FYI: rdma-core 26.1-1.fc32 dropped support for %arm:
# 32-bit arm is missing required arch-specific memory barriers,
ExcludeArch: %{arm}
This broke dependecies for the arm package of openmpi
(https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1780584)
This may have affected other users of rdma-core, depending of if they use rdma on arm. Using my x86_64 machine:
$ dnf repoquery --whatrequires libibverbs.so.1'()(64bit)' --sourceLast metadata expiration check: 0:14:21 ago on Fri 06 Dec 2019 10:35:11 PM MST.
ceph-14.2.4-3.fc32.src.rpm dapl-2.1.9-10.fc31.src.rpm fio-3.16-2.fc32.src.rpm ga-5.6.5-6.fc31.src.rpm glusterfs-7.0-1.fc32.src.rpm libfabric-1.9.0-1.fc32.src.rpm libiscsi-1.18.0-9.fc32.src.rpm libocrdma-1.0.8-6.fc27.src.rpm nwchem-6.8.2-1.fc32.src.rpm openmpi-3.1.5-1.module_f32+7117+998651d7.src.rpm orangefs-2.9.7-6.fc31.src.rpm perftest-4.2-5.fc31.src.rpm qemu-4.2.0-0.3.rc2.fc32.src.rpm qperf-0.4.9-16.fc31.src.rpm rdma-core-26.1-1.fc32.src.rpm scsi-target-utils-1.0.70-9.fc31.src.rpm ucx-1.6.1-1.fc32.src.rpm This has also broken hwloc-devel on arm: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1780813Is this a definite hard requirement, or can we have at least a minimal rdma-core for arm to avoid having to propagate a bunch of arm conditionals down the stack?
-- Orion Poplawski Manager of NWRA Technical Systems 720-772-5637 NWRA, Boulder/CoRA Office FAX: 303-415-9702 3380 Mitchell Lane or...@nwra.com Boulder, CO 80301 https://www.nwra.com/
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
