From mskalick at redhat.com Tue Feb 2 15:00:01 2016 From: mskalick at redhat.com (Marek =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skalick=FD?=) Date: Tue, 02 Feb 2016 16:00:01 +0100 Subject: [scl.org] =?iso-8859-1?q?Self-introduction_-_Marek_Skalick=FD?= Message-ID: <1454425201.18743.1.camel@redhat.com> Hello everyone! My name is Marek Skalick? and I would like to become member of sclo-sig to help with packaging of MongoDB related packages. Cheers, Marek {mskalick} From hhorak at redhat.com Tue Feb 2 15:31:58 2016 From: hhorak at redhat.com (Honza Horak) Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2016 16:31:58 +0100 Subject: [scl.org] =?utf-8?q?Self-introduction_-_Marek_Skalick=C3=BD?= In-Reply-To: <1454425201.18743.1.camel@redhat.com> References: <1454425201.18743.1.camel@redhat.com> Message-ID: <56B0CBEE.9090302@redhat.com> +1 from me, Marek is one of the members of rhscl team. Honza On 02/02/2016 04:00 PM, Marek Skalick? wrote: > Hello everyone! > > My name is Marek Skalick? and I would like to become member > of sclo-sig to help with packaging of MongoDB related packages. > > Cheers, > Marek > {mskalick} > > _______________________________________________ > SCLorg mailing list > SCLorg at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/sclorg > From dominic at cleal.org Tue Feb 16 14:18:23 2016 From: dominic at cleal.org (Dominic Cleal) Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 14:18:23 +0000 Subject: [scl.org] sclo-* collections issue tracker Message-ID: <56C32FAF.7020506@cleal.org> Is there a good place to report bugs against sclo-* collections? I'm aware that softwarecollections.org has a product in Red Hat's Bugzilla with per-collection components, but this doesn't seem a good place to log bugs against CentOS SCLo SIG collections. Is it worth asking for a SIG-specific project within bugs.centos.org? -- Dominic Cleal dominic at cleal.org From dominic at cleal.org Mon Feb 22 14:17:16 2016 From: dominic at cleal.org (Dominic Cleal) Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2016 14:17:16 +0000 Subject: [scl.org] sclo-ror42: Ruby on Rails 4.2 packages available for testing Message-ID: <56CB186C.305@cleal.org> I'm happy to announce test packages of a new Ruby on Rails 4.2 collection are available from the CentOS Software Collections SIG. These are modelled on previous collections (e.g. rh-ror41) and provide all of Rails with full asset compilation support, plus extras such as jQuery (1.11.2 & 2.1.3). It depends on the rh-ruby22 and v8314 collections. To install it, run: yum install centos-release-scl yum install --enablerepo=centos-sclo-sclo-testing --nogpgcheck sclo-ror42 Activate and use the collection with "scl enable sclo-ror42". https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/SCLo/RubyOnRails contains tips on using the RoR collection(s) with Passenger. Please test the collection out and report bugs to https://github.com/domcleal/sclo-ror42/issues or on this thread. -- Dominic Cleal dominic at cleal.org From hhorak at redhat.com Mon Feb 22 21:00:24 2016 From: hhorak at redhat.com (Honza Horak) Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2016 22:00:24 +0100 Subject: [scl.org] sclo-* collections issue tracker In-Reply-To: <56C32FAF.7020506@cleal.org> References: <56C32FAF.7020506@cleal.org> Message-ID: <56CB76E8.3050200@redhat.com> On 02/16/2016 03:18 PM, Dominic Cleal wrote: > Is there a good place to report bugs against sclo-* collections? > > I'm aware that softwarecollections.org has a product in Red Hat's > Bugzilla with per-collection components, but this doesn't seem a good > place to log bugs against CentOS SCLo SIG collections. > > Is it worth asking for a SIG-specific project within bugs.centos.org? Actually there is a tracker for sclo-vagrant1 already for example: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=softwarecollections.org&component=sclo-vagrant1 On the other hand, there were indeed ideas to keep track issues at bugs.centos.org, which is what centos users are used to. I agree with ^ but I also like bugzilla, since then we can easily clone bugs to RHSCL product and generally I find it to be a more convenient tool, so I'm not totally decided here. Honza From davejohansen at gmail.com Sat Feb 27 05:12:05 2016 From: davejohansen at gmail.com (Dave Johansen) Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2016 22:12:05 -0700 Subject: [scl.org] devtoolset 2? In-Reply-To: <569FBEEE.50201@redhat.com> References: <568BE1A1.8060207@redhat.com> <568D2CF3.50900@redhat.com> <568D7D66.6090305@redhat.com> <569FBEEE.50201@redhat.