October 2022 - openSUSE Build Service - openSUSE Mailing Lists

How to use the osc command to get the reason for the unresolvable of the package
by liuxueping.snow＠bytedance.com 28 Oct '22

28 Oct '22

I want to use osc cmd to get the reason for the unresolvable of the package, but I don't know how to do.

3 3

Local build for Ubuntu: Package setup problem
by Martin Winter 28 Oct '22

28 Oct '22

I'm experimenting with builds for Ubuntu 22.04 on OBS. Generally, this works fine on the server, but when I'm trying to do a local build I get the following error during package setup: ``` osc build -j 4 xUbuntu_22.04 x86_64 .... [ 41s] [394/558] installing libdebuginfod-common-0.186-1build1 [ 42s] /usr/bin/ucf: 352: getopt: not found [ 42s] dpkg: error processing package libdebuginfod-common (--install): [ 42s] installed libdebuginfod-common package post-installation script subprocess returned error exit status 127 [ 42s] Errors were encountered while processing: [ 42s] libdebuginfod-common [ 42s] exit ... [ 42s] [ 42s] gepard failed "build openboard.dsc" at Fri Oct 28 06:26:06 UTC 2022. ``` I already deleted the package cache under `/var/tmp/osbuild-packagecache` and the buildroot under `/var/tmp/build-root/`, but this did not help. Any idea what casuses this issue?

2 3

OBS_VM_TYPE=qemu:ppc64le: cpuflags?
by Stefan Seyfried 27 Oct '22

27 Oct '22

Hi all, on a private instance, I'm trying to get rid of the "real" ppc worker and run an emulated ppc64le machine. I fixed bs_worker (which only works in master for VM_TYPE=qemu:..., can send a patch for 2.10 if wanted), and it builds. However, the worker's cpuflags are the x86_64 host's cpuflags... not the emulated cpu's. For example in build.o.o, SUSE:SLE-12-SP5:GA has %ifarch ppc64le Constraint: hardware:cpu:flag power8 %endif and thus a build job against this repo will never get scheduled. Is there a way to "fake" the cpuflags? Or do I need to remove the constraints from the prjconf (and thus deviate from the "upstream" config)? Thanks, seife -- Stefan Seyfried "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled." -- Richard Feynman

1 1

Re: nothing provides cmake-filesystem(x86-64) = 3.20.2-4.el8 needed by cmake when trying to compile for CentOS Stream 8
by Luciano Santos 27 Oct '22

