Processing control commands:
> tags -1 pending
Bug #836917 [release.debian.org] transition: openmpi
Added tag(s) pending.
--
836917: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=836917
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Control: tags -1 pending
On 07/09/16 10:25, Bas Couwenberg wrote:
> The upload of openmpi (2.0.1-3) to unstable has triggered another
> transition.
This needed a big hammer to get it into testing. The fact that the different
libopenmpi versions conflict with each other doesn't really help.
This
On 25/09/16 12:15, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
> One binNMU is needed for experimental, too:
>
> nmu hdf5_1.10.0-patch1+docs-1~exp4 . ANY . experimental . -m "Rebuild against
> libopenmpi2."
Scheduled.
Emilio
One binNMU is needed for experimental, too:
nmu hdf5_1.10.0-patch1+docs-1~exp4 . ANY . experimental . -m "Rebuild against
libopenmpi2."
Andreas
On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 22:21:19 +0200, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
> Thanks, that did the trick. Let's hope it doesn't get stuck in Uploaded
> state like pnetcdf (I've already emailed ar...@buildd.debian.org about
> that).
>
pnetcdf poked to reupload. Please use debian-wb-team rather than the
On 09/15/2016 09:41 PM, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> On 15/09/16 21:28, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>> On 09/12/2016 05:52 PM, Alastair McKinstry wrote:
>>> mpi4py was also failing to build with openmpi-2.0.1 due to hangs in the
>>> test suite; I've just uploaded 2.0.1-5 which includes a fix fo
On 15/09/16 21:28, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
> On 09/12/2016 05:52 PM, Alastair McKinstry wrote:
>> mpi4py was also failing to build with openmpi-2.0.1 due to hangs in the
>> test suite; I've just uploaded 2.0.1-5 which includes a fix for this.
>> mpi4py will need to be rebuilt (there is an olde
On 09/12/2016 05:52 PM, Alastair McKinstry wrote:
> mpi4py was also failing to build with openmpi-2.0.1 due to hangs in the
> test suite; I've just uploaded 2.0.1-5 which includes a fix for this.
> mpi4py will need to be rebuilt (there is an older RC bug due to FTBFS on
> 1.10.3, which is now obsol
On 12/09/16 17:52, Alastair McKinstry wrote:
> I've NMU'd libint2 to fix the FTBFS with mpqc3, below. However it takes
> ~6 hours to compile on my decent laptop, and has been failing to build
> on build systems, typically terminating with memory exhaustion.
>
> What, if anything, can be done to fi
On 09/12/2016 05:52 PM, Alastair McKinstry wrote:
> I've NMU'd libint2 to fix the FTBFS with mpqc3, below. However it takes
> ~6 hours to compile on my decent laptop, and has been failing to build
> on build systems, typically terminating with memory exhaustion.
>
> What, if anything, can be done
I've NMU'd libint2 to fix the FTBFS with mpqc3, below. However it takes
~6 hours to compile on my decent laptop, and has been failing to build
on build systems, typically terminating with memory exhaustion.
What, if anything, can be done to fix this?
mpi4py was also failing to build with openmpi-
On Fri, Sep 09, 2016 at 05:30:34PM +0200, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
> On 09/09/2016 05:24 PM, Kumar Appaiah wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 09, 2016 at 09:19:39PM +0800, Drew Parsons wrote:
> >> On Fri, 9 Sep 2016 14:05:25 +0200 Sebastiaan Couwenberg >> l.nl> wrote:
> >> ...
>
> It looks lik
On 09/09/2016 05:24 PM, Kumar Appaiah wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 09, 2016 at 09:19:39PM +0800, Drew Parsons wrote:
>> On Fri, 9 Sep 2016 14:05:25 +0200 Sebastiaan Couwenberg > l.nl> wrote:
>> ...
It looks like armadillo will require a transition before it will
>> support
superlu >= 5.2.
On Fri, Sep 09, 2016 at 09:19:39PM +0800, Drew Parsons wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Sep 2016 14:05:25 +0200 Sebastiaan Couwenberg l.nl> wrote:
> ...
> > >
> > > It looks like armadillo will require a transition before it will
> support
> > > superlu >= 5.2.
> >
> > To deal with the armadillo/superlu situa
On Fri, 9 Sep 2016 14:05:25 +0200 Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
...
> >
> > It looks like armadillo will require a transition before it will
support
> > superlu >= 5.2.
>
> To deal with the armadillo/superlu situation, I've disabled armadillo
> support in gdal and will upload a new revision with
On 09/09/2016 11:25 AM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
> On 09/08/2016 01:07 PM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>> I've done a round of rebuilds to assess the impact of this transition.
>> The results are summarized below. Several package suffer from
>> uninstallable build dependencies by having libope
On 09/08/2016 01:07 PM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
> I've done a round of rebuilds to assess the impact of this transition.
> The results are summarized below. Several package suffer from
> uninstallable build dependencies by having libopenmpi1.10 pulled in by
> dependencies that failed to rebuil
On 08/09/2016 12:07, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
> I've done a round of rebuilds to assess the impact of this transition.
> The results are summarized below. Several package suffer from
> uninstallable build dependencies by having libopenmpi1.10 pulled in by
> dependencies that failed to rebuild
Dear Bas,
I sincerely apologise for the upload 2.0.1-3. It was meant to be an
upload to 'experimental', not to 'sid', to avoid the transition.
Kind regards
Alastair
On 07/09/2016 09:25, Bas Couwenberg wrote:
> Package: release.debian.org
> Severity: normal
> User: release.debian@packages.d
I've done a round of rebuilds to assess the impact of this transition.
The results are summarized below. Several package suffer from
uninstallable build dependencies by having libopenmpi1.10 pulled in by
dependencies that failed to rebuild.
fftw (2.1.5-4) FTBFS due to . being removed from @INC in
On 09/08/2016 12:00 AM, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> On 07/09/16 10:25, Bas Couwenberg wrote:
>> It sadly seems to be the season of uncoordinated transitions, with some
>> maintainers not learning for their past mistakes. Very disappointing.
>
> It's already started, so let's tag it as such.
>
Control: tags -1 confirmed
On 07/09/16 10:25, Bas Couwenberg wrote:
> It sadly seems to be the season of uncoordinated transitions, with some
> maintainers not learning for their past mistakes. Very disappointing.
It's already started, so let's tag it as such.
I have urgented proj so that e.g. v
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 confirmed
Bug #836917 [release.debian.org] transition: openmpi
Added tag(s) confirmed.
--
836917: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=836917
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: transition
Control: forwarded -1
https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/auto-openmpi.html
It sadly seems to be the season of uncoordinated transitions, with some
maintainers not learning for t
24 matches
Mail list logo
