Re: DNF vs YUM, $pkg, $pkg-mpi, $pkg-openmpi having same provides

On 19.06.2015 01:26, Sandro Mani wrote: On 19.06.2015 01:10, T.C. Hollingsworth wrote: You should instead use the new depdendency generator hooks, which are also quite a bit nicer to work with. All you have to do is create a file %{_rpmconfigdir}/fileattrs/openmpi.attrs with something like: #

Re: DNF vs YUM, $pkg, $pkg-mpi, $pkg-openmpi having same provides

On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 12:44:29AM +0200, Sandro Mani wrote: > > > On 16.06.2015 17:02, Miloslav Trmač wrote: > >>On 16.06.2015 00:30, Susi Lehtola wrote: > >>>On 06/14/2015 03:02 PM, Sandro Mani wrote: > On 14.06.2015 16:28, Sandro Mani wrote: > >Rules to generate such requires/provides:

Re: DNF vs YUM, $pkg, $pkg-mpi, $pkg-openmpi having same provides

On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 2:43 AM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: > On Friday, 19 June 2015 at 01:10, T.C. Hollingsworth wrote: >> # a regular expression that paths in an RPM >> # must match to trigger the generator >> %__openmpi_path ^%{_prefix}/lib(64)/(openmpi|mpich)/.*$ > > Isn't the '.*$

Re: DNF vs YUM, $pkg, $pkg-mpi, $pkg-openmpi having same provides

On Friday, 19 June 2015 at 01:10, T.C. Hollingsworth wrote: [...] > You should instead use the new depdendency generator hooks, which are > also quite a bit nicer to work with. All you have to do is create a > file %{_rpmconfigdir}/fileattrs/openmpi.attrs with something like: > > # the path to you

Re: DNF vs YUM, $pkg, $pkg-mpi, $pkg-openmpi having same provides

On 19.06.2015 01:10, T.C. Hollingsworth wrote: You don't have to override the internal dependency generator. In fact, you really shouldn't because overriding it also overrides portions of rpm's multilib handling. :-( Patching find-(requires|provides) in /usr/lib/rpm is also useless, as mode

Re: DNF vs YUM, $pkg, $pkg-mpi, $pkg-openmpi having same provides

On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 7:28 AM, Sandro Mani wrote: > Having had a go at this: if bar{-openmpi} requires foo-{openmpi}, filtering > the provides from foo-openmpi and adding an explicit requires to bar-openmpi > on foo-openmpi, this all will result in bar-openmpi depending both on > foo-openmpi as

Re: DNF vs YUM, $pkg, $pkg-mpi, $pkg-openmpi having same provides

- Original Message - > From: "James Antill" > To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" > > Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2015 9:16:27 PM > Subject: Re: DNF vs YUM, $pkg, $pkg-mpi, $pkg-openmpi having same provides > > On Fri, 2015-06-12 at 1

Re: DNF vs YUM, $pkg, $pkg-mpi, $pkg-openmpi having same provides

On 16.06.2015 17:02, Miloslav Trmač wrote: On 16.06.2015 00:30, Susi Lehtola wrote: On 06/14/2015 03:02 PM, Sandro Mani wrote: On 14.06.2015 16:28, Sandro Mani wrote: Rules to generate such requires/provides: * Provides: if the path of the library starts with $MPI_LIB, append the (openmpi) r

Re: DNF vs YUM, $pkg, $pkg-mpi, $pkg-openmpi having same provides

On Fri, 2015-06-12 at 15:09 +0200, Kalev Lember wrote: > On 06/12/2015 10:28 AM, Radek Holy wrote: > > If a package "Requires: foo" and both "bar" and "barbaz" "Provides: > > foo", they are handled as being equally suitable. DNF/libsolv is not > > going to prefer packages with shorter names. > > Y

Re: DNF vs YUM, $pkg, $pkg-mpi, $pkg-openmpi having same provides

> On 16.06.2015 00:30, Susi Lehtola wrote: > > On 06/14/2015 03:02 PM, Sandro Mani wrote: > >> On 14.06.2015 16:28, Sandro Mani wrote: > >>> Rules to generate such requires/provides: > >>> * Provides: if the path of the library starts with $MPI_LIB, append > >>> the (openmpi) resp (mpich) to the pr

Re: DNF vs YUM, $pkg, $pkg-mpi, $pkg-openmpi having same provides

On 16.06.2015 00:30, Susi Lehtola wrote: On 06/14/2015 03:02 PM, Sandro Mani wrote: On 14.06.2015 16:28, Sandro Mani wrote: Rules to generate such requires/provides: * Provides: if the path of the library starts with $MPI_LIB, append the (openmpi) resp (mpich) to the provides string * Require

