openSUSE Packaging October 2015

packaging@lists.opensuse.org

32 participants
25 discussions

[opensuse-packaging] release-notes-openSUSE requires google-opensans-fonts

by Felix Miata

TW $SUBJECT can't be right, but trying to zypper rm opensans wants to remove releasenotes. :-( -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

5 years

[opensuse-packaging] Call for adoption and/or erase warning Bacula related package in Archiving:Backup

by Bruno Friedmann

Since sometimes, bacula project has released two main major version. (7.0 and 7.2). Nobody has taken care of the packages available on obs Archiving:Backup [1] Those packages have never been submitted to Factory, and from the last upstream announcement the project will deliver directly prebuild package for major distribution. Moreover, since at least 3 years I'm using another tool called Bareos, and have no more interest nor time to maintain the software. So if you're interested to take ownership of those, raise your hands now. I will let a grace period of one or two months before sending a delete request. [1] https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/Archiving:Backup/bacula https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/Archiving:Backup/bacula-docs https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/Archiving:Backup/bacula-regress -- Bruno Friedmann Ioda-Net Sàrl www.ioda-net.ch openSUSE Member & Board, fsfe fellowship GPG KEY : D5C9B751C4653227 irc: tigerfoot -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

6 years, 4 months

[opensuse-packaging] Delays in submission notification?

by Takashi Iwai

Hi, recently I got notification mails from hermes so late, one or two days after the actual package submission or status change. Is it only me? Takashi -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

6 years, 6 months

[opensuse-packaging] Epoch vs. dup

by Andrei Borzenkov

10:~ # zypper se -s gnu-unifont-bitmap-fonts Loading repository data... Reading installed packages... S | Name | Type | Version | Arch | Repository --+--------------------------+---------+---------------+--------+------------------------ i | gnu-unifont-bitmap-fonts | package | 20080123-85.2 | noarch | (System Packages) v | gnu-unifont-bitmap-fonts | package | 8.0.01-1.1 | noarch | openSUSE-Tumbleweed-Oss (reverse-i-search)`up': vi /mnt/d^C 10:~ # zypper up gnu-unifont-bitmap-fonts Loading repository data... Reading installed packages... No update candidate for 'gnu-unifont-bitmap-fonts-20080123-85.2.noarch'. The highest available version is already installed. Resolving package dependencies... Nothing to do. 10:~ # zypper dup Warning: You are about to do a distribution upgrade with all enabled repositories. Make sure these repositories are compatible before you continue. See 'man zypper' for more information about this command. Loading repository data... Reading installed packages... Computing distribution upgrade... ... The following package is going to be downgraded: gnu-unifont-bitmap-fonts 1 package to downgrade, 1 new, 1 to remove. Overall download size: 47.5 MiB. Already cached: 0 B. After the operation, 485.7 KiB will be freed. Continue? [y/n/? shows all options] (y): To me this sounds like the exact use case for RPM epoch - version scheme changes so we want to start new sequence which is "newer" than any previous sequence. Are there some guidelines that say when (not) use epoch? Or is it simply considered non-issue because anyone will use dup anyway? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

6 years, 6 months

[opensuse-packaging] "unresolvable: have choice for ..." in network:samba:STABLE/cifs-utils

by Lars Müller

Hi, in network:samba:STABLE we aligned the python sub package names with the remaining system. Instead of the short "py" prefix we now use there too the long "python-" one. Resuling in the two new package names python-talloc and python-ldb. The spec files got the required Provides and Obsoletes to smooth the transition. Plus the packages consuming one of them (Build)Require the new names too. This worked quite well for all packages inside network:samba:STABLE despite the cifs-utils one. There we currently see when trying to build with osc for the openSUSE_13.2 x86_64 target for example: Getting buildconfig from server and store to /home/lm/opensuse/network:samba:STABLE/cifs-utils/.osc/_buildconfig-openSUSE_13.2-x86_64 buildinfo is broken... it says: unresolvable: have choice for libpytalloc-util.so.2()(64bit) needed by samba-libs: python-talloc pytalloc, have choice for libpytalloc-util.so.2(PYTALLOC_UTIL_2.0.6)(64bit) needed by samba-libs: python-talloc pytalloc In the home:lmuelle:pysamba/cifs-utils project I got it working by adding #!BuildIgnore: pytalloc but I fear this approach isn't correct. To the python-talloc package we added: Provides: pytalloc = %{version} Obsoletes: pytalloc < %{version} And to python-talloc-devel Provides: pytalloc-devel = %{version} Obsoletes: pytalloc-devel < %{version} Cheers, Lars -- Lars Müller [ˈlaː(r)z ˈmʏlɐ] Samba Team + SUSE Labs SUSE Linux, Maxfeldstraße 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany

6 years, 6 months

[opensuse-packaging] [13.2] Chromium dep missing in patch (openSUSE-2015-679)

