Fedora Rawhide 20160121 compose check report

Missing expected images: Kde disk raw armhfp Kde live i386 Kde live x86_64 No images in this compose but not Rawhide 20160120 No images in Rawhide 20160120 but not this. Failed openQA tests: 2 of 63 ID: 3655Test: i386 universal package_set_kde URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/test

Re: How to test appdata for a package?

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 6:44 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek < zbys...@in.waw.pl> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 11:26:18AM -0600, Richard Shaw wrote: > > Coming back around to this... > > > > I have made sure that gnome-software wasn't already running, did > > appstream-util validate (no relaxe

Re: The %license property is now supported in EPEL6

On Wed, 2016-01-20 at 15:09 -0600, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > Just a note that it EPEL6 no longer requires you to include the > definition of %license property; you can use it freely in your %files > list as you would in EPEL7 or Fedora.  It simply maps to %doc as it > would if you had included

Re: nss_myhostname as default in Fedora

Hi, yes, it's been a while with little progress. Initially I thought it would be just a packaging issue, but various issues were raised which require upstream fixes. I let it slip, but I still hope to get this finished. Thank you for pushing for a resolution. On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 03:18:47PM -0

Re: Schedule for Friday's FESCo Meeting (2016-01-22)

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 7:46 PM, Kalev Lember wrote: > Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FESCo > meeting Friday at 17:00UTC in #fedora-meeting on irc.freenode.net. > > To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto > > or ru

Schedule for Friday's FESCo Meeting (2016-01-22)

Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FESCo meeting Friday at 17:00UTC in #fedora-meeting on irc.freenode.net. To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto or run: date -d '2016-01-22 17:00 UTC' Links to all tickets below c

Re: How to test appdata for a package?

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 11:26:18AM -0600, Richard Shaw wrote: > Coming back around to this... > > I have made sure that gnome-software wasn't already running, did > appstream-util validate (no relaxed and fixed all output), and I still > can't get it to show up in gnome-software after installing t

Re: nss_myhostname as default in Fedora

On Thu, 2016-01-21 at 15:18 -0700, Orion Poplawski wrote: > See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1284323 as well > > For a while (from 197-1 until 228-5), systemd added "myhostname" to > the end of > the hosts line in /etc/nsswitch.conf in %post via sed.  This has been > removed > as it

Re: Should 'dnf install gtk3-devel.i686' work?

On Thu, 21 Jan 2016 23:24:13 +0100, Ian Malone wrote: > and shifting data in and out is more awkward than working directly on it. Mock has bind_mount* plugin for that. Jan -- 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 today

On 01/21/2016 06:52 AM, Orion Poplawski wrote: > On 01/14/2016 04:25 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote: >> 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 >>>

Re: Should 'dnf install gtk3-devel.i686' work?

On 21 January 2016 at 15:15, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:10 AM, Ian Malone wrote: >> On 21 January 2016 at 14:25, Dennis Gilmore wrote: >> >>> >>> However I really think we need to sit down and rethink multilib. I would >>> like >>> to start by changing the multilib method t

Re: Should 'dnf install gtk3-devel.i686' work?

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 12:53:45PM -0700, Orion Poplawski wrote: > On 01/21/2016 10:32 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 04:36:33PM +, Sérgio Basto wrote: > >> On Qui, 2016-01-21 at 08:25 -0600, Dennis Gilmore wrote: > >>> > >>> I am not really sure that people have test

nss_myhostname as default in Fedora

See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1284323 as well For a while (from 197-1 until 228-5), systemd added "myhostname" to the end of the hosts line in /etc/nsswitch.conf in %post via sed. This has been removed as it is error prone, and the above request filed to add it by default to /et

F24 Self Contained Change: Atomic Developer Mode

= Proposed Self Contained Change: Atomic Developer Mode = https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Atomic_Developer_Mode Change owner(s): * Jonathan Lebon < jlebon AT redhat DOT com> Add a "Developer Mode" boot menu entry in the Atomic image to allow users to boot without setting up cloud-init. ==

Gnome keyring security in Fedora

I've been thinking about Gnome keyring a lot lately, and I have concerns about security, and I don't know if this is a Gnome keyring problem, or a problem affecting Fedora specifically. In short, it doesn't look like Gnome keyring has the ability to notify a user interactively when a password is r

Re: Embedding javascript in binary

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 2:03 PM Sander Hoentjen wrote: > On 01/21/2016 12:29 AM, Christopher wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 12:34 PM Sander Hoentjen > > wrote: > > [snip] > > > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:JavaScript > > Yeah I read that, bu

Re: Should 'dnf install gtk3-devel.i686' work?

