update nwchem git hash and ga br

[marcindulak]

No description provided.

[marcindulak]

Here are the builds

el6 i686 https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=42286142 OK (openmpi build only)
el6 x86_64 https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=42276737 OK (openmpi build only)
el7 x86_64 https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=42276745 OK
el8 x86_64 https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=42276751 OK
f32 i686 waiting for ga getting into the repos
f32 x86_64 waiting for ga getting into the repos
rawhide i686 https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=42276747 tests Segmentation fault
rawhide x86_64 https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=42276749 OK

[edoapra]

The tests logs look good other than the i686 seg fault on rawhide.
I thought 32-bit linux was going to be deprecated soon ... is this the case?

[marcindulak]

The tests logs look good other than the i686 seg fault on rawhide.
I thought 32-bit linux was going to be deprecated soon ... is this the case?

Deprecation of i686 seems correct since https://pagure.io/releng/issue/8529 is closed and there is no i686 directory under https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora/linux/development/rawhide/Everything/ (only aarch64 armhfp x86_64) nor https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora-secondary/development/rawhide/Everything/ (ppc64le s390x).

However, the builds of https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-f9333353d9 (still pending) include i686. I wonder whether this may be due to a meaning of

fedpkg/nwchem/nwchem.spec

Line 29 in b810dd0

ExclusiveArch: x86_64 %{ix86}

which may be actually forcing an i686 build? Maybe also the pending status is due to a i686 build being forced.

https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/7CVCMBKQGXP4TNYVZAQIT3ZUUALKPIXG/

[marcindulak]

Should we drop i686 rpm support of nwchem and package on ExclusiveArch: x86_64?

[edoapra]

Not yet. I might have found a fix for it with the latest commits. I am verifying that this is the case.
If the tests are inconclusive, it might be a good idea to drop i686 support.
I think that if would be more useful to provide aarch64 rpms (and ppc64le, too)

[marcindulak]

Not yet. I might have found a fix for it with the latest commits. I am verifying that this is the case.
If the tests are inconclusive, it might be a good idea to drop i686 support.
I think that if would be more useful to provide aarch64 rpms (and ppc64le, too)

#10

[edoapra]

Not sure what made the real difference, but it could be the combination of the changes a340c00 in ga.spec and nwchem.spec that now makes i686 to work on rawhide.
Anyhow, now the build works
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=42413063