Open Seats on the Fedora Packaging Committee

 The Fedora Packaging Committee has some open seats and is accepting submissions from interested candidates to serve on the FPC.  The FPC would like to thank Ralf Corsepius, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski, and Thomas Spura for their service.  This position involves not only reviewing Packaging Gu

Open Seats on the Fedora Packaging Committee

 The Fedora Packaging Committee has some open seats and is accepting submissions from interested candidates to serve on the FPC. The FPC would like to thank Ralf Corsepius, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski, and Thomas Spura for their service. This position involves not only reviewing Packaging Gu

Schedule for Thursday's FPC Meeting (2018-03-01 17:00 UTC)

 Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FPC meeting Thursday at 2018-03-01 17:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on irc.freenode.net.  Local time information (via. uitime): = Day: Thursday == 2018-03-01 09:00 PST  US/Pacific 2018-03-01 1

Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

On 28 February 2018 at 11:37, Björn Persson wrote: > Orcan Ogetbil wrote: >> Shouldn't we consider having -devel packages Require gcc or gcc-c++? >> What good is a header package without a compiler anyway? >> This would also (indirectly) pull in the compiler and fix most of >> these failed builds.

Frequently broken Rawhide/Branched composes (was: Re: Unannounced soname bump (Rawhide): qpdf (libqpdf.so.18 -> libqpdf.so.21))

Fabio Valentini wrote: > AFAICT, those "broken deps in rawhide" mails are only sent if there is a > compose, and during the past weeks, there have been few of those ... so > breakage is sometimes allowed to sit unnoticed (and grow increasingly > worse) for very long. Isn't that the real issue to f

Re: Re: Re: Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

On 28 February 2018 at 10:03, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > Le 2018-02-28 15:28, Orcan Ogetbil a écrit : >> >> On 28 February 2018 at 09:19, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > > >> These are all _very_ edge use-cases. > > > Those are *not* edge-cases. We have a few thousand build failures. If you cannot find as

Re: Test gating enabled in Bodhi

On 02/28/2018 07:05 PM, mcatanz...@gnome.org wrote: > I have an update here: > > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/epiphany-3.26.6-1.fc27 > > that is blocked due to some harmless translation-related warnings from > desktop-file-validate. It does not appear to be blocked currently. signa

Re: Unannounced soname bump (Rawhide): qpdf (libqpdf.so.18 -> libqpdf.so.21)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 02/28/2018 01:38 PM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 01:12:03PM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote: >> On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 05:57:53PM +, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: >>> mistake that caused files to go missing, and was never de

Re: Test gating enabled in Bodhi

I have an update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/epiphany-3.26.6-1.fc27 that is blocked due to some harmless translation-related warnings from desktop-file-validate. I'm not the translation police and do not plan to make any changes to the desktop file. * Who can help unblock

Re: march VFAD for the atomic working group

Hi Dusty, I'm very excited for atomic workstation. Sincerely, signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Schedule for Friday's FESCo Meeting (2018-03-02)

Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FESCo meeting Friday at 15:00 UTC 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 '2018-03-02 15:00 UTC' Links to all issues below c

Re: Unannounced soname bump (Rawhide): qpdf (libqpdf.so.18 -> libqpdf.so.21)

On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 09:53:19AM -0700, stan wrote: > On Wed, 28 Feb 2018 08:04:41 -0500 > "Jared K. Smith" wrote: > > > ... Even if we didn't have > > this rule, it would be common courtesy to announce any change that > > causes others to have to do work, even if it's only for a few users. >

Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

> "OO" == Orcan Ogetbil writes: OO> Shouldn't we consider having -devel packages Require gcc or gcc-c++? OO> What good is a header package without a compiler anyway? You could argue whether they're useful without a compiler, but they are certainly useful without gcc. Because that's not the

Re: Unannounced soname bump (Rawhide): qpdf (libqpdf.so.18 -> libqpdf.so.21)

On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 12:49:09PM -0600, Richard Shaw wrote: > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 12:38 PM, Daniel P. Berrangé > wrote: > > > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 01:12:03PM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote: > > > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 05:57:53PM +, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > > > mistake that caused

Re: Unannounced soname bump (Rawhide): qpdf (libqpdf.so.18 -> libqpdf.so.21)

On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 12:38 PM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 01:12:03PM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 05:57:53PM +, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > > mistake that caused files to go missing, and was never detected by the > person > > > making

Re: Unannounced soname bump (Rawhide): qpdf (libqpdf.so.18 -> libqpdf.so.21)

On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 01:12:03PM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 05:57:53PM +, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > mistake that caused files to go missing, and was never detected by the > > person > > making the change, because of the use of globs. So I agree it is good > >

