Bug 2381334 - open-amp: FTBFS with change proposal CMake 4.0
Summary: open-amp: FTBFS with change proposal CMake 4.0
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: open-amp
Version: rawhide
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Peter Robinson
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: CMake4.0
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2025-07-16 16:52 UTC by Cristian Le
Modified: 2025-07-24 11:12 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2025-07-24 11:12:58 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Cristian Le 2025-07-16 16:52:52 UTC
Dear package maintainer,

This is an automated bug created due to a FTBFS when rebuilding this package for the change proposal CMake 4.0.

The rebuild is being tracked in https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/lecris/cmake-4.0/package/open-amp.

See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/CMake4.0 for more information on how to make the package compatible.

More specifically, depending on the state of the project:
- If it is actively maintained, please update the `cmake_minimum_required`, and instruct upstream to do so as well.
  To minimize future maintenance, please add a higher bound as well, preferrably with the highest CMake version being
  tested. You may use 4.0 as the higher bound as this is being tested in the tracked copr project.
- If the project is not maintained, you may add `CMAKE_POLICY_VERSION_MINIMUM=3.5` as a CMake variable or environment
  variable.

You can check the build locally following the instructions in the change proposal, or submit your build to the tracking
copr project.

Let me know if you encounter any issues, or need any other help.

Comment 1 Peter Robinson 2025-07-18 09:06:43 UTC
According to the change all OLD options < 3.5 are being dropped, but open-amp has a check for 3.16 which is newer that 3.5 so I am not sure why this is a problem?

Comment 2 Cristian Le 2025-07-18 10:03:11 UTC
Are you referring to this commit https://github.com/OpenAMP/open-amp/commit/8c0c0c386b5799b54faf9613a191f66dee76e400? This was only present in v2025.04.0, but you can safely backport it.

PS: You can suggest them to include a higher-bound policy if you wish to be kind to future maintainers.

Comment 3 Peter Robinson 2025-07-18 12:37:41 UTC
(In reply to Cristian Le from comment #2)
> Are you referring to this commit
> https://github.com/OpenAMP/open-amp/commit/
> 8c0c0c386b5799b54faf9613a191f66dee76e400? This was only present in
> v2025.04.0, but you can safely backport it.

I'm planning on updating so that should be fine.
 
> PS: You can suggest them to include a higher-bound policy if you wish to be
> kind to future maintainers.

Personally I'm not sure their reason to set a particular version and I don't think it's a distro maintainer to dictate to an upstream project versions, I would hope they're smart enough to set reasonable versions for considered reasons.

Comment 4 Peter Robinson 2025-07-18 12:40:09 UTC
Their reasons for that version is because of debian releases as outlined in this PR: https://github.com/OpenAMP/libmetal/pull/327

Comment 5 Cristian Le 2025-07-18 12:46:24 UTC
> Personally I'm not sure their reason to set a particular version and I don't think it's a distro maintainer to dictate to an upstream project versions, I would hope they're smart enough to set reasonable versions for considered reasons.

This is a safe recommendation you can make. For the most cases upstream is not aware of how `cmake_minimum_required` works, but if you set a higher bound matching *any* version they have in the CI, then it is a safe usage, and it minimizes the need to bump it in the downstream.

> Their reasons for that version is because of debian releases as outlined in this PR: https://github.com/OpenAMP/libmetal/pull/327

That's only the reason for lower-bound, which indeed it is a more difficult point to consider. But anyway, thanks for the link, I'll contact upstream about it there.

Comment 6 Peter Robinson 2025-07-24 11:12:58 UTC
Updated to new upstream which has this fixed.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.