Re: DNF vs YUM, $pkg, $pkg-mpi, $pkg-openmpi having same provides

On 06/14/2015 03:02 PM, Sandro Mani wrote: On 14.06.2015 16:28, Sandro Mani wrote: Rules to generate such requires/provides: * Provides: if the path of the library starts with $MPI_LIB, append the (openmpi) resp (mpich) to the provides string * Requires: if the path of the scanned object starts

Re: DNF vs YUM, $pkg, $pkg-mpi, $pkg-openmpi having same provides

On 06/12/2015 06:34 AM, Orion Poplawski wrote: On 06/11/2015 10:01 AM, Sandro Mani wrote: So, whose fault is this? Packaging of dnf? Nothing relevant for this caught my eye skimming through the packaging guidelines. And related: trying to install some $pkg-openmpi package, I don't generally see

Re: DNF vs YUM, $pkg, $pkg-mpi, $pkg-openmpi having same provides

- Original Message - > From: "Dennis Jacobfeuerborn" > To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > Sent: Saturday, June 13, 2015 12:30:39 PM > Subject: Re: DNF vs YUM, $pkg, $pkg-mpi, $pkg-openmpi having same provides > > On 12.06.2015 15:25, Radek Holy wrote:

Re: DNF vs YUM, $pkg, $pkg-mpi, $pkg-openmpi having same provides

W dniu 13.06.2015 o 12:30, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn pisze: On 12.06.2015 15:25, Radek Holy wrote: What I feel would be a good solution to the problem above would be to have a way to specify the default. I believe this problem is already solved in apt-get with a very nice syntax: the OR syntax: R

Re: DNF vs YUM, $pkg, $pkg-mpi, $pkg-openmpi having same provides

On 14.06.2015 16:28, Sandro Mani wrote: I was rather thinking, is there an obvious disadvantage in having a {mpich,openmpi}-find-requires.sh script which encodes the mpi flavour in the provides/requires? I.e. libfoo.so.0()(64bit)(openmpi) Rules to generate such requires/provides: * Provid

Re: DNF vs YUM, $pkg, $pkg-mpi, $pkg-openmpi having same provides

On 12.06.2015 15:34, Orion Poplawski wrote: On 06/11/2015 10:01 AM, Sandro Mani wrote: Hello, Investigating bug #1230838, I noticed that when installing mmg3d-libs, dnf installs Konsole output ptscotch-mpich, whereas yum-deprecated installs scotch. Both scotch and ptscotch-mpich provide the

Re: DNF vs YUM, $pkg, $pkg-mpi, $pkg-openmpi having same provides

On 12.06.2015 15:25, Radek Holy wrote: > > > - Original Message - >> From: "Kalev Lember" >> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" >> >> Sent: Friday, June 12, 2015 3:09:50 PM >> Subject: Re: DNF vs YUM, $pkg, $pkg

Re: DNF vs YUM, $pkg, $pkg-mpi, $pkg-openmpi having same provides

On 12.06.2015 15:34, Orion Poplawski wrote: On 06/11/2015 10:01 AM, Sandro Mani wrote: Hello, Investigating bug #1230838, I noticed that when installing mmg3d-libs, dnf installs Konsole output ptscotch-mpich, whereas yum-deprecated installs scotch. Both scotch and ptscotch-mpich provide the

Re: DNF vs YUM, $pkg, $pkg-mpi, $pkg-openmpi having same provides

On 06/11/2015 10:01 AM, Sandro Mani wrote: Hello, Investigating bug #1230838, I noticed that when installing mmg3d-libs, dnf installs Konsole output ptscotch-mpich, whereas yum-deprecated installs scotch. Both scotch and ptscotch-mpich provide the required libscotch.so.0()(64bit), albeit one in

Re: DNF vs YUM, $pkg, $pkg-mpi, $pkg-openmpi having same provides

- Original Message - > From: "Kalev Lember" > To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" > > Sent: Friday, June 12, 2015 3:09:50 PM > Subject: Re: DNF vs YUM, $pkg, $pkg-mpi, $pkg-openmpi having same provides > > On 06/12/2015 10:

Re: DNF vs YUM, $pkg, $pkg-mpi, $pkg-openmpi having same provides

On 06/12/2015 10:28 AM, Radek Holy wrote: If a package "Requires: foo" and both "bar" and "barbaz" "Provides: foo", they are handled as being equally suitable. DNF/libsolv is not going to prefer packages with shorter names. Yes, very much agreed here. Please don't add the yum shortest name hack