On 01/21/2016 10:32 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 04:36:33PM +, Sérgio Basto wrote: >> On Qui, 2016-01-21 at 08:25 -0600, Dennis Gilmore wrote: >>> >>> I am not really sure that people have tested this use case in years. >>> It would >>> be interesting to see if yum-d

Re: Embedding javascript in binary

On 01/21/2016 12:29 AM, Christopher wrote: > On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 12:34 PM Sander Hoentjen > wrote: > [snip] > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:JavaScript > Yeah I read that, but is says "Please note that this section > really only > applie

Re: Updating hdf5 to 1.8.16 in rawhide today

On 01/21/2016 08:07 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > On 21/01/16 06:52 -0700, Orion Poplawski wrote: >> On 01/14/2016 04:25 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote: >>> 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 bu

Re: Fedora Rawhide 20160121 compose check report

On Thu, 2016-01-21 at 16:36 +, Fedora compose checker wrote: > Missing expected images: > > Kde disk raw armhfp > Kde live i386 > Kde live x86_64 > > No images in this compose but not Rawhide 20160120 > > No images in Rawhide 20160120 but not this. > > Failed openQA tests: 53 of 63 Sigh -

Re: Should 'dnf install gtk3-devel.i686' work?

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 04:36:33PM +, Sérgio Basto wrote: > On Qui, 2016-01-21 at 08:25 -0600, Dennis Gilmore wrote: > > > > I am not really sure that people have tested this use case in years. > > It would  > > be interesting to see if yum-deprecated gave you working results. If > > so then I

Re: How to test appdata for a package?

Coming back around to this... I have made sure that gnome-software wasn't already running, did appstream-util validate (no relaxed and fixed all output), and I still can't get it to show up in gnome-software after installing the resultant RPM... Any other ideas? I would really like a method to vi

Re: Should 'dnf install gtk3-devel.i686' work?

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 11:37:36AM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote: > > Aren't the multiuser systems a history now with VPSes or even just > > containers cheaper than a hamburger? Moreover for anyone with any > > special requirements. > No. They are incredibly common in schools and in high performance

Re: Should 'dnf install gtk3-devel.i686' work?

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 04:49:21PM +0100, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > Aren't the multiuser systems a history now with VPSes or even just > containers cheaper than a hamburger? Moreover for anyone with any > special requirements. No. They are incredibly common in schools and in high performance computi

Re: bodhi - new update obsoleted an older update that had been submitted for stable

On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 08:22:29PM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 7:38 PM, Luke Macken wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 07:17:10AM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: > >> On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 5:55 AM, Richard Fearn > >> wrote: > >> > Hi, > >> > > >> >> https://github.com/fedora-in

Re: Should 'dnf install gtk3-devel.i686' work?

On 21/01/16 16:49 +0100, Jan Kratochvil wrote: On Thu, 21 Jan 2016 16:37:01 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: A developer who wants to build a 32-bit program on x86_64 might not be in the mock group. Their system administrator might not want to Aren't the multiuser systems a history now with VPSes

Re: Should 'dnf install gtk3-devel.i686' work?

On Qui, 2016-01-21 at 08:25 -0600, Dennis Gilmore wrote: > > I am not really sure that people have tested this use case in years. > It would  > be interesting to see if yum-deprecated gave you working results. If > so then I  > would say it is a dnf bug. Is not a dnf bug  Somehow  dnf repoqu

Fedora Rawhide 20160121 compose check report

Missing expected images: Kde disk raw armhfp Kde live i386 Kde live x86_64 No images in this compose but not Rawhide 20160120 No images in Rawhide 20160120 but not this. Failed openQA tests: 53 of 63 ID: 3570Test: x86_64 universal server_mirrorlist_graphical URL: https://openqa.fedorap

Re: Should 'dnf install gtk3-devel.i686' work?

On 21/01/16 10:52 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:37 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: On 21/01/16 10:15 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:10 AM, Ian Malone wrote: Successfully build and run 20+ year old programs without having to completely rewrite them woul

Re: Should 'dnf install gtk3-devel.i686' work?

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:37 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > On 21/01/16 10:15 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: >> >> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:10 AM, Ian Malone wrote: >>> >>> Successfully build and run 20+ year old programs without having to >>> completely rewrite them would be one of the things I want

Re: Python naming guidelines clarification

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 02:36:00PM +0100, Jan Včelák wrote: > On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 2:12 PM, Robert Kuska wrote: > >> And what is the best current practice if the library contains some > >> utilities. Should the utilities land in the python{2,3}-name package? > >> Should it land in both? > >> >

Re: Should 'dnf install gtk3-devel.i686' work?

