Re: [HEADS UP] Update libgit2 to 0.27

Hi Igor, On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 4:33 PM Igor Gnatenko < ignatenkobr...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > Hello everyone, > > 0.27.x is released long time ago, but I never got time for updating it. It > obviously involves SONAME change. > > The good thing about this release is that it breaks only thing

Re: Provenpackager help request: ignored pull requests

On Thu, 16 Aug 2018, Miro Hrončok wrote: I'm slowly trying to move packages to wxWidgets 3.0 so we can get rid of wx 2.8 which is not maintained since 2011. I have made a bunch of pull requests but very frustratingly, many of them received no response (and no response to the bugs I filed). Rat

Re: Fedora updates-20180815.1 compose check report

On 08/15/2018 07:01 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Wed, 2018-08-15 at 19:51 +, Fedora compose checker wrote: >> No missing expected images. >> >> Passed openQA tests: 2/2 (x86_64) >> -- >> Mail generated by check-compose: >> https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose > > So, generating upda

Re: Provenpackager help request: ignored pull requests

> I'm slowly trying to move packages to wxWidgets 3.0 so we can get rid of > wx 2.8 which is not maintained since 2011. I have made a bunch of pull > requests but very frustratingly, many of them received no response (and no > response to the bugs I filed). Rather than go through the non-respo

soname change - libqalculate.so.19

libqalculate soname bump is happening with v2.6.2. The following packages are affected - plasma-workspace step cantor qalculate-kde I will rebuild these packages for rawhide and F29 before Sunday. Mukundan. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Provenpackager help request: ignored pull requests

Hi, I'm slowly trying to move packages to wxWidgets 3.0 so we can get rid of wx 2.8 which is not maintained since 2011. I have made a bunch of pull requests but very frustratingly, many of them received no response (and no response to the bugs I filed). Rather than go through the non-respons

Re: Fedora updates-20180815.1 compose check report

On Wed, 2018-08-15 at 19:51 +, Fedora compose checker wrote: > No missing expected images. > > Passed openQA tests: 2/2 (x86_64) > -- > Mail generated by check-compose: > https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose So, generating updates and updates-testing via Pungi composes is a relatively n

Fedora testing-20180815.1 compose check report

Missing expected images: Atomichost qcow2 x86_64 Atomichost raw-xz x86_64 Passed openQA tests: 2/2 (x86_64) -- Mail generated by check-compose: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubsc

Fedora updates-20180815.1 compose check report

No missing expected images. Passed openQA tests: 2/2 (x86_64) -- Mail generated by check-compose: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedorap

Re: Mono - Do we have a maintainer?

Michael Cronenworth wrote: > On 08/15/2018 08:55 AM, Florian Weimer wrote: >> Are you sure about that? Ocaml does it as well. >> >> Thanks, >> Florian > > The guidelines allow an initial bootstrap from binaries, but subsequent > builds are supposed to build from source. The problem is that we ca

Re: Mono - Do we have a maintainer?

Michael Cronenworth writes: > On 08/15/2018 05:16 AM, Radka Janekova wrote: >> >> mono-devel packages are far behind upstream, and the mono-sig seems >> unresponsive as whole. This leads me to a question, do we have a >> maintainer for mono? >> >> I can take a look at it within the next month or

Re: Mono - Do we have a maintainer?

On 08/15/2018 08:55 AM, Florian Weimer wrote: Are you sure about that?  Ocaml does it as well. Thanks, Florian The guidelines allow an initial bootstrap from binaries, but subsequent builds are supposed to build from source. The problem is that we can't build without the binaries at all. Th

Re: Mono - Do we have a maintainer?

On 15.8.2018 15:55, Florian Weimer wrote: On 08/15/2018 03:20 PM, Michael Cronenworth wrote: The Roslyn compiler is now the default and requires bootstrapping from binary-only sources provided by upstream. This is a no-no in Fedora. Are you sure about that?  Ocaml does it as well. See also:

Re: Mono - Do we have a maintainer?

On 08/15/2018 03:20 PM, Michael Cronenworth wrote: The Roslyn compiler is now the default and requires bootstrapping from binary-only sources provided by upstream. This is a no-no in Fedora. Are you sure about that? Ocaml does it as well. Thanks, Florian __

Re: Mono - Do we have a maintainer?

On 08/15/2018 05:16 AM, Radka Janekova wrote: mono-devel packages are far behind upstream, and the mono-sig seems unresponsive as whole. This leads me to a question, do we have a maintainer for mono? I can take a look at it within the next month or two if there really isn't anyone else...

Re: [HEADS UP] -Wl,--as-needed is added in rawhide

On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 8:29 AM Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 10:51 AM Panu Matilainen wrote: >> >> On 08/15/2018 08:11 AM, Igor Gnatenko wrote: >> > It's in redhat-rpm-config-118-1.fc30. >> > >> > If it causes any problems for you - let me know. In the meantime, you >> > can u

Re: [HEADS UP] -Wl,--as-needed is added in rawhide

On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 10:51 AM Panu Matilainen wrote: > On 08/15/2018 08:11 AM, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > It's in redhat-rpm-config-118-1.fc30. > > > > If it causes any problems for you - let me know. In the meantime, you > > can use `%undefine _ld_as_needed` to disable it. > > I still don't see

Re: Mono - Do we have a maintainer?

Hello All! 2018-08-15 12:16 GMT+02:00 Radka Janekova : > > Hi, > > mono-devel packages are far behind upstream, and the mono-sig seems > unresponsive as whole. This leads me to a question, do we have a maintainer > for mono? > > I can take a look at it within the next month or two if there reall

Re: Mono - Do we have a maintainer?

Hey, incase this has been abandoned,i can take this up.I recently published my first package --> KernelHighperf and would love to work on something else and gain more experience as a packager. On Wed,

Mono - Do we have a maintainer?

Hi, mono-devel packages are far behind upstream, and the mono-sig seems unresponsive as whole. This leads me to a question, do we have a maintainer for mono? I can take a look at it within the next month or two if there really isn't anyone else... Regards, Radka -- *

Re: Fedora 29 Mass Branching

Dne 15.8.2018 v 00:37 Mohan Boddu napsal(a): > Hi All, > > Fedora 29 has now been branched, please be sure to do a git pull > --rebase to pick up the new branch, as an additional reminder > rawhide/f30 has been completely isolated from previous releases, so > this means that anything you do for f2

Re: [HEADS UP] -Wl,--as-needed is added in rawhide

On 08/15/2018 08:11 AM, Igor Gnatenko wrote: It's in redhat-rpm-config-118-1.fc30. If it causes any problems for you - let me know. In the meantime, you can use `%undefine _ld_as_needed` to disable it. I still don't see anything to resolve the libtool issue - namely that libtool reorders the

Fedora 29 Mass Branching

Hi All, Fedora 29 has now been branched, please be sure to do a git pull --rebase to pick up the new branch, as an additional reminder rawhide/f30 has been completely isolated from previous releases, so this means that anything you do for f29 you also have to do in the master branch and do a build