Re: DNF vs YUM, $pkg, $pkg-mpi, $pkg-openmpi having same provides

On 11.06.2015 22:15, Susi Lehtola wrote: On 06/11/2015 09:01 AM, Sandro Mani wrote: So, whose fault is this? Packaging of dnf? Nothing relevant for this caught my eye skimming through the packaging guidelines. I think this is dnf's fault. YUm didn't have the same problem, since if multiple

Re: DNF vs YUM, $pkg, $pkg-mpi, $pkg-openmpi having same provides

- Original Message - > From: "Sandro Mani" > To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" > > Sent: Friday, June 12, 2015 10:40:40 AM > Subject: Re: DNF vs YUM, $pkg, $pkg-mpi, $pkg-openmpi having same provides > On 12.06.2015 10:28, Radek H

Re: DNF vs YUM, $pkg, $pkg-mpi, $pkg-openmpi having same provides

On 12.06.2015 10:28, Radek Holy wrote: *From: *"Sandro Mani" *To: *"Development discussions related to Fedora" *Sent: *Thursday, June 11, 2015 6:01:12 PM *Subject: *DNF vs

Re: DNF vs YUM, $pkg, $pkg-mpi, $pkg-openmpi having same provides

- Original Message - > From: "Sandro Mani" > To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" > > Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 6:01:12 PM > Subject: DNF vs YUM, $pkg, $pkg-mpi, $pkg-openmpi having same provides > Hello, > Investigating bug

Re: DNF vs YUM, $pkg, $pkg-mpi, $pkg-openmpi having same provides

On 06/11/2015 09:01 AM, Sandro Mani wrote: So, whose fault is this? Packaging of dnf? Nothing relevant for this caught my eye skimming through the packaging guidelines. I think this is dnf's fault. YUm didn't have the same problem, since if multiple packages provided the necessary library, yum

DNF vs YUM, $pkg, $pkg-mpi, $pkg-openmpi having same provides

Hello, Investigating bug #1230838, I noticed that when installing mmg3d-libs, dnf installs Konsole output ptscotch-mpich, whereas yum-deprecated installs scotch. Both scotch and ptscotch-mpich provide the required libscotch.so.0()(64bit), albeit one in /usr/lib64/ and the other one in /usr/l

Re: dnf vs yum

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Fri, 24 Oct 2014 14:59:14 +0200 Miroslav Suchý wrote: > On 10/24/2014 01:33 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > > That would be a good reason to switch the default in Rawhide at > > this stage. > > No. This is the *first* release with explicit DNF suppor

Re: dnf vs yum

Hi Of course, dnf repoquery for packages that depend on yum/yum-utils yielded quite a few more packages. So I have filed RFE's against all of them and added them to the tracker and fixed the wiki references etc just to complete this process https://bugzilla.redhat.com/showdependencytree.cgi?id=1

Re: dnf vs yum

> > > "Drop" as in "use yum for that, but dnf for the new versions"? That > > sounds reasonable. > > Well reality is f-r is mostly for checking *current* Fedora > guidelines that in some cases apply only to rawhide. If someone is > running f-r on a system from 4 years ago to verify current packagin

Re: dnf vs yum

On Fri 24 Oct 2014 05:35:00 PM CEST Matthew Miller wrote: > On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 04:56:20PM +0200, Stanislav Ochotnicky wrote: >> Thought we should really switch to actually use dnf api instead. Things >> get complicated for us when we want to support EL6 then...Maybe we should >> just drop EPEL

Re: dnf vs yum

On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 04:56:20PM +0200, Stanislav Ochotnicky wrote: > Thought we should really switch to actually use dnf api instead. Things > get complicated for us when we want to support EL6 then...Maybe we should > just drop EPEL6 support. "Drop" as in "use yum for that, but dnf for the new

Re: dnf vs yum

On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 10:00 AM, Stanislav Ochotnicky wrote: > On Fri 24 Oct 2014 02:26:37 PM CEST Rahul Sundaram wrote: > > > > Bodhi-client, fedpkg, python-meh, libreport-python, yum-utils depends on > > yum and yum-utils itself is a dependency for fedora-review, lpf and > > mock. > > FWIW fe

Re: dnf vs yum

On Fri 24 Oct 2014 04:27:37 PM CEST Tim Lauridsen wrote: > On Fri Oct 24 2014 at 4:01:20 PM Stanislav Ochotnicky < > sochotni...@redhat.com> wrote: > >> On Fri 24 Oct 2014 02:26:37 PM CEST Rahul Sundaram wrote: >> >> > Hi >> > >> > On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 7:58 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> > >> >> >> >

Re: dnf vs yum

On Fri Oct 24 2014 at 4:01:20 PM Stanislav Ochotnicky < sochotni...@redhat.com> wrote: > On Fri 24 Oct 2014 02:26:37 PM CEST Rahul Sundaram wrote: > > > Hi > > > > On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 7:58 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote: > > > >> > >> Yes, switch the defaults ASAP. Thanks > >> > > > > FWIW, there is

Re: dnf vs yum

On Fri 24 Oct 2014 02:26:37 PM CEST Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Hi > > On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 7:58 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote: > >> >> Yes, switch the defaults ASAP. Thanks >> > > FWIW, there is still considerable work left is switching over to dnf > completely. > > Filtering out some minor details (bas

Re: dnf vs yum

On 10/24/2014 01:33 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: That would be a good reason to switch the default in Rawhide at this stage. No. This is the *first* release with explicit DNF support. Until now it was tested only by those who run mock directly from git checkout (that is maybe 3-5 people). Now it

Re: dnf vs yum

Hi On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 7:58 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote: > > Yes, switch the defaults ASAP. Thanks > FWIW, there is still considerable work left is switching over to dnf completely. Filtering out some minor details (based on my system), Bodhi-client, fedpkg, python-meh, libreport-python, yum-

Re: dnf vs yum

Dne 24.10.2014 v 13:43 Pierre-Yves Chibon napsal(a): > On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 07:33:06AM -0400, Rahul Sundaram wrote: >>Hi >>On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 7:27 AM, Tim Lauridsen wrote: >> >> Proberly because dnf support is very new, so it will need some more real >> time use >> >>T

Re: dnf vs yum

Am 24.10.2014 um 13:45 schrieb Corey Sheldon: its in the repos and in the test release notes last i saw so use as you feel and test it out and last i checked while it is the cornerstone feature not likely a blocker as yum is still working and IT is afterall a fork of yum first: stop top posti

Re: dnf vs yum

its in the repos and in the test release notes last i saw so use as you feel and test it out and last i checked while it is the cornerstone feature not likely a blocker as yum is still working and IT is afterall a fork of yum Corey W Sheldon Freelance IT Consultant, Multi-Discipline Tutor 310.909

Re: dnf vs yum

On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 07:33:06AM -0400, Rahul Sundaram wrote: >Hi >On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 7:27 AM, Tim Lauridsen wrote: > > Proberly because dnf support is very new, so it will need some more real > time use > >That would be a good reason to switch the default in Rawhide

Re: dnf vs yum

Am 24.10.2014 um 13:38 schrieb Corey Sheldon: Rawhide is far from "realtime use" in my book as that means public use not just developer/tester types and how do you ever reach "public use" if it keeps disabled for devel/testing? On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 7:33 AM, Rahul Sundaram signature

Re: dnf vs yum

Rawhide is far from "realtime use" in my book as that means public use not just developer/tester types Corey W Sheldon Freelance IT Consultant, Multi-Discipline Tutor 310.909.7672 www.facebook.com/1stclassmobileshine On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 7:33 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Hi > > On Fri, Oct 24

Re: dnf vs yum

Hi On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 7:27 AM, Tim Lauridsen wrote: > Proberly because dnf support is very new, so it will need some more real > time use > That would be a good reason to switch the default in Rawhide at this stage. Rahul -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.f

Re: dnf vs yum

On Fri Oct 24 2014 at 1:23:27 PM Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Hi > > On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 6:51 AM, Tim Lauridsen wrote: > >> >> Mock still defaults to yum, but supports dnf also using >> config_opts['package_manager']='dnf' >> >> So it makes sense to have a hard requirement on yum >> > > Well the

Re: dnf vs yum

Hi On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 6:51 AM, Tim Lauridsen wrote: > > Mock still defaults to yum, but supports dnf also using > config_opts['package_manager']='dnf' > > So it makes sense to have a hard requirement on yum > Well the question is, why doesn't it default to dnf in Rawhide? Rahul -- devel

Re: dnf vs yum

On Fri Oct 24 2014 at 12:46:41 PM Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Hi > > On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 3:51 AM, Michael Simacek wrote: > >> >> Mock-1.2 no longer depends on yum API and has been ported to use DNF. >> So if you use the new version and set config_opts['package_manager']='dnf' >> and also install

Re: dnf vs yum

Hi On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 3:51 AM, Michael Simacek wrote: > > Mock-1.2 no longer depends on yum API and has been ported to use DNF. > So if you use the new version and set config_opts['package_manager']='dnf' > and also install dnf-plugins-core, you should be able to use it without > any proble

Re: dnf vs yum

- Original Message - > From: "Rahul Sundaram" > To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" > > Sent: Monday, October 6, 2014 10:00:54 AM > Subject: Re: dnf vs yum > > Hi > > On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 3:52 AM, Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote:

Re: dnf vs yum

Hi On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 3:52 AM, Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote: > Too bad that it does not also say that it provides yum ;( > > 09:52 root@pinkiepie-rawhide:mnt$ dnf install dnf-yum mock > Error: package mock-1.1.41-3.fc22.noarch requires yum >= 2.4, but none > of the providers can be installed >

Re: dnf vs yum

W dniu 04.10.2014 o 18:32, Matthew Miller pisze: > I'm not sure why you would need to do that because of running yum, > but, one thing you can do is remove the yum package and install > dnf-yum instead, which provides a /usr/bin/yum compatibility > wrapper. Too bad that it does not also say that i

Re: dnf vs yum

I checked that I was talking from experience as 1 or more weeks ago. For a single package install indeed, dnf and yum are now working. I figured I have a lot of duplicates left from some earlier update, for example: $ rpm -q xz-libs xz-libs-5.1.2-13alpha.fc22.x86_64 xz-libs-5.1.2-15alpha.fc

Re: dnf vs yum

2014-10-04 18:23 GMT-03:00 Rahul Sundaram : > Hi > > On Sat, Oct 4, 2014 at 5:03 PM, Paulo César Pereira de Andrade >> >> I did not remove "plain" yum so far on purpose, because I was expecting >> it to be automatically replaced, or kept working, but only now I sent a >> note >> about the problem

Re: dnf vs yum

Hi On Sat, Oct 4, 2014 at 5:03 PM, Paulo César Pereira de Andrade > > I did not remove "plain" yum so far on purpose, because I was expecting > it to be automatically replaced, or kept working, but only now I sent a > note > about the problems I noticed :) > Would you filing a bug report agains

Re: dnf vs yum

2014-10-04 13:32 GMT-03:00 Matthew Miller : > On Sat, Oct 04, 2014 at 11:02:23AM -0300, Paulo César Pereira de Andrade > wrote: >> I only recall it was supposed to exist some compatibility >> layer at some point. >> But I keep all the time needing to >> $ sudo rm -f /var/lib/rpm/__db* >> becau

Re: dnf vs yum

On Sat, Oct 04, 2014 at 11:02:23AM -0300, Paulo César Pereira de Andrade wrote: > I only recall it was supposed to exist some compatibility > layer at some point. > But I keep all the time needing to > $ sudo rm -f /var/lib/rpm/__db* > because I forget and use yum instead of dnf in rawhide. I'

Re: dnf vs yum

Am 04.10.2014 um 16:49 2014-10-04 11:08 GMT-03:00 Reindl Harald : First think of me of as just an slightly above average user :) I am sorry I did not fully follow the discussions earlier. I only recall it was supposed to exist some compatibility layer at some point. But I keep all the tim

Re: dnf vs yum

2014-10-04 11:08 GMT-03:00 Reindl Harald : First think of me of as just an slightly above average user :) >> I am sorry I did not fully follow the discussions earlier. >> I only recall it was supposed to exist some compatibility >> layer at some point. >> >>But I keep all the time needing t

Re: dnf vs yum

I am sorry I did not fully follow the discussions earlier. I only recall it was supposed to exist some compatibility layer at some point. But I keep all the time needing to $ sudo rm -f /var/lib/rpm/__db* there is no need to do so because I forget and use yum instead of dnf in rawhide.

dnf vs yum

I am sorry I did not fully follow the discussions earlier. I only recall it was supposed to exist some compatibility layer at some point. But I keep all the time needing to $ sudo rm -f /var/lib/rpm/__db* because I forget and use yum instead of dnf in rawhide. I am not really needing a

5tFTw: F21 on Track, FESCo Membership Change, More DNF vs. Yum, Reading VM Logs, and Wiki Infoboxes (2014-06-17)

Reposted from . Fedora is a big project, and it’s hard to follow it all. This series highlights interesting happenings in five different areas every week. It isn’t comprehensive news coverage — just quick summaries with links to each. Here are the five