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 10:07 AM, Honza Horak wrote: > On 01/13/2016 05:14 AM, Dave Johansen wrote: > >> On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 1:47 PM, Honza Horak > > wrote: >> >> On 01/06/2016 05:41 PM, Dave Johansen wrote: >> >> On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 8:04 AM, Honza Horak > >> >> wrote: >> >> On 01/05/2016 04:35 PM, Dave Johansen wrote: >> >> On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 8:30 AM, Honza Horak >> >> > >> >> >>> wrote: >> >> Interesting, you're first who asks for that. >> Currently, >> there is >> nobody working on it. >> >> >> We're working on moving to EL 7, but still need to >> support EL 6 >> installations. We'd also like to start allowing use of >> C++11 in >> our code >> base and using the same version of gcc on both EL 6 and >> 7 seemed >> like >> the best way to accomplish both of these goals. >> >> If you're willing to try that, I wouldn't be >> against, I >> just must >> warn you that rebuilding devtoolset is always a >> lot of fun >> (like >> >> https://www.redhat.com/archives/sclorg/2015-December/msg00050.html).. >> >> >> What's the best way to start this? >> Are there modifications that are required for source >> .rpm (removing >> RedHat naming, etc)? Or is it just start building it >> and dealing >> with >> the issues that pop up? >> >> >> There is no need to remove any naming, we usually take srpm >> from RH >> and rebuild. However, the bootstrapping is usually very >> challenging. >> I'd recommend first to try to rebuild at least basic packages >> yourself using mock (or copr), so you see how far you can >> get.. >> Then, if you'll see it is worth the work, we can create >> tags/targets >> in CBS and start with real rebuilds. >> >> >> I was just going to start playing around with this on COPR and I >> noticed >> that there appears to already be an existing build of >> devtoolset-2: >> https://copr.fedoraproject.org/coprs/rhscl/devtoolset/ >> >> It looks like it's not complete because only some of the packages >> succeeded, but would that serve as the best starting point? If so, >> what's the best way to move forward with that? >> >> >> Well, why not, I can add you as collaborator in this project -- what >> is your copr username? However, I'm afraid that whoever tried that, >> he got blocked on some non easy issues, which is the reason why it >> is not finished. >> >> >> My username is daveisfera. >> > > Well, I've realized the copr is not named devtoolset-2, but just > devtoolset, which is not ideal.. and renaming is not possible in copr.. > maybe it would be better if you'd create your own copr, which has correct > name.. > > Is there anything special that needs to be done to do these builds? >> > > Honestly, I don't know what is necessary to fix the builds, but since they > were failing, I expect something would need to be fixed. > > Is there an original location for the source rpms? And is this COPR use >> those or some modification of them? >> > > The sources are available here: > > http://ftp.redhat.com/redhat/linux/enterprise/6Server/en/RHDevToolset/SRPMS/ > It looks like the source .rpm for felix-gogo-parent is missing. What needs to happen for that to be added? Thanks, Dave -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davejohansen at gmail.com Sat Feb 27 05:38:04 2016 From: davejohansen at gmail.com (Dave Johansen) Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2016 22:38:04 -0700 Subject: [scl.org] devtoolset 2? In-Reply-To: References: <568BE1A1.8060207@redhat.com> <568D2CF3.50900@redhat.com> <568D7D66.6090305@redhat.com> <569FBEEE.50201@redhat.