Hi!
All packages in d:l:R:autoCran turned to state unresolvable
because there is choice :-) :-(
unresolvable: have choice for xorg-x11-fonts-100dpi needed by R-base:
xorg-x11-fonts xorg-x11-fonts-legacy have choice for
xorg-x11-fonts-75dpi needed by R-base: xorg-x11-fonts
xorg-x11-fonts-legacy have choice for python3 needed by
texlive-filesystem: python3 python38
Is this temporarily or will this persist? Do I need to recreate 13556
spec files or not?
In case this change is here to stay: How could I have known? How could
I have found out beforehand, that such a change is imminent?
Where can I read what I have to do now to make the packages build again?
All the best
Detlef
Hello,
The SSL certificate I was using on my OBS server recently expired, and
had to be replaced with a renewed certificate yesterday. However, even
with the renewed certificate, I am having trouble getting packages to
build. In the scheduler log, I see the following:
2020-11-19 15:13:43: [1620] looking at high prio cmake/xUbuntu_16.04
(1/0/2/0/2)
- cmake/xUbuntu_16.04
scanning repo cmake/xUbuntu_16.04...
sorting 2 packages
checking packages
- cmake-xenial (500 remote error: Internal Server Error)
broken: 1
disabled: 1
building: 0, notready: 0, unfinished: 0
took 0 seconds to check the packages
leaf prp, freeing data
2020-11-19 15:13:44: [1620] looking at high prio cmake/xUbuntu_20.04
(0/0/2/0/2)
- cmake/xUbuntu_20.04
scanning repo cmake/xUbuntu_20.04...
sorting 2 packages
checking packages
- cmake-focal (interconnect error: rpc timeout)
broken: 1
disabled: 1
building: 0, notready: 0, unfinished: 0
took 0 seconds to check the packages
leaf prp, freeing data
2020-11-19 15:13:44: [1620] looking at low prio cmake/xUbuntu_16.04
(0/0/1/0/2)
- cmake/xUbuntu_16.04
scanning repo cmake/xUbuntu_16.04...
sorting 2 packages
checking packages
- cmake-xenial (500 remote error: Internal Server Error)
broken: 1
disabled: 1
building: 0, notready: 0, unfinished: 0
took 0 seconds to check the packages
leaf prp, freeing data
2020-11-19 15:13:44: [1620] looking at low prio cmake/xUbuntu_20.04
(0/0/0/0/2)
- cmake/xUbuntu_20.04
scanning repo cmake/xUbuntu_20.04...
sorting 2 packages
checking packages
- cmake-focal (interconnect error: rpc timeout)
broken: 1
disabled: 1
building: 0, notready: 0, unfinished: 0
took 0 seconds to check the packages
leaf prp, freeing data
Kyle
Hi!
In recent days we've seen a many hours of downtime of not only
download.opensuse.org but also mirrors.opensuse.org and
status.opensuse.org I'm not complaining, just stating the facts.
This caused severe downstream problems for e.g. any CI/CD jobs that try
to use the related packages, or builds of Dockerfiles failed, etc.
So I thought, in order to be better prepared for possible future
incidents, I'd want to create a mirror for the network:osmocom project
and it's sub-projects.
According to https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Mirror_infrastructure
the 'buildservice-repos' module on rsync.opensuse.org contains "The
complete content".
However, much to my surprise, when I call
"rsync rsync.opensuse.org::buildservice-repos/network:/osmocom:/nightly/"
I only see some of the distributions (not even all OpenSuSE and
Raspobian_10), but not the majority of them (like all our Debian,
xUbuntu CentOS builds).
This is quite strange, and I'm somewhat surprised given that it's
supposedly "The complete content".
Is this intentional? Then the wiki page with the description should
probably be updated. And in this case: is there some other rsync
module that one can use to mirror all of the content of one's project on
build.opensuse.org?
Or is it a bug? In that case, it would be great if somebody could look
into it.
Thanks to roox I found a wokr-around: rsync from one of the [few]
mirrors that have all of the OBS builds ("repositories") and themselves
offer rsync access. Interestingly, that works. But then why do those
mirrors get "all" of the content, while the official rsync archive
doesn't have it?
Here the respective output:
-----
$ rsync rsync.opensuse.org::buildservice-repos/network:/osmocom:/nightly/
drwxr-xr-x 4,096 2020/10/29 14:50:01 .
drwxr-xr-x 8,192 2020/11/18 11:02:51 Raspbian_10
drwxr-xr-x 121 2020/11/21 02:40:54 openSUSE_Leap_15.1
drwxr-xr-x 141 2020/11/21 04:51:29 openSUSE_Leap_15.1_ARM
drwxr-xr-x 121 2020/11/21 02:40:58 openSUSE_Leap_15.2
drwxr-xr-x 137 2020/11/21 02:41:04 openSUSE_Tumbleweed
-----
vs.
