Neal Gompa wrote:
> Then there'd be the problem of where we'd have the build capacity. We
> barely have enough for what we do now...
To be honest, I would just ignore the modules and do the side tag rebuilds
only for the non-modular Rawhide, and only once a month or so.
Kevin Kofler
On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 7:17 AM Kevin Kofler wrote:
>
> Neal Gompa wrote:
> > I think it does have value, however I think the Red Hat compiler team
> > drastically underestimated how much breakage we're willing to tolerate
> > for it.
>
> I think you mean "overestimated" there, not "underestimated"
Neal Gompa wrote:
> I think it does have value, however I think the Red Hat compiler team
> drastically underestimated how much breakage we're willing to tolerate
> for it.
I think you mean "overestimated" there, not "underestimated", don't you?
> That's not true. Since Koji 1.18, it's been possi
On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 6:02 AM Kevin Kofler wrote:
>
> Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > Although the sync issues are annoying I do think we, as developers of
> > and developers on the Fedora platform benefit from having the annobin
> > notes in the binaries. It is like making sure there is unwind
> > inf
Mark Wielaard wrote:
> Although the sync issues are annoying I do think we, as developers of
> and developers on the Fedora platform benefit from having the annobin
> notes in the binaries. It is like making sure there is unwind
> information or debug packages for each binary.
I am not convinced t
Hi all,
I just want to warn you the error got into Fedora 32 too.
The symptoms are the same - not being able to build on aarch64 due 'gcc
is not able to create executables'.
Builds:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=48241569
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID
On Thu, 2020-07-30 at 10:09 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Jeff Law wrote:
> > :( I'll raise it again with Nick and Jakub, it's a sore point for
> > everyone I think and it causes far more friction than just what we see
> > here in Fedora.
>
> IMHO, we should just drop annobin from Fedora (or at le
Jeff Law wrote:
> :( I'll raise it again with Nick and Jakub, it's a sore point for
> everyone I think and it causes far more friction than just what we see
> here in Fedora.
IMHO, we should just drop annobin from Fedora (or at least disable it). It
provides no tangible benefit to end users and
Hi,
On 7/25/20 5:25 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
On Sat, 2020-07-25 at 10:46 +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
On Sat, Jul 25, 2020 at 10:35 AM Neal Gompa wrote:
Hey all,
So I was trying to update libseccomp last night, and I was able to
build it for everything except aarch64 on Rawhide because it says th
On Sat, Jul 25, 2020 at 11:25 AM Jeff Law wrote:
>
> On Sat, 2020-07-25 at 10:46 +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 25, 2020 at 10:35 AM Neal Gompa wrote:
> > > Hey all,
> > >
> > > So I was trying to update libseccomp last night, and I was able to
> > > build it for everything except a
On Sat, 2020-07-25 at 10:46 +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 25, 2020 at 10:35 AM Neal Gompa wrote:
> > Hey all,
> >
> > So I was trying to update libseccomp last night, and I was able to
> > build it for everything except aarch64 on Rawhide because it says the
> > compiler can't build
On Sat, Jul 25, 2020 at 10:35 AM Neal Gompa wrote:
>
> Hey all,
>
> So I was trying to update libseccomp last night, and I was able to
> build it for everything except aarch64 on Rawhide because it says the
> compiler can't build executables[1].
>
> Looking a bit closer, it looks like the compiler
Hey all,
So I was trying to update libseccomp last night, and I was able to
build it for everything except aarch64 on Rawhide because it says the
compiler can't build executables[1].
Looking a bit closer, it looks like the compiler stack is out of sync
again with annobin.
Is there anything that
13 matches
Mail list logo