by Uzair Shamim

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi, I tried to update the system using apper and got the following message: A package dependency could not be found. More information is available in the detailed report. chromium-ffmpeg-45.0.2454.101-54.1.x86_64 requires chromium = 45.0.2454.101, but this requirement cannot be provided Running zypper patch gives the same error: user:~ # zypper patch Loading repository data... Reading installed packages... Resolving package dependencies... Problem: chromium-ffmpeg-45.0.2454.101-54.1.x86_64 requires chromium = 45.0.2454.101, but this requirement cannot be provided Solution 1: deinstallation of chromium-ffmpeg-45.0.2454.101-54.1.x86_64 Solution 2: do not install patch:openSUSE-2015-679-1.noarch Solution 3: do not install patch:openSUSE-2015-679-1.noarch Solution 4: break chromium-ffmpeg-45.0.2454.101-54.1.x86_64 by ignoring some of its dependencies Choose from above solutions by number or cancel [1/2/3/4/c] (c): c It seems like the issue is with patch openSUSE-2015-679? - -- Regards, Uzair Shamim -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJWK6RbAAoJEKk4ocK8JbkdaSwP/Rt4pesMZDXh7ASdoBp7s3fY xf0OrxGdL0ikHn0Z7PL3NIHwIykf25Tq/oENpfq/Xx+Jead5VkLTqJfLIqF3/Vnf HUc4SJ/N8Bca6vtgs3pYvG+ttqTUxYccAvgp6vHpI/s0La3EzzD/fBG9dWT1rkFA SWCFsRXUCDwvRqszEXat2ifF8oACVxhzR7PissNmDcAYdGFhQ930f7xlRZSZzZoi GlqYh7MJz7EAZYzRoXPe95qtDzGqq91a75Vm0h9AIMk7dzo/TxuvgZwos79PXcpF mUPY1y7HaYQmQwa7ex9w6jxWoTLOVf6f9n+tHUbQyueT8JU7xEwkaukzPSPajWm3 xjOSyyE6pvTI3pXsn9WWfzarPf9iarZatWHqnjCwFpO68DzhL5qDm2ff1yxaVNSl giHwjKi5X5+Y+eQpfnfQhDgHNdOAnMfHKSZ5H2KPv/UfXMCusWuVDrbxBkRhxYyv Hd0v59jrHw8VJySHqTkIv9PiDMa+R2FAqnq1HeR91LtW2cX0qHCrgH6whm2wVuVQ K4VKvN5ww25g74IIt8GmkXmEM2fouQUxALjgFyFxd6ii09n84zaITqsqPw9XAxvy zfoxqQ4juV262clcST17CQ9dTIiuWHaWSL8dGbJMZ+PfTdclY6QsbaP/hx5PHhao RHs3kYmIhO5IYL/4k0XV =K12i -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

6 years, 6 months

[opensuse-packaging] Features for Leap on Wiki

by Douglas DeMaio

Hi all, it's that time of the year and we need to rally the Geekos to tell the world all the great things you have done this past year that are now in Leap. Please take the time to update the features page on the openSUSE wiki - https://en.opensuse.org/Features Please add the current information, new and relevant information related to Leap. We highly is appreciated. If you haven't read already, we are having a Wikithon (https://news.opensuse.org/2015/10/19/weekend-wikithon-to-refresh-content/) this weekend to refresh the wiki and add new features to our newest release. Without your help, it won't be possible. Please help where you can and try to win one of the four hats we are awarding to the people with the most contributions. v/r Doug -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

6 years, 6 months

[opensuse-packaging] How to "not use for build" another package in same project?

by Johannes Meixner

Hello, in short: I have a package "foo" in a development project where also a package "bar" in that same project exists that is used to build "foo". I like to specify in my package "foo" not to use "bar" from that development project but to use "bar" from the repository that is used to build "foo". Can I specify that in my package "foo" and if yes how can I do it? Details: I have "sane-backends" in its development project "graphics" where also "libgphoto2" exists. sane-backends needs libgphoto2 to build. I build sane-backends also for released openSUSE versions. Now when a user of a released openSUSE version likes to install sane-backends from the graphics project he also needs libgphoto2 from the graphics project. But unfortunately the newest version of libgphoto2 from the graphics project cannot be installed into released openSUSE versions without dependency issues because other packages in the released openSUSE versions need an older version of libgphoto2. If I could build sane-backends in the graphics project not with libgphoto2 from the graphics project but with libgphoto2 from the repository that is used to build sane-backends, then sane-backends would require the libgphoto2 version of the released openSUSE versions and users could install sane-backends from the graphics project into their released openSUSE versions without dependency issues. As a workaround the maintainer of libgphoto2 has now disabled in the graphics project that libgphoto2 is used for build for released openSUSE versions but this has the drawback that libgphoto2 is no longer used for build for all packages in the graphics project. What I would prefer is that I could specify only in sane-backends how exactly I like to have this particular package built. Kind Regards Johannes Meixner -- SUSE LINUX GmbH - GF: Felix Imendoerffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton - HRB 21284 (AG Nuernberg) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

6 years, 6 months

[opensuse-packaging] linking package dependency to another project

by Roman Evstifeev

Hi. I am trying to create package lvtk in my home:rwman project. This package needs lv2-devel >= 1.10.0, which is availabe only from multimedia:libs project. I tried to create aggregate package "lv2" in my home project, but this does not help. When i run "osc build" locally, I am still getting error: unresolvable: nothing provides lv2-devel >= 1.10.0 What am i doing wrong with aggregates? I currently solved this problem by running "osc meta -e prj home:rwman" and adding following line in corresponding repository xml node: <path project="multimedia:libs" repository="openSUSE_13.2"/> But if i understand correctly - this will make all my home project packages prefer multimedia:libs project when looking for dependencies. I am looking for a way to make only one my package (lvtk) use only one package (lv2) from multimedia:libs project. I there such a way? Thanks in advance! -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

6 years, 6 months

[opensuse-packaging] Can someone drop the the "drivers:" project ?

by Johannes Weberhofer

There is a "drivers:" project that's deletion is still on my todo-list. The project and all it's sub-projects are is completely unmaintained. There were discussions about those projects in http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-factory/2014-09/msg00163.html and a request to delete by myself on http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-buildservice/2014-11/msg00079.html How about dropping that repos and freeing some resources? -- Johannes Weberhofer Weberhofer GmbH, Austria, Vienna -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

6 years, 6 months

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

openSUSE Packaging October 2015