DevHeads.net

Postings by Guido Aulisi

Help needed for FTBFS in rawhide because of libraries order

Hi,
I'm trying to debug a FTBFS in rawhide:

<a href="https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=32412101" title="https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=32412101">https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=32412101</a>

Apparently it fails because of library ordering, but it works in f29.
g_object_unref is defined in gobject-2.0 and it gets surely added by
the 'pkgconf --libs cairo pangocairo pango' command.

Did anything about gobject or glib change in rawhide recently?

Thank you for any help.

Guido

FAS account: tartina

Library ABI change

Hi,
recently serd library changed its ABI adding 1 function without
bumping the soname.
I think adding one function should not be a problem for depending
packages, what do you think about it?

Guido
fas account: tartina

Build failures of packages which use waf as build system

Hi all,

I found many build failure of packages using waf as build system.
This is due to recent move of /usr/bin/python into a separate package

<a href="https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Move_usr_bin_python_into_separat" title="https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Move_usr_bin_python_into_separat">https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Move_usr_bin_python_into_separat</a>
e_package

Many audio related packages have this problem.

I fixed some of these audio packages, prefixing waf calls with
%{__python2} macro.

Ambiguous python version in waf

Hi,
according to latest python guides, we should avoid calling generic
unversioned python command
(<a href="https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Avoid_usr_bin_python_in_RPM_Build#Quick_Opt-Out" title="https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Avoid_usr_bin_python_in_RPM_Build#Quick_Opt-Out">https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Avoid_usr_bin_python_in_RPM_Build...</a>)

But what should we do if it's called inside waf?

ardour5 build failures in rawhide

Hi,
recently ardour5 failed to build in rawhide, I think because glibmm
now requires c++14.

I patched the spec at the beginning this way and it works on my pc:

# glibmm needs --std=c++11 for F-23..F-27 and --std=c++14 for F-28 and later
# --std=c++14 is the default for F-28
%if !0%{?fedora}%{?rhel} || ( 0%{?fedora} >= 23 && 0%{?fedora} < 28 )
|| 0%{?rhel} >= 8
%bcond_without cxx11
%else
%bcond_with cxx11
%endif

But I think we should remove all c++ explicit standard selection and
let the compiler use its default, which should work for every fedora
version (I hope).

What do you think about i

Comaintaining of lv2-x42-plugins

Hi,
I'd like to help update lv2-x42-plugins to the latest upstream version,
so I asked for acls on pkgdb.
As pkgdb is near EOL, I'm also writing here...

Guido Aulisi

Upgrade of Ardour to latest version

I'm going to upgrade ardour5 to the latest upstream version 5.10,
starting with rawhide, f26, f25 and f24.

Guido Aulisi

Possible patch to fix Ardour appdata

Hi,
Nils in your pull request to fix Ardour appdata
<a href="https://github.com/Ardour/ardour/pull/261" title="https://github.com/Ardour/ardour/pull/261">https://github.com/Ardour/ardour/pull/261</a>
there's a comment by x42 that says it would break bundle-scripts,
'revision' is expected in the 2nd line.

So I modified your first commit to let revision stay in the 2nd line,
as Paul suggested in the PR.

This patch should be applied after your
commit 0f1915a7162a0f64d01
AppData release tags need a date to be valid

I'm attaching my patch, maybe this could help accept the PR

Bye
Guido Aulisi

Update Ardour to 5.9.0

Hi,
I'm updating Ardour 5 to the latest 5.9.0 version in rawhide.

Nils, I will wait for your review to update f26 and f25, too.

Guido Aulisi
fas account: tartina

Upgrade of lv2 audio plugin system related packages in F26

Hi,
I have updated some LV2 related packages in F26, as announced some days
ago.

The packages are:

lv2
serd
sord
sratom
lilv
suil

FWIU any packages that depend on these should rebuild.

There are no soname bumps, so old packages should work fine, but you
could get enhancements if dependent packages use #ifdef in the source
(like Ardour).

A list of possible affected packages:

lv2-abGate
lv2-amsynth-plugin
lv2-artyfx-plugins
lv2-avw-plugins
lv2-calf-plugins
lv2-devel
lv2-drumkv1
lv2-EQ10Q-plugins
lv2-fabla
lv2-fomp-plugins
lv2-guitarix-plugins
lv2-invada-plugins
lv2-ir-plugins
lv2-kn0ck0ut

Conflicting gstreamer1-plugins packages in rawhide?

