Summary: | sci-libs/vtk-9.0.1: NOT merged due to file collisions (collision with sci-visualization/paraview-5.9.0 which seems to install bundled files?) | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | Bob Johnson <bob> |
Component: | Current packages | Assignee: | Bernd <waebbl-gentoo> |
Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | ||
Severity: | normal | CC: | DEEJAY.JPM+bugs, esigra, proxy-maint, sam, sci, tamiko, waebbl-gentoo |
Priority: | Normal | ||
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
See Also: | https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=253881 | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
Bug Depends on: | |||
Bug Blocks: | 251464 |
Description
Bob Johnson
2021-05-31 15:08:01 UTC
Thanks for the report. Honestly, I didn't check compatibility with paraview installations. For an easy fix, we could remove the two readme files from either vtk-9 or paraview. I wonder it worked with vtk-8, however. In the longer term, a more reliable solution would be to get a separate package for vtkm into ::gentoo. I thought about it, while working on the vtk-9 update but decided against it for now. IIRC it's not possible to build paraview against an external vtk. Although they both use the same codebase, paraview modifies some of the vtk code. I have to check if paraview would work against an external vtkm package, which is a 3rd-party library for vtk, and possibly also for paraview. Just checked the toplevel CMakeLists.txt of paraview. It has a PARAVIEW_USE_EXTERNAL_VTK switch (https://github.com/Kitware/ParaView/blob/v5.9.0/CMakeLists.txt#L213), referencing version 9.0 of vtk, so we could check whether it will build with external vtk. The bug has been referenced in the following commit(s): https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/commit/?id=4342b5087bd84cbe64de318c152b5425ec7f8d7b commit 4342b5087bd84cbe64de318c152b5425ec7f8d7b Author: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org> AuthorDate: 2021-06-02 01:23:23 +0000 Commit: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org> CommitDate: 2021-06-02 01:23:23 +0000 sci-libs/vtk: delete README from bundled vtkm for now Avoids collision with paraview. We'll ideally try to get paraview building with system VTK again but VTK takes a while to build so anything to prevent collisions for users now is important while we investigate that possibility. Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/253881 Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/793221 Signed-off-by: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org> sci-libs/vtk/vtk-9.0.1.ebuild | 5 +++++ 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) Sam, many thanks for the quick fix! (In reply to Bernd from comment #5) > Sam, many thanks for the quick fix! np! (Bit late.) I suppose we may be able to close this one now and just revisit the general bundled issue... VTK-9.2.2 has an cmake option to disable installation of readme file. We hopefully won't need this hack for the new version. The bug has been referenced in the following commit(s): https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/commit/?id=588025882a58b613f5ef08e02b96efbb7d4c7445 commit 588025882a58b613f5ef08e02b96efbb7d4c7445 Author: Bernd Waibel <waebbl-gentoo@posteo.net> AuthorDate: 2022-09-29 05:18:39 +0000 Commit: Joonas Niilola <juippis@gentoo.org> CommitDate: 2022-12-12 06:08:29 +0000 sci-libs/vtk: add 9.2.2 - add a new function to check memory and disk space requirements - don't drop bundled external libraries, it's only a few MB which are freed through this and upstream does a good job to avoid automagic deps - request more modules to build explicitly depending on USE flag settings - don't export CC and friends with USE=mpi, package builds fine with gcc and still links to MPI libraries - add USE flag to build vtk-m optional Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/793221 Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/835659 Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/880759 Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/820593 Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/827310 Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/846374 Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/874798 Signed-off-by: Bernd Waibel <waebbl-gentoo@posteo.net> Closes: https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo/pull/28250 Signed-off-by: Joonas Niilola <juippis@gentoo.org> sci-libs/vtk/Manifest | 6 + .../vtk-9.2.2-VTKm-respect-user-CXXFLAGS.patch | 81 +++ ...9.2.2-link-with-glut-library-for-freeglut.patch | 18 + ...metryFilter-add-missing-mutex-header-file.patch | 20 + sci-libs/vtk/metadata.xml | 11 +- sci-libs/vtk/vtk-9.2.2.ebuild | 728 +++++++++++++++++++++ 6 files changed, 863 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) Hello and happy 2023, let me reopen this bug with: >>> Installing (1 of 1) sci-visualization/paraview-5.11.0_rc2-r1::gentoo * checking 8730 files for package collisions * This package will overwrite one or more files that may belong to other * packages (see list below). You can use a command such as `portageq * owners / <filename>` to identify the installed package that owns a * file. If portageq reports that only one package owns a file then do * NOT file a bug report. A bug report is only useful if it identifies at * least two or more packages that are known to install the same file(s). * If a collision occurs and you can not explain where the file came from * then you should simply ignore the collision since there is not enough * information to determine if a real problem exists. Please do NOT file * a bug report at https://bugs.gentoo.org/ unless you report exactly * which two packages install the same file(s). See * https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Knowledge_Base:Blockers for tips on how * to solve the problem. And once again, please do NOT file a bug report * unless you have completely understood the above message. * * Detected file collision(s): * * /usr/lib64/qt5/qml/VTK.9.2/plugins.qmltypes * /usr/lib64/qt5/qml/VTK.9.2/qmldir * /usr/lib64/qt5/qml/VTK.9.2/libqmlvtkplugin.so * * Searching all installed packages for file collisions... * * Press Ctrl-C to Stop * * sci-libs/vtk-9.2.2-r1:0::gentoo * /usr/lib64/qt5/qml/VTK.9.2/libqmlvtkplugin.so * /usr/lib64/qt5/qml/VTK.9.2/plugins.qmltypes * /usr/lib64/qt5/qml/VTK.9.2/qmldir * * Package 'sci-visualization/paraview-5.11.0_rc2-r1' NOT merged due to * file collisions. If necessary, refer to your elog messages for the * whole content of the above message. Seems the collision is back? (In reply to Jordi PM from comment #9) > Hello and happy 2023, let me reopen this bug with: > While this is a similar issue, I'd ask you to file a new bug please. Different files are involved and it's likely caused by the new version of paraview. |