OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20181219.n.1
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20181222.n.1
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 11
Dropped packages:1
Upgraded packages: 130
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 95.76 MiB
Size of dropped packages
No missing expected images.
Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check!
6 of 47 required tests failed, 4 results missing
openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING**
below
Failed openQA tests: 16/131 (x86_64), 4/24 (i386), 1/2 (arm)
New failures (same test not fa
Thanks Kevin. The build worked!
Sorry about not opening a ticket. That's done here, right?
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
--
Bojan
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedo
Hey folks! Just a reminder that, as it's the holidays - and so Fedora
is pretty quiet, and lots of folks will be busy with family etc., there
won't be any QA or blocker review meetings on Monday 24th or Monday
31st. We'll resume in the new year. Hope everyone enjoys their time
off, if indeed it is
On 12/22/18 1:58 PM, Bojan Smojver wrote:
> EPEL7 builds for x86_64 and ppc64le appear to be failing still. Example:
>
> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=31577177
>
> Just FYI.
Thanks for reporting it (although a ticket might do better next time).
I think I have this fixed, c
EPEL7 builds for x86_64 and ppc64le appear to be failing still. Example:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=31577177
Just FYI.
--
Bojan
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le..
On 12/22/18 3:55 AM, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY wrote:
>
> f28: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-e6538e58ce
>
> and
>
> f29: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-175284c10b
>
> Is there a reason they haven't moved to testing state?
Yeah, for some reason they were not c
On 12/21/18 7:03 AM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> There is currently a problem with the networking of various systems in
> our Phoenix data-center which houses most of our build systems. The
> problem has knocked off most of our x86_64 build systems and several
> of our aarch64/arm systems. Builds
> On Sat, Dec 22, 2018 at 11:33:31AM -, Martin Gansser wrote:
>
> There's no point in fixing that. Helm is an addon for Kubernetes, and
> k8s itself is not available on i686.
> Just do what kubernetes does:
> ExclusiveArch: x86_64 aarch64 ppc64le s390x %{arm}
Thanks for your feedback, i
On Sat, Dec 22, 2018 at 11:33:31AM -, Martin Gansser wrote:
> I am working on a review for the helm package, but it don't compile on i686
> architecure [1].
>
> [1] https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=31566238
> [2] https://martinkg.fedorapeople.org/Review/SPECS/helm.spec
> [3
f28: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-e6538e58ce
and
f29: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-175284c10b
Is there a reason they haven't moved to testing state?
Thanks
--
Kaleb
___
devel mailing list -- devel@list
I am working on a review for the helm package, but it don't compile on i686
architecure [1].
[1] https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=31566238
[2] https://martinkg.fedorapeople.org/Review/SPECS/helm.spec
[3]
https://martinkg.fedorapeople.org/Review/SRPMS/helm-1.0.0-0.1.20180708git
Hi,
personally, I don't like the advertisment for that commercial service, see the
given price and link. It does not comply with FLOSS policies, therefore I
commented in the releng ticket.
Just my 5ct, Raphael
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fed
13 matches
Mail list logo