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 10:12 PM, Dave Johansen wrote: > On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 10:07 AM, Honza Horak wrote: > >> On 01/13/2016 05:14 AM, Dave Johansen wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 1:47 PM, Honza Horak >> > wrote: >>> >>> On 01/06/2016 05:41 PM, Dave Johansen wrote: >>> >>> On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 8:04 AM, Honza Horak >> >>> >> wrote: >>> >>> On 01/05/2016 04:35 PM, Dave Johansen wrote: >>> >>> On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 8:30 AM, Honza Horak >>> >>> > >>> >>> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Interesting, you're first who asks for that. >>> Currently, >>> there is >>> nobody working on it. >>> >>> >>> We're working on moving to EL 7, but still need to >>> support EL 6 >>> installations. We'd also like to start allowing use of >>> C++11 in >>> our code >>> base and using the same version of gcc on both EL 6 and >>> 7 seemed >>> like >>> the best way to accomplish both of these goals. >>> >>> If you're willing to try that, I wouldn't be >>> against, I >>> just must >>> warn you that rebuilding devtoolset is always a >>> lot of fun >>> (like >>> >>> https://www.redhat.com/archives/sclorg/2015-December/msg00050.html).. >>> >>> >>> What's the best way to start this? >>> Are there modifications that are required for source >>> .rpm (removing >>> RedHat naming, etc)? Or is it just start building it >>> and dealing >>> with >>> the issues that pop up? >>> >>> >>> There is no need to remove any naming, we usually take srpm >>> from RH >>> and rebuild. However, the bootstrapping is usually very >>> challenging. >>> I'd recommend first to try to rebuild at least basic >>> packages >>> yourself using mock (or copr), so you see how far you can >>> get.. >>> Then, if you'll see it is worth the work, we can create >>> tags/targets >>> in CBS and start with real rebuilds. >>> >>> >>> I was just going to start playing around with this on COPR and I >>> noticed >>> that there appears to already be an existing build of >>> devtoolset-2: >>> https://copr.fedoraproject.org/coprs/rhscl/devtoolset/ >>> >>> It looks like it's not complete because only some of the packages >>> succeeded, but would that serve as the best starting point? If >>> so, >>> what's the best way to move forward with that? >>> >>> >>> Well, why not, I can add you as collaborator in this project -- what >>> is your copr username? However, I'm afraid that whoever tried that, >>> he got blocked on some non easy issues, which is the reason why it >>> is not finished. >>> >>> >>> My username is daveisfera. >>> >> >> Well, I've realized the copr is not named devtoolset-2, but just >> devtoolset, which is not ideal.. and renaming is not possible in copr.. >> maybe it would be better if you'd create your own copr, which has correct >> name.. >> >> Is there anything special that needs to be done to do these builds? >>> >> >> Honestly, I don't know what is necessary to fix the builds, but since >> they were failing, I expect something would need to be fixed. >> >> Is there an original location for the source rpms? And is this COPR use >>> those or some modification of them? >>> >> >> The sources are available here: >> >> http://ftp.redhat.com/redhat/linux/enterprise/6Server/en/RHDevToolset/SRPMS/ >> > > It looks like the source .rpm for felix-gogo-parent is missing. What needs > to happen for that to be added? > Also, it appears that some of them depend on maven plugins that aren't available: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/daveisfera/devtoolset2/epel-6-x86_64/00163449-devtoolset-2-apache-commons-codec/root.log.gz What can be done to resolve that? Thanks, Dave -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davejohansen at gmail.com Sat Feb 27 20:57:32 2016 From: davejohansen at gmail.com (Dave Johansen) Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2016 13:57:32 -0700 Subject: [scl.org] devtoolset 2? In-Reply-To: References: <568BE1A1.8060207@redhat.com> <568D2CF3.50900@redhat.com> <568D7D66.6090305@redhat.com> <569FBEEE.50201@redhat.