Re: Issue with undefined reference with assembler in rr

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 5:39 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 10:00:08PM -0700, Dave Johansen wrote: > > I was working on packaging rr [1] and one of the tests [2] fails to build > > when optimizations are turned on. I've reduced it to the following and > > still been able

Re: Cannot add dependency job for unit dnf-makecache.timer, ignoring: Unit dnf-makecache.timer is masked

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 10:17:54PM +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: > WHO defines that "dependency" and WHY? > > when i say "mask, i want it refreshed when it is used" than *i mean* > that and there is no business to spit my logs on all machines al day > long full with "you have masked it" > > Jan 14

Re: ZFS on linux

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 5:29 PM, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 5:07 PM, Zach Villers wrote: >> Well - If there was to be a plan, it would have to start with RH legal >> making that determination would it not? >> >> Could FESCO or the other council (sorry it escapes me ATM) take this

Re: ZFS on linux

Am 15.01.2016 um 01:07 schrieb Neal Gompa: On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 6:54 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: On 14 January 2016 at 12:20, Neal Gompa wrote: On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 2:14 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: who is "Lawrence Livermore"? Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory is an organiz

Re: kmods and Fedora

Am 15.01.2016 um 01:07 schrieb Andrew Lutomirski: On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 4:01 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 15.01.2016 um 00:36 schrieb Andrew Lutomirski: If, for example, it simply installed into /lib/modules/VERSION/akmod/path/to/driver.ko, then rpm could be taught to delete /lib/modules/V

Re: ZFS on linux

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 6:54 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > On 14 January 2016 at 12:20, Neal Gompa wrote: >> On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 2:14 PM, Reindl Harald >> wrote: >>> >>> >>> Am 14.01.2016 um 19:57 schrieb Gerald B. Cox: On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 10:45 AM, Bill Nottingham >>>

Re: kmods and Fedora

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 4:01 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: > > > Am 15.01.2016 um 00:36 schrieb Andrew Lutomirski: >> >> If, for example, it simply installed into >> /lib/modules/VERSION/akmod/path/to/driver.ko, then rpm could be taught >> to delete /lib/modules/VERSION when the corresponding kernel pa

Re: ZFS on linux

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 3:07 PM, Zach Villers wrote: > Well - If there was to be a plan, it would have to start with RH legal > making that determination would it not? > > Could FESCO or the other council (sorry it escapes me ATM) take this up as a > meeting item? Is it worth presenting for a lega

Re: kmods and Fedora

Am 15.01.2016 um 00:36 schrieb Andrew Lutomirski: If, for example, it simply installed into /lib/modules/VERSION/akmod/path/to/driver.ko, then rpm could be taught to delete /lib/modules/VERSION when the corresponding kernel package goes away (either using a scriptlet in the kernel package or an

Re: ZFS on linux

On 14 January 2016 at 12:20, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 2:14 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: >> >> >> Am 14.01.2016 um 19:57 schrieb Gerald B. Cox: >>> >>> On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 10:45 AM, Bill Nottingham >> > wrote: >>> >>> As a rule, I try not to take leg

Re: kmods and Fedora

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 3:04 PM, Ian Malone wrote: > On 14 January 2016 at 19:29, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: >> 2. Assuming that shipping an out-of-tree module is okay, is akmod a good >> mechanism? >> >> I would argue strongly that akmod is *not* a good mechanism. >> >> Clearly any end-user-box-bu

Re: Updating hdf5 to 1.8.16 in rawhide soon

On 11/20/2015 02:39 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote: > I'll be updating hdf5 to 1.8.16 in rawhide in the next few days. This > includes a soname bump for the C++ wrapper libs, but as usual I'll be > rebuilding all deps due to run-time version checking by the library. > Well, the arm build is hanging i

Re: kmods and Fedora

On 14 January 2016 at 19:29, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: > > On Jan 14, 2016 9:34 AM, "Nicolas Chauvet" wrote: >> >> 2016-01-14 18:05 GMT+01:00 Neal Gompa : >>> >>> On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 11:01 AM, Reindl Harald >>> wrote: >>> > >>> > Am 14.01.2016 um 16:56 schrieb Neal Gompa: >>> >> >>> >> I've r

