what about soname bumps and rebuilds

[Sérgio Basto]

On Ter, 2015-11-10 at 11:17 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
> 
> Am 02.11.2015 um 19:14 schrieb Reindl Harald:
> > Am 02.11.2015 um 19:03 schrieb Sérgio Basto:
> >> On Seg, 2015-11-02 at 15:35 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
> >>> Fedora 23
> >>>
> >>> * x264 so 148
> >>> * avidemux requires so 142
> >>> * the gstreamer ugly requires so 142
> >>>
> >>> why does that happen *everytime* when somebody decides to bump x264
> >>> without take care of rebuild depending packages?
> >>>
> >>
> >> Where you got x264 so 148 ?
> >
> > rpmfusion testing most likely?
> >
> >> it happens , hold your breath please
> >
> > for how long?
> >
> > 6 days and the few deps are not rebuilt
> > normally that should happen instantly if not automated at all
> >
> > [root at rh:~]$ ls /usr/lib64/libx264.so.148
> > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1019K 2015-10-27 18:29 /usr/lib64/libx264.so.148
> 
> congratulations, avidemux dependencies are now broken in stable updates 
> too even for Fedora 21
> 
> F21:
> Error: Package: avidemux-qt-2.6.10-1.fc21.x86_64 
> (rpmfusion-free-updates) Requires: libADM_render6_QT5.so()(64bit)
> 
> F23:
> nothing provides libADM_render6_QT5.so()(64bit) needed by 
> avidemux-qt-2.6.10-1.fc23.x86_64
> nothing provides libx264.so.142 needed by avidemux-qt-2.6.8-3.fc22.i686
> 
> thanks god it can't solve i686 deps on a pure x86_64 machine where 
> dnf/yum tries to fallback because the unsolveable deps....

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3815

-- 
Sérgio M. B.