[scl.org] devtoolset 2?
Dave Johansen
davejohansen at gmail.com
Tue Mar 1 14:42:28 UTC 2016
On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 12:30 AM, Honza Horak <hhorak at redhat.com> wrote:
> On 02/27/2016 09:57 PM, Dave Johansen wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 10:38 PM, Dave Johansen <davejohansen at gmail.com
>> <mailto:davejohansen at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 10:12 PM, Dave Johansen
>> <davejohansen at gmail.com <mailto:davejohansen at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 10:07 AM, Honza Horak <hhorak at redhat.com
>> <mailto:hhorak at 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 at redhat.com <mailto:hhorak at redhat.com>
>> <mailto:hhorak at redhat.com <mailto:hhorak at 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 at redhat.com <mailto:hhorak at redhat.com>
>> <mailto:hhorak at redhat.com
>> <mailto:hhorak at redhat.com>>
>> <mailto:hhorak at redhat.com
>> <mailto:hhorak at redhat.com> <mailto:hhorak at redhat.com
>> <mailto:hhorak at 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 at redhat.com <mailto:hhorak at redhat.com>
>> <mailto:hhorak at redhat.com <mailto:hhorak at redhat.com>>
>> <mailto:hhorak at redhat.com
>> <mailto:hhorak at redhat.com> <mailto:hhorak at redhat.com
>> <mailto:hhorak at redhat.com>>>
>> <mailto:hhorak at redhat.com
>> <mailto:hhorak at redhat.com> <mailto:hhorak at redhat.com
>> <mailto:hhorak at redhat.com>>
>> <mailto:hhorak at redhat.com
>> <mailto:hhorak at redhat.com> <mailto:hhorak at redhat.com
>> <mailto:hhorak at 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?
>>
>>
>> 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.
>>
>
> Do you think sources from devtoolset-3 could be used?
>
> https://github.com/sclorg-distgit/felix-gogo-parent/tree/sig-sclo6-devtoolset-3-rh
>
I'm guessing that would probably work, but isn't making the source
available that was used to build devtoolset-2 required to satisfy the
license?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/sclorg/attachments/20160301/2089f5da/attachment.htm>
More information about the SCLorg
mailing list