Re: ZFS on linux

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 5:07 PM, Zach Villers wrote: > Well - If there was to be a plan, it would have to start with RH legal > making that determination would it not? > > Could FESCO or the other council (sorry it escapes me ATM) take this up as a > meeting item? Is it worth presenting for a lega

Re: ZFS on linux

Reindl Harald writes: >>> who is "Lawrence Livermore"? >> >> Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory is an organization founded by >> the University of California to do research and development for >> academic and government purposes. The US Department of Energy >> commissioned them to port ZFS to

Re: ZFS on linux

Zach Villers writes: > I understand. My thought was, that there seems to be a push to add support > in Debian and Ubuntu. Would it now be possible/make sense to create maybe a > nodebug kernel package based on a stable kernel supported by ZFS and > zfs/spl packages maybe even as a copr repo? Wha

Re: ZFS on linux

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 05:07:57PM -0500, Zach Villers wrote: > A - determine with we were going to start building a kernel with nodebug > turned off Why? -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: ZFS on linux

Well - If there was to be a plan, it would have to start with RH legal making that determination would it not? Could FESCO or the other council (sorry it escapes me ATM) take this up as a meeting item? Is it worth presenting for a legal determination? In my mind, if it was approved by legal we wo

Re: Call for Fedora 24 Test Days

Hello Adam! I have noticed that the Koji build of the "cloud vagrant libvirt" box[0] found at [1] doesn't boot. The console just says that it's waiting for the disk. I scanned through the page at [1] but I didn't see a section that was specifically dedicated to documenting problems that are spe

Cannot add dependency job for unit dnf-makecache.timer, ignoring: Unit dnf-makecache.timer is masked

WHO defines that "dependency" and WHY? when i say "mask, i want it refreshed when it is used" than *i mean* that and there is no business to spit my logs on all machines al day long full with "you have masked it" Jan 14 21:30:01 localhost systemd[1]: Cannot add dependency job for unit dnf-ma

Re: ZFS on linux

> On 14 Jan 2016, at 11:39, Neal Gompa wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 2:35 PM, Michael Catanzaro > wrote: >> On Thu, 2016-01-14 at 20:24 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: >>> likely i did much more research than you can even imagine long >>> before >>> that thread started >> >> I find this chal

Re: ZFS on linux

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 2:35 PM, Michael Catanzaro wrote: > On Thu, 2016-01-14 at 20:24 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: >> likely i did much more research than you can even imagine long >> before >> that thread started > > I find this challenging to believe. > >> CDDL is incompatible with GPLv2 - peri

Re: ZFS on linux

I think someone needs to agree to become the maintainer for such a package, correct? Who's willing to do this? I haven't tested ZoL on my UEFI+Secure Boot NUC yet, but my expectation is that this kernel module isn't going to be signed by anything trusted, so it'd fail to load. If that's true, ther

Re: ZFS on linux

Am 14.01.2016 um 20:35 schrieb Michael Catanzaro: On Thu, 2016-01-14 at 20:24 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: likely i did much more research than you can even imagine long before that thread started I find this challenging to believe. i don't care what you believe CDDL is incompatible with

Re: ZFS on linux

Am 14.01.2016 um 20:34 schrieb Gerald B. Cox: On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 11:14 AM, Reindl Harald mailto:h.rei...@thelounge.net>> wrote: ZFS cannot be included in the GPL-licensed Linux kernel, because it is licensed under the GPL-incompatible CDDL Harald, you missed the point you mi

Re: Packages that remove the egg-info

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 01/14/2016 02:25 PM, Fabio Alessandro Locati wrote: > During a Package Review I was doing on a python package, Kevin > Kofler joined the conversation to point out that was wrong to > suggest that the python packages should remove the egg-info > p

