openSUSE:Factory - Build fail notification
Dear Package maintainers and hackers. Below package(s) in openSUSE:Factory have been failing to build for at least 4 weeks. We tried to send out notifications to the configured bugowner/maintainers of the package(s), but so far no fix has been submitted. This probably means that the maintainer/bugowner did not yet find the time to look into the matter and he/she would certainly appreciate help to get this sorted. - bitcoin Unless somebody is stepping up and submitting fixes, the listed package(s) are going to be removed from openSUSE:Factory. Kind regards, DimStar / Dominique Leuenberger <dimstar@opensuse.org>
Am 22.01.22 um 00:03 schrieb DimStar / Dominique Leuenberger:
Dear Package maintainers and hackers.
Below package(s) in openSUSE:Factory have been failing to build for at least 4 weeks. We tried to send out notifications to the configured bugowner/maintainers of the package(s), but so far no fix has been submitted. This probably means that the maintainer/bugowner did not yet find the time to look into the matter and he/she would certainly appreciate help to get this sorted.
- bitcoin
This doesn't come with a little bit of irony - bitcoin isn't just failing Factory for the last 4 weeks :) Geetings, Stephan
El sáb, 22 ene 2022 a las 6:01, Stephan Kulow (<coolo@suse.de>) escribió:
Am 22.01.22 um 00:03 schrieb DimStar / Dominique Leuenberger:
Dear Package maintainers and hackers.
Below package(s) in openSUSE:Factory have been failing to build for at least 4 weeks. We tried to send out notifications to the configured bugowner/maintainers of the package(s), but so far no fix has been submitted. This probably means that the maintainer/bugowner did not yet find the time to look into the matter and he/she would certainly appreciate help to get this sorted.
- bitcoin
This doesn't come with a little bit of irony - bitcoin isn't just failing Factory for the last 4 weeks :)
Yes! Bitcoin is falling! https://www.cnbc.com/2022/01/21/cryptocurrencies-bitcoin-falls-7percent-ethe... Regards, Juan -- USA LINUX OPENSUSE QUE ES SOFTWARE LIBRE, NO NECESITAS PIRATEAR NADA Y NI TE VAS A PREOCUPAR MAS POR LOS VIRUS Y SPYWARES: http://www.opensuse.org/es/ Puedes visitar mi blog en: http://jerbes.blogspot.com.ar/
On 1/22/22 10:00, Stephan Kulow wrote:
This doesn't come with a little bit of irony - bitcoin isn't just failing Factory for the last 4 weeks :)
Maybe someone didn't pay the bills for the electric power consumption and the CO2 emissions of bitcoin: it uses as much electricity as the Netherlands [1]. It seems to be better for mother nature to cut trees for good old paper money. [1] https://www.derstandard.de/story/2000132519190/umweltsuende-bitcoin-so-schae... Have a nice day, Berny
El sáb, 22 ene 2022 a las 14:06, Bernhard Voelker (<mail@bernhard-voelker.de>) escribió:
On 1/22/22 10:00, Stephan Kulow wrote:
This doesn't come with a little bit of irony - bitcoin isn't just failing Factory for the last 4 weeks :)
Maybe someone didn't pay the bills for the electric power consumption and the CO2 emissions of bitcoin: it uses as much electricity as the Netherlands [1]. It seems to be better for mother nature to cut trees for good old paper money.
[1] https://www.derstandard.de/story/2000132519190/umweltsuende-bitcoin-so-schae...
When you talk about the energetic cost "of a bitcoin transaction", are you referring to a purchase or sale using bitcoins, or to the mining process to obtain a bitcoin? In most countries it is illegal to print paper money for individuals, but it is not illegal to mine cryptocurrencies. Regards, Juan -- USA LINUX OPENSUSE QUE ES SOFTWARE LIBRE, NO NECESITAS PIRATEAR NADA Y NI TE VAS A PREOCUPAR MAS POR LOS VIRUS Y SPYWARES: http://www.opensuse.org/es/ Puedes visitar mi blog en: http://jerbes.blogspot.com.ar/
On 1/22/22 18:15, Juan Erbes wrote:
When you talk about the energetic cost "of a bitcoin transaction", [...]
I did not use the word transaction.
[...] are you referring to a purchase or sale using bitcoins, or to the mining process to obtain a bitcoin?
The discussion is far off GNU/Linux or openSUSE, so I think it's better to not share further my opinion about this here. Have a nice day, Berny
El sáb, 22 ene 2022 a las 19:58, Bernhard Voelker (<mail@bernhard-voelker.de>) escribió:
On 1/22/22 18:15, Juan Erbes wrote:
When you talk about the energetic cost "of a bitcoin transaction", [...]
I did not use the word transaction.
No. But appears "Bitcoin-Transaktion" on the image of the link You posted: https://i.ds.at/MQVyuQ/rs:fill:1600:0/plain/2022/01/13/grafik-aktuell.jpg
[...] are you referring to a purchase or sale using bitcoins, or to the mining process to obtain a bitcoin?
The discussion is far off GNU/Linux or openSUSE, so I think it's better to not share further my opinion about this here.
