On 18. 12. 18 11:22, Dave Love wrote:
loveshack: makedepf90
I don't think that's the case now. dl_poly used it, but I've removed the dependency and I wonder why it's showing up with a threat (I assume) to remove dl_poly.
Indeed:
Depending on: makedepf90 (1), status change: 2017-10-06 (62 weeks ago) dl_poly (maintained by: loveshack) dl_poly-1.10-1.fc30.src requires makedepf90 = 2.8.8-15.fc29
That is because https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/dl_poly/c/b39e9ea3ac097d85e6574c1167088c8... was never built and the metadata are taken from the repos.
On Tuesday, 18 December 2018 at 11:29, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 18. 12. 18 11:22, Dave Love wrote:
loveshack: makedepf90
I don't think that's the case now. dl_poly used it, but I've removed the dependency and I wonder why it's showing up with a threat (I assume) to remove dl_poly.
Indeed:
Depending on: makedepf90 (1), status change: 2017-10-06 (62 weeks ago) dl_poly (maintained by: loveshack) dl_poly-1.10-1.fc30.src requires makedepf90 = 2.8.8-15.fc29
That is because https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/dl_poly/c/b39e9ea3ac097d85e6574c1167088c8... was never built and the metadata are taken from the repos.
For a bit of history behind makedepf90, it was a bundled build depencency for cp2k for a couple of releases, but they switched to another implementation, so it was no longer required. Also, makedepf90 upstream is not active as far as I remember.
Regards, Dominik
Miro Hrončok mhroncok@redhat.com writes:
On 18. 12. 18 11:22, Dave Love wrote:
loveshack: makedepf90
I don't think that's the case now. dl_poly used it, but I've removed the dependency and I wonder why it's showing up with a threat (I assume) to remove dl_poly.
Indeed:
Depending on: makedepf90 (1), status change: 2017-10-06 (62 weeks ago) dl_poly (maintained by: loveshack) dl_poly-1.10-1.fc30.src requires makedepf90 = 2.8.8-15.fc29
That is because https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/dl_poly/c/b39e9ea3ac097d85e6574c1167088c8... was never built and the metadata are taken from the repos.
Does that mean we actually have to rebuild things to prevent them getting removed?
On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 01:13:05PM +0000, Dave Love wrote:
Miro Hrončok mhroncok@redhat.com writes:
On 18. 12. 18 11:22, Dave Love wrote:
loveshack: makedepf90
I don't think that's the case now. dl_poly used it, but I've removed the dependency and I wonder why it's showing up with a threat (I assume) to remove dl_poly.
Indeed:
Depending on: makedepf90 (1), status change: 2017-10-06 (62 weeks ago) dl_poly (maintained by: loveshack) dl_poly-1.10-1.fc30.src requires makedepf90 = 2.8.8-15.fc29
That is because https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/dl_poly/c/b39e9ea3ac097d85e6574c1167088c8... was never built and the metadata are taken from the repos.
Does that mean we actually have to rebuild things to prevent them getting removed?
This is being discussed in the fesco ticket starting at https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/1970#comment-546480. It seems that the policy will become to open a FTBFS bug (or possibly wait for the mass rebuild, since we have one coming up), and let the usual FTBFS policy take over. So if the package builds, there should be no issue. If it FTBFS, the package will be retired after some time.
Zbyszek
-
Dave Love -
Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski -
Miro Hrončok -
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek