[yast-devel] Using the new libstorage-bgl
There are no packages yet for libstorage-bgl-eval and the new proposal. Here
is what you have to do to work with them:
- Force-uninstall old libstorage:
sudo rpm -e --nodeps libstorage6 libstorage-ruby libstorage-python
libstorage-devel libstorage-testsuite
- Check out new libstorage from github:
git clone git@github.com:openSUSE/libstorage-bgl-eval.git
- Build and install:
cd libstorage-bgl-eval
make -f Makefile.repo
make
sudo make install
New Proposal:
- Check out the "new-proposal" branch of yast2-storage
- In the yast2-storage source directory, to to the lib/storage directory:
cd $MYSRC/yast-storage
cd src/lib/storage
- Start the minimalistic test frame as root (required for hardware probing):
sudo ./storage_proposal.rb
- Watch the y2log and stdout
Kind regards
--
Stefan Hundhammer
On 02/02/2016 11:09 AM, Stefan Hundhammer wrote:
There are no packages yet for libstorage-bgl-eval and the new proposal.
Hmmm, that should never happen with Scrum. Potentially shippable products and all that. ;-)
Here is what you have to do to work with them:
- Force-uninstall old libstorage:
sudo rpm -e --nodeps libstorage6 libstorage-ruby libstorage-python libstorage-devel libstorage-testsuite
- Check out new libstorage from github:
git clone git@github.com:openSUSE/libstorage-bgl-eval.git
- Build and install:
cd libstorage-bgl-eval make -f Makefile.repo make sudo make install
I tried the instructions for building a rpm instead (from the README), but it failed when checking the python bindings. I tried a couple of workarounds (like adding -modern to the swig call) and ended up commenting the %check section in the specfile in order to proceed.
New Proposal:
- Check out the "new-proposal" branch of yast2-storage
- In the yast2-storage source directory, to to the lib/storage directory:
cd $MYSRC/yast-storage cd src/lib/storage
- Start the minimalistic test frame as root (required for hardware probing):
sudo ./storage_proposal.rb
- Watch the y2log and stdout
It works! Nice job!... but we have to improve our "shippability". We are going to have real stakeholders now, so let's make real Scrum. :-) Cheers. -- Ancor González Sosa YaST Team at SUSE Linux GmbH -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: yast-devel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: yast-devel+owner@opensuse.org
On Fri, Feb 05, 2016 at 07:42:47PM +0100, Ancor Gonzalez Sosa wrote:
On 02/02/2016 11:09 AM, Stefan Hundhammer wrote:
There are no packages yet for libstorage-bgl-eval and the new proposal.
Hmmm, that should never happen with Scrum. Potentially shippable products and all that. ;-)
It did not happen: https://build.opensuse.org/project/monitor/home:aschnell:storage-redesign
I tried the instructions for building a rpm instead (from the README), but it failed when checking the python bindings. I tried a couple of workarounds (like adding -modern to the swig call) and ended up commenting the %check section in the specfile in order to proceed.
Indeed, with Factory something is broken. A few weeks ago it was
still working. Try the swig version from the redesign project.
ciao Arvin
--
Arvin Schnell,
On Fri, Feb 05, 2016 at 11:09:06PM +0100, Arvin Schnell wrote:
On Fri, Feb 05, 2016 at 07:42:47PM +0100, Ancor Gonzalez Sosa wrote:
I tried the instructions for building a rpm instead (from the README), but it failed when checking the python bindings. I tried a couple of workarounds (like adding -modern to the swig call) and ended up commenting the %check section in the specfile in order to proceed.
Indeed, with Factory something is broken. A few weeks ago it was still working. Try the swig version from the redesign project.
The Python bindings work with swig 3.0.7 but not with swig
3.0.8.
Luckily others have found the same problem
(http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.programming.swig.devel/23745)
and the workaround also works. So a clean solution should be
possible.
ciao
Arvin
--
Arvin Schnell,
On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 04:03:05PM +0100, Arvin Schnell wrote:
On Fri, Feb 05, 2016 at 11:09:06PM +0100, Arvin Schnell wrote:
On Fri, Feb 05, 2016 at 07:42:47PM +0100, Ancor Gonzalez Sosa wrote:
I tried the instructions for building a rpm instead (from the README), but it failed when checking the python bindings. I tried a couple of workarounds (like adding -modern to the swig call) and ended up commenting the %check section in the specfile in order to proceed.
Indeed, with Factory something is broken. A few weeks ago it was still working. Try the swig version from the redesign project.
The Python bindings work with swig 3.0.7 but not with swig 3.0.8.
Luckily others have found the same problem (http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.programming.swig.devel/23745) and the workaround also works. So a clean solution should be possible.
Actually the issue should be fixed meanwhile in swig, see
https://github.com/swig/swig/issues/583. I have updated swig to
3.0.7 in
https://build.opensuse.org/project/monitor/home:aschnell:storage-redesign
and enabled it for openSUSE:Factory.
So in short: Don't use swig 3.0.8.
ciao Arvin
--
Arvin Schnell,
* Ancor Gonzalez Sosa
I tried the instructions for building a rpm instead (from the README), but it failed when checking the python bindings. I tried a couple of workarounds (like adding -modern to the swig call) and ended up commenting the %check section in the specfile in order to proceed.
Current libstorage-bgl builds fine with swig-3.0.8 from Tumbleweed. Feel free to ping me if you have any troubles with swig. Klaus -- SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: yast-devel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: yast-devel+owner@opensuse.org
participants (4)
-
Ancor Gonzalez Sosa -
Arvin Schnell -
Klaus Kaempf -
Stefan Hundhammer