Re: Unannounced soname bump (Rawhide): qpdf (libqpdf.so.18 -> libqpdf.so.21)

On Wed, 2018-02-28 at 13:12 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 05:57:53PM +, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > mistake that caused files to go missing, and was never detected by the > > person > > making the change, because of the use of globs. So I agree it is good > > practi

Re: Unannounced soname bump (Rawhide): qpdf (libqpdf.so.18 -> libqpdf.so.21)

On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 05:57:53PM +, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > mistake that caused files to go missing, and was never detected by the person > making the change, because of the use of globs. So I agree it is good practice > to explicitly list files without globs whereever it is practical tod

Re: Should we have a release manager for each release? (or, "who owns rawhide"?)

On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 10:35:11 +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote: And was the compose successful today or not. Looking at https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/compose/rawhide/Fedora-Rawhide-20180228.n.0/logs/global/pungi.global.log it probably was, but it is not obvious from the log. Depending on

Re: Unannounced soname bump (Rawhide): qpdf (libqpdf.so.18 -> libqpdf.so.21)

On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 09:51:49AM -0800, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On 02/27/2018 06:06 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > On Tue, 2018-02-27 at 19:41 -0600, Richard Shaw wrote: > >> On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 6:47 PM, Kevin Kofler > >> wrote: > >> > >>> Richard Shaw wrote: > Is it time to update the pac

Re: Unannounced soname bump (Rawhide): qpdf (libqpdf.so.18 -> libqpdf.so.21)

On 02/27/2018 06:06 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Tue, 2018-02-27 at 19:41 -0600, Richard Shaw wrote: >> On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 6:47 PM, Kevin Kofler >> wrote: >> >>> Richard Shaw wrote: Is it time to update the packaging guidelines to enforce setting a "%global sover " and using it i

Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

On Wed, 2018-02-28 at 16:51 +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote: > > Dne 18.2.2018 v 18:09 Igor Gnatenko napsal(a): > > > > List of packages and respective maintainers: > > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal-pkgs.txt > > Igor, you will fix my packages isn't it ? Thanks, -- Sérgio M. B.

march VFAD for the atomic working group

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/429 In the Atomic working group in Fedora we have occasionally used virtual Fedora Activity Days (VFADs) to get the community together to discuss in a high bandwidth setting (video conference) some techical issues

Re: Unannounced soname bump (Rawhide): qpdf (libqpdf.so.18 -> libqpdf.so.21)

On Wed, 28 Feb 2018 08:04:41 -0500 "Jared K. Smith" wrote: > ... Even if we didn't have > this rule, it would be common courtesy to announce any change that > causes others to have to do work, even if it's only for a few users. What about an email list called fedora-soname-bump. If you are goin

Re: News in net-snmp package

On 27 February 2018 at 14:02, Josef Ridky wrote: > Hi folks, > > I would like to inform you, that net-snmp package will use Python3 package > instead of Python2. > With this change, python2-net-snmp package will be renamed to > python3-net-snmp package. > This change will be applied in Fedora Ra

Re: Unannounced soname bump (Rawhide): qpdf (libqpdf.so.18 -> libqpdf.so.21)

On Wed, 2018-02-28 at 12:14 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On 02/27/2018 07:27 PM, Richard Shaw wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 12:16 PM, Adam Williamson > > mailto:adamw...@fedoraproject.org>> wrote: > > > > > > Once again, folks, *please* announce your soname bumps, and co-ordinate > >

Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

Orcan Ogetbil wrote: > Shouldn't we consider having -devel packages Require gcc or gcc-c++? > What good is a header package without a compiler anyway? > This would also (indirectly) pull in the compiler and fix most of > these failed builds. Do you mean that maintainers should add those dependenc

Re: Unannounced soname bump (Rawhide): qpdf (libqpdf.so.18 -> libqpdf.so.21)

El mié, 28-02-2018 a las 12:32 +0100, Ralf Corsepius escribió: > On 02/28/2018 12:21 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote: > > > > > > Dne 28.2.2018 v 12:14 Ralf Corsepius napsal(a): > > > On 02/27/2018 07:27 PM, Richard Shaw wrote: > > > > On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 12:16 PM, Adam Williamson > > > > mailto:adamw.

Re: Should we have a release manager for each release? (or, "who owns rawhide"?)

l/pungi.global.log > > it probably was, but it is not obvious from the log. > the status of the compose can always be found in the STATUS file of the root of the compose https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/compose/rawhide/ Fedora-Rawhide-20180228.n.0/STATUS is todays for instance Dennis sign

Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

Dne 18.2.2018 v 18:09 Igor Gnatenko napsal(a): > > List of packages and respective maintainers: > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal-pkgs.txt > xchat-ruby was retired. ruby and rubygem-bcrypt are fixed (at least in git). Vít signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signat

packmol license change

Hi, I've updated packmol to version 18.013. This carries a license change from GPLv2+ to MIT. No other packages are affected, since packmol is executable only. -- Susi Lehtola Fedora Project Contributor jussileht...@fedoraproject.org ___ devel maili

Re: News in net-snmp package

Hi thanks a lot for your review. | On Tue, 2018-02-27 at 09:02 -0500, Josef Ridky wrote: | > Hi folks, | > | > I would like to inform you, that net-snmp package will use Python3 package | > instead of Python2. | > With this change, python2-net-snmp package will be renamed to | > python3-net-snmp

Re: Re: Re: Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

Le 2018-02-28 16:03, Nicolas Mailhot a écrit : Most system libraries are written in C/C++ so pretty much all the language toolchains we ship (except for toy languages not intended to produce complex apps) will read C/C++ header files from their compilers to use those system libraries, and will B

Re: Re: Re: Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

Le 2018-02-28 15:28, Orcan Ogetbil a écrit : On 28 February 2018 at 09:19, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: These are all _very_ edge use-cases. Those are *not* edge-cases. Most system libraries are written in C/C++ so pretty much all the language toolchains we ship (except for toy languages not int

Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

On 02/18/2018 07:09 PM, Igor Gnatenko wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Over this weekend I've performed scratch-mass-rebuild without having gcc and gcc-c++ in buildroot of all Fedora packages, many of which failed due to random reasons and I grepped all logs for some common

Re: Re: Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

On 02/28/2018 04:28 PM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote: On 28 February 2018 at 09:19, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: My point was *non-C-compilers* can read *C/C++* header files because they need to read the ABI definitions to use it from their non C/C++ code. That makes a C/C++ header file consumable by pretty m

Re: Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

On 02/28/2018 11:28 AM, Rafal Luzynski wrote: 28.02.2018 09:33 Nicolas Mailhot wrote: Le mercredi 28 février 2018 à 00:11 -0500, Orcan Ogetbil a écrit : Shouldn't we consider having -devel packages Require gcc or gcc-c++? What good is a header package without a compiler anyway? This would al

Re: Re: Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

On 28 February 2018 at 09:19, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > My point was *non-C-compilers* can read *C/C++* header files because they > need to read the ABI definitions to use it from their non C/C++ code. > > That makes a C/C++ header file consumable by pretty much any kind of > compiler, so it's *comp

Re: Re: Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

My point was *non-C-compilers* can read *C/C++* header files because they need to read the ABI definitions to use it from their non C/C++ code. That makes a C/C++ header file consumable by pretty much any kind of compiler, so it's *completely useless* to try to make C/C++ devel packages pull

Re: Unannounced soname bump (Rawhide): qpdf (libqpdf.so.18 -> libqpdf.so.21)

Dne 28.2.2018 v 13:46 Kevin Kofler napsal(a): > Richard Shaw wrote: >> Unannounced soname bumps are a pain :) > The requirement to announce soname bumps to begin with is unreasonable > bureaucracy in the first place. If your package shows up in the broken > dependency report, you rebuild it and

Re: Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

On 28 February 2018 at 05:28, Rafal Luzynski wrote: > 28.02.2018 09:33 Nicolas Mailhot wrote: >> >> Le mercredi 28 février 2018 à 00:11 -0500, Orcan Ogetbil a écrit : >> > >> > Shouldn't we consider having -devel packages Require gcc or gcc-c++? >> > What good is a header package without a compile

Re: Unannounced soname bump (Rawhide): qpdf (libqpdf.so.18 -> libqpdf.so.21)

On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 12:32:19PM +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On 02/28/2018 12:21 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote: > > > > > > Dne 28.2.2018 v 12:14 Ralf Corsepius napsal(a): > > > On 02/27/2018 07:27 PM, Richard Shaw wrote: > > > > On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 12:16 PM, Adam Williamson > > > > mailto:adamw

Re: Unannounced soname bump (Rawhide): qpdf (libqpdf.so.18 -> libqpdf.so.21)

On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 7:46 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote: > The requirement to announce soname bumps to begin with is unreasonable > bureaucracy in the first place. If your package shows up in the broken > dependency report, you rebuild it and move on, where is the problem? > I'm going to respectfull

Re: Unannounced soname bump (Rawhide): qpdf (libqpdf.so.18 -> libqpdf.so.21)

