Sorry folks -- thanks for untagging. I'll ping the list again after May 9, as was
suggested earlier in this thread.
AG
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kevin Fenzi" <kevin(a)scrye.com>
To: devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, "Anthony Green" <green(a)redhat.com>
Sent: Friday, April 13, 2012 8:05:33 PM
I'm thinking that a
Subject: Re: disruptive libffi upgrade
On Fri, 13 Apr 2012 16:34:55 -0500
Michael Cronenworth <mike(a)cchtml.com> wrote:
Anthony Green wrote:
> I recently release libffi 3.0.11, and ABI changes are mandating
> a .so number change. Despite the ABI change, I suspect that simple
> rebuilds are all that will be required for dependent packages.
Can you untag your build for a few weeks? It is too disruptive at the
moment.
Additionally, it's broken the build root. ;(
You are going to have to coordinate with the python maintainer(s) at
least in order to get it in.
DEBUG backend.py:862: ['/usr/bin/yum', '--installroot',
'/var/lib/mock/f18-build-1319856-211379/root/', 'groupinstall',
'build']
DEBUG util.py:307: Executing command: ['/usr/bin/yum', '--installroot',
'/var/lib/mock/f18-build-1319856-211379/root/', 'groupinstall',
'build']
DEBUG util.py:257: Error: Package: python-libs-2.7.3-1.fc18.x86_64 (build)
DEBUG util.py:257: Requires: libffi.so.5()(64bit)
DEBUG util.py:257: You could try using --skip-broken to work around the problem
DEBUG util.py:257: You could try running: rpm -Va --nofiles --nodigest
DEBUG util.py:257: Error: Package: glib2-2.32.0-1.fc17.x86_64 (build)
DEBUG util.py:257: Requires: libffi.so.5()(64bit)
DEBUG util.py:347: Child returncode was: 1
You may have to provide both versions for a rebuild of python, or some other
bootstrapping method.
I have untagged this build for now.
kevin