Have a nice weekend, Juan -- USA LINUX OPENSUSE QUE ES SOFTWARE LIBRE, NO NECESITAS PIRATEAR NADA Y NI TE VAS A PREOCUPAR MAS POR LOS VIRUS Y SPYWARES: http://www.opensuse.org/es/ Puedes visitar mi blog en: http://jerbes.blogspot.com.ar/
Dne 22. 01. 22 v 10:00 Stephan Kulow napsal(a):
- bitcoin
This doesn't come with a little bit of irony - bitcoin isn't just failing Factory for the last 4 weeks :)
Do we want to have it in the repository at all? Matěj -- https://matej.ceplovi.cz/blog/, Jabber: mcepl@ceplovi.cz GPG Finger: 3C76 A027 CA45 AD70 98B5 BC1D 7920 5802 880B C9D8 Our lives are spectacles of powerlessness. -- Richard Rohr
On 1/24/22 09:37, Jason Craig wrote:
On 1/23/2022 14:22, Matěj Cepl wrote:
Dne 22. 01. 22 v 10:00 Stephan Kulow napsal(a):
- bitcoin
This doesn't come with a little bit of irony - bitcoin isn't just failing Factory for the last 4 weeks :)
Do we want to have it in the repository at all?
IMHO, no.
Well in that case we need to drastically rewrite our policy on what an acceptable package is. At the moment its along the lines of Legal thinks its ok, it would be useful for atleast some part of the community and someone is willing to maintain it. Beyond that we have very few restrictions so adding rules against a certain category of application would be a massive change for the project. -- 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
Am 24.01.22 um 02:51 schrieb Simon Lees:
IMHO, no. Well in that case we need to drastically rewrite our policy on what an acceptable package is. At the moment its along the lines of Legal thinks its ok, it would be useful for atleast some part of the community and someone is willing to maintain it. Beyond that we have very few restrictions so adding rules against a certain category of application would be a massive change for the project.
IMO there is a difference between "we don't want it" and "we forbid it". Someone in the community obviously wants it and did some decision in the past that makes the bitcoin application useful for them. Just as others discussed I personally find this problematic (both from an economical and financial stand point), but I also find using FORTRAN problematic, so I'm not willing to take sides when it comes to a policy. Packaging policies really aren't the place of political statements. We even ship nmap (which is problematic enough from a open source license point of view) and if you've seen "The Matrix" you know it's more dangerous than bitcoin in destroying the world we live in ;-) Greetings, Stephan
On 1/23/22 23:26, Stephan Kulow wrote:
Am 24.01.22 um 02:51 schrieb Simon Lees:
IMHO, no. Well in that case we need to drastically rewrite our policy on what an acceptable package is. At the moment its along the lines of Legal thinks its ok, it would be useful for atleast some part of the community and someone is willing to maintain it. Beyond that we have very few restrictions so adding rules against a certain category of application would be a massive change for the project.
IMO there is a difference between "we don't want it" and "we forbid it".
Indeed, I was more speaking to "we don't want it". Although I think a discussion could be had about "we forbid it", but as pointed out I don't know that that discussion would go anywhere. -- Jason Craig
El dom, 23 ene 2022 a las 18:23, Matěj Cepl (<mcepl@cepl.eu>) escribió:
Dne 22. 01. 22 v 10:00 Stephan Kulow napsal(a):
- bitcoin
This doesn't come with a little bit of irony - bitcoin isn't just failing Factory for the last 4 weeks :)
Do we want to have it in the repository at all?
You can see it on: https://software.opensuse.org/package/bitcoin-qt5 Actually it fails to install on Tumbleweed, because the library boostfilesystem required by bitcoin is older than the present on the system. A workaround can force the installation and create a symlink with the name of the required library pointing to the existing library. Regards, Juan -- USA LINUX OPENSUSE QUE ES SOFTWARE LIBRE, NO NECESITAS PIRATEAR NADA Y NI TE VAS A PREOCUPAR MAS POR LOS VIRUS Y SPYWARES: http://www.opensuse.org/es/ Puedes visitar mi blog en: http://jerbes.blogspot.com.ar/
On Monday 2022-01-24 00:29, Juan Erbes wrote:
Dne 22. 01. 22 v 10:00 Stephan Kulow napsal(a):
- bitcoin
This doesn't come with a little bit of irony - bitcoin isn't just failing Factory for the last 4 weeks :)
Do we want to have it in the repository at all?
A workaround can force the installation and create a symlink with the name of the required library pointing to the existing library.
Different name, different ABI. 's not gonna work.
On 22/01/2022 00.03, DimStar / Dominique Leuenberger wrote:
Dear Package maintainers and hackers.
Below package(s) in openSUSE:Factory have been failing to build for at least 4 weeks.
- bitcoin
I tracked this down to the boost-1.78 update from 2021-12-23 and will submit a fix soon https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/942092 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24104
participants (9)
-
Bernhard M. Wiedemann -
Bernhard Voelker -
DimStar / Dominique Leuenberger -
Jan Engelhardt -
Jason Craig -
Juan Erbes -
Matěj Cepl -
Simon Lees -
Stephan Kulow