> AL> Thanks. Unfortunately it appears that this affects gnome-python2
> AL> as well:
>
> [...]
>
>>>> Broken deps for i386
>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>>>> gnome-python2-gdl-2.19.1-20.fc10.i386 requires libgdl-gnome-1.so.0
>
> And sure enough gnome-python2-extras fails to rebuild after this
> change because it can't find certain gdl files:

I filed this: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/468698

Due to the lack of comments on the GNOME bugzilla about the proposed
patch, I am reluctant to apply that patch on the Fedora package, of
which I am neither the maintainer nor the co-maintainer.

Happy hacking,
Debarshi

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

>>>>> Debarshi Ray writes:

AL> Thanks. Unfortunately it appears that this affects gnome-python2
AL> as well:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>>>> Broken deps for i386
>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> gnome-python2-gdl-2.19.1-20.fc10.i386 requires
>>>>> libgdl-gnome-1.so.0
>>
>> And sure enough gnome-python2-extras fails to rebuild after this
>> change because it can't find certain gdl files:

> I filed this: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/468698

> Due to the lack of comments on the GNOME bugzilla about the proposed
> patch, I am reluctant to apply that patch on the Fedora package, of
> which I am neither the maintainer nor the co-maintainer.

Thanks for filing the bug. The patch doesn't apply in any case.
Nevertheless, it would be good to pester the maintainer of the
gnome-python2-extras and help him look into it, given that it was your
soname bump of libgdl that caused the problem in the first place.

I'm not trying to pick on you (because at least you announced the
change on f-d-l), but, in general, it would be good if maintainers got
in the habit of always running repoquery when an soname bump is going
to happen to check exactly which packages a given soname depends on,
rather than guess. Then the maintainer can co-ordinate with the
maintainers of the affected packages *in advance* (or rebuild them
yourself if sufficiently comfortable with the package), rather than
having broken deps in rawhide which last for several days (or weeks in
some cases).

Alex

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Alex Lancaster <alexl <at> users.sourceforge.net> writes:
> Thanks for filing the bug. The patch doesn't apply in any case.
> Nevertheless, it would be good to pester the maintainer of the
> gnome-python2-extras and help him look into it, given that it was your
> soname bump of libgdl that caused the problem in the first place.

The gnome-python2-extras maintainer got it to build.

Kevin Kofler

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

>>>>> Debarshi Ray writes:

>> Debarshi,
>>
>> gnome-build, anjuta are still broken in rawhide as of 20081016 and
>> I don't see any new builds in koji. The development freeze is
>> coming in one day, can you please fix these builds ASAP as you
>> promised above before the freeze?

> Actually I had to go out of station over the weekend, and the libgdl
> build was done just before I left. I am back now, and have the Koji
> and Bugzilla links opened in the other browser tabs. Will push the
> builds today evening.

As far as I can see, anjuta has not yet been rebuilt:

https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=1302

and still causing broken deps in rawhide... :-(

Does this require a new upstream version? It's really not a good idea
to bump soname, and then leave the dependent packages to be broken for
about 5 days. Either rebuild the dependent packags immediately after
pushing the soname, or wait until you have time to do them all at
once.

Alex

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

> gnome-build, anjuta are still broken in rawhide as of 20081016 and I
> don't see any new builds in koji. The development freeze is coming in
> one day, can you please fix these builds ASAP as you promised above
> before the freeze?

Anjuta 2.24 needed some testing and I did not want to push it into
Rawhide before testing some of its basic functionality. This,
unfortunately, takes some time and I filed a ticket with the Release
Engineering team: https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/888

Happy hacking,
Debarshi

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

> As far as I can see, anjuta has not yet been rebuilt:
>
> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=1302
>
> and still causing broken deps in rawhide... :-(
>
> Does this require a new upstream version? It's really not a good idea
> to bump soname, and then leave the dependent packages to be broken for
> about 5 days. Either rebuild the dependent packags immediately after
> pushing the soname, or wait until you have time to do them all at
> once.

Since there are multiple packages contributing to broken dependencies
in Rawhide, and some of them don't get fixed for weeks (ruby-rpm comes
to my mind), I can not agree with the above rationale.

The reason Anjuta 2.23.x were not built and we directly jumped to
Anjuta 2.24 has been mentioned on the Trac ticket [1]. At this point
in the development cycle I wanted to be sure about Anjuta 2.24's
functionality before pushing it. 2.24.1 is already a bug fix release,
but if Rawhide users can unearth some more problems, I will gladly
take them up.

Happy hacking,
Debarshi

[1] https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/888

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list