Re: ZFS on linux

On Thu, 2016-01-14 at 20:24 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: > likely i did much more research than you can even imagine long > before  > that thread started I find this challenging to believe. > CDDL is incompatible with GPLv2 - period Did you read the web site at all? The argument is that it can be

Re: ZFS on linux

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 11:14 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: > > ZFS cannot be included in the GPL-licensed Linux kernel, because it is > licensed under the GPL-incompatible CDDL Harald, you missed the point. We all understand it cannot be included in the kernel - we're talking about whether or not

Re: kmods and Fedora

On Thu, 2016-01-14 at 10:56 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: > Hello all, > > I've recently been wondering why we haven't allowed kernel module > packages in Fedora since Fedora 8. I've tried searching through our > wiki and the mailing list, but I haven't come up with any concrete > reasons for why we di

Re: kmods and Fedora

On Jan 14, 2016 9:34 AM, "Nicolas Chauvet" wrote: > > 2016-01-14 18:05 GMT+01:00 Neal Gompa : >> >> On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 11:01 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: >> > >> > Am 14.01.2016 um 16:56 schrieb Neal Gompa: >> >> >> >> I've recently been wondering why we haven't allowed kernel module >> >> packa

Re: ZFS on linux

Am 14.01.2016 um 19:45 schrieb Bill Nottingham: Bill, your maildomain is burned and the only reason that your mails appear here is there the mailing list is whitelisted based on SPF 1.5 URIBL_SBL_A Contains URL's A record listed in the SBL blocklist [URIs: splat.cc] 1.5 URIBL_SBL Contains

Packages that remove the egg-info

During a Package Review I was doing on a python package, Kevin Kofler joined the conversation to point out that was wrong to suggest that the python packages should remove the egg-info provided by upstream. I was a little surprised by this so I started to look around and I found a wiki page (https:

Re: ZFS on linux

Am 14.01.2016 um 20:20 schrieb Neal Gompa: On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 2:14 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 14.01.2016 um 19:57 schrieb Gerald B. Cox: On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 10:45 AM, Bill Nottingham mailto:nott...@splat.cc>> wrote: As a rule, I try not to take legal licensing interpretatio

Re: ZFS on linux

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 2:14 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: > > > Am 14.01.2016 um 19:57 schrieb Gerald B. Cox: >> >> On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 10:45 AM, Bill Nottingham > > wrote: >> >> As a rule, I try not to take legal licensing interpretations from a >> CTO >> who's tr

Re: ZFS on linux

Am 14.01.2016 um 20:15 schrieb Gerald B. Cox: On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 10:57 AM, Gerald B. Cox mailto:gb...@bzb.us>> wrote: On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 10:45 AM, Bill Nottingham mailto:nott...@splat.cc>> wrote: As a rule, I try not to take legal licensing interpretations from

Re: kmods and Fedora

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 2:09 PM, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 2:00 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: >> On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 1:54 PM, Neal Gompa wrote: >>> On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 1:49 PM, Samuel Sieb wrote: On 01/14/2016 07:56 AM, Neal Gompa wrote: > > Aside from the DNF iss

Re: kmods and Fedora

Am 14.01.2016 um 20:09 schrieb Neal Gompa: On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 2:00 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 1:54 PM, Neal Gompa wrote: On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 1:49 PM, Samuel Sieb wrote: On 01/14/2016 07:56 AM, Neal Gompa wrote: Aside from the DNF issue, is there anything else

Re: ZFS on linux

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 10:57 AM, Gerald B. Cox wrote: > On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 10:45 AM, Bill Nottingham > wrote: > >> As a rule, I try not to take legal licensing interpretations from a CTO >> who's trying to sell me the thing they're talking about the licensing of. >> >> We certainly could s

Re: ZFS on linux

Am 14.01.2016 um 19:57 schrieb Gerald B. Cox: On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 10:45 AM, Bill Nottingham mailto:nott...@splat.cc>> wrote: As a rule, I try not to take legal licensing interpretations from a CTO who's trying to sell me the thing they're talking about the licensing of. We