Richard Shaw wrote: > Unannounced soname bumps are a pain :) The requirement to announce soname bumps to begin with is unreasonable bureaucracy in the first place. If your package shows up in the broken dependency report, you rebuild it and move on, where is the problem? I can see the point of

Re: Unannounced soname bump (Rawhide): qpdf (libqpdf.so.18 -> libqpdf.so.21)

On Feb 28, 2018 12:35, "Ralf Corsepius" wrote: On 02/28/2018 12:21 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote: > > > Dne 28.2.2018 v 12:14 Ralf Corsepius napsal(a): > >> On 02/27/2018 07:27 PM, Richard Shaw wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 12:16 PM, Adam Williamson >>> mailto:adamw...@fedoraproject.org>> wrote:

Re: Unannounced soname bump (Rawhide): qpdf (libqpdf.so.18 -> libqpdf.so.21)

On 02/28/2018 12:21 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote: Dne 28.2.2018 v 12:14 Ralf Corsepius napsal(a): On 02/27/2018 07:27 PM, Richard Shaw wrote: On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 12:16 PM, Adam Williamson mailto:adamw...@fedoraproject.org>> wrote:     Once again, folks, *please* announce your soname bumps, an

Re: Unannounced soname bump (Rawhide): qpdf (libqpdf.so.18 -> libqpdf.so.21)

Dne 28.2.2018 v 12:14 Ralf Corsepius napsal(a): > On 02/27/2018 07:27 PM, Richard Shaw wrote: >> On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 12:16 PM, Adam Williamson >> mailto:adamw...@fedoraproject.org>> wrote: >> >> >>     Once again, folks, *please* announce your soname bumps, and >> co-ordinate >>     rebuilds.

Re: Unannounced soname bump (Rawhide): qpdf (libqpdf.so.18 -> libqpdf.so.21)

On 02/28/2018 02:41 AM, Richard Shaw wrote: On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 6:47 PM, Kevin Kofler > wrote: Richard Shaw wrote: > Is it time to update the packaging guidelines to enforce setting a > "%global sover " and using it in %files? > > If nothing

Re: Unannounced soname bump (Rawhide): qpdf (libqpdf.so.18 -> libqpdf.so.21)

On 02/27/2018 07:27 PM, Richard Shaw wrote: On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 12:16 PM, Adam Williamson mailto:adamw...@fedoraproject.org>> wrote: Once again, folks, *please* announce your soname bumps, and co-ordinate rebuilds. (In fact it looks like Zdenek is the maintainer of both package

Re: Unannounced soname bump (Rawhide): qpdf (libqpdf.so.18 -> libqpdf.so.21)

Hi, I'm deeply sorry, I thought cups-filters will be rebuilt with new qpdf during next mass rebuild - I forgot about 'rawhide is alpha' policy so dependent packages need to be rebuild immediately with rebased package. Again, I'm deeply sorry and thank you Adam and Rex for fixing it! On 02/27/20

Re: Should we have a release manager for each release? (or, "who owns rawhide"?)

Dne 28.2.2018 v 10:52 Lubomír Sedlář napsal(a): > Vít Ondruch píše v St 28. 02. 2018 v 10:35 +0100: >> Can the logs actually contain timestamps with timezone? > There's a timezone offset at the beginning of the log: > > 2018-02-28 00:33:30 [INFO] Current timezone offset: +00:00 A bit hard to

Re: Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

28.02.2018 09:33 Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > > Le mercredi 28 février 2018 à 00:11 -0500, Orcan Ogetbil a écrit : > > > > Shouldn't we consider having -devel packages Require gcc or gcc-c++? > > What good is a header package without a compiler anyway? > > This would also (indirectly) pull in the comp

Re: Should we have a release manager for each release? (or, "who owns rawhide"?)

Vít Ondruch píše v St 28. 02. 2018 v 10:35 +0100: > Can the logs actually contain timestamps with timezone? There's a timezone offset at the beginning of the log: 2018-02-28 00:33:30 [INFO] Current timezone offset: +00:00 > And was the compose successful today or not. Looking at > > https:/

Re: Should we have a release manager for each release? (or, "who owns rawhide"?)

Can the logs actually contain timestamps with timezone? And was the compose successful today or not. Looking at https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/compose/rawhide/Fedora-Rawhide-20180228.n.0/logs/global/pungi.global.log it probably was, but it is not obvious from the log. Vít Dne

Re: Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

Le mercredi 28 février 2018 à 00:11 -0500, Orcan Ogetbil a écrit : > > Shouldn't we consider having -devel packages Require gcc or gcc-c++? > What good is a header package without a compiler anyway? > This would also (indirectly) pull in the compiler and fix most of > these failed builds. > gcc