[opensuse-buildservice] Dependency conflicts in Ubuntu
Hi, I have a package in my personal project at the openSUSE Build Service that I build for several distributions. For Ubuntu I get "unresolvable" errors: "have choice for libjpeg-dev needed by libhdf5-serial-dev: libjpeg-turbo8-dev libjpeg-dev, have choice for libjpeg-dev needed by libhdf4-dev: libjpeg-turbo8-dev libjpeg-dev". For Ubuntu 12.10 I additionally get even more: "have choice for libblas3gf | libblas.so.3gf | libatlas3gf-base needed by python-numpy: libblas3 libblas3gf, have choice for liblapack3gf | liblapack.so.3gf | libatlas3gf-base needed by python-numpy: liblapack3 liblapack3gf". For RPM based distributions, I solve such kind of conflicts by adding appropriate entries in the Project Config, so I currently have there for instance: %if 0%{?centos_version} || 0%{?rhel_version} Prefer: atlas %endif %if 0%{?fedora_version} == 18 Prefer: texlive-simplecv %endif Does something similar also work for DEB based distributions? How would a corresponding entries for Ubuntu look like? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+owner@opensuse.org
On Freitag, 31. Januar 2014, 09:07:28 wrote Rolf Krahl:
Hi,
I have a package in my personal project at the openSUSE Build Service that I build for several distributions. For Ubuntu I get "unresolvable" errors:
"have choice for libjpeg-dev needed by libhdf5-serial-dev: libjpeg-turbo8-dev libjpeg-dev, have choice for libjpeg-dev needed by libhdf4-dev: libjpeg-turbo8-dev libjpeg-dev".
For Ubuntu 12.10 I additionally get even more:
"have choice for libblas3gf | libblas.so.3gf | libatlas3gf-base needed by python-numpy: libblas3 libblas3gf, have choice for liblapack3gf | liblapack.so.3gf | libatlas3gf-base needed by python-numpy: liblapack3 liblapack3gf".
For RPM based distributions, I solve such kind of conflicts by adding appropriate entries in the Project Config, so I currently have there for instance:
%if 0%{?centos_version} || 0%{?rhel_version} Prefer: atlas %endif
%if 0%{?fedora_version} == 18 Prefer: texlive-simplecv %endif
Does something similar also work for DEB based distributions? How would a corresponding entries for Ubuntu look like?
eg. Prefer: libblas3 just the same .... however, at least the jpeg one looks like we should apply this in the main Ubuntu project... I have done so now for Ubuntu 12.10 - 13.10. Please test and tell if anything else is needed. thanks adrian -- Adrian Schroeter email: adrian@suse.de SUSE LINUX GmbH, GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg) Maxfeldstraße 5 90409 Nürnberg Germany -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+owner@opensuse.org
Thanks for the quick answer! Am Freitag, 31. Januar 2014, 09:12:30 schrieb Adrian Schröter:
On Freitag, 31. Januar 2014, 09:07:28 wrote Rolf Krahl:
%if 0%{?centos_version} || 0%{?rhel_version} Prefer: atlas %endif
%if 0%{?fedora_version} == 18 Prefer: texlive-simplecv %endif
Does something similar also work for DEB based distributions? How would a corresponding entries for Ubuntu look like?
Prefer: libblas3
Ok. But is there something like "%if 0%{?ubuntu_version} == 1210" to enclose this in? I'm not sure if I would like to prefer libblas3 unconditionally for all distributions in the project without knowing about the respective alternatives.
just the same .... however, at least the jpeg one looks like we should apply this in the main Ubuntu project...
I have done so now for Ubuntu 12.10 - 13.10. Please test and tell if anything else is needed.
I don't see the effect on my project yet, but maybe it just takes a little more time to propagate? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+owner@opensuse.org
On Freitag, 31. Januar 2014, 09:26:26 wrote Rolf Krahl:
Thanks for the quick answer!
Am Freitag, 31. Januar 2014, 09:12:30 schrieb Adrian Schröter:
On Freitag, 31. Januar 2014, 09:07:28 wrote Rolf Krahl:
%if 0%{?centos_version} || 0%{?rhel_version} Prefer: atlas %endif
%if 0%{?fedora_version} == 18 Prefer: texlive-simplecv %endif
Does something similar also work for DEB based distributions? How would a corresponding entries for Ubuntu look like?
Prefer: libblas3
Ok. But is there something like "%if 0%{?ubuntu_version} == 1210" to enclose this in? I'm not sure if I would like to prefer libblas3
yes, check the prjconf of osc meta prjconf Ubuntu:12.10 for exmaple. You find the ubuntu_version macro at the end.
unconditionally for all distributions in the project without knowing about the respective alternatives.
just the same .... however, at least the jpeg one looks like we should apply this in the main Ubuntu project...
I have done so now for Ubuntu 12.10 - 13.10. Please test and tell if anything else is needed.
I don't see the effect on my project yet, but maybe it just takes a little more time to propagate?
yes, it is low prio. you may manual retrigger build to increase prio. -- Adrian Schroeter email: adrian@suse.de SUSE LINUX GmbH, GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg) Maxfeldstraße 5 90409 Nürnberg Germany -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+owner@opensuse.org
On Friday 2014-01-31 09:26, Rolf Krahl wrote:
I have done so now for Ubuntu 12.10 - 13.10. Please test and tell if anything else is needed.
I don't see the effect on my project yet, but maybe it just takes a little more time to propagate?
Was it not such that prjconf changes did not trigger a scheduler rescan? (Workaround: change the prjmeta, for example a space to the description field.) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+owner@opensuse.org
On Freitag, 31. Januar 2014, 12:01:01 wrote Jan Engelhardt:
On Friday 2014-01-31 09:26, Rolf Krahl wrote:
I have done so now for Ubuntu 12.10 - 13.10. Please test and tell if anything else is needed.
I don't see the effect on my project yet, but maybe it just takes a little more time to propagate?
Was it not such that prjconf changes did not trigger a scheduler rescan?
as it changes the package resolution it should trigger.
(Workaround: change the prjmeta, for example a space to the description field.)
-- Adrian Schroeter email: adrian@suse.de SUSE LINUX GmbH, GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg) Maxfeldstraße 5 90409 Nürnberg Germany -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+owner@opensuse.org
participants (3)
-
Adrian Schröter -
Jan Engelhardt -
Rolf Krahl