27 Oct '22

It took a bit of a discussion in #opensuse-buildservice and some digging up. So let's see what's going on. In security:zeek project we can see this message for CentOS 8 Stream repository: > unresolvable: nothing provides glibc(x86-64) = 2.28-203.el8 needed by glibc-gconv-extra, (got version 2.28-214.el8 provided by glibc), nothing provides glibc-common = 2.28-203.el8 needed by glibc-gconv-extra, (got version 2.28-214.el8) Please remember that our CentOS 8 Stream repository uses http://mirror.centos.org/centos/8-stream/ for package download, and that the AppStream repo takes precedence over BaseOS. First, let's check the version 2.28-203 for glibc, because that's the latest release that AppStream got: > $ curl -sLI http://mirror.centos.org/centos/8-stream/AppStream/x86_64/os/Packages/glibc… | head -1 > HTTP/1.1 404 Not Found > curl -sLI http://mirror.centos.org/centos/8-stream/AppStream/x86_64/os/Packages/glibc… | head -1 > HTTP/1.1 200 OK > > $ curl -sLI http://mirror.centos.org/centos/8-stream/BaseOS/x86_64/os/Packages/glibc-2.… | head -1 > HTTP/1.1 200 OK > $ curl -sLI http://mirror.centos.org/centos/8-stream/BaseOS/x86_64/os/Packages/glibc-gc… | head -1 > HTTP/1.1 404 Not Found Here we can see that glibc-gconv-extra, a sub-package ofglibc, found in BaseOS, got split and is found in Appstream instead. OBS/openSUSE/many-other-RPM-based-distros(I believe) doesn't support a Package A being required by its Sub-Package B when A comes from Vendor/repo X and B, from Vendor/repo Y. DNF doesn't seem to share such restrictions, though, as seen here [1] in this bug report. And those missing glib (and possibly others) RPMs from mirror.centos.org are a result of an official decision to move certain packages from one repository to another (as stated in that bug report), but it seems that the move wasn't completed/successful, at least from my perspective of having Package A living in repo X being required by its Sub-Package B living in repo Y. Now, if the BaseOS repo takes precedence over AppStream we can find both 2.28-214 glibc and glibc-gconv-extra packages there: > $ fc > curl -sLI http://mirror.centos.org/centos/8-stream/BaseOS/x86_64/os/Packages/glibc-2.… | head -1 > curl -sLI http://mirror.centos.org/centos/8-stream/BaseOS/x86_64/os/Packages/glibc-gc… | head -1 > HTTP/1.1 200 OK > HTTP/1.1 200 OK Nonetheless, with BaseOS being above AppStream we get the unresolvable reported in this thread: > unresolvable: nothing provides cmake-filesystem(x86-64) = 3.20.2-4.el8 needed by cmake, (got version 3.20.2-1.el8 provided by cmake-filesystem) That's because in BaseOS we can find another Package/Sub-Package missing: > $ curl -sLI http://mirror.centos.org/centos/8-stream/BaseOS/x86_64/os/Packages/cmake-3.… | head -1 > HTTP/1.1 404 Not Found > curl -sLI http://mirror.centos.org/centos/8-stream/BaseOS/x86_64/os/Packages/cmake-fi… | head -1 > HTTP/1.1 200 OK A cmake-filesystem-3.20.2-1 that wants a not found cmake-3.20.2-1. And in AppStream: > $ curl -sLI http://mirror.centos.org/centos/8-stream/AppStream/x86_64/os/Packages/cmake… | head -1 > HTTP/1.1 200 OK > $ curl -sLI http://mirror.centos.org/centos/8-stream/AppStream/x86_64/os/Packages/cmake… | head -1 > HTTP/1.1 200 OK Both packages are there, but since we're prioritizing BaseOS and one of them was already found, we end up with an unresolvable. In BaseOS we don't have a 3.20.2-4 CMake release (which would take precedence over 3.20.2-1), only in Appstream: > $ curl -sLI http://mirror.centos.org/centos/8-stream/BaseOS/x86_64/os/Packages/cmake-3.… | head -1 > HTTP/1.1 404 Not Found > $ curl -sLI http://mirror.centos.org/centos/8-stream/BaseOS/x86_64/os/Packages/cmake-fi… | head -1 > HTTP/1.1 404 Not Found > > $ curl -sLI http://mirror.centos.org/centos/8-stream/AppStream/x86_64/os/Packages/cmake… | head -1 > HTTP/1.1 200 OK > $ curl -sLI http://mirror.centos.org/centos/8-stream/AppStream/x86_64/os/Packages/cmake… | head -1 > HTTP/1.1 200 OK But, again, since we're prioritizing BaseOS and one of them was already found, we end up with an unresolvable. The right way forward, I'd say, is to file bugs for those missing packages and/or add comments to existing bugs, like the one for glibc. Cheers, Luciano [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2102548

1 0

Re: nothing provides cmake-filesystem(x86-64) = 3.20.2-4.el8 needed by cmake when trying to compile for CentOS Stream 8
by Luciano Santos 27 Oct '22

27 Oct '22

It took a bit of a discussion in #opensuse-buildservice and some digging up. So let's see what's going on. In security:zeek project we can see this message for CentOS 8 Stream repository: > unresolvable: nothing provides glibc(x86-64) = 2.28-203.el8 needed by glibc-gconv-extra, (got version 2.28-214.el8 provided by glibc), nothing provides glibc-common = 2.28-203.el8 needed by glibc-gconv-extra, (got version 2.28-214.el8) Please remember that our CentOS 8 Stream repository uses http://mirror.centos.org/centos/8-stream/ for package download, and that the AppStream repo takes precedence over BaseOS. First, let's check the version 2.28-203 for glibc, because that's the latest release that AppStream got: > $ curl -sLI http://mirror.centos.org/centos/8-stream/AppStream/x86_64/os/Packages/glibc… | head -1 > HTTP/1.1 404 Not Found > curl -sLI http://mirror.centos.org/centos/8-stream/AppStream/x86_64/os/Packages/glibc… | head -1 > HTTP/1.1 200 OK > > $ curl -sLI http://mirror.centos.org/centos/8-stream/BaseOS/x86_64/os/Packages/glibc-2.… | head -1 > HTTP/1.1 200 OK > $ curl -sLI http://mirror.centos.org/centos/8-stream/BaseOS/x86_64/os/Packages/glibc-gc… | head -1 > HTTP/1.1 404 Not Found Here we can see that glibc-gconv-extra, a sub-package ofglibc, found in BaseOS, got split and is found in Appstream instead. OBS/openSUSE/many-other-RPM-based-distros(I believe) doesn't support a Package A being required by its Sub-Package B when A comes from Vendor/repo X and B, from Vendor/repo Y. DNF doesn't seem to share such restrictions, though, as seen here [1] in this bug report. And those missing glib (and possibly others) RPMs from mirror.centos.org are a result of an official decision to move certain packages from one repository to another (as stated in that bug report), but it seems that the move wasn't completed/successful, at least from my perspective of having Package A living in repo X being required by its Sub-Package B living in repo Y. Now, if the BaseOS repo takes precedence over AppStream we can find both 2.28-214 glibc and glibc-gconv-extra packages there: > $ fc > curl -sLI http://mirror.centos.org/centos/8-stream/BaseOS/x86_64/os/Packages/glibc-2.… | head -1 > curl -sLI http://mirror.centos.org/centos/8-stream/BaseOS/x86_64/os/Packages/glibc-gc… | head -1 > HTTP/1.1 200 OK > HTTP/1.1 200 OK Nonetheless, with BaseOS being above AppStream we get the unresolvable reported in this thread: > unresolvable: nothing provides cmake-filesystem(x86-64) = 3.20.2-4.el8 needed by cmake, (got version 3.20.2-1.el8 provided by cmake-filesystem) That's because in BaseOS we can find another Package/Sub-Package missing: > $ curl -sLI http://mirror.centos.org/centos/8-stream/BaseOS/x86_64/os/Packages/cmake-3.… | head -1 > HTTP/1.1 404 Not Found > curl -sLI http://mirror.centos.org/centos/8-stream/BaseOS/x86_64/os/Packages/cmake-fi… | head -1 > HTTP/1.1 200 OK A cmake-filesystem-3.20.2-1 that wants a not found cmake-3.20.2-1. And in AppStream: > $ curl -sLI http://mirror.centos.org/centos/8-stream/AppStream/x86_64/os/Packages/cmake… | head -1 > HTTP/1.1 200 OK > $ curl -sLI http://mirror.centos.org/centos/8-stream/AppStream/x86_64/os/Packages/cmake… | head -1 > HTTP/1.1 200 OK Both packages are there, but since we're prioritizing BaseOS and one of them was already found, we end up with an unresolvable. In BaseOS we don't have a 3.20.2-4 CMake release (which would take precedence over 3.20.2-1), only in Appstream: > $ curl -sLI http://mirror.centos.org/centos/8-stream/BaseOS/x86_64/os/Packages/cmake-3.… | head -1 > HTTP/1.1 404 Not Found > $ curl -sLI http://mirror.centos.org/centos/8-stream/BaseOS/x86_64/os/Packages/cmake-fi… | head -1 > HTTP/1.1 404 Not Found > > $ curl -sLI http://mirror.centos.org/centos/8-stream/AppStream/x86_64/os/Packages/cmake… | head -1 > HTTP/1.1 200 OK > $ curl -sLI http://mirror.centos.org/centos/8-stream/AppStream/x86_64/os/Packages/cmake… | head -1 > HTTP/1.1 200 OK But, again, since we're prioritizing BaseOS and one of them was already found, we end up with an unresolvable. The right way forward, I'd say, is to file bugs for those missing packages and/or add comments to existing bugs, like the one for glibc. Cheers, Luciano [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2102548