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 10:38 PM, Dave Johansen wrote: > On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 10:12 PM, Dave Johansen > wrote: > >> On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 10:07 AM, Honza Horak wrote: >> >>> On 01/13/2016 05:14 AM, Dave Johansen wrote: >>> >>>> On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 1:47 PM, Honza Horak >>> > wrote: >>>> >>>> On 01/06/2016 05:41 PM, Dave Johansen wrote: >>>> >>>> On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 8:04 AM, Honza Horak >>> >>>> >> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 01/05/2016 04:35 PM, Dave Johansen wrote: >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 8:30 AM, Honza Horak >>>> >>>> > >>>> >>>> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Interesting, you're first who asks for that. >>>> Currently, >>>> there is >>>> nobody working on it. >>>> >>>> >>>> We're working on moving to EL 7, but still need to >>>> support EL 6 >>>> installations. We'd also like to start allowing use of >>>> C++11 in >>>> our code >>>> base and using the same version of gcc on both EL 6 and >>>> 7 seemed >>>> like >>>> the best way to accomplish both of these goals. >>>> >>>> If you're willing to try that, I wouldn't be >>>> against, I >>>> just must >>>> warn you that rebuilding devtoolset is always a >>>> lot of fun >>>> (like >>>> >>>> https://www.redhat.com/archives/sclorg/2015-December/msg00050.html).. >>>> >>>> >>>> What's the best way to start this? >>>> Are there modifications that are required for source >>>> .rpm (removing >>>> RedHat naming, etc)? Or is it just start building it >>>> and dealing >>>> with >>>> the issues that pop up? >>>> >>>> >>>> There is no need to remove any naming, we usually take srpm >>>> from RH >>>> and rebuild. However, the bootstrapping is usually very >>>> challenging. >>>> I'd recommend first to try to rebuild at least basic >>>> packages >>>> yourself using mock (or copr), so you see how far you can >>>> get.. >>>> Then, if you'll see it is worth the work, we can create >>>> tags/targets >>>> in CBS and start with real rebuilds. >>>> >>>> >>>> I was just going to start playing around with this on COPR and I >>>> noticed >>>> that there appears to already be an existing build of >>>> devtoolset-2: >>>> https://copr.fedoraproject.org/coprs/rhscl/devtoolset/ >>>> >>>> It looks like it's not complete because only some of the >>>> packages >>>> succeeded, but would that serve as the best starting point? If >>>> so, >>>> what's the best way to move forward with that? >>>> >>>> >>>> Well, why not, I can add you as collaborator in this project -- what >>>> is your copr username? However, I'm afraid that whoever tried that, >>>> he got blocked on some non easy issues, which is the reason why it >>>> is not finished. >>>> >>>> >>>> My username is daveisfera. >>>> >>> >>> Well, I've realized the copr is not named devtoolset-2, but just >>> devtoolset, which is not ideal.. and renaming is not possible in copr.. >>> maybe it would be better if you'd create your own copr, which has correct >>> name.. >>> >>> Is there anything special that needs to be done to do these builds? >>>> >>> >>> Honestly, I don't know what is necessary to fix the builds, but since >>> they were failing, I expect something would need to be fixed. >>> >>> Is there an original location for the source rpms? And is this COPR use >>>> those or some modification of them? >>>> >>> >>> The sources are available here: >>> >>> http://ftp.redhat.com/redhat/linux/enterprise/6Server/en/RHDevToolset/SRPMS/ >>> >> >> It looks like the source .rpm for felix-gogo-parent is missing. What >> needs to happen for that to be added? >> > > Also, it appears that some of them depend on maven plugins that aren't > available: > > https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/daveisfera/devtoolset2/epel-6-x86_64/00163449-devtoolset-2-apache-commons-codec/root.log.gz > What can be done to resolve that? > It looks like the maven packages are supposed to come from the maven SCL, so never mind about that. On a related note, the odd thing is that some of the apache-common packages are in the devtoolset SCL and other are in maven SCL. It just seems kind of odd to be broken up that way, but whatever works I guess. So, the only real issue seems to be the missing source .rpm for felix-gogo-parent. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: