FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 01-15-2010, 08:44 PM
Adam Williamson
 
Default Candidate packages for removal due to FTBFS, implications

On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 20:04 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 18:17:21 +0100, Milos wrote:
>
> > On 15.1.2010 07:00, Matt Domsch wrote:
> >
> > > synce-kde-0.9.1-4.fc11.src.rpm
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=539195
> >
> > Synce-kde should be EOL'd already a long time (it has been replaced
> by
> > something else, can't remember details unfortunately anymore) -- I
> spoke
> > about this with the maintainer some months ago and wonder this is
> still
> > on the list...
>
> I only remember that synce-hal replaced synce-serial, ... but in case
> synce-kde really has been replaced by something, what is so difficult
> about removing files in cvs and adding a dead.package? I can
> understand
> that creating a releng ticket for the remaining steps is a bit of a
> hurdle,
> but removing files in cvs/devel is easy enough.

synce-kde is replaced by synce-kpm. The maintainer seems somewhat
erratic in his availability - I may ask to be made a co-maintainer for
the synce stuff so I can take a shot at keeping it up to date (I really
need to look into whether opensync 0.4 is vaguely usable yet).
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 01-15-2010, 09:24 PM
Toshio Kuratomi
 
Default Candidate packages for removal due to FTBFS, implications

On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 01:12:14PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 00:00 -0600, Matt Domsch wrote:
>
> > xqilla-2.1.3-0.6.fc11.src.rpm
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=511425
>
> This one also has a major policy breach issue:
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=555836
>
> (it ships its own copy of xerces)

A new maintainer has stepped up and I've been working with him so he can get
this bug fixed up as well. Hopefully we'll get this package will be ship
shape soon.

-Toshio
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 01-15-2010, 11:38 PM
Adam Williamson
 
Default Candidate packages for removal due to FTBFS, implications

On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 17:24 -0500, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 01:12:14PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 00:00 -0600, Matt Domsch wrote:
> >
> > > xqilla-2.1.3-0.6.fc11.src.rpm
> > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=511425
> >
> > This one also has a major policy breach issue:
> >
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=555836
> >
> > (it ships its own copy of xerces)
>
> A new maintainer has stepped up and I've been working with him so he
> can get
> this bug fixed up as well. Hopefully we'll get this package will be
> ship
> shape soon.

It'd be good to explain that on the bug reports, so we know the package
shouldn't be blocked.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 01-16-2010, 03:34 AM
supercyper
 
Default Candidate packages for removal due to FTBFS, implications

I want to take qtiplot, because the maintainer of qtiplot*becomes unresponsive for nearly one year.


Since I am not a fedora packages yet, I need a sponser to review some of my packages such as https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=541207.


*


Chen Lei,

*

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 01-20-2010, 09:52 PM
Jeff Johnston
 
Default Candidate packages for removal due to FTBFS, implications

On 15/01/10 01:00 AM, Matt Domsch wrote:
> The following 30 packages, with respective FTBFS bugs, have been open
> since the Fedora 11 time frame, and continue to fail to build. These
> are the oldest non-building packages in the distribution, everything
> else (over 8800) managed to build for Fedora 12 or newer already.
>
> geronimo-specs-1.0-2.M2.fc10.src.rpm https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=511494
>

This was a bit of a mess.

This package was last built successfully for F-11.

I have taken ownership of the orphaned package and built it for F-12.
For F-13, there were numerous upgrades from 1.0-M4 all the way to 1.2.
Unfortunately, none of these ever built, most were never tagged, and 1.2
has a number of build dependencies for packages that don't exist
currently in Fedora.

It's not pretty, but I regressed the F-13 spec file back to the F-12
version (1.0-3.2.M2) which is the last successful version to build. I
have documented what I did and what packages were missing so 1.2 work
can resume if/when needed. There is work under-way by akurtakov to try
and remove the need for the geronimo-specs package altogether.

The package has been built in rawhide and the FTBFS bug 511494 has been
closed.

-- Jeff J.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 05:53 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org