On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 6:58 AM, Tomasz Kłoczko
wrote:
>
> On 16 March 2017 at 04:50, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> [..]
>>
>> > And one more clarification: remove static libraries from glibc distro
>> > packages does not blocks static linking.
>> > It will only removes possibility linking against s
Hi folks! I'm proposing we cancel the QA meeting on Monday. I don't have
anything significant for the agenda, I think we covered everything
pretty well last week.
If you think there is something we need to discuss, please do reply to
this mail and we can go ahead and schedule the meeting! Thanks.
Tomasz Kłoczko wrote:
> [mode=kidding]
> So stop provide glibc-static and redirect those guys to /dev/tree in
> uClibc garden may be kind of "solution" how to block (easy way) violating
> LGPL ..
> [/mode]
I'm not kidding, and uClibc is also under the LGPL.
>> ucLibc has the same issue, by the wa
Missing expected images:
Server dvd i386
Server boot i386
Failed openQA tests: 18/108 (x86_64), 1/2 (arm)
New failures (same test did not fail in 26-20170316.n.0):
ID: 66575 Test: x86_64 Workstation-boot-iso install_default
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/66575
ID: 66603
Missing expected images:
Server dvd i386
Xfce raw-xz armhfp
Server boot i386
Failed openQA tests: 22/107 (x86_64), 1/2 (arm)
New failures (same test did not fail in Rawhide-20170316.n.0):
ID: 66464 Test: x86_64 Workstation-boot-iso memory_check
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
===
#fedora-meeting: FESCO (2017-03-17)
===
Meeting started by sgallagh at 16:00:11 UTC. The full logs are available
at
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2017-03-17/fes
(And yet another resend as it has been send only privately)
On 17 March 2017 at 08:29, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
> It is really not so simple. :-)
>
> Running GDB testsuite in Koji was crashing the build hosts as they were
> running on older RHEL kernels with ptrace bugs. Hopefully they all run
> r
See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424890
DomTerm homepage: http://domterm.org
GitHub sources: https://github.com/PerBothner/DomTerm
LWN article (a year old): https://lwn.net/Articles/670062/
'DomTerm' is an embeddable terminal emulator written in JavaScript,
while 'domterm' is a c
Great work Adame. Where do these modules end up? Is there a repo now
or just the build jobs/IDs?
Radek
On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 11:20 AM, Adam Samalik wrote:
> Short version:
>
> If you want to build a module, edit your modulemd file, change
> "base-runtime" to "bootstrap" in dependencies, commit
On 16 March 2017 at 16:17, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote:
> BTW: during checking that current Fedora glibc static binaries are not
> ready even solve those well known scenarios I found that already glibc spec
> file is generating glibs-nss-devel subpackage.
>
> S rpm -qpl glibc-nss-devel-2.25.90-1.fc27.x8
On Fri, 17 Mar 2017 15:40:34 +0100, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote:
> (Resending below as looks like I've replied only to Jan)
also resending
On Fri, 17 Mar 2017 06:18:56 +0100, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote:
> I saw already such tweaks in many Fedora specs %check sections.
> IMO such %ifing inside or around %chec
On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 09:27:04AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > What about looking at the F27 schedule in light of the approved
> > no-more-alphas feature?
> Huh... I could have sworn I put that on the list. I must have missed it.
> Ah, it was Closed, so it didn't show up when I did the 'mee
(Resending below as looks like I've replied only to Jan)
On 16 March 2017 at 18:01, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Mar 2017 01:32:06 +0100, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote:
> > OK here is full list of spec files which have glibc-static in
> BuildRequires:
> >
> > ./g/gdb.git/gdb.spec:BuildRequires: gli
On 03/15/2017 11:49 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 11:32:35AM -0400, Dusty Mabe wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 03/15/2017 05:17 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>>>
>>> Sure, if udev maintainers are willing to ship the kvm rule by default,
>>> that's fine with me for reason you suggest.
