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

Re: Rebuilds for openssl/openldap



>>>>> "MC" == Matthias Clasen  writes:

MC> Here is a list of packages which still need to be rebuilt against
MC> the new openssl or openldap. (The list is just what is blocking
MC> the update on my machine, there may be more in the repository).

MC> I would be happy to help out with this, but most of these have
MC> ACLs that prevent me from doing so...

MC> apr-util autofs bind-libs bind-utils cups cyrus-sasl
MC> cyrus-sasl-md5 fetchmail hpijs hplip htdig httpd httpd-tools
MC> inkscape libflashsupport libsane-hpaio mysql-libs nss_ldap ntp
MC> opal pam_ccreds postgresql-libs pwlib pyOpenSSL python-ldap
MC> qca-tls sendmail subversion sudo tcpdump transmission xchat
MC> xorg-x11-server-Xephyr xorg-x11-server-Xnest xorg-x11-server-Xorg

That's just the tip of iceberg, did you see this e-mail:

http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2007-December/msg00102.html

I count *656* packages (which does include subpackages) but either
way, is a big number.

This rebuild is going to be a huge deal and probably needs to be
co-ordinated like a "mass-rebuild" because of BuildRequires ordering
problems.  Just to give one example:

I was trying to rebuild ruby-gnome2, but it didn't work because it
depended on cups being rebuilt.  Warren Togami on #fedora-devel
volunteered to rebuild cups, but cups itself depended on php being
rebuilt first, then (I think) php needed to wait on an httpd rebuild,
and so on...  So we stopped at that point because the deps started
getting too deep to be done in an ad-hoc way.

To avoid wasting time on rebuilds that will immediately fail, it seems
to me that the build should be done in a semi-systematic way
(e.g. perhaps concentrating on packages in "Base" comps group, then
working up through "Development Libraries" or some such, I don't
know).

Alex


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