Bug#1088632: transition: hdf5

[Gilles Filippini]

Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: ***@packages.debian.org
Usertags: transition

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

Hi Release Team,

I am requesting a transition slot for HDF5 1.14 currently in experimental. I've run a test rebuild of the 154 reverse dependencies. Out of them most of the FTBFS are currently not in testing and the other have patch proposals [1]. There is only issue left: #1087738 (khl). I am confident it will be solved because khl's maintainer is its upstream as well.

[1] https://udd.debian.org/cgi-bin/bts-usertags.cgi?user=pini%40debian.org&tag=ftbfs-hdf5-1.14

Please let me know in case you think other issues need attention.

Thanks in advance,
_g.


Ben file:

title = "hdf5";
is_affected = .depends ~ "libhdf5-103-1t64" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-cpp-103-1t64" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-fortran-102t64" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-hl-100t64" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-hl-cpp-100t64" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-hl-fortran-100t64" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-mpich-103-1t64" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-mpich-cpp-103-1t64" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-mpich-fortran-102t64" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-mpich-hl-100t64" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-mpich-hl-cpp-100t64" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-mpich-hl-fortran-100t64" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-openmpi-103-1t64" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-openmpi-cpp-103-1t64" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-openmpi-fortran-102t64" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-openmpi-hl-100t64" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-openmpi-hl-cpp-100t64" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-openmpi-hl-fortran-100t64" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-310" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-cpp-310" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-fortran-310" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-hl-310" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-hl-cpp-310" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-hl-fortran-310" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-mpich-310" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-mpich-cpp-310" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-mpich-fortran-310" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-mpich-hl-310" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-mpich-hl-cpp-310" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-mpich-hl-fortran-310" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-openmpi-310" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-openmpi-cpp-310" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-openmpi-fortran-310" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-openmpi-hl-310" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-openmpi-hl-cpp-310" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-openmpi-hl-fortran-310";
is_good = .depends ~ "libhdf5-310" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-cpp-310" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-fortran-310" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-hl-310" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-hl-cpp-310" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-hl-fortran-310" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-mpich-310" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-mpich-cpp-310" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-mpich-fortran-310" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-mpich-hl-310" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-mpich-hl-cpp-310" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-mpich-hl-fortran-310" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-openmpi-310" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-openmpi-cpp-310" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-openmpi-fortran-310" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-openmpi-hl-310" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-openmpi-hl-cpp-310" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-openmpi-hl-fortran-310";
is_bad = .depends ~ "libhdf5-103-1t64" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-cpp-103-1t64" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-fortran-102t64" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-hl-100t64" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-hl-cpp-100t64" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-hl-fortran-100t64" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-mpich-103-1t64" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-mpich-cpp-103-1t64" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-mpich-fortran-102t64" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-mpich-hl-100t64" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-mpich-hl-cpp-100t64" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-mpich-hl-fortran-100t64" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-openmpi-103-1t64" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-openmpi-cpp-103-1t64" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-openmpi-fortran-102t64" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-openmpi-hl-100t64" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-openmpi-hl-cpp-100t64" | .depends ~ "libhdf5-openmpi-hl-fortran-100t64";

[p***@debian.org]

Post by Gilles Filippini
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
Usertags: transition
Hi Release Team,
I am requesting a transition slot for HDF5 1.14 currently in
experimental. I've run a test rebuild of the 154 reverse dependencies.
Out of them most of the FTBFS are currently not in testing and the
other have patch proposals [1]. There is only issue left: #1087738
(khl). I am confident it will be solved because khl's maintainer is
its upstream as well.
[1]
https://udd.debian.org/cgi-bin/bts-usertags.cgi?user=pini%40debian.org&tag=ftbfs-hdf5-1.14
Please let me know in case you think other issues need attention.

This should wait until openmpi 5 is in testing.

Now that openmpi 5 is in testing is there any other blocker left?

Best,
_g.

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

tags -1 confirmed

Bug #1088632 [release.debian.org] transition: hdf5
Added tag(s) confirmed.

[p***@debian.org]

Control: tags -1 confirmed

Post by p***@debian.org

Post by Gilles Filippini
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
Usertags: transition
Hi Release Team,
I am requesting a transition slot for HDF5 1.14 currently in
experimental. I've run a test rebuild of the 154 reverse
dependencies. Out of them most of the FTBFS are currently not in
testing and the other have patch proposals [1]. There is only issue
left: #1087738 (khl). I am confident it will be solved because khl's
maintainer is its upstream as well.
[1] https://udd.debian.org/cgi-bin/bts-usertags.cgi?
user=pini%40debian.org&tag=ftbfs-hdf5-1.14
Please let me know in case you think other issues need attention.