On Thu, 21 Jan 2016 16:37:01 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > A developer who wants to build a 32-bit program on x86_64 might not > be in the mock group. Their system administrator might not want to Aren't the multiuser systems a history now with VPSes or even just containers cheaper than a hamburg

Re: Should 'dnf install gtk3-devel.i686' work?

On 21/01/16 10:15 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:10 AM, Ian Malone wrote: Successfully build and run 20+ year old programs without having to completely rewrite them would be one of the things I want today. In fact it's one of the things I was doing earlier this week. Is t

[Test-Announce] Fedora 24 Rawhide 20160121 nightly compose nominated for testing

Announcing the creation of a new nightly release validation test event for Fedora 24 Rawhide 20160121. Please help run some tests for this nightly compose if you have time. For more information on nightly release validation testing, see: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki

Re: Should 'dnf install gtk3-devel.i686' work?

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:10 AM, Ian Malone wrote: > On 21 January 2016 at 14:25, Dennis Gilmore wrote: > >> >> However I really think we need to sit down and rethink multilib. I would >> like >> to start by changing the multilib method to runtime. So you only get runtime >> libraries and noth

Re: Should 'dnf install gtk3-devel.i686' work?

On 21 January 2016 at 14:25, Dennis Gilmore wrote: > > However I really think we need to sit down and rethink multilib. I would like > to start by changing the multilib method to runtime. So you only get runtime > libraries and nothing to build 32 bit apps on 64 bit. For 32 bit building you > sh

Re: Updating hdf5 to 1.8.16 in rawhide today

On 21/01/16 06:52 -0700, Orion Poplawski wrote: On 01/14/2016 04:25 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote: 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 a

Re: Should 'dnf install gtk3-devel.i686' work?

On Wednesday, January 20, 2016 03:50:03 PM Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > If you're on freshly installed Fedora 23 (x86-64), then > > dnf install gtk3-devel.x86_64 > > gets you everything you need to compile a simple Gtk3 application[1]. > > However on the same host if you do: > > dnf install

Re: Should 'dnf install gtk3-devel.i686' work?

On 2016-01-21, Rex Dieter wrote: > Rex Dieter wrote: >> Sounds like one way forward to fix this is to make pkgconfig dependencies >> arch'd > > Hrm, thinking on it more, I don't think that can ever work for this purpose. > There's no way to know that > Requires: foo > in a bar.pc pkgconfig file

Re: Updating hdf5 to 1.8.16 in rawhide today

On 01/14/2016 04:25 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote: 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 l

Re: Should 'dnf install gtk3-devel.i686' work?

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 07:41:23AM -0600, Rex Dieter wrote: > Rex Dieter wrote: > > > Michael Schwendt wrote: > > > >> On Wed, 20 Jan 2016 17:32:52 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > >> > >>> IMO, this is supposed to work => Bug > >>> > >>> The big question would be: Where? > >> > >> It cannot wor

Re: Should 'dnf install gtk3-devel.i686' work?

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 03:34:34PM +0200, Yanko Kaneti wrote: > On Thu, 2016-01-21 at 09:38 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 11:10:22AM +0200, Yanko Kaneti wrote: > > > On Wed, 2016-01-20 at 15:50 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > > > If you're on freshly installed Fe

Re: Should 'dnf install gtk3-devel.i686' work?

Rex Dieter wrote: > Michael Schwendt wrote: > >> On Wed, 20 Jan 2016 17:32:52 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: >> >>> IMO, this is supposed to work => Bug >>> >>> The big question would be: Where? >> >> It cannot work as long as gtk3-devel relies on pkgconfig(foo) >> dependencies instead of arch-s

Re: Should 'dnf install gtk3-devel.i686' work?

Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Wed, 20 Jan 2016 17:32:52 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > >> IMO, this is supposed to work => Bug >> >> The big question would be: Where? > > It cannot work as long as gtk3-devel relies on pkgconfig(foo) dependencies > instead of arch-specific explicit Requires. Sou

Re: Should 'dnf install gtk3-devel.i686' work?

Am 21.01.2016 um 14:34 schrieb Yanko Kaneti: On Thu, 2016-01-21 at 09:38 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 11:10:22AM +0200, Yanko Kaneti wrote: On Wed, 2016-01-20 at 15:50 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: If you're on freshly installed Fedora 23 (x86-64), then dnf

Re: Python naming guidelines clarification

Thank you, Robert. It makes perfect sense. I'll fix my packages. Cheers, Jan On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 2:12 PM, Robert Kuska wrote: > > > - Original Message - >> From: "Jan Včelák" >> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" >> >> Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2016 12:40:47 PM >>

Re: Should 'dnf install gtk3-devel.i686' work?

On Thu, 2016-01-21 at 09:38 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 11:10:22AM +0200, Yanko Kaneti wrote: > > On Wed, 2016-01-20 at 15:50 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > > If you're on freshly installed Fedora 23 (x86-64), then > > > > > >   dnf install gtk3-devel.x86_64 >

Re: The %license property is now supported in EPEL6

On Thursday, January 21, 2016 11:48:22 AM Petr Pisar wrote: > On 2016-01-20, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > > Just a note that it EPEL6 no longer requires you to include the > > definition of %license property; you can use it freely in your %files > > list as you would in EPEL7 or Fedora. It simpl

Re: Python naming guidelines clarification

- Original Message - > From: "Jan Včelák" > To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" > > Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2016 12:40:47 PM > Subject: Re: Python naming guidelines clarification > > On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 11:54 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > Yes, the guid

rawhide report: 20160121 changes

Compose started at Thu Jan 21 05:15:03 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: The %license property is now supported in EPEL6

On 2016-01-20, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > Just a note that it EPEL6 no longer requires you to include the > definition of %license property; you can use it freely in your %files > list as you would in EPEL7 or Fedora. It simply maps to %doc as it > would if you had included the magic line nois

Re: Python naming guidelines clarification

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 9:09 AM, Robert Kuska wrote: > I don't see an use case for python2 subpackage, or am I missing something? This is a good catch. I'll verify this with upstream. But most probably, you are right. Thank you. Jan -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists

Re: Python naming guidelines clarification

On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 11:54 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > Yes, the guidelines apply to the source rpm name too. Those > srpms should be called python-*, because they contain python libries. OK. Thank you. And what is the best current practice if the library contains some utilities. S

Re: Should 'dnf install gtk3-devel.i686' work?

On 21 January 2016 at 09:10, Yanko Kaneti wrote: > On Wed, 2016-01-20 at 15:50 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >> If you're on freshly installed Fedora 23 (x86-64), then >> >> dnf install gtk3-devel.x86_64 >> .. >> >> Is this a bug or is it not expected this would work or I am doing it >> w

Re: The %license property is now supported in EPEL6

Great!!! Thanks for the good news On 01/20/2016 10:09 PM, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: Just a note that it EPEL6 no longer requires you to include the definition of %license property; you can use it freely in your %files list as you would in EPEL7 or Fedora. It simply maps to %doc as it would if

Re: Should 'dnf install gtk3-devel.i686' work?

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 11:10:22AM +0200, Yanko Kaneti wrote: > On Wed, 2016-01-20 at 15:50 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > If you're on freshly installed Fedora 23 (x86-64), then > > > >   dnf install gtk3-devel.x86_64 > > .. > > > > Is this a bug or is it not expected this would work o

Re: Should 'dnf install gtk3-devel.i686' work?

On Wed, 2016-01-20 at 15:50 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > If you're on freshly installed Fedora 23 (x86-64), then > >   dnf install gtk3-devel.x86_64 > .. > > Is this a bug or is it not expected this would work or I am doing it > wrong? IMO trying to get this (i686 development environme

Re: Should 'dnf install gtk3-devel.i686' work?

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 09:39:38AM +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On 01/21/2016 09:27 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > >I also > >tried yum-deprecated with the same results. > > I also tried - same result. I guess, investigating this any further > will require pre-dnf Fedora. The earliest Fedora I

Re: Should 'dnf install gtk3-devel.i686' work?

On 01/21/2016 09:27 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 04:10:00AM +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: On 01/20/2016 08:23 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: I have filed a bug (against gtk3 for now) about this issue: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1300432 I still don'

Re: Should 'dnf install gtk3-devel.i686' work?

On 01/20/2016 05:59 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote: On Wed, 20 Jan 2016 17:32:52 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: IMO, this is supposed to work => Bug The big question would be: Where? It cannot work as long as gtk3-devel relies on pkgconfig(foo) dependencies instead of arch-specific explicit Requir

Re: Should 'dnf install gtk3-devel.i686' work?

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 04:10:00AM +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On 01/20/2016 08:23 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > > >I have filed a bug (against gtk3 for now) about this issue: > > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1300432 > > I still don't know the cause of this issue, I don

Re: Python naming guidelines clarification

- Original Message - > From: "Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek" > To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" > > Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 2016 11:54:30 PM > Subject: Re: Python naming guidelines clarification > > On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 09:44:50PM +0100, Jan Včelák wrote: > > Hello.