-13.el9.x86_64 > +kmod-libs-28-7.el9.x86_64 > +krb5-libs-1.19.1-15.el9.x86_64 > -libgcc-11.2.1-9.4.el9.x86_64 > -libgcrypt-1.10.0-2.el9.x86_64 > -libgfortran-11.2.1-9.4.el9.x86_64 > -libgomp-11.2.1-9.4.el9.x86_64 > +libgcc-11.2.1-10.el9.x86_64 > +libgcrypt-1.10.0-3.el9.x86_64 > +libgfortran-11.2.1-10.el9.x86_64 > +libgomp-11.2.1-10.el9.x86_64 > -libquadmath-11.2.1-9.4.el9.x86_64 > +libquadmath-11.2.1-10.el9.x86_64 > +libseccomp-2.5.2-2.el9.x86_64 > -libstdc++-11.2.1-9.4.el9.x86_64 > +libstdc++-11.2.1-10.el9.x86_64 > -libxml2-2.9.12-4.el9.x86_64 > +libxml2-2.9.13-1.el9.x86_64 > -openblas-openmp-0.3.15-2.el9.x86_64 > +openblas-openmp-0.3.15-3.el9.x86_64 > -openblas-0.3.15-2.el9.x86_64 > -openldap-2.4.59-3.el9.x86_64 > -openssl-libs-3.0.1-12.el9.x86_64 > -openssl-3.0.1-12.el9.x86_64 > +openblas-0.3.15-3.el9.x86_64 > +openldap-2.4.59-4.el9.x86_64 > +openssl-libs-3.0.1-18.el9.x86_64 > +openssl-3.0.1-18.el9.x86_64 > -pyproject-rpm-macros-1.0.0~rc1-1.el9.noarch > +pyproject-rpm-macros-1.0.1-1.el9.noarch > -systemd-libs-250-3.el9.x86_64 > +systemd-libs-250-4.el9.x86_64 > +systemd-pam-250-4.el9.x86_64 > +systemd-rpm-macros-250-4.el9.noarch > +systemd-250-4.el9.x86_64 > -tpm2-tss-3.0.3-7.el9.x86_64 > -zlib-1.2.11-31.el9.x86_64 > +zlib-1.2.11-32.el9.x86_64 > > This seems like my local mock has newer c9s packages than the Koji build > repo. > Is that expected, or is pulling c9s packages into the build repo stuck on > Koji > side? > > Actually, I got an idea that EPEL 9 Koji might already be using > (internal?) > RHEL 9.0, possibly I have missed this switch... However, the > centos-stream-release package contraditcs taht idea :/ > > I've checked with an EPEL 9 Next Koji scratchbuild and it got e.g. > pyproject-rpm-macros-1.0.1-1.el9. > > -- > Miro Hrončok > -- > Phone: +420777974800 > IRC: mhroncok > ___ > 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:
[EPEL-devel] Re: Does EPEL 9 Koji have older c9s packages than local mock?
