[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [scl.org] devtoolset 2?



On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 10:38 PM, Dave Johansen <davejohansen gmail com> wrote:
On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 10:12 PM, Dave Johansen <davejohansen gmail com> wrote:
On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 10:07 AM, Honza Horak <hhorak redhat com> wrote:
On 01/13/2016 05:14 AM, Dave Johansen wrote:
On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 1:47 PM, Honza Horak <hhorak redhat com
<mailto:hhorak redhat com>> wrote:

    On 01/06/2016 05:41 PM, Dave Johansen wrote:

        On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 8:04 AM, Honza Horak <hhorak redhat com
        <mailto:hhorak redhat com>
        <mailto:hhorak redhat com <mailto:hhorak redhat com>>> wrote:

             On 01/05/2016 04:35 PM, Dave Johansen wrote:

                 On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 8:30 AM, Honza Horak
        <hhorak redhat com <mailto:hhorak redhat com>
                 <mailto:hhorak redhat com <mailto:hhorak redhat com>>
                 <mailto:hhorak redhat com <mailto:hhorak redhat com>
        <mailto:hhorak redhat com <mailto:hhorak redhat com>>>> 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?

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.

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]