1 0

New blog post - Build results and superseded conversations on request page
by Rubhan Azeem 25 Oct '22

25 Oct '22

Hello! We are back with new updates on the request page. This time we bring build results and conversations from superseded requests to the request page. We invite you to read our latest blog post and let us know what you think: https://openbuildservice.org/2022/10/24/request-workflow-redesign/ Kind regards, The Build Solutions Team Rubhan Azeem SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH Maxfeldstr. 5 90409 Nürnberg Germany HRB 36809, AG Nürnberg Geschäftsführer: Felix Imendörffer

1 0

nothing provides cmake-filesystem(x86-64) = 3.20.2-4.el8 needed by cmake when trying to compile for CentOS Stream 8
by Will Furnell 24 Oct '22

24 Oct '22

Hello, I'm trying to build a package (Icinga2) on CentOS Stream 8 on my local OBS instance, but am getting the following error message: nothing provides cmake-filesystem(x86-64) = 3.20.2-4.el8 needed by cmake, (got version 3.20.2-1.el8 provided by cmake-filesystem) I have seen a mailing list post which suggests changing the order of the AppStream and BaseOS repositories in the configuration - https://lists.opensuse.org/archives/list/buildservice@lists.opensuse.org/th… - but the problem with that is that it then breaks with a glibc error - which mailing list posts suggest to change the order of the repositories the other way around! https://lists.opensuse.org/archives/list/buildservice@lists.opensuse.org/th… What can I do please!? Either way CentOS Stream 8 builds are broken :( Thank you, Will.

3 2

Debian:Testing couldn't get packages signed for download
by Wong Hoi Sing Edison 21 Oct '22

21 Oct '22

Hi Everyone, I found that my https://build.opensuse.org/project/show/home:alvistack couldn't get Debian:Testing signing package for download: * https://build.opensuse.org/project/repository_state/home:alvistack/Debian_T… * https://build.opensuse.org/projects/home:alvistack/rebuild_time?arch=x86_64… BTW, following repo for latest rolling release could get signed package correctly, e.g. * https://build.opensuse.org/project/repository_state/home:alvistack/Fedora_R… * https://build.opensuse.org/project/repository_state/home:alvistack/openSUSE… * https://build.opensuse.org/project/repository_state/home:alvistack/xUbuntu_… (especially for this, because it is most likely with latest packages as similar as Debian:Testing) From Web UI I couldn't find any hints why all package for Debian:Testing build successfully completed, but didn't get signed for download. May someone give me a hints for debugging this issue? Regards, Edison Wong

2 3

Debian 10 + QEMU 7.1.0: blocked: downloading 16 dod packages
by Wong Hoi Sing Edison 21 Oct '22

21 Oct '22

Hi Everyone, I am building QEMU 7.1.0 with Debian 10: * https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/home:alvistack/qemu-qemu-7.1.0 But it is now showing blocked with following message: > blocked: downloading 16 dod packages It seems like due to backports repo enabled: * https://build.opensuse.org/projects/home:alvistack/meta BTW, how could I check which packages are being blocked by dod, or even that should be resolved from OBS side? Regards, Edison Wong

1 1

Delete requests for devel projects parents.
by Simon Lees 19 Oct '22

19 Oct '22

Hi, Yesterday I got a delete request for X11:Enlightenment [1] which is the parent project of a factory devel project X11:Enlightenment:Factory, can we please save busy maintainers a little time by making the bot slightly smarter so that it ignores parents of such directories. It might also be worth going through and checking that no other things are likely to break badly if project maintainers miss these. 1. https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/1029538 -- Simon Lees (Simotek) http://simotek.net Emergency Update Team keybase.io/simotek SUSE Linux Adelaide Australia, UTC+10:30 GPG Fingerprint: 5B87 DB9D 88DC F606 E489 CEC5 0922 C246 02F0 014B

3 3