On Tue, Dec 28, 2021 at 10:07:25PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
* Kevin Fenzi:
> On Tue, Dec 28, 2021 at 09:54:39AM +0900, Mamoru TASAKA wrote:
>> Hello:
>>
>> Looks like glibc-2.34.9000-33.fc36 was tagged into f36 buildroot on 2021-12-18,
>> but very recently untagged from f36 buildroot.
>> Many binary rpms rebuilt recently have "Requires: glibc >=
2.34.9000-33.fc36"
>> ( for example firefox has:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/rpminfo?rpmID=28655956 )
>> and not looks like lots of packages cause dependency breakage, e.g.
>>
>>
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=80543777
>>
>> Is this intentional?
>
> Yes, I untagged it. I am trying to get a rawhide comppose to work. ;(
>
> I guess I can tag it back... that requires is... unfortunate.
I've added it based on feedback that partial rawhide upgrades are
supposed to work. It's a conservative approximation because we do not
have per-symbol RPM version information.
Can you expand on how that works?
Every new glibc makes everything built against it require that version
or newer?
I can remove it again, but it has cut down the amount of “why
can't I
build my package locally” reports significantly (but then there are also
fewer glibc symbol changes this cycle).
Hum, yeah...
Ideally if we see a problem we would untag pretty quickly.
This time it was different because it wasn't very clear at all that it
was caused by glibc until a bunch of digging. ;)
kevin