Re: kmods and Fedora

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 10:56 AM, Neal Gompa wrote: > Hello all, > > I've recently been wondering why we haven't allowed kernel module > packages in Fedora since Fedora 8. I've tried searching through our > wiki and the mailing list, but I haven't come up with any concrete > reasons for why we dis

Re: kmods and Fedora

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 2:00 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 1:54 PM, Neal Gompa wrote: >> On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 1:49 PM, Samuel Sieb wrote: >>> On 01/14/2016 07:56 AM, Neal Gompa wrote: Aside from the DNF issue, is there anything else I'm missing in relation to

Re: kmods and Fedora

Am 14.01.2016 um 19:54 schrieb Neal Gompa: On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 1:49 PM, Samuel Sieb wrote: On 01/14/2016 07:56 AM, Neal Gompa wrote: Aside from the DNF issue, is there anything else I'm missing in relation to kmods in Fedora? If you have secure boot, you have to go through the process

Re: kmods and Fedora

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 1:54 PM, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 1:49 PM, Samuel Sieb wrote: >> On 01/14/2016 07:56 AM, Neal Gompa wrote: >>> >>> Aside from the DNF issue, is there anything else I'm missing in >>> relation to kmods in Fedora? >>> >> If you have secure boot, you have t

Re: ZFS on linux

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 10:45 AM, Bill Nottingham wrote: > As a rule, I try not to take legal licensing interpretations from a CTO > who's trying to sell me the thing they're talking about the licensing of. > > We certainly could send that interpretation of CDDL/GPL and the kernel to > the > lega

Re: kmods and Fedora

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 1:49 PM, Samuel Sieb wrote: > On 01/14/2016 07:56 AM, Neal Gompa wrote: >> >> Aside from the DNF issue, is there anything else I'm missing in >> relation to kmods in Fedora? >> > If you have secure boot, you have to go through the process to sign the > kernel modules you bu

Re: kmods and Fedora

On 01/14/2016 07:56 AM, Neal Gompa wrote: Aside from the DNF issue, is there anything else I'm missing in relation to kmods in Fedora? If you have secure boot, you have to go through the process to sign the kernel modules you build and register the key with the boot system. -- devel mailing li

Re: ZFS on linux

Gerald B. Cox (gb...@bzb.us) said: > On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 9:25 AM, Stephen John Smoogen > wrote: > > > > > Here is a simple if then for figuring out how ZFS support may ever get > > into Fedora: > > > I originally believed it was simply a licensing issue that was preventing > the inclusion

Re: Updating hdf5 to 1.8.16 in rawhide soon

Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 11:26 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > > Richard, once the hdf5 builds are done, would it be better for your > rebuild to be done in the f24-boost tag with the new Boost, to avoid > building it twice? Works for me. I don't think too many are using it in Rawhide :) Thanks, Rich

Re: ZFS on linux

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 9:25 AM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > > Here is a simple if then for figuring out how ZFS support may ever get > into Fedora: I originally believed it was simply a licensing issue that was preventing the inclusion in Fedora, but apparently that isn't true: http://warpme

Re: ZFS on linux

Thanks Smooge/Florian. I respect your opinions, thoughts, and explanations. Regards. On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 12:25 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > On 14 January 2016 at 08:58, Zach Villers wrote: > > I understand. My thought was, that there seems to be a push to add > support > > in Debian a

Re: kmods and Fedora

2016-01-14 18:05 GMT+01:00 Neal Gompa : > On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 11:01 AM, Reindl Harald > wrote: > > > > Am 14.01.2016 um 16:56 schrieb Neal Gompa: > >> > >> I've recently been wondering why we haven't allowed kernel module > >> packages in Fedora since Fedora 8. I've tried searching through ou

Re: kmods and Fedora

Am 14.01.2016 um 18:05 schrieb Neal Gompa: On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 11:01 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 14.01.2016 um 16:56 schrieb Neal Gompa: We have two tools that can help us in this regard: akmod and Koschei, both came after our policy change to disallow kernel modules. akmod is a dirty

Re: Updating hdf5 to 1.8.16 in rawhide soon

On 14/01/16 09:53 -0700, Orion Poplawski wrote: On 01/14/2016 09:51 AM, Richard Shaw wrote: I needed an update to OpenImageIO (new patch version) which I just submitted. I assume I waited long enough for the new hdf5 build. Thanks, Richard Nope, still waiting for the arm build to complete...

