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

Re: rawhide report: 20091027 changes



On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 08:35:34AM -0500, Jeffrey Ollie wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 8:10 AM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski
> <D Mierzejewski icm edu pl> wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 12:11:10PM +0000, Rawhide Report wrote:
> >> Compose started at Tue Oct 27 06:15:09 UTC 2009
> >>
> >> Broken deps for i386
> >> ----------------------------------------------------------
> >>       blacs-lam-1.1-33.fc12.i686 requires liblamf77mpi.so.0
> >>       blacs-lam-1.1-33.fc12.i686 requires liblam.so.0
> >>       orsa-lam-0.7.0-11.fc12.i686 requires lam
> >>       scalapack-lam-1.7.5-7.fc12.i686 requires liblam.so.0
> >>       scalapack-lam-1.7.5-7.fc12.i686 requires liblamf77mpi.so.0
> >>       tachyon-lam-0.98.7-1.fc12.i686 requires liblam.so.0
> >>       tachyon-lam-0.98.7-1.fc12.i686 requires liblamf77mpi.so.0
> >>       tachyon-lam-gl-0.98.7-1.fc12.i686 requires liblam.so.0
> >>       tachyon-lam-gl-0.98.7-1.fc12.i686 requires liblamf77mpi.so.0
> >
> >> Removed package lam
> >
> > Huh what? WTH are you thinking removing a package when we're in Beta
> > freeze?
> 
> Here's the tickets that discussed the removal:
> 
> https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/2712
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523998
> 
> lam should probably be added back until the dependent programs can be
> migrated to use OpenMPI.

I notice that there isn't a word there about who will be responsible for
fixing the packages which depend on LAM currently. You can't just remove
a package without some sort of early warning and a plan to fix the
fall-out.

Regards,
R.

-- 
Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski <rathann*at*icm.edu.pl>  |  LAN  Staff
Interdisciplinary Centre for Mathematical and Computational Modelling
University of Warsaw  |  http://www.icm.edu.pl  | tel. +48 22 5540810


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