Mailing List Archive

Hi!

On 2013-09-20 8:35 AM, OM Ugarcina wrote:
> Do we have plans to start building .27 into regular stable repos since the official release of upstream . Had a quick look on the 'electric interweb' and one sentence caught my eye from the mythtv web site :
>
> "I'd like to remind everyone that 0.25.x has now reached End of Life and 0.26.x is End of Support. Please upgrade to 0.27 to benefit from bug fixes and to receive support."
>
> Those guys are quick to drop the old stuff, I guess it's onwards and upwards from now on.

Almost a year and a half is quick? (-;

(0.25 was released about a year and a half ago...)

Except for trivial stuff it would be difficult to backport anything
worthwhile to more than one or two versions (for example backport
something from master to 0.27 and 0.26) and we don't have the manpower
to do it (without affecting regular development that is)...

Have a nice day!

Nicolas
(MythTV developer)




_______________________________________________
atrpms-users mailing list
atrpms-users@atrpms.net
http://lists.atrpms.net/mailman/listinfo/atrpms-users

Hi,

On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 10:05:07PM -0400, Nicolas Riendeau wrote:
> On 2013-09-20 8:35 AM, OM Ugarcina wrote:
> > Do we have plans to start building .27 into regular stable repos
> > since the official release of upstream

Of course. The last build from 0.27 master was 6-7 weeks ago - I hope
there wasn't too much changed in that time (from a builder's
perspective) - if there are no surprises there will be new package up
soon in the stable repos.

> > [...] Those guys are quick to drop the old stuff, I guess it's
> > onwards and upwards from now on.

> Almost a year and a half is quick? (-;
>
> (0.25 was released about a year and a half ago...)
>
> Except for trivial stuff it would be difficult to backport anything
> worthwhile to more than one or two versions (for example backport
> something from master to 0.27 and 0.26) and we don't have the
> manpower to do it (without affecting regular development that is)...
>
> Have a nice day!
>
> Nicolas
> (MythTV developer)

As far as I know the migration from version to version was mostly
smooth, so I agree with Nicolas - the way to maintain your mythtv
setup (*if* it needs maintenance at all) is to upgrade.

mythtv has the fixes branch for several years now which proved very
helpful to close the gaps between releases. Also the packaging is
trying hard to make your upgrade process almost just a "yum upgrade".

I will respin a 0.26.1 with all current fixes and a 0.27 with the few
fixes that are already in the git.
--
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net

_______________________________________________
atrpms-users mailing list
atrpms-users@atrpms.net
http://lists.atrpms.net/mailman/listinfo/atrpms-users

On 24/09/2013 2:06 AM, Axel Thimm wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 10:05:07PM -0400, Nicolas Riendeau wrote:
>> On 2013-09-20 8:35 AM, OM Ugarcina wrote:
>>> Do we have plans to start building .27 into regular stable repos
>>> since the official release of upstream
> Of course. The last build from 0.27 master was 6-7 weeks ago - I hope
> there wasn't too much changed in that time (from a builder's
> perspective) - if there are no surprises there will be new package up
> soon in the stable repos.
>
>>> [...] Those guys are quick to drop the old stuff, I guess it's
>>> onwards and upwards from now on.
>> Almost a year and a half is quick? (-;
>>
>> (0.25 was released about a year and a half ago...)
>>
>> Except for trivial stuff it would be difficult to backport anything
>> worthwhile to more than one or two versions (for example backport
>> something from master to 0.27 and 0.26) and we don't have the
>> manpower to do it (without affecting regular development that is)...
>>
>> Have a nice day!
>>
>> Nicolas
>> (MythTV developer)
> As far as I know the migration from version to version was mostly
> smooth, so I agree with Nicolas - the way to maintain your mythtv
> setup (*if* it needs maintenance at all) is to upgrade.
>
> mythtv has the fixes branch for several years now which proved very
> helpful to close the gaps between releases. Also the packaging is
> trying hard to make your upgrade process almost just a "yum upgrade".
>
> I will respin a 0.26.1 with all current fixes and a 0.27 with the few
> fixes that are already in the git.
Any chance of spinning 0.27 for EL6?