Re: ZFS on linux

On 14 January 2016 at 08:58, Zach Villers wrote: > I understand. My thought was, that there seems to be a push to add support > in Debian and Ubuntu. Would it now be possible/make sense to create maybe a > nodebug kernel package based on a stable kernel supported by ZFS and zfs/spl > packages mayb

Re: kmods and Fedora

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 11:01 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: > > Am 14.01.2016 um 16:56 schrieb Neal Gompa: >> >> I've recently been wondering why we haven't allowed kernel module >> packages in Fedora since Fedora 8. I've tried searching through our >> wiki and the mailing list, but I haven't come up w

Re: Updating hdf5 to 1.8.16 in rawhide soon

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 10:53 AM, Orion Poplawski wrote: > > Nope, still waiting for the arm build to complete... Ok, I killed the build. Thanks, Richard -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Updating hdf5 to 1.8.16 in rawhide soon

I needed an update to OpenImageIO (new patch version) which I just submitted. I assume I waited long enough for the new hdf5 build. Thanks, Richard -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Updating hdf5 to 1.8.16 in rawhide soon

On 01/14/2016 09:51 AM, Richard Shaw wrote: > I needed an update to OpenImageIO (new patch version) which I just submitted. > I assume I waited long enough for the new hdf5 build. > > Thanks, > Richard > Nope, still waiting for the arm build to complete... -- Orion Poplawski Technical Manager

Re: Re[2]: Debugging practices and hardened packages

You can use ABRT to manage your core dumps, but it's not as nice as coredumpctl. I recommend disabling ABRT ('systemctl disable abrtd' and 'systemctl stop abrtd') so that your core dumps will appear in coredumpctl. The ABRT developers are working on better coredumpctl integration. On Thu, 2016-01-

kmods and Fedora

Hello all, I've recently been wondering why we haven't allowed kernel module packages in Fedora since Fedora 8. I've tried searching through our wiki and the mailing list, but I haven't come up with any concrete reasons for why we disallow them. If it is perhaps the issue of keeping things in syn

Re: kmods and Fedora

Am 14.01.2016 um 16:56 schrieb Neal Gompa: I've recently been wondering why we haven't allowed kernel module packages in Fedora since Fedora 8. I've tried searching through our wiki and the mailing list, but I haven't come up with any concrete reasons for why we disallow them. If it is perhaps

Re: ZFS on linux

I understand. My thought was, that there seems to be a push to add support in Debian and Ubuntu. Would it now be possible/make sense to create maybe a nodebug kernel package based on a stable kernel supported by ZFS and zfs/spl packages maybe even as a copr repo? On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 10:04 AM,

Re: ZFS on linux

On 01/14/2016 03:26 PM, Zach Villers wrote: > Now that Debian has added zfs support to their experimental branch; > https://ftp-master.debian.org/new/zfs-linux_0.6.4.2-1.html I don't know where you got this information. If a package is in NEW, it is not yet part of Debian. In fact, it means that

Fedora Rawhide 20160114 compose check report

Missing expected images: Kde disk raw armhfp No images in this compose but not Rawhide 20160113 Images in Rawhide 20160113 but not this: Cloud_atomic vagrant virtualbox x86_64 Cloud_atomic vagrant libvirt x86_64 Failed openQA tests: 5 of 66 ID: 3126Test: x86_64 kde_live default_instal

Re: ELF arch question

On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 15:42:48 +0100, Orion Poplawski wrote: > I want BLAS/LAPACK implementations to do something like: > > %if > Provides: libblas.so.3()(64bit) > %else > Provides: libblas.so.3 > %endif https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2015-August/213021.html %if %{__isa_bits} = 6

