Re: Packages silently dropping approved changes
The policies specifying use of FlexiBLAS[1] are full of MUSTs; you can’t just opt out and
reject all prospective PRs out of hand. If someone can get the package working with
FlexiBLAS, you should accept a PR. If you think freefem++ needs to be exempt from the
requirement, you should open an FPC ticket[2] explaining why and requesting an explicit
exception.
[1]
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/BLAS_LAPACK/#_p...
[2] https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issues
On Thu, Aug 25, 2022, at 6:36 PM, Ralf Corsépius wrote:
> Am 25.08.22 um 23:00 schrieb Iñaki Ucar:
>> On Thu, 25 Aug 2022 at 19:15, Iñaki Ucar <iucar(a)fedoraproject.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, 25 Aug 2022 at 18:34, Ralf Corsépius <rc040203(a)freenet.de>
wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Am 25.08.22 um 13:19 schrieb Iñaki Ucar:
>>>>
>>>>> I assume their maintainers didn't do it on purpose, maybe it was
>>>>> easier for a certain update, didn't have time to look into it
and
>>>>> weren't aware of the guideline. But this is very frustrating.
Seeing
>>>>> many hours of work just wiped out without any notice or explanation
is
>>>>> very frustrating.
>>>>
>>>> In my case (freefem++), it was actually was a mixture of all.
>>>>
>>>> To cut a long story short: This flexblas stuff doesn't
"harmonize well"
>>>> with freefem++, rsp. more bluntly speaking, flexblas breaks freefem++.
>>>>
>>>> Because of this, when going after freefem++'s regressions, years
after
>>>> the flexiblas changes had been introduced, I inadvertedly and
>>>> accidentally reverted the flexblas related changes, because these
>>>> apparently do not work out with freefem++.
>>>
>>> How exactly does flexiblas break freefem++? I see v4.10 was built just
>>> fine. Then v4.11 reverted to openblas. If it works with openblas, I
>>> see no reason to break with flexiblas, among other things because
>>> openblas is the default backend. Moreover, arpack, superlu,
>>> suitesparse and other BuildRequires link against flexiblas.
>>
>> In fact, freefem++ was one of the easiest packages to adapt: you just
>> set the library, and it does nothing fancy nor too-clever to try to
>> discover anything.
> Then you haven't looked into details (build.log rsp. config.status).
>
> flexiblas causes freefem's configure script to produce bogus results.
>
>
> Here's a simple patch [1] and a successful scratch
>> build [2], with all checks passing. Please let me know if I'm missing
>> anything, but otherwise, I'll open a PR.
> Please don't and also abstain from submitting pull requests.
>
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue