Thanks, Jos? and Elliott. I can help with reviews. I attach here a list of batches of CRAN packages to be rebuilt in order (batches separated by a blank line), and the script that generates it. Hope it helps. I?aki On Wed, 24 Jun 2020 at 11:35, Elliott Sales de Andrade <quantum.analyst at gmail.com> wrote:> > I could do so, but it wouldn't be until this weekend. > > Also, Tom mixed in some version bumps to the rebuild, so we'd have to > check whether those would actually be okay in a released version. I > would also appreciate some review on new (mostly test) dependencies > for these bumps. > > On Tue, 23 Jun 2020 at 09:43, I?aki Ucar <iucar at fedoraproject.org> wrote: > > > > Maybe Elliott? > > > > On Tue, 23 Jun 2020 at 15:01, Tom Callaway <spotrh at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > At this point, I simply don't have the time. > > > > > > Tom > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 23, 2020, 6:06 AM I?aki Ucar <iucar at fedoraproject.org> wrote: > > >> > > >> On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 at 10:21, I?aki Ucar <iucar at fedoraproject.org> wrote: > > >> > > > >> > > Given the huge amount of builds (and rebuilds) in this process, I am > > >> > > strongly disinclined to attempt this work for Fedora 32 (the idea of > > >> > > hundreds of bodhi overrides does not fill me with joy), but I would not > > >> > > prevent someone else who wished to try to do so. > > >> > > > >> > Note that this is no longer needed. It is possible to use a side tag > > >> > for F32 too, which is much easier and more appropriate for a massive > > >> > update like this. > > >> > > >> Any plan on doing this in a side tag for F32? I would happily > > >> volunteer, but I'm not a provenpackager. > > >> > > >> -- > > >> I?aki ?car > > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> R-SIG-Fedora mailing list > > >> R-SIG-Fedora at r-project.org > > >> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-fedora > > > > > > > > -- > > I?aki ?car > > > > -- > Elliott-- I?aki ?car -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: build-list.txt URL: <https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-sig-fedora/attachments/20200624/985b95e1/attachment-0001.txt> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: build-list.R Type: text/x-r-source Size: 963 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-sig-fedora/attachments/20200624/985b95e1/attachment-0001.bin>
Oh, and maybe in this process we could add to all packages the requirement on R(ABI) = 4 that Tom implemented. On Wed, 24 Jun 2020 at 11:42, I?aki Ucar <iucar at fedoraproject.org> wrote:> > Thanks, Jos? and Elliott. I can help with reviews. > > I attach here a list of batches of CRAN packages to be rebuilt in > order (batches separated by a blank line), and the script that > generates it. Hope it helps. > > I?aki > > On Wed, 24 Jun 2020 at 11:35, Elliott Sales de Andrade > <quantum.analyst at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > I could do so, but it wouldn't be until this weekend. > > > > Also, Tom mixed in some version bumps to the rebuild, so we'd have to > > check whether those would actually be okay in a released version. I > > would also appreciate some review on new (mostly test) dependencies > > for these bumps. > > > > On Tue, 23 Jun 2020 at 09:43, I?aki Ucar <iucar at fedoraproject.org> wrote: > > > > > > Maybe Elliott? > > > > > > On Tue, 23 Jun 2020 at 15:01, Tom Callaway <spotrh at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > At this point, I simply don't have the time. > > > > > > > > Tom > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 23, 2020, 6:06 AM I?aki Ucar <iucar at fedoraproject.org> wrote: > > > >> > > > >> On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 at 10:21, I?aki Ucar <iucar at fedoraproject.org> wrote: > > > >> > > > > >> > > Given the huge amount of builds (and rebuilds) in this process, I am > > > >> > > strongly disinclined to attempt this work for Fedora 32 (the idea of > > > >> > > hundreds of bodhi overrides does not fill me with joy), but I would not > > > >> > > prevent someone else who wished to try to do so. > > > >> > > > > >> > Note that this is no longer needed. It is possible to use a side tag > > > >> > for F32 too, which is much easier and more appropriate for a massive > > > >> > update like this. > > > >> > > > >> Any plan on doing this in a side tag for F32? I would happily > > > >> volunteer, but I'm not a provenpackager. > > > >> > > > >> -- > > > >> I?aki ?car > > > >> > > > >> _______________________________________________ > > > >> R-SIG-Fedora mailing list > > > >> R-SIG-Fedora at r-project.org > > > >> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-fedora > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > I?aki ?car > > > > > > > > -- > > Elliott > > > > -- > I?aki ?car-- I?aki ?car
On Wed, 24 Jun 2020 at 05:42, I?aki Ucar <iucar at fedoraproject.org> wrote:> > Thanks, Jos? and Elliott. I can help with reviews. >Thanks. I have a few open already: - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1839451 - R-servr - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1839456 - R-filelock - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1839474 - R-DBItest> I attach here a list of batches of CRAN packages to be rebuilt in > order (batches separated by a blank line), and the script that > generates it. Hope it helps. > > I?aki > > On Wed, 24 Jun 2020 at 11:35, Elliott Sales de Andrade > <quantum.analyst at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > I could do so, but it wouldn't be until this weekend. > > > > Also, Tom mixed in some version bumps to the rebuild, so we'd have to > > check whether those would actually be okay in a released version. I > > would also appreciate some review on new (mostly test) dependencies > > for these bumps. > > > > On Tue, 23 Jun 2020 at 09:43, I?aki Ucar <iucar at fedoraproject.org> wrote: > > > > > > Maybe Elliott? > > > > > > On