This should wait until openmpi 5 is in testing.

Now that openmpi 5 is in testing is there any other blocker left?

No, go ahead.

Uploaded.

Best,
_g.

[p***@debian.org]

Post by p***@debian.org

Control: tags -1 confirmed

Post by p***@debian.org

Post by Gilles Filippini
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
Usertags: transition
Hi Release Team,
I am requesting a transition slot for HDF5 1.14 currently in
experimental. I've run a test rebuild of the 154 reverse
dependencies. Out of them most of the FTBFS are currently not in
testing and the other have patch proposals [1]. There is only
issue left: #1087738 (khl). I am confident it will be solved
because khl's maintainer is its upstream as well.
[1] https://udd.debian.org/cgi-bin/bts-usertags.cgi?
user=pini%40debian.org&tag=ftbfs-hdf5-1.14
Please let me know in case you think other issues need attention.

This should wait until openmpi 5 is in testing.

Now that openmpi 5 is in testing is there any other blocker left?

No, go ahead.

Uploaded.

There are a few autopkgtest regressions. I briefly looked at fast5 and
it looks like its examples need changes for the new API. I haven't
looked at the others. Can you take a look and file bugs as appropriate?

* fast5: I filed bug #1090898 and proposed a patch
* fclib: autopkgtest is successful on my box
* fenics-dolfinx: autopkgtest is successful on my box
* field3d: needs a binNMU
* gatb-core: autopkgtest is successful on my box
* petsc: autopkgtest is successful on my box

Best,
_g.

[p***@debian.org]

Post by p***@debian.org

There are a few autopkgtest regressions. I briefly looked at fast5
and it looks like its examples need changes for the new API. I
haven't looked at the others. Can you take a look and file bugs as
appropriate?

* fclib: autopkgtest is successful on my box

I assume you test in a pure unstable/sid environment. Indeed on ci.d.n
fclib also passes on unstable. Most of the times that means we're
missing a *versioned* (test-) Depends or Breaks somewhere. The test
infrastructure tries to test in a testing/trixie environment with as
little as possible from unstable. Do you have any idea what that could
be?

Post by p***@debian.org
* fenics-dolfinx: autopkgtest is successful on my box

Same.

Post by p***@debian.org
* gatb-core: autopkgtest is successful on my box

Same.

Post by p***@debian.org
* petsc: autopkgtest is successful on my box

Same.

Should I upload a new HDF5 revision with versioned `Breaks:` against
these packages?

Best,
_g.

[p***@debian.org]

Post by p***@debian.org

Post by p***@debian.org

There are a few autopkgtest regressions. I briefly looked at fast5
and it looks like its examples need changes for the new API. I
haven't looked at the others. Can you take a look and file bugs as
appropriate?

* fclib: autopkgtest is successful on my box

I assume you test in a pure unstable/sid environment. Indeed on ci.d.n
fclib also passes on unstable. Most of the times that means we're
missing a *versioned* (test-) Depends or Breaks somewhere. The test
infrastructure tries to test in a testing/trixie environment with as
little as possible from unstable. Do you have any idea what that could
be?

Post by p***@debian.org
* fenics-dolfinx: autopkgtest is successful on my box

Same.

Post by p***@debian.org
* gatb-core: autopkgtest is successful on my box

Same.

Post by p***@debian.org
* petsc: autopkgtest is successful on my box

Same.

Should I upload a new HDF5 revision with versioned `Breaks:` against
these packages?

As I understand it the failing test for fclib depends on libfclib-dev
which brings the transitioning libhdf5-dev. This leads to an executable
linked to both libhdf5_serial_hl.so.100 and libhdf5_serial_hl.so.310,
causing the failure.

What is the best practice to prevent this?

I thought about adding `Breaks: libfclib-dev (<< 3.1.0+dfsg-3+b4)` to
libhdf5-dev but it seems inappropriable because the binNMU number is not
the same for all architectures.

Best,
_g.

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Thu, 9 Jan 2025 08:49:10 -0100
with message-id <CAM8zJQuJUD382aS18Mt7TBbY5D64qcSgtKFcXCxwFR0Ts=***@mail.gmail.com>
and subject line Re: Bug#1088632: transition: hdf5
has caused the Debian Bug report #1088632,
regarding transition: hdf5
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ***@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)