I tried to build a new version of jalv package and I got a conflict
between gstreamer1-plugins-bad-free-1.11.2-1.fc26.x86_64 and
gstreamer1-plugins-base-1.11.90-1.fc27.x86_64

Local mockbuild for x86_64 had no errors.

Partial output of root.log:
DEBUG util.py:439:  Error: Transaction check error:
DEBUG util.py:439:    file /usr/lib64/gstreamer-1.0/libgstrawparse.so
conflicts between attempted installs of gstreamer1-plugins-bad-free-
1.11.2-1.fc26.x86_64 and gstreamer1-plugins-base-1.11.90-1.fc27.x86_64

Other arches report the same error.

It seems to me that gstreamer1-plugins-bad-free-1.11.

Upgrade of lv2 audio plugin system related packages in F26

Hi,
I'm upgrading some LV2 audio plugin system related packages in f26,
after the upgrade in rawhide.

The packages are:

lv2
serd
sord
sratom
lilv
suil

I will use some buildroot overrides to get the work done.

FWIU any packages that depend on these should rebuild after this update
ends.

There are no soname bumps, so old packages should work fine, but you
could get enhancements if dependent packages use #ifdef in the source
(like Ardour).

A list of possible affected packages:

lv2-abGate
lv2-amsynth-plugin
lv2-artyfx-plugins
lv2-avw-plugins
lv2-calf-plugins
lv2-devel
lv2-drumkv1
lv2-EQ10Q-

Gitignore configuration for packages

Hi list,
I was thinking about adding some default gitignores to package
repositories, I think we need at least:

/results_*
/*.src.rpm

This is to ignore fedpkg mockbuild output

What do you think about that?
Should I add that gitignore lines by myself in every package I
manintain or should it be a global fedora config?

Guido Aulisi
FAS account: tartina

Upgrade of lv2 audio plugin system related packages in rawhide

Hi,
I'm upgrading some LV2 audio plugin system related packages in rawhide.
The packages are:

lv2
serd
sord
sratom
lilv
suil

I'm not using a build tag, so the entire work will last some days.
Any packages that depend on these should rebuild after this update
ends.

There are no soname bumps, so old packages should work fine, but you
could get enhancements if dependent packages use #ifdef in the source
(like Ardour).

A list of possible affected packages:

lv2-abGate
lv2-amsynth-plugin
lv2-artyfx-plugins
lv2-avw-plugins
lv2-calf-plugins
lv2-devel
lv2-drumkv1
lv2-EQ10Q-plugins
lv2-fabla
lv2-fo

How to ask for package co-maintaining

Hi,
what's the right way to ask for package co-maintaining, possibly not
epel?
Should I use "Request commit ACL?" on pkgdb or "Request commit access"
FWIK "request commit access" would request epel too.

Thanks
Guido

Offering to co maintain lv2 related packages (lv2, lilv, suil, serd, sord, sratom...)

Hello,
I recently joined the packager group and I made 2 audio related
packages (setBfree and lv2-ir-plugins).
I noticed that lv2 related packages are behind upstream releases, and I
know there are important bug fixes in these new releases, so I'm
proposing myself as a co-maintainer of lv2 related packages (from
drobilla.net) to try to package the latest versions (in rawhide).
The packages are:

lv2
sratom
serd
sord
suil
lilv

Ciao
Guido

Unofficial review MUST items

Hi,
I'm trying to complete an unofficial review
(<a href="https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1401450" title="https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1401450">https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1401450</a>) to check my
review skills :-), and I have some problems filling some MUST items
which fedora-review leaves blanks.
The items are:

1) Sources contain only permissible code or content: this is very hard
to check if source code is big enough; I'm quite sure that it doesn't
contain content, but checking all source code would be a very long
work.

Offering help for audio related packages, seeking sponsor

Hi,
I recently posted 2 review requests and a sponsor request for 2 audio
related packages, <a href="https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1373641" title="https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1373641">https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1373641</a>
and <a href="https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1374510" title="https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1374510">https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1374510</a> and I am
seeking for a sponsor.
I also noticed that some audio related packages (lilv, suil, serd,
sord) are old, new versions have been released by upstream, and I am
offering help to update these packages as well, maybe as a
co-maintainer.

Best regards.
Guido AUlisi

Self Introduction: Guido Aulisi

Hi all,
I'm GNU/Linux system administrator and a musician too.
During my working hours I maintain Linux servers, mostly RedHat
distributions, but during my free time I like make music recordings
using Fedora, I'm a supporter of the Ardour daw, but I use many audio
applications.
I'm also a C, C++, Java programmer.
I think it's time to help the Fedora Project trying to package some
programs I use, exspecially related to music and audio.

Guido