Tue, 23 Jun 2020 at 15:01, Tom Callaway <spotrh at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > At this point, I simply don't have the time. > > > > > > > > Tom > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 23, 2020, 6:06 AM I?aki Ucar <iucar at fedoraproject.org> wrote: > > > >> > > > >> On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 at 10:21, I?aki Ucar <iucar at fedoraproject.org> wrote: > > > >> > > > > >> > > Given the huge amount of builds (and rebuilds) in this process, I am > > > >> > > strongly disinclined to attempt this work for Fedora 32 (the idea of > > > >> > > hundreds of bodhi overrides does not fill me with joy), but I would not > > > >> > > prevent someone else who wished to try to do so. > > > >> > > > > >> > Note that this is no longer needed. It is possible to use a side tag > > > >> > for F32 too, which is much easier and more appropriate for a massive > > > >> > update like this. > > > >> > > > >> Any plan on doing this in a side tag for F32? I would happily > > > >> volunteer, but I'm not a provenpackager. > > > >> > > > >> -- > > > >> I?aki ?car > > > >> > > > >> _______________________________________________ > > > >> R-SIG-Fedora mailing list > > > >> R-SIG-Fedora at r-project.org > > > >> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-fedora > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > I?aki ?car > > > > > > > > -- > > Elliott > > > > -- > I?aki ?car-- Elliott
On Wednesday, 24 June 2020 10.42.10 WEST I?aki Ucar wrote:> Thanks, Jos? and Elliott. I can help with reviews. > > I attach here a list of batches of CRAN packages to be rebuilt in > order (batches separated by a blank line), and the script that > generates it. Hope it helps. > > I?akiSure it does. I am doing the rebuild in side tag f32-build-side-24797. -- Jos? Ab?lio
On Wednesday, 24 June 2020 10.44.14 WEST I?aki Ucar wrote:> Oh, and maybe in this process we could add to all packages the > requirement on R(ABI) = 4 that Tom implemented.For that we need to start with rawhide and then change the R-rpm-macros package. Probably it should be enough to change the /usr/lib/rpm/R-deps.R script to add Requires: R(ABI)=4.0 I suggest to continue this as is and then implement that change in rawhide and bring it back to Fedora 32 as new updates are issued. What do you think? -- Jos? Ab?lio
On Wednesday, 24 June 2020 10.42.10 WEST I?aki Ucar wrote:> Thanks, Jos? and Elliott. I can help with reviews. > > I attach here a list of batches of CRAN packages to be rebuilt in > order (batches separated by a blank line), and the script that > generates it. Hope it helps. > > I?akiR-acepack depends on R-testthat so I moved it the batch after R-testthat. :-) If I find a circular dependency I will need to do a bootstrap build. Fun lies ahead... :-) -- Jos? Ab?lio
On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 at 19:01, Jos? Ab?lio Matos <jamatos at fc.up.pt> wrote:> > On Wednesday, 24 June 2020 10.42.10 WEST I?aki Ucar wrote: > > Thanks, Jos? and Elliott. I can help with reviews. > > > > I attach here a list of batches of CRAN packages to be rebuilt in > > order (batches separated by a blank line), and the script that > > generates it. Hope it helps. > > > > I?aki > > R-acepack depends on R-testthat so I moved it the batch after R-testthat. :-) > > If I find a circular dependency I will need to do a bootstrap build. > > Fun lies ahead... :-)Thanks for starting off builds. However, please be careful merging to master, as some packages were bumped and have incompatibilities that should not be put in stable releases. I will try to come up with an exact list soon.> -- > Jos? Ab?lio >-- Elliott
On Wednesday, 24 June 2020 10.42.10 WEST I?aki Ucar wrote:> Thanks, Jos? and Elliott. I can help with reviews. > > I attach here a list of batches of CRAN packages to be rebuilt in > order (batches separated by a blank line), and the script that > generates it. Hope it helps. > > I?akiHi I?aki, I noticed that you do not have TH.data, that in Fedora corresponds to R-TH-data in your results. I noticed it because multcomp depends on it and the compilation failed because R-TH-data was not yet ported. This questions is mainly directed to you, to Elliot and Tom, should we add to the rpm- macros something that puts Provides(R-rname) or since the naming is more or less the same we can add manually this for packages for which the R-rname and the Fedora package diverge... So in this case we would add, either directly or automatically, Provides(R-TH.data) What do you think? -- Jos? Ab?lio [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 at 13:19, Jos? Ab?lio Matos <jamatos at fc.up.pt> wrote:> > On Wednesday, 24 June 2020 10.42.10 WEST I?aki Ucar wrote: > > Thanks, Jos? and Elliott. I can help with reviews. > > > > I attach here a list of batches of CRAN packages to be rebuilt in > > order (batches separated by a blank line), and the script that > > generates it. Hope it helps. > > > > I?aki > > Hi I?aki, > I noticed that you do not have TH.data, that in Fedora corresponds to R-TH-data in your > results.Yeah, sorry, that's a kind of bug in my script. I'm using CRAN names, and I forgot that some RPM packages change those names due to the dot to adhere to the guidelines. So TH-data is mistakenly dropped.> I noticed it because multcomp depends on it and the compilation failed because R-TH-data > was not yet ported. > > This questions is mainly directed to you, to Elliot and Tom, should we add to the rpm- > macros something that puts Provides(R-rname) or since the naming is more or less the > same we can add manually this for packages for which the R-rname and the Fedora > package diverge... > > > So in this case we would add, either directly or automatically, > > Provides(R-TH.data) > > What do you think?Now, we have $ sudo dnf repoquery --provides R-TH-data R(TH.data) = 1.0-10 R-TH-data = 1.0.10-4.fc3 which is what you are looking for I guess? I should be using that instead of the RPM package names. -- I?aki ?car