Re: ELF arch question

Am 14.01.2016 um 15:42 schrieb Orion Poplawski: I want BLAS/LAPACK implementations to do something like: %if Provides: libblas.so.3()(64bit) %else Provides: libblas.so.3 %endif not sure why you think you need to specify that explicitly while rpmbuild does that on it's own, but anyways, you

Re: ELF arch question

On 01/14/2016 07:24 AM, Adam Jackson wrote: On Wed, 2016-01-13 at 16:03 -0700, Orion Poplawski wrote: rpm flags shared libraries of ELFCLASS64 with '(64bit)' on all architectures except Alpha (which thankfully we don't support). My question is, are ELFCLASS64 libraries always installed in /usr/

Re: ELF arch question

On Wed, 2016-01-13 at 16:03 -0700, Orion Poplawski wrote: > rpm flags shared libraries of ELFCLASS64 with '(64bit)' on all architectures > except Alpha (which thankfully we don't support).  My question is, are > ELFCLASS64 libraries always installed in /usr/lib64 on all Fedora platforms, > or am I

ZFS on linux

Now that Debian has added zfs support to their experimental branch; https://ftp-master.debian.org/new/zfs-linux_0.6.4.2-1.html is there a possibility that Fedora could add support/packages as well? Regards, Zach #aikidouke -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproj

Re: Testing chrony seccomp support

On Tue, Oct 06, 2015 at 10:15:38AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > On 10/05/2015 05:27 PM, Miroslav Lichvar wrote: > > I guess glibc and getaddrinfo() will be the most problematic part in > > the chrony seccomp support. Is there a precedent in Fedora of a > > package using a seccomp filter and getad

Re: Boost 1.60?

On 14/01/16 13:27, Jonathan Wakely wrote: On 14/01/16 13:23 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote: On 14/01/16 12:40 +, Tom Hughes wrote: Are we expecting boost 1.60 to land in Rawhide today? I see 1.60.0-1 built in the f24-boost side tag yesterday and then 1.60.0-2 this morning in the main f24 tag

Re: Boost 1.60?

On 14/01/16 13:23 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote: On 14/01/16 12:40 +, Tom Hughes wrote: Are we expecting boost 1.60 to land in Rawhide today? I see 1.60.0-1 built in the f24-boost side tag yesterday and then 1.60.0-2 this morning in the main f24 tag? Obviously that has triggered a bunch o

Re: Boost 1.60?

On 14/01/16 12:40 +, Tom Hughes wrote: Are we expecting boost 1.60 to land in Rawhide today? I see 1.60.0-1 built in the f24-boost side tag yesterday and then 1.60.0-2 this morning in the main f24 tag? Obviously that has triggered a bunch of dependency failures in koschei. Argh! Sorry,

Re: Boost 1.60?

Jan Kurik wrote: > There is an approved Change for F24 to upgrade boost: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/F24Boost160 > Perhaps someone started to work on it. > > Regards, > Jan > > On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 1:49 PM, Peter Robinson > wrote: >> On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 12:40 PM, Tom Hughes

Re: Package name for EPEL7 branch

Hello: Greg Hellings wrote on 01/14/2016 01:30 PM: I'm working with a package (rubygem-minitest) which already exists in the core EL packages on the 4.x series. In order to enable a whole slew of new packages to be created in EPEL7, it will be necessary to package the 5.x series. However, since

Re: Boost 1.60?

There is an approved Change for F24 to upgrade boost: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/F24Boost160 Perhaps someone started to work on it. Regards, Jan On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 1:49 PM, Peter Robinson wrote: > On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 12:40 PM, Tom Hughes wrote: >> Are we expecting boost 1.6

Re: Boost 1.60?

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 12:40 PM, Tom Hughes wrote: > Are we expecting boost 1.60 to land in Rawhide today? > > I see 1.60.0-1 built in the f24-boost side tag yesterday and then 1.60.0-2 > this morning in the main f24 tag? There's been no request on the rel-eng ticket to tag it all back in so I s

Boost 1.60?

Are we expecting boost 1.60 to land in Rawhide today? I see 1.60.0-1 built in the f24-boost side tag yesterday and then 1.60.0-2 this morning in the main f24 tag? Obviously that has triggered a bunch of dependency failures in koschei. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ --

Re: Issue with undefined reference with assembler in rr

On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 10:00:08PM -0700, Dave Johansen wrote: > I was working on packaging rr [1] and one of the tests [2] fails to build > when optimizations are turned on. I've reduced it to the following and > still been able to reproduce the issue: > > static const float xmm0 = 10; > > int m

Re: Rules regarding whitespace inside .spec files

On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 06:35:08PM -0600, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > > "AT" == Andrew Toskin writes: > > AT> Is there a way to convert tags like "BuildRequires:" into %macros so > AT> that they *can* be indented? > > Sure there is, but please don't actually try to do that in Fedora >

Re: F24 System Wide Change: Change Proposal Name NewRpmDBFormat

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 07:50:05AM +0100, Petr Spacek wrote: > On 13.1.2016 13:48, Florian Festi wrote: > > On 01/11/2016 03:57 PM, Dan Horák wrote: > >> On Mon, 11 Jan 2016 15:46:27 +0100 > >> Jan Kurik wrote: > >> > >>> = Proposed System Wide Change: Change Proposal Name NewRpmDBFormat = > >>> h

Re: Debugging practices and hardened packages

On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 11:39:23 +0100, Roman Tsisyk wrote: > -debuginfo should be for the same build version as a binary itself. > Most users never install -debuginfo. GDB instructs them they should: $ gdb -q xvinfo Reading symbols from xvinfo...Reading symbols from /root/xvinfo...(no debugging symb

Re: Unreachable Developer

Dne 13.1.2016 v 17:41 Greg Hellings napsal(a): > I've been trying to reach jstribny( > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/accounts/user/view/jstribny) for a few > weeks regarding commit privileges on EPEL7 to several packages in > pkgdb. Most notable among those are: > rubygem-minitest > rubygem-i18n

Re[2]: Debugging practices and hardened packages

> Thursday, January 14, 2016 8:50 AM +01:00 from Florian Weimer : > > How it is supposed to be debugged by upstream developers? > > With GDB? Yes, for C/C++ packages. > Fedora provides debugging information for most of its packages, and you > can extract them from RPMs and specify “set debug-fil

rawhide report: 20160114 changes

Compose started at Thu Jan 14 05:15:02 UTC 2016 Broken deps for i386 -- [IQmol] IQmol-2.3.0-9.fc24.i686 requires libboost_serialization.so.1.58.0 IQmol-2.3.0-9.fc24.i686 requires libboost_iostreams.so.1.58.0 IQmol-2.3.0

Re: Bug 917362: poco rpms, maintener not responding

I am the upstream maintener/packager of this Poco library: http://pocoproject.org and would like to see the latest official release of poco-1.6.1 become an official rpms of Fedora. I have updated this issue https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=917362 but the official maintener Maxim Udushli

Re: Bug 917362: poco rpms, maintener not responding

On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 09:47:55 +0100, zosrothko wrote: > As mentioned by the Policy_for_nonresponsive_package_maintainers, I am > asking if anyone knows how to contact the poco rpms maintener > udushlivy > since the issue 917362 has been o

Bug 917362: poco rpms, maintener not responding

Hi As mentioned by the Policy_for_nonresponsive_package_maintainers, I am asking if anyone knows how to contact the poco rpms maintener udushlivy since the issue 917362 has been opended more than 2 years ago without any response. Thanks

Re: Packaging of PlayOnLinux

On Wed, 2016-01-13 at 22:55 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 08:59:09AM +0100, Jiří Konečný wrote: > > On Sat, 2016-01-09 at 23:36 -0600, Bruno Wolff III wrote: > > > On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 10:33:01 +0100, > > >   Jiří Konečný wrote: > > > > On Fri, 2015-12-11 a