On Sat, 2016-11-05 at 05:01 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Otherwise, you have to hunt down the old builds
> directly in Koji
"hunt down"?
koji download-build (nvr) works fine.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
ht
On Sáb, 2016-11-05 at 04:45 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Sérgio Basto wrote:
> >
> > yeah, so the group tag shouldn't be obsolete , we should use it as
> > fallback .
> I don't see how the text you quoted support this in any way. None of
> the KDE
> tools support the Group tag. (They never did.)
Pedro Alves wrote:
> On 11/03/2016 03:08 PM, Sérgio Basto wrote:
>> On Qui, 2016-11-03 at 06:57 -0400, Neal Becker wrote:
>
>>> > So we updated debuginfo, but didn't install the corresponding
>>> > packages.
>>> > That seems like a bug.
>> it isn't a bug , debuginfo packages doesn't require same
Adam Williamson wrote:
> 1) Both dnf and GNOME Software / PackageKit default to performing
> fairly data-hungry transactions in the background, out of the box,
> without telling you about it. GNOME's is particularly bad, as it will
> happily download available updates in the background, which can b
Theodore Papadopoulo wrote:
> Add to this that these caches seem to be never cleaned, so that they
> grow up very large up to the point they prevent updating the system. I
> just found that the packagekit cache on my machine is about 7Gb !!!
> Probably because I do use packageit at all (dnf cache
Sérgio Basto wrote:
> yeah, so the group tag shouldn't be obsolete , we should use it as
> fallback .
I don't see how the text you quoted support this in any way. None of the KDE
tools support the Group tag. (They never did.)
Kevin Kofler
___
d
Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> Actually we have autosigning all setup, but it needs a fedpkg update
> flag day. (Which we hope to do after f25 is out). So, it doesn't depend
> on this feature.
Why does a pure server-side feature (autosigning) need a client (fedpkg)
flag day?
Kevin Kofler
_
Pavel Raiskup wrote:
> On Friday, October 28, 2016 12:17:13 AM CET Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> Users should be using a stable release, not Rawhide. Rawhide is for doing
>> development, it is not meant to be used.
>
> There's hidden potential, then. I would say your statement is way too
> strict anywa
Christian Stadelmann wrote:
> Answers from my (user and frequent bug reporter) view:
> 1. abrt/libreport reports way too much data. There is no need to report my
> hostname to Fedora/RedHat infrastructure. Same for UID, PID, username,
> time, environ, …
The UID can actually matter. We have a frequ
On Sex, 2016-11-04 at 10:12 +, Pedro Alves wrote:
> On 11/03/2016 03:08 PM, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> >
> > On Qui, 2016-11-03 at 06:57 -0400, Neal Becker wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > So we updated debuginfo, but didn't install the corresponding
> > > > packages.
> > > > That seems like a
- Original Message -
> On Fri, 2016-11-04 at 15:20 +, Fedora compose checker wrote:
> > No missing expected images.
> >
> > Failed openQA tests: 3/101 (x86_64), 1/17 (i386), 1/2 (arm)
> >
> > New failures (same test did not fail in 25-20161103.n.0):
> >
> > ID: 45653 Test: arm Mi
Il 04/11/2016 19:21, Richard W.M. Jones ha scritto:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1391950
This is ocamlbuild, which used to be part of the ocaml package
(indeed, it still is in Fedora <= 25) but was spun out upstream and so
needs to be packaged separately in Fedora too.
So far s
Hi,
for Fedora it is part (subpackage) of the regular numpy source package.
So you can install python3-numpy there too ;)
Greetings,
Christian
On 11/04/2016 07:42 PM, Ms Sanchez wrote:
>
> Hello everybody,
>
> I just stumbled upon this. In
> https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/python3-numpy
Hello everybody,
I just stumbled upon this. In
https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/python3-numpy this package
appears as available in EPEL but not in Fedora or Rawhide.
Does anyone know why?
Thanks,
Sylvia
___
devel mailing list -- devel@
On Fri, Nov 04, 2016 at 03:02:22PM +, Nick Clifton wrote:
> Hello Everyone,
>
> We (the tools team at Red Hat) are working on a project to add
> annotations to ELF binaries, so that we can answer various questions
> about them. We have set up a wiki page about the project here:
>
> htt
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1391950
This is ocamlbuild, which used to be part of the ocaml package
(indeed, it still is in Fedora <= 25) but was spun out upstream and so
needs to be packaged separately in Fedora too.
So far so easy. However the problem is you won't be able to bu
On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 11:16 AM, Jared K. Smith
wrote:
> Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in theFESCo meeting
> Friday at 16:00UTC in #fedora-meeting onirc.freenode.net.
>
> To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto
>
> or
On Fri, Nov 04, 2016 at 10:03:42AM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Nov 2016 03:29:03 +
> Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
>
> > Hello everyone,
> >
> > systmed-232 has been released today and is now building in koji.
> > With a bit of luck, it'll be available in rawhide tommorrow.