On 03/17/2017 09:23 AM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 08:56:37AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>>> = New business =
>
> What about looking at the F27 schedule in light of the approved
> no-more-alphas feature?
>
>
Huh... I could have sworn I put that on the list. I must have
On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 08:56:37AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > = New business =
What about looking at the F27 schedule in light of the approved
no-more-alphas feature?
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
devel mailing list -- devel@li
On 03/16/2017 02:05 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
> Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the
> FESCo meeting Friday at 16:00UTC in #fedora-meeting on
> irc.freenode.net.
>
> To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto
>
> or
On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 03:58:33AM +, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote:
> I'm not sure am I introducing such proposal correctly.
> If not please let me know (priv) what is TheRightWay(tm).
File a Change (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Policy).
Zbyszek
On 03/17/2017 12:31 PM, Xavier Bachelot wrote:
> On 17/03/2017 12:26, Kalev Lember wrote:
>> Thanks. I've kicked off a gvfs rebuilt for rawhide now.
>>
>> Would you mind if I include the libblueray F26 update in the next week's
>> upcoming GNOME 3.24.0 megaupdate? This way it's much easier to
>> co
On 17/03/2017 12:26, Kalev Lember wrote:
> On 03/17/2017 12:04 PM, Xavier Bachelot wrote:
>> On 09/03/2017 17:38, Björn 'besser82' Esser wrote:
>>> Am 09.03.2017 um 17:34 schrieb Xavier Bachelot:
oops, with the proper fedora devel mail now...
On 09/03/2017 17:11, Xavier Bachelot wrot
Dne 16.3.2017 v 11:32 Guido Aulisi napsal(a):
> Hi list,
> I was thinking about adding some default gitignores to package
> repositories, I think we need at least:
>
> /results_*
> /*.src.rpm
>
> This is to ignore fedpkg mockbuild output
>
> What do you think about that?
> Should I add that gitig
On 03/17/2017 12:04 PM, Xavier Bachelot wrote:
> On 09/03/2017 17:38, Björn 'besser82' Esser wrote:
>> Am 09.03.2017 um 17:34 schrieb Xavier Bachelot:
>>> oops, with the proper fedora devel mail now...
>>>
>>> On 09/03/2017 17:11, Xavier Bachelot wrote:
Hi,
I'm going to update libblu
On 16/03/17 23:24 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Jonathan Wakely wrote:
If glibc-static was removed from Fedora and that change propagated to
RHEL I know of companies that might stop being customers of Red Hat.
Being unable to statically link their applications would be a
showstopper for some, and
On 09/03/2017 17:38, Björn 'besser82' Esser wrote:
> Am 09.03.2017 um 17:34 schrieb Xavier Bachelot:
>> oops, with the proper fedora devel mail now...
>>
>> On 09/03/2017 17:11, Xavier Bachelot wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I'm going to update libbluray in rawhide (and f26 as I believe its early
>>> enoug
On 16 March 2017 at 22:24, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> The thing is, proprietary applications statically linking to glibc are
> highly likely to be in violation of the LGPL. Or how many proprietary
> applications do you know that distribute their object files (and/or their
> source code) to allow relin
Hi all.
I'm going to orphan 'telegram-cli' (and 'python-tg') because lack of
upstream maintainer since long time.
Feel free to take them.
--
--
Antonio Trande
sagitter AT fedoraproject dot org
See my vCard.
<>
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Hi all,
It's GNOME 3.24.0 release next week. As usual, we have a f26-gnome side
tag / build target for Fedora 26 to make it easier to prepare the update
on the side. If you are helping with builds, please use 'fedpkg build
--target f26-gnome' for F26 (and also please do a separate build for
rawhid
On Fri, 17 Mar 2017 06:18:56 +0100, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote:
> I saw already such tweaks in many Fedora specs %check sections.
> IMO such %ifing inside or around %check is incorrect/not needed and can be
> removed.
> Why? Because:
> - all possible to use package tests should be by default enabled
> -
28 matches
Mail list logo
