[opensuse-packaging] SuperLU 5.2.1 and CMake: Please review and test
Dear openSuse packagers, I created a merge request for SuperLU to update it to version 5.2.1 and switch to CMake as the build-sytem. I am pretty sure that not everything works now, both packaging-wise and compatiblity-wise. SuperLU 5 changed the signature for dgssvx et al. and packaging relying on SuperLU must be updated. So please help me improving the package by reviewing and testing it. I am not sure whether my merge request should be accepted and we try to fix it in the devel project. SR 398781: https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/398781 My forked and updated package:
https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/home:mathletic:branches:devel:librar...
Bye Christoph -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
Hi Christoph, On Sun, 2016-05-29 at 18:45 +0200, Christoph Grüninger wrote:
Dear openSuse packagers, I created a merge request for SuperLU to update it to version 5.2.1 and switch to CMake as the build-sytem. I am pretty sure that not everything works now, both packaging-wise and compatiblity-wise. SuperLU 5 changed the signature for dgssvx et al. and packaging relying on SuperLU must be updated.
So please help me improving the package by reviewing and testing it. I am not sure whether my merge request should be accepted and we try to fix it in the devel project.
SR 398781: https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/398781
My forked and updated package:
https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/home:mathletic:branches:dev el:libraries:c_c++/superlu
Thank you very much for working on this very important update. Armadillo, a package that I maintain is switching to depending on superlu > 5 from version 7.0 onwards, so I have personal interest in this. The diff in the spec file looks ok, except for this part: %package devel Summary: Development files for %{name} Group: Development/Libraries/C and C++ Provides: superlu = %{version} Obsoletes: superlu < %{version} Requires: libsuperlu4 = %{version} The "Requires" should be on libsuperlu5. I would suggest that you define a macro for the shlib name, e.g. %define soname lib%{name}5 and use that consistently. Everything else seems ok to me. Cheers. -- Atri Bhattacharya Mon 30 May 22:30:42 CEST 2016 Sent from openSUSE Tumbleweed (20160526) (x86_64) on my laptop. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
Hello, Am Montag, 30. Mai 2016, 22:42:21 CEST schrieb Atri Bhattacharya:
The diff in the spec file looks ok, except for this part:
%package devel Summary: Development files for %{name} Group: Development/Libraries/C and C++ Provides: superlu = %{version} Obsoletes: superlu < %{version}
It's probably a good idea to use a fixed version number (slightly bigger than the latest version that ever existed) instead of %{version} in Obsoletes. Something like: Obsoletes: superlu < 4.1.2 This assumes that the last version of "superlu" was 4.1.1. I didn't check which version was really available, so please adjust as needed. Even "< 5.2.1" would be better than "< %{version}". Regards, Christian Boltz --
But does your response also means that there is no concern if openSUSE is left with no multimedia support normally provided from packman? Only if your psychic abilities surpass those of Miss Cleo and I'm the evil cousin of the wicked witch of the west. But who knows... [> Basil Chupin and Henne Vogelsang in opensuse-project]
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
Hi Atri, thanks for your feedback. I followed your advice, it is now 399049. https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/399049 Bye Christoph -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
Hi Christian, thanks for your feedback. I don't get why this should be better. I did not change this part. I only see the disadvantage of your suggestion, that next time this place is overlooked to change. By the way, the last version packaged for openSuse was SuperLU 4.3 Bye Christoph
%package devel Summary: Development files for %{name} Group: Development/Libraries/C and C++ Provides: superlu = %{version} Obsoletes: superlu < %{version}
It's probably a good idea to use a fixed version number (slightly bigger than the latest version that ever existed) instead of %{version} in Obsoletes. Something like:
Obsoletes: superlu < 4.1.2
This assumes that the last version of "superlu" was 4.1.1. I didn't check which version was really available, so please adjust as needed. Even "< 5.2.1" would be better than "< %{version}". -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
Hello, Am Dienstag, 31. Mai 2016, 08:23:23 CEST schrieb Christoph Grüninger:
thanks for your feedback. I don't get why this should be better. I did not change this part. I only see the disadvantage of your suggestion, that next time this place is overlooked to change.
Actually this is exactly the point ;-) - the Obsoletes never needs to be changed to a higher version number.
By the way, the last version packaged for openSuse was SuperLU 4.3
This means you'll never need to obsolete a superlu package newer than 4.3. Obsoletes: superlu < 4.4 is a close match, which will obsolete only packages that really existed. Obsoletes: superlu < %{version} will also obsolute packages with a (from today's POV) future version number that probably will never exist - but if they do [1], it will become interesting[tm] to install such a package. Yes, I know / hope this rarely happens in practise - but why make things harder than they need to be? Regards, Christian Boltz [1] possible reasons include: - in some years superlu 7.0 could come with a new tool that should be packaged in a package named "superlu". - someone starts a totally different project which is for some reason also named "superlu" (maybe he/she just didn't google if that name is already used by something else). With the < 4.4, he/she will "just" need to fast-forward the version number once, but with < %{version} the version must always be higher than the version of superlu-devel - or the package needs to be renamed. --
Einmal im Jahr sorgen MS Produkte durch das Internet für Milliardenschäden in der Wirtschaft 2000: Love Letter, 2001: Code Red und Nimda, 2003: Sapphire, 2002? Windows XP. [Eric Wick, Wolfgang Ewert und Urs Traenkner in dcsm]
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 2:23 AM, Christoph Grüninger
Hi Christian, thanks for your feedback. I don't get why this should be better. I did not change this part. I only see the disadvantage of your suggestion, that next time this place is overlooked to change. By the way, the last version packaged for openSuse was SuperLU 4.3
Bye Christoph
%package devel Summary: Development files for %{name} Group: Development/Libraries/C and C++ Provides: superlu = %{version} Obsoletes: superlu < %{version}
It's probably a good idea to use a fixed version number (slightly bigger than the latest version that ever existed) instead of %{version} in Obsoletes. Something like:
Obsoletes: superlu < 4.1.2
This assumes that the last version of "superlu" was 4.1.1. I didn't check which version was really available, so please adjust as needed. Even "< 5.2.1" would be better than "< %{version}".
Christoph, I took the time to research this. I would change the code snippet to have a comment and a fixed version number: =============== # The standalone superlu rpm has been eliminated, and the relevant files are now in superlu-devel # The last standalone superlu rpm was was v3.0 Provides: superlu = %{version} Obsoletes: superlu <= 3.0 =============== See https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/146203 if you want to see where that functional change took place. Greg -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
Hi Greg, thanks for the extended explanation, now I get what you and Christian want. I created a new merge request 399550 https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/399550 I hope my requests don't annoy. Bye Christoph -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
On Mittwoch, 1. Juni 2016, 22:36:18 CEST wrote Christoph Grüninger:
Hi Greg, thanks for the extended explanation, now I get what you and Christian want. I created a new merge request 399550 https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/399550
I hope my requests don't annoy.
The entire purpose of requests is to annoy package maintainers. They are _ALWAYS_ upset that they have less work. So just ignore them ;) bye adrian PS: it was ironic, right? ;) Thanks a lot for your work :) -- Adrian Schroeter email: adrian@suse.de SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg) Maxfeldstraße 5 90409 Nürnberg Germany -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
participants (5)
-
Adrian Schröter -
Atri Bhattacharya -
Christian Boltz -
Christoph Grüninger -
Greg Freemyer