[Bug 1114209] New: go: provides(API) causes "have option" unresolveable builds
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114209 Bug ID: 1114209 Summary: go: provides(API) causes "have option" unresolveable builds Classification: openSUSE Product: openSUSE Tumbleweed Version: Current Hardware: Other OS: Other Status: NEW Severity: Normal Priority: P5 - None Component: Development Assignee: bnc-team-screening@forge.provo.novell.com Reporter: asarai@suse.com QA Contact: qa-bugs@suse.de Found By: --- Blocker: --- Within OBS, if you have more than one option of a package to use for a build, the build will be considered unresolveable. In this case, the problem is that both "go1.11" and "go" provide "golang(API) = 1.11". We should avoid having the API provides in "go" -- since the point of the API provides is to allow for version pinning (and "go" is always the latest so it doesn't make sense to use it for pinning). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114209
Aleksa Sarai
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114209
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114209#c3
--- Comment #3 from Jeff Kowalczyk
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114209
Swamp Workflow Management
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114209
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114209#c5
--- Comment #5 from Aleksa Sarai
What sequence of events will happen before OBS builds of the updated go metapackage start clearing the 'unresolvable' error?
Does each affected SUSE/openSUSE distribution make and accept request(s) to update a package in preparation for a release milestone, then when the next full release lands (date TBD) OBS updates its repositories?
Or, do the distributions have configured repositories of in-development packages that will be seen by OBS during builds?
For the main distributions, they'd need to be accepted everywhere. However, practically speaking, by submitting to Factory and SLE it will get auto-forwarded to Leap (in most cases -- @Jordi, is this true of the Go packages?). But individual projects can add the repository to OBS so that it's built on top of devel:languages:go -- this is what we do for Virtualization:containers (from memory). But I've already included the devel:languages:go change into SLE, because we needed it for Docker (we should probably have a discussion over how the hand-off to you for maintaining Go within SLE should work -- historically the container team has done this). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114209
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114209#c6
--- Comment #6 from Aleksa Sarai
Can you provide a syntax example of declaring dependency on a specific version of golang(API)? We are seeing the issue now with the upstream release versions of some packages having soft (gofmt) or hard (GoPkg.lock -> go.mod) dependency on go1.10 or go1.11.
Basically, you would do: BuildRequires: golang(API) = 1.10 % hard or BuildRequires: golang(API) >= 1.9 % soft Historically this was actually a not-very-good decision, but now that we have actually designed the packaging around pinning the "API" version it makes more sense. The problem is that having golang(API) provided by both go and go1.10 causes OBS to get confused (depending on what repos its using, the prjconf and so on).
Use of golang(API) is not mentioned in https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Packaging_Go, and I'll document the example there.
Yeah that needs to be rewritten basically, though I would really like us to first have a discussion on how golang-packaging should be reworked to actually be useful. There was a bug about this opened recently -- let me see if I can find the bug number. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114209
Swamp Workflow Management
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114209
Marcus Meissner
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114209
Swamp Workflow Management
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114209
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114209#c21
--- Comment #21 from Swamp Workflow Management
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114209
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114209#c22
--- Comment #22 from Swamp Workflow Management
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114209
Swamp Workflow Management
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114209
Swamp Workflow Management
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114209
Swamp Workflow Management
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114209
Swamp Workflow Management
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114209
Swamp Workflow Management
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114209
Swamp Workflow Management
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114209
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114209#c25
--- Comment #25 from Swamp Workflow Management
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114209
Swamp Workflow Management
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114209
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114209#c26
--- Comment #26 from Swamp Workflow Management
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114209
Swamp Workflow Management
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114209
Swamp Workflow Management
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114209
Swamp Workflow Management
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114209
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114209#c27
--- Comment #27 from Swamp Workflow Management
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114209
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114209#c28
--- Comment #28 from Swamp Workflow Management
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114209
Swamp Workflow Management
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114209
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114209#c29
--- Comment #29 from Swamp Workflow Management
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114209
Swamp Workflow Management
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114209
Swamp Workflow Management
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114209
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114209#c30
--- Comment #30 from Swamp Workflow Management
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114209
Swamp Workflow Management
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114209
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114209#c31
Aleksa Sarai
participants (2)
-
bugzilla_noreply@novell.com
-
bugzilla_noreply@suse.com