-----
rsync rsync://ftp.gwdg.de/pub/opensuse/repositories/network:/osmocom:/nightly/
drwxr-xr-x 4,096 2020/10/29 14:50:01 .
drwxr-xr-x 134 2020/11/21 04:58:31 CentOS_8_Stream
drwxr-xr-x 8,192 2020/11/21 06:26:01 Debian_10
drwxr-xr-x 8,192 2020/11/21 02:52:28 Debian_8.0
drwxr-xr-x 8,192 2020/11/21 06:27:13 Debian_9.0
drwxr-xr-x 8,192 2020/11/21 05:03:27 Debian_Testing
drwxr-xr-x 8,192 2020/11/21 04:38:53 Debian_Unstable
drwxr-xr-x 12,288 2020/11/18 11:02:51 Raspbian_10
drwxr-xr-x 135 2020/11/20 03:01:23 openSUSE_Factory_ARM
drwxr-xr-x 116 2020/11/21 02:40:54 openSUSE_Leap_15.1
drwxr-xr-x 135 2020/11/21 04:51:29 openSUSE_Leap_15.1_ARM
drwxr-xr-x 116 2020/11/21 02:40:58 openSUSE_Leap_15.2
drwxr-xr-x 131 2020/11/21 02:41:04 openSUSE_Tumbleweed
drwxr-xr-x 8,192 2020/10/29 04:09:53 xUbuntu_16.04
drwxr-xr-x 8,192 2020/11/21 02:57:04 xUbuntu_18.04
drwxr-xr-x 8,192 2020/10/29 04:04:55 xUbuntu_18.10
drwxr-xr-x 8,192 2020/11/21 02:54:52 xUbuntu_19.04
drwxr-xr-x 8,192 2020/11/21 02:59:10 xUbuntu_19.10
drwxr-xr-x 8,192 2020/11/21 03:08:48 xUbuntu_20.04
drwxr-xr-x 8,192 2020/11/21 03:09:06 xUbuntu_20.10
-----
Compare the list of distros at
rsync -av --delete rsync://ftp.gwdg.de/pub/opensuse/repositories/network:/osmocom: /external/packages/repositories/network\:/
Regards,
Harald
--
- Harald Welte <laforge(a)gnumonks.org> http://laforge.gnumonks.org/
============================================================================
"Privacy in residential applications is a desirable marketing option."
(ETSI EN 300 175-7 Ch. A6)
Hi all,
I've checked out the user interface overhaul behind the beta switch,
and I have to comment on a specific point: the placement of the
"actions on this page" in the sidebar.
It is quite understandable to have the "global" actions, e.g. "Places",
in the sidebar, which constitutes the top level of the page's
"navigational hierarchy".
However, it is very puzzling to have to find the actions that pertain
to *usually just a tab* of the current page (but not all of them!) there.
I understand the desire to fill the sidebar, but it is really breaking
the hierarchy.
To make it clearer what I mean, let's take the overview page for a
package, where the sidebar has actions such as "delete package".
The tab bar at the top changes what actions are available, but is
below the sidebar in the hierarchy. On the other hand, there are
also a lot of actions which are *not* in the sidebar, such as
"Download package" and "Add file".
On other tabs such as "Users", most of the actions (editing, deleting)
are inline, while the "add" action is in the sidebar, quite far away.
It is, all in all, quite hard to see why some actions have been singled
out and moved to a completely different location, while others have
stayed. (From a user point of view; I can guess the technical side.)
Thanks for your consideration,
Georg
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Forschungszentrum Juelich GmbH
52425 Juelich
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Juelich
Eingetragen im Handelsregister des Amtsgerichts Dueren Nr. HR B 3498
Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: MinDir Volker Rieke
Geschaeftsfuehrung: Prof. Dr.-Ing. Wolfgang Marquardt (Vorsitzender),
Karsten Beneke (stellv. Vorsitzender), Prof. Dr.-Ing. Harald Bolt
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi,
I want to submit a new GUI multimedia program package that depends on 2
library packages: lib1 and lib2.
lib2 depends on lib1 and the program package depends on lib1 and lib2
(referenced in its .spec).
Currently I have lib1, lib2 and the program packages in a subproject of
my home repo.
From what I understand, the multimedia:libs devel project seems
appropriate to host the lib1 and lib2.
And the multimedia:apps devel project for the program package.
My question is if I submit all 3 packages to their relevant devel
project and they are accepted,
will the program package find its lib1 and lib2 dependencies for
building properly ?
Ultimately, the goal is to have these package accepted in Factory.
Hello,
I have by accident removed all rights on my home project (home:adaedra), and have no way of putting them back. How is it possible to be put back into my project’s users?
Regards,
Hi,
given a usual project with several targets, one can see, that the scheduler
works from left to right as being displayed and ordered in the UI. A way to
modify the ordering would be nice.
Olaf Hering asked a similar question here with subject "prioritizing workers
for a specific architecture" last year, which unfortunately remained
unanswered.
Any news on that front?
Cheers,
Pete
