Re: Packages FTBFS with Python 3.6

On Sat, 2017-01-07 at 13:00 +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > python-deap    zbyszek This one needed some pandoc packages rebuilt. I have done all of that, and the python-deap build basically works now (and I enabled the test suite for it too), but my Rawhide build failed because o

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20170107.n.1 changes

OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20170107.n.0 NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20170107.n.1 = SUMMARY = Added images:1 Dropped images: 6 Added packages: 0 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 42 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 0.00 B Size of dropped packages:0.00 B

Re: Text editors and IDEs for editing RPM spec files: worthy addition to the Packaging:Guidelines article?

On Sat, 2017-01-07 at 21:40 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Sun, 2017-01-08 at 13:38 +1000, Brenton Horne wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I'm sending this email in response to a pagure request > > I filed that was replied > > with, essentially, them telling

Re: Text editors and IDEs for editing RPM spec files: worthy addition to the Packaging:Guidelines article?

On Sun, 2017-01-08 at 13:38 +1000, Brenton Horne wrote: > Hi, > > I'm sending this email in response to a pagure request > I filed that was replied > with, essentially, them telling me to use this devel mailing list. I think > it would benefit users in

Broken dependencies: perl-OpenOffice-UNO

perl-OpenOffice-UNO has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree: On armhfp: perl-OpenOffice-UNO-0.07-20.fc25.armv7hl requires libuno_cppu.so.3 perl-OpenOffice-UNO-0.07-20.fc25.armv7hl requires libuno_cppu.so.3(LIBO_UDK_4.4) perl-OpenOffice-UNO-0.07-20.fc25.armv7hl require

Broken dependencies: perl-ZMQ-LibZMQ3

perl-ZMQ-LibZMQ3 has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree: On x86_64: perl-ZMQ-LibZMQ3-1.19-5.fc25.x86_64 requires libzmq.so.3()(64bit) On armhfp: perl-ZMQ-LibZMQ3-1.19-5.fc25.armv7hl requires libzmq.so.3 On ppc64le: perl-ZMQ-LibZMQ3-1.19-5.fc25.ppc64le requires libzmq.

Broken dependencies: perl-Data-Alias

perl-Data-Alias has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree: On x86_64: perl-Data-Alias-1.20-2.fc24.x86_64 requires libperl.so.5.22()(64bit) perl-Data-Alias-1.20-2.fc24.x86_64 requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.22.1) On armhfp: perl-Data-Alias-1.20-2.fc24.armv7hl requires libp

Broken dependencies: perl-ZMQ-LibZMQ2

perl-ZMQ-LibZMQ2 has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree: On x86_64: perl-ZMQ-LibZMQ2-1.09-9.fc25.x86_64 requires libzmq.so.1()(64bit) On armhfp: perl-ZMQ-LibZMQ2-1.09-9.fc25.armv7hl requires libzmq.so.1 On ppc64le: perl-ZMQ-LibZMQ2-1.09-9.fc25.ppc64le requires libzmq.

Broken dependencies: perl-ZeroMQ

perl-ZeroMQ has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree: On x86_64: perl-ZeroMQ-0.23-13.fc25.x86_64 requires libzmq.so.1()(64bit) On armhfp: perl-ZeroMQ-0.23-13.fc25.armv7hl requires libzmq.so.1 On ppc64le: perl-ZeroMQ-0.23-13.fc25.ppc64le requires libzmq.so.1()(64bit) On

Broken dependencies: perl-Alien-ROOT

perl-Alien-ROOT has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree: On aarch64: perl-Alien-ROOT-5.34.36.1-2.fc26.noarch requires root-core On ppc64: perl-Alien-ROOT-5.34.36.1-2.fc26.noarch requires root-core On ppc64le: perl-Alien-ROOT-5.34.36.1-2.fc26.noarch requires root-core P

Text editors and IDEs for editing RPM spec files: worthy addition to the Packaging:Guidelines article?

Hi, I'm sending this email in response to a pagure request I filed that was replied with, essentially, them telling me to use this devel mailing list. I think it would benefit users interested in packaging if there was a paragraph or two mentioning whi

Re: Proposal: Rethink Fedora multilib support (Take Two!)

On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 3:16 PM Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > Partly because there exist more than 2 architectures (think: > RV64G/RV64GC/RV128G, ARMv5/6/7/8, or less esoterically, having various > CPU features like SSE or AVX compiled in and out). Partly because > there will be fewer differences b

Re: Proposal: Rethink Fedora multilib support (Take Two!)

Brendan Conoboy wrote: > Enhancing interoperability increases the reach of Fedora and doesn't > require a bit of compromise on the the Freedom principle. Splitting a single well-integrated distribution (where all the pieces are known to work well together) into a bunch of loosely-coupled black-bo

[EPEL-devel] Fedora EPEL 7 updates-testing report

The following Fedora EPEL 7 Security updates need testing: Age URL 671 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-1087 dokuwiki-0-0.24.20140929c.el7 433 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-dac7ed832f mcollective-2.8.4-1.el7 151 https://bodhi.fedorapr

Re: Proposal: Rethink Fedora multilib support (Take Two!)

Oron Peled wrote: > On Friday, 6 January 2017 19:02:16 IST Kevin Kofler wrote: >> The right way to do cross toolchains is to cross-build sysrooted packages >> from source in dedicated cross packages, which is how the Fedora cross >> toolchains work. Mixing binaries for completely different machine

Re: Proposal: Rethink Fedora multilib support (Take Two!)

On Friday, 6 January 2017 19:02:16 IST Kevin Kofler wrote: > The right way to do cross toolchains is to cross-build sysrooted packages > from source in dedicated cross packages, which is how the Fedora cross > toolchains work. Mixing binaries for completely different machines in the > same direc

Re: Proposal: Rethink Fedora multilib support (Take Two!)

On 01/06/2017 06:47 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: I think that by destroying what Fedora is all about, we will become a footnote in history. On the other hand, sticking to our principles (Freedom) and to our technical strengths (an integrated distribution of integrated packages) will keep us relevant f

[EPEL-devel] Fedora EPEL 6 updates-testing report

The following Fedora EPEL 6 Security updates need testing: Age URL 549 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-7031 python-virtualenv-12.0.7-1.el6 543 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-7168 rubygem-crack-0.3.2-2.el6 474 https://bodhi.fedoraproje

Re: Proposal: Rethink Fedora multilib support (Take Two!)

On Fri, Jan 06, 2017 at 02:47:35AM +0100, Pavel Raiskup wrote: > On Thursday, January 5, 2017 5:08:16 PM CET Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > Two suggestions were raised as alternatives to the container approach: > > > > * Switch to using the Debian style of multi-arch layout, which instead of > > /us

Re: Proposal: Rethink Fedora multilib support

On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 01:31:19PM -0500, Daniel J Walsh wrote: > Sadly will we be hearing these same arguments 10 years from now... A 10 year horizon is also the timeframe proposed for introducing RISC-V 128 bit hardware (128 bit emulation is already available, although unless you enjoy writing m

Re: Proposal: Rethink Fedora multilib support

On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 5:53 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 05:38:58PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: >> Lo! On 05.01.2017 17:03, Stephen Gallagher wrote: >> > [...] >> > ## Advantages >> > >> > * Simplification of build-tree creation. We wouldn't have to maintain the >>

Re: Proposal: Rethink Fedora multilib support

On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 05:38:58PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Lo! On 05.01.2017 17:03, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > [...] > > ## Advantages > > > > * Simplification of build-tree creation. We wouldn't have to maintain the > > lists > > and hacks that are required to make sure that multilib

Re: Best practices for getting CFLAGS/LDFLAGS etc.

On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 11:58:07AM +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Thu, 5 Jan 2017 00:58:00 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > > It would also be nice if: > > > > PYTHON=/usr/bin/python3 %configure > > > > didn't (silently) do the wrong thing by default. For a long time we > > shipped a

Re: Packagers - Flag day 2016 Important changes

On Thu, 22 Dec 2016 14:52:45 + Dave Love wrote: > Kevin Fenzi writes: > > > In this case you should simply be able to kinit on the RHEL node you > > wish to push changes/builds from? > > That would be a good start in case epel-testing's fedora-packager was > installable, but I can't. >

Re: Packages FTBFS with Python 3.6

On Sat, 2017-01-07 at 13:00 +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > python-sphinxcontrib-programoutput itamarjp >    zbyszek I sent an email about this one the other day. It's been abandoned upstream for many years and both the things we package that used it (python-acme and

Re: Packagers - Flag day 2016 Important changes

Kevin Fenzi writes: >> Some people use "Enterprise Linux" (ugh) server systems in >> "enterprises" which have Kerberized services -- like networked home >> filestores, where the old certificate is. (I did copy the >> credentials with Firefox sync.) OK, Red Hat people think we shouldn't >> work t

Re: Packagers - Flag day 2016 Important changes

Kevin Fenzi writes: > If you are using the default kerberos cache (the linux kernel keyring), For what it's worth, not on RHEL6, and some of the (unsatisfactory) methods for dealing with Kerberos in batch systems currently rely on the traditional ccache, whether or not they could copy credential

Fedora Rawhide-20170107.n.0 compose check report

Missing expected images: Cloud_base qcow2 x86_64 Atomic qcow2 x86_64 Cloud_base raw-xz x86_64 Atomic raw-xz x86_64 Failed openQA tests: 16/103 (x86_64), 1/2 (arm) New failures (same test did not fail in Rawhide-20170106.n.0): ID: 54021 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso support_server URL: https

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20170107.n.0 changes

OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20170106.n.0 NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20170107.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:2 Dropped images: 1 Added packages: 11 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 76 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 2.85 MiB Size of dropped packages

Re: Packages FTBFS with Python 3.6

On Wed, Dec 28, 2016 at 8:25 PM, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 12:18 AM, Miro Hrončok wrote: >> Hi all, >> We've recently tried to rebuild all Python packages with Python 3.6. >> However, we currently have bunch of packages that simply fail to build. >> >> As the list contains >2