I'm doing some test compiles using epel qt5.1

Cheers
Stephen

_______________________________________________
atrpms-users mailing list
atrpms-users@atrpms.net
http://lists.atrpms.net/mailman/listinfo/atrpms-users

On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 2:36 AM, Stephen Collier <judithc@bigpond.net.au>wrote:

> On 24/09/2013 2:06 AM, Axel Thimm wrote:
>>
>> I will respin a 0.26.1 with all current fixes and a 0.27 with the few
>> fixes that are already in the git.
>>
> Any chance of spinning 0.27 for EL6?
>
> I'm doing some test compiles using epel qt5.1
>

I'm assuming you already know the pitfalls of qt5 for mythtv?

For those that don't, I was experimenting with this for RPM Fusion EPEL 6
packages but there's a couple of components/plugins that won't build with
qt5 and even if it does, it's not guaranteed to work. Until someone has
time to do the full port, it's not supported upstream so unless you have a
patch, any bugs you file will probably be ignored...

Thanks,
Richard

On 26/09/2013 10:47 PM, Richard Shaw wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 2:36 AM, Stephen Collier
> <judithc@bigpond.net.au <mailto:judithc@bigpond.net.au>> wrote:
>
> On 24/09/2013 2:06 AM, Axel Thimm wrote:
>
> I will respin a 0.26.1 with all current fixes and a 0.27 with
> the few
> fixes that are already in the git.
>
> Any chance of spinning 0.27 for EL6?
>
> I'm doing some test compiles using epel qt5.1
>
>
> I'm assuming you already know the pitfalls of qt5 for mythtv?
>
> For those that don't, I was experimenting with this for RPM Fusion
> EPEL 6 packages but there's a couple of components/plugins that won't
> build with qt5 and even if it does, it's not guaranteed to work. Until
> someone has time to do the full port, it's not supported upstream so
> unless you have a patch, any bugs you file will probably be ignored...
>
> Thanks,
> Richard
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> atrpms-users mailing list
> atrpms-users@atrpms.net
> http://lists.atrpms.net/mailman/listinfo/atrpms-users
I'm compiling qt4.8 as there are still some issues with qt5.1. I'll let
you know if it works, its building now but who knows how long it will take.

Cheers
Stephen

On 23/09/2013 17:06, Axel Thimm wrote:
>
> As far as I know the migration from version to version was mostly
> smooth, so I agree with Nicolas - the way to maintain your mythtv
> setup (*if* it needs maintenance at all) is to upgrade.
>
> mythtv has the fixes branch for several years now which proved very
> helpful to close the gaps between releases. Also the packaging is
> trying hard to make your upgrade process almost just a "yum upgrade".
>
> I will respin a 0.26.1 with all current fixes and a 0.27 with the few
> fixes that are already in the git.
Hi Axel

I'm trying to do a --rebuild on the latest 0.26.1 srpm, and it's
erroring out with

/usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lGL

any suggestions? I'm building with nvidia-graphics-long-lived if that
makes a difference?

cheers

Dunc

_______________________________________________
atrpms-users mailing list
atrpms-users@atrpms.net
http://lists.atrpms.net/mailman/listinfo/atrpms-users

On 28/09/2013 9:13 PM, Duncan Brown wrote:
> On 23/09/2013 17:06, Axel Thimm wrote:
>>
>> As far as I know the migration from version to version was mostly
>> smooth, so I agree with Nicolas - the way to maintain your mythtv
>> setup (*if* it needs maintenance at all) is to upgrade.
>>
>> mythtv has the fixes branch for several years now which proved very
>> helpful to close the gaps between releases. Also the packaging is
>> trying hard to make your upgrade process almost just a "yum upgrade".
>>
>> I will respin a 0.26.1 with all current fixes and a 0.27 with the few
>> fixes that are already in the git.
> Hi Axel
>
> I'm trying to do a --rebuild on the latest 0.26.1 srpm, and it's
> erroring out with
>
> /usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lGL
>
> any suggestions? I'm building with nvidia-graphics-long-lived if that
> makes a difference?
>
> cheers
>
> Dunc
>
> _______________________________________________
> atrpms-users mailing list
> atrpms-users@atrpms.net
> http://lists.atrpms.net/mailman/listinfo/atrpms-users
>
yum whatprovides libGL.so

will give you what provides the library. What OS are you using?

Cheers
Stephen

_______________________________________________
atrpms-users mailing list
atrpms-users@atrpms.net
http://lists.atrpms.net/mailman/listinfo/atrpms-users

On 28/09/2013 12:28, Stephen Collier wrote:
>
>>
> yum whatprovides libGL.so
>
> will give you what provides the library. What OS are you using?
>
> Cheers
> Stephen
>
> _______________________________________________
Sorry, should have mentioned, Centos 6

I've got nvidia-graphics319.32-libs-319.32-157.el6.x86_64 installed,
which should provide it fine, but its not being picked up by the build

Up until now I was using the version of 0.26 that you put together for
el6, and that had no issues with it

cheers

Dunc

_______________________________________________
atrpms-users mailing list
atrpms-users@atrpms.net
http://lists.atrpms.net/mailman/listinfo/atrpms-users

On 29/09/2013 12:55 AM, Duncan Brown wrote:
> On 28/09/2013 12:28, Stephen Collier wrote:
>>
>>>
>> yum whatprovides libGL.so
>>
>> will give you what provides the library. What OS are you using?
>>
>> Cheers
>> Stephen
>>
>> _______________________________________________
> Sorry, should have mentioned, Centos 6
>
> I've got nvidia-graphics319.32-libs-319.32-157.el6.x86_64 installed,
> which should provide it fine, but its not being picked up by the build
>
> Up until now I was using the version of 0.26 that you put together for
> el6, and that had no issues with it
>
> cheers
>
> Dunc
>
> _______________________________________________
> atrpms-users mailing list
> atrpms-users@atrpms.net
> http://lists.atrpms.net/mailman/listinfo/atrpms-users
>
Try the packaged version from atrpms there shouldn't be any reason to
repackage it.

Good Luck

Cheers

Stephen

_______________________________________________
atrpms-users mailing list
atrpms-users@atrpms.net
http://lists.atrpms.net/mailman/listinfo/atrpms-users

On 26/09/2013 10:47 PM, Richard Shaw wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 2:36 AM, Stephen Collier
> <judithc@bigpond.net.au <mailto:judithc@bigpond.net.au>> wrote:
>
> On 24/09/2013 2:06 AM, Axel Thimm wrote:
>
> I will respin a 0.26.1 with all current fixes and a 0.27 with
> the few
> fixes that are already in the git.
>
> Any chance of spinning 0.27 for EL6?
>
> I'm doing some test compiles using epel qt5.1
>
>
> I'm assuming you already know the pitfalls of qt5 for mythtv?
>
> For those that don't, I was experimenting with this for RPM Fusion
> EPEL 6 packages but there's a couple of components/plugins that won't
> build with qt5 and even if it does, it's not guaranteed to work. Until
> someone has time to do the full port, it's not supported upstream so
> unless you have a patch, any bugs you file will probably be ignored...
>
> Thanks,
> Richard
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> atrpms-users mailing list
> atrpms-users@atrpms.net
> http://lists.atrpms.net/mailman/listinfo/atrpms-users
I now have qt48 working with the stcok atrpm 0.26.1 rpms let me know if
you want to try them.

Cheers
Stephen

On 29/09/2013 2:18 PM, Axel Thimm wrote:
> Hi,
>
> do you want to update ATrpms' qt47 to qt48? The qt47 is a Fedora backport you can diff the spec file to see what was done. Thanks!!! :-)
>
> Stephen Collier <judithc@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>> On 26/09/2013 10:47 PM, Richard Shaw wrote:
>>> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 2:36 AM, Stephen Collier
>>> <judithc@bigpond.net.au <mailto:judithc@bigpond.net.au>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 24/09/2013 2:06 AM, Axel Thimm wrote:
>>>
>>> I will respin a 0.26.1 with all current fixes and a 0.27 with
>>> the few
>>> fixes that are already in the git.
>>>
>>> Any chance of spinning 0.27 for EL6?
>>>
>>> I'm doing some test compiles using epel qt5.1
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm assuming you already know the pitfalls of qt5 for mythtv?
>>>
>>> For those that don't, I was experimenting with this for RPM Fusion
>>> EPEL 6 packages but there's a couple of components/plugins that won't
>>> build with qt5 and even if it does, it's not guaranteed to work.
>> Until
>>> someone has time to do the full port, it's not supported upstream so
>>> unless you have a patch, any bugs you file will probably be
>> ignored...
>>> Thanks,
>>> Richard
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> atrpms-users mailing list
>>> atrpms-users@atrpms.net
>>> http://lists.atrpms.net/mailman/listinfo/atrpms-users
>> I now have qt48 working with the stcok atrpm 0.26.1 rpms let me know if
>>
>> you want to try them.
>>
>> Cheers
>> Stephen
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> atrpms-users mailing list
>> atrpms-users@atrpms.net
>> http://lists.atrpms.net/mailman/listinfo/atrpms-users
>
Axel,