On Fri, Apr 22, 2022 at 2:22 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > Hello, > > I've been trying to debug a segfault during %check that only occurs in epel9 > Koji, but not in mock. > > At the end, I compared the list of packages with: > > $ koji list-buildroot 34845388 | sort > koji > $ mock -r centos-stream+epel-9-x86_64 shell -- rpm -qa | sort > mock > $ diff -u koji mock | grep -v ' ' > +acl-2.3.1-3.el9.x86_64 > -audit-libs-3.0.7-101.el9.x86_64 > +audit-libs-3.0.7-102.el9.x86_64 > -binutils-gold-2.35.2-17.el9.x86_64 > -binutils-2.35.2-17.el9.x86_64 > +binutils-gold-2.35.2-19.el9.x86_64 > +binutils-2.35.2-19.el9.x86_64 > -centos-gpg-keys-9.0-9.el9.noarch > -centos-stream-release-9.0-9.el9.noarch > -centos-stream-repos-9.0-9.el9.noarch > +centos-gpg-keys-9.0-12.el9.noarch > +centos-stream-release-9.0-12.el9.noarch > +centos-stream-repos-9.0-12.el9.noarch > -crypto-policies-20220203-1.gitf03e75e.el9.noarch > +crypto-policies-20220404-1.git845c0c1.el9.noarch > +cryptsetup-libs-2.4.3-4.el9.x86_64 > -cyrus-sasl-lib-2.1.27-19.el9.x86_64 > +cyrus-sasl-lib-2.1.27-20.el9.x86_64 > +dbus-broker-28-5.el9.x86_64 > +dbus-common-1.12.20-5.el9.noarch > +dbus-1.12.20-5.el9.x86_64 > +device-mapper-libs-1.02.183-4.el9.x86_64 > +device-mapper-1.02.183-4.el9.x86_64 > -elfutils-debuginfod-client-0.186-1.el9.x86_64 > -elfutils-default-yama-scope-0.186-1.el9.noarch > -elfutils-libelf-0.186-1.el9.x86_64 > -elfutils-libs-0.186-1.el9.x86_64 > -elfutils-0.186-1.el9.x86_64 > -epel-release-9-2.el9.noarch > +elfutils-debuginfod-client-0.186-3.el9.x86_64 > +elfutils-default-yama-scope-0.186-3.el9.noarch > +elfutils-libelf-0.186-3.el9.x86_64 > +elfutils-libs-0.186-3.el9.x86_64 > +elfutils-0.186-3.el9.x86_64 > -expat-2.2.10-9.el9.x86_64 > -fedpkg-minimal-1.2.0-4.el9.noarch > +expat-2.2.10-10.el9.x86_64 > -flexiblas-netlib-3.0.4-7.el9.x86_64 > -flexiblas-openblas-openmp-3.0.4-7.el9.x86_64 > -flexiblas-3.0.4-7.el9.x86_64 > +flexiblas-netlib-3.0.4-8.el9.x86_64 > +flexiblas-openblas-openmp-3.0.4-8.el9.x86_64 > +flexiblas-3.0.4-8.el9.x86_64 > -glibc-common-2.34-25.el9.x86_64 > -glibc-gconv-extra-2.34-25.el9.x86_64 > -glibc-minimal-langpack-2.34-25.el9.x86_64 > -glibc-2.34-25.el9.x86_64 > +glibc-common-2.34-29.el9.x86_64 > +glibc-gconv-extra-2.34-29.el9.x86_64 > +glibc-minimal-langpack-2.34-29.el9.x86_64 > +glibc-2.34-29.el9.x86_64 > -gnutls-3.7.3-6.el9.x86_64 > +gnutls-3.7.3-9.el9.x86_64 > +gpg-pubkey-3228467c-613798eb > +gpg-pubkey-8483c65d-5ccc5b19 > -krb5-libs-1.19.1-13.el9.x86_64 > +kmod-libs-28-7.el9.x86_64 > +krb5-libs-1.19.1-15.el9.x86_64 > -libgcc-11.2.1-9.4.el9.x86_64 > -libgcrypt-1.10.0-2.el9.x86_64 > -libgfortran-11.2.1-9.4.el9.x86_64 > -libgomp-11.2.1-9.4.el9.x86_64 > +libgcc-11.2.1-10.el9.x86_64 > +libgcrypt-1.10.0-3.el9.x86_64 > +libgfortran-11.2.1-10.el9.x86_64 > +libgomp-11.2.1-10.el9.x86_64 > -libquadmath-11.2.1-9.4.el9.x86_64 > +libquadmath-11.2.1-10.el9.x86_64 > +libseccomp-2.5.2-2.el9.x86_64 > -libstdc++-11.2.1-9.4.el9.x86_64 > +libstdc++-11.2.1-10.el9.x86_64 > -libxml2-2.9.12-4.el9.x86_64 > +libxml2-2.9.13-1.el9.x86_64 > -openblas-openmp-0.3.15-2.el9.x86_64 > +openblas-openmp-0.3.15-3.el9.x86_64 > -openblas-0.3.15-2.el9.x86_64 > -openldap-2.4.59-3.el9.x86_64 > -openssl-libs-3.0.1-12.el9.x86_64 > -openssl-3.0.1-12.el9.x86_64 > +openblas-0.3.15-3.el9.x86_64 > +openldap-2.4.59-4.el9.x86_64 > +openssl-libs-3.0.1-18.el9.x86_64 > +openssl-3.0.1-18.el9.x86_64 > -pyproject-rpm-macros-1.0.0~rc1-1.el9.noarch > +pyproject-rpm-macros-1.0.1-1.el9.noarch > -systemd-libs-250-3.el9.x86_64 > +systemd-libs-250-4.el9.x86_64 > +systemd-pam-250-4.el9.x86_64 > +systemd-rpm-macros-250-4.el9.noarch > +systemd-250-4.el9.x86_64 > -tpm2-tss-3.0.3-7.el9.x86_64 > -zlib-1.2.11-31.el9.x86_64 > +zlib-1.2.11-32.el9.x86_64 > > This seems like my local mock has newer c9s packages than the Koji build repo. > Is that expected, or is pulling c9s packages into the build repo stuck on Koji > side? > > Actually, I got an idea that EPEL 9 Koji might already be using (internal?) > RHEL 9.0, possibly I have missed this switch... However, the > centos-stream-release package contraditcs taht idea :/ > > I've checked with an EPEL 9 Next Koji scratchbuild and it got e.g. > pyproject-rpm-macros-1.0.1-1.el9. EPEL 9 is frozen on the Feb 24 compose for CentOS Stream 9 until RHEL 9 GA. -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! ___ 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[EPEL-devel] Re: Does EPEL 9 Koji have older c9s packages than local mock?
On Fri, 22 Apr 2022 at 14:22, Miro Hrončok wrote: > Hello, > > I've been trying to debug a segfault during %check that only occurs in > epel9 > Koji, but not in mock. > > At the end, I compared the list of packages with: > > > ... > This seems like my local mock has newer c9s packages than the Koji build > repo. > Is that expected, or is pulling c9s packages into the build repo stuck on > Koji > side? > > Yes it is expected until RHEL9 comes out and then EPEL9 is moved to using RHEL9 as its build environment. At some point a month ago or so, the sync was stopped from updating CentOS 9 on Fedora's batcave box for using with koji. That was to make sure that EPEL9 did not start getting packages from the future which would cause builds not to work after RHEL9 came out. I think that this was announced earlier but I don't know if it was only at the Alpha Centauri filing cabinet that I keep track of (aka IRC meeting) or an email. > Actually, I got an idea that EPEL 9 Koji might already be using > (internal?) > RHEL 9.0, possibly I have missed this switch... However, the > centos-stream-release package contraditcs taht idea :/ > > I've checked with an EPEL 9 Next Koji scratchbuild and it got e.g. > pyproject-rpm-macros-1.0.1-1.el9. > > -- > Miro Hrončok > -- > Phone: +420777974800 > IRC: mhroncok > ___ > 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 > Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure > -- Stephen J Smoogen. Let us be kind to one another, for most of us are fighting a hard battle. -- Ian MacClaren ___ 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[EPEL-devel] Re: Does EPEL 9 Koji have older c9s packages than local mock?
On Fri, Apr 22, 2022 at 07:53:10PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > Hello, > > I've been trying to debug a segfault during %check that only occurs in epel9 > Koji, but not in mock. > > At the end, I compared the list of packages with: ...snip... > > This seems like my local mock has newer c9s packages than the Koji build > repo. Is that expected, or is pulling c9s packages into the build repo stuck > on Koji side? It's expected, because epel9 is going to be tracking RHEL9 as soon as it's out, so we cut the sync when CentOS stream 9 started tracking 9.1 packages. Your local mock likely has 9.1 packages. > Actually, I got an idea that EPEL 9 Koji might already be using (internal?) > RHEL 9.0, possibly I have missed this switch... However, the > centos-stream-release package contraditcs taht idea :/ > > I've checked with an EPEL 9 Next Koji scratchbuild and it got e.g. > pyproject-rpm-macros-1.0.1-1.el9. It's not using rhel9 (yet) just a snapshot of stream9 back when it was tracking 9.0. kevin signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