>
> Zbigniew, thanks for the prompt fix, but there goes my dream to file a
> bug against systemd :-p
Don't worry, we already have plenty :)
> I'm personally waiting for Fedora 25 to be out, and after upgrading I
> will start looking at the mass bug filing process. It'd be nice if
> people with diffe
On Fri, 4 Nov 2016 03:29:03 +
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> systmed-232 has been released today and is now building in koji.
> With a bit of luck, it'll be available in rawhide tommorrow.
> Apart from fairly significant upstream changes [1], there are some
> downst
On Fri, 2016-11-04 at 15:20 +, Fedora compose checker wrote:
> No missing expected images.
>
> Failed openQA tests: 3/101 (x86_64), 1/17 (i386), 1/2 (arm)
>
> New failures (same test did not fail in 25-20161103.n.0):
>
> ID: 45653 Test: arm Minimal-raw_xz-raw.xz
> install_arm_image_depl
On Fri, Nov 04, 2016 at 04:00:21PM +0100, Dridi Boukelmoune wrote:
> repositories have this ownership issue. Filing bugs may not be the
> best thing to do if 7% of the whole package collection have ownership
> issues.
It might be something to file a ticket with FESCo about and to work
with a prove
On Thu, 03 Nov 2016 21:28:56 +0200
Jonathan Dieter wrote:
> On Thu, 2016-11-03 at 11:24 +0100, Sergio Pascual wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I have a machine with two identical nvidia cards and I configured it
> > with multiseat and Fedora 23. It worked well, that is, two GDM login
> > screens, one i
On Fri, Nov 04, 2016 at 04:00:21PM +0100, Dridi Boukelmoune wrote:
> I'm personally waiting for Fedora 25 to be out, and after upgrading I
> will start looking at the mass bug filing process. It'd be nice if
Since F25 is branched off of what-will-become-F26 already, I suggest
looking at Rawhide. (
Hi Tristan,
>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Toolchain/Watermark#Markup_for_ELF_objects
> This will generalise attributes used by some architectures (ppc, arm), won't
> it ?
Yes. Or at least it would if implemented as currently proposed. Maybe a better
solution would be to only record attrib
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 3/101 (x86_64), 1/17 (i386), 1/2 (arm)
New failures (same test did not fail in 25-20161103.n.0):
ID: 45653 Test: arm Minimal-raw_xz-raw.xz
install_arm_image_deployment_upload
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/45653
ID: 45717
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in theFESCo
meeting Friday at 16:00UTC in #fedora-meeting onirc.freenode.net.
To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto
or run:
date -d '2016-10-28 16:00 UTC'
Links to all issues below can
Hello Everyone,
We (the tools team at Red Hat) are working on a project to add
annotations to ELF binaries, so that we can answer various questions
about them. We have set up a wiki page about the project here:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Toolchain/Watermark#Markup_for_ELF_objects
We
On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 2:59 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
> Fixed in systemd-232-2.fc26.
Zbigniew, thanks for the prompt fix, but there goes my dream to file a
bug against systemd :-p
I'm personally waiting for Fedora 25 to be out, and after upgrading I
will start looking at the mass bu
Hi everyone,
I would like to announce the first version of PackPack [1] - a convenient
tool to build RPM and Debian packages from git repositories:
+ Fast reproducible builds using Docker containers
+ Semantic versioning based on annotated git tags
+ Support for all major Linux distributions a
OLD: Fedora-25-20161103.n.0
NEW: Fedora-25-20161104.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 1
Added packages: 0
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 0
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 0.00 B
Size of dropped packages:0.00 B
Size of
On Tue, Nov 01, 2016 at 10:51:18PM +0100, Dridi Boukelmoune wrote:
> [1] https://paste.fedoraproject.org/467731/14780369/
systemd-229-16.fc24.x86_64
|-- /etc/dbus-1/system.d/org.freedesktop.hostname1.conf
|-- /etc/dbus-1/system.d/org.freedesktop.locale1.conf
|-- /etc/dbus-1/system.d/org.freedeskto
On Wednesday, November 2, 2016 6:47:32 PM CET Pavel Raiskup wrote:
> On Wednesday, November 2, 2016 1:38:57 PM CET Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > On 11/02/2016 01:09 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > > On 11/02/2016 12:51 PM, Pavel Raiskup wrote:
> > >> Consider we have package 'foo-libs' that provide
Hello, are you aware of this bug ?
Moving many files in Nautilus often but not always takes a very long time to
complete
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=757747
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1321684
It's a quite annoying one and of course it will be great if it can be fi
On 11/03/2016 04:08 PM, Sérgio Basto wrote:
On Qui, 2016-11-03 at 06:57 -0400, Neal Becker wrote:
So we updated debuginfo, but didn't install the corresponding
packages.
That seems like a bug.
it isn't a bug , debuginfo packages doesn't require same version of
counter part and vice-versa .
On 11/03/2016 03:08 PM, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> On Qui, 2016-11-03 at 06:57 -0400, Neal Becker wrote:
>> > So we updated debuginfo, but didn't install the corresponding
>> > packages.
>> > That seems like a bug.
> it isn't a bug , debuginfo packages doesn't require same version of
> counter part a
36 matches
Mail list logo
