Bug 5713

Summary:	Issues with kodi build in master branch
Product:	Fedora	Reporter:	Nicolas Chauvet <kwizart>
Component:	kodi	Assignee:	Michael Cronenworth <mike>
Status:	RESOLVED FIXED
Severity:	enhancement	CC:	alexl, ktdreyer, maci
Priority:	P1
Version:	unspecified
Hardware:	x86_64
OS:	GNU/Linux
namespace:

Description Nicolas Chauvet 2020-08-03 13:57:56 CEST

There are few issue with kodi build in master branch:


1/ java -version doesn't work on armhfp
reported as https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1862977

It could be related to the build hw, but is a regression from previously working build...

2/ release tag breaks bumpspec.
Because of a missing number < 1 at the begining of the release tag, the date is the other next number. This date was bumped 
-> Please fix the release tag as appropriate.


3/ GL drivers includes armhfp. Unless a dedicated issue, the only case with gles drivers should be the rpi namespace (and even)
Fedora is building FLOSS arm and aarch64 drivers as normal GL drivers, so unless one is building kodi to a dedicated board (but will also needs dedicated GLES drivers) using normal GL drivers should be the default for %{arm}

Comment 1 Nicolas Chauvet 2020-08-03 22:28:42 CEST

Side note for x86_64 builders:
buildvm-05/06 rootfs was resized to the same size as buildvm-07. So a new build shouldn't fail on disk space (consumed about 70G to build which is crazily insane. But either...).

Comment 2 Nicolas Chauvet 2020-08-03 22:39:28 CEST

Workaround might be to downgrade to java-1.8.0 for armhfp on f33+

Comment 3 Michael Cronenworth 2020-08-07 17:26:12 CEST

(In reply to Nicolas Chauvet from comment #0)
> 1/ java -version doesn't work on armhfp
> reported as https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1862977

Are you able to answer the upstream's question about reproducing it?

> 2/ release tag breaks bumpspec.
> Because of a missing number < 1 at the begining of the release tag, the date
> is the other next number. This date was bumped 
> -> Please fix the release tag as appropriate.

Sure, but it was a Fedora policy standard release tag. You can add a minor version number at the end.

<date><scm><hash>.<minor_ver_num>

> 3/ GL drivers includes armhfp. Unless a dedicated issue, the only case with
> gles drivers should be the rpi namespace (and even)
> Fedora is building FLOSS arm and aarch64 drivers as normal GL drivers, so
> unless one is building kodi to a dedicated board (but will also needs
> dedicated GLES drivers) using normal GL drivers should be the default for
> %{arm}

Do you have hardware to test the resulting binaries? I do not. Will you commit to testing the resulting packages?

Comment 4 Nicolas Chauvet 2020-08-09 11:32:06 CEST

(In reply to Michael Cronenworth from comment #3)
> (In reply to Nicolas Chauvet from comment #0)
> > 1/ java -version doesn't work on armhfp
> > reported as https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1862977
> 
> Are you able to answer the upstream's question about reproducing it?
I'm currently In vacation. No ARM devices to reproduce until the 17th.
Pix should be able to reproduce until then...

> > 2/ release tag breaks bumpspec.
> > Because of a missing number < 1 at the begining of the release tag, the date
> > is the other next number. This date was bumped 
> > -> Please fix the release tag as appropriate.
> 
> Sure, but it was a Fedora policy standard release tag. You can add a minor
> version number at the end.
> 
> <date><scm><hash>.<minor_ver_num>
Yes. But you must start with Integer if post release and have a dist tag.
Please fix as appropriate, so that rpmdev-bumspec works.

> > 3/ GL drivers includes armhfp. Unless a dedicated issue, the only case with
...
 
> Do you have hardware to test the resulting binaries? I do not. Will you
> commit to testing the resulting packages?
This is the very fondamental Fedora default. PLease fix as appropriate.