I started with the F19 spec and then backported everything from
qt47.spec to maintain a seperate base like was done with qt47 to
maintain the stock qt4.6. I'm still testing - recompiling mythtv-0.26.1
now as it doen't play nicely changing qt versions - the mysql connection
isn't working properly. I'll let you know if the recompiled 0.26 is OK.

Then I'll move to 0.27 and test.

The upgrade to qt48 is not smooth as qt47 has phonon compiled in and
qt48 doesn't. The only way I could get the upgrade was to rpm -e
--nodeps qt47-webkit qt47-mysql. then yum install qt48 qt48-mysql
qt48-webkit. I may have to make an rpm for phonon but I hope not as
fedora are only using a qt4.6 based one so the phonon built into qt4.6
may be OK.

Cheers
Stephen

_______________________________________________
atrpms-users mailing list
atrpms-users@atrpms.net
http://lists.atrpms.net/mailman/listinfo/atrpms-users

On 29/09/2013 2:33 PM, Stephen Collier wrote:
> On 29/09/2013 2:18 PM, Axel Thimm wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> do you want to update ATrpms' qt47 to qt48? The qt47 is a Fedora
>> backport you can diff the spec file to see what was done. Thanks!!! :-)
>>
>> Stephen Collier <judithc@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>>> On 26/09/2013 10:47 PM, Richard Shaw wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 2:36 AM, Stephen Collier
>>>> <judithc@bigpond.net.au <mailto:judithc@bigpond.net.au>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 24/09/2013 2:06 AM, Axel Thimm wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I will respin a 0.26.1 with all current fixes and a 0.27 with
>>>> the few
>>>> fixes that are already in the git.
>>>>
>>>> Any chance of spinning 0.27 for EL6?
>>>>
>>>> I'm doing some test compiles using epel qt5.1
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm assuming you already know the pitfalls of qt5 for mythtv?
>>>>
>>>> For those that don't, I was experimenting with this for RPM Fusion
>>>> EPEL 6 packages but there's a couple of components/plugins that won't
>>>> build with qt5 and even if it does, it's not guaranteed to work.
>>> Until
>>>> someone has time to do the full port, it's not supported upstream so
>>>> unless you have a patch, any bugs you file will probably be
>>> ignored...
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Richard
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> atrpms-users mailing list
>>>> atrpms-users@atrpms.net
>>>> http://lists.atrpms.net/mailman/listinfo/atrpms-users
>>> I now have qt48 working with the stcok atrpm 0.26.1 rpms let me know if
>>>
>>> you want to try them.
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>> Stephen
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> atrpms-users mailing list
>>> atrpms-users@atrpms.net
>>> http://lists.atrpms.net/mailman/listinfo/atrpms-users
>>
> Axel,
>
> I started with the F19 spec and then backported everything from
> qt47.spec to maintain a seperate base like was done with qt47 to
> maintain the stock qt4.6. I'm still testing - recompiling
> mythtv-0.26.1 now as it doen't play nicely changing qt versions - the
> mysql connection isn't working properly. I'll let you know if the
> recompiled 0.26 is OK.
>
> Then I'll move to 0.27 and test.
>
> The upgrade to qt48 is not smooth as qt47 has phonon compiled in and
> qt48 doesn't. The only way I could get the upgrade was to rpm -e
> --nodeps qt47-webkit qt47-mysql. then yum install qt48 qt48-mysql
> qt48-webkit. I may have to make an rpm for phonon but I hope not as
> fedora are only using a qt4.6 based one so the phonon built into qt4.6
> may be OK.
>
> Cheers
> Stephen
>
> _______________________________________________
> atrpms-users mailing list
> atrpms-users@atrpms.net
> http://lists.atrpms.net/mailman/listinfo/atrpms-users
>
It is now working fully with recompile. I'll rebuild 0.27 tomorrow and test.

_______________________________________________
atrpms-users mailing list
atrpms-users@atrpms.net
http://lists.atrpms.net/mailman/listinfo/atrpms-users