Re: Boost 1.69 update with soname bumps in rawhide/F30

On 1/30/19 7:31 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: The following packages use Boost.Signals which is been REMOVED from Boost. The packages must be updated to use Boost.Signals2 (or bundle an old Boost). Maintainers by package: ekiga    mcrha pbrobinson freecad  hobbes1069 jkastne

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

I chatted with the Koji team and they are planning on having the yum dependency removed in the upcoming 1.17 release and getting that release finished before F30 code freeze. On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 3:35 PM Michal Domonkos wrote: > On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 6:29 PM Ben Cotton wrote: > > https://fe

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Retire YUM 3

On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 6:29 PM Ben Cotton wrote: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Retire_YUM_3 > > == Summary == > Remove yum (v3) and all related packages from Fedora. Just a heads-up that I have updated the proposal so that it does *not*[2] include python2-urlgrabber, given how much it

Schedule for Monday's FESCo Meeting (2019-02-04)

(Sorry for the late announcment.) Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FESCo meeting Monday at 15:00UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on irc.freenode.net. To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto or run: date -d '2019-02-04 15:

Re: MBI (Playground 2.0)

On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 10:37 AM Josh Boyer wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 8:19 PM Neal Gompa wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 6:58 PM Stephen John Smoogen > > wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 at 07:28, Igor Gnatenko > > > wrote: > > >> > > >> Problem №1: Build-only packages >

Re: Unannounced soname bump - libwmf-0.2.so.7 -> libwmf-0.2.so.8

Björn 'besser82' Esser wrote: > Am Freitag, den 01.02.2019, 19:27 +0100 schrieb Björn 'besser82' Esser: >> > Yeah, my mistake. I was rushing before heading to the airport and >> > inadvertently bumped the soname upstream. I should have just waited >> > until the next day. I'll sort it out. >> >>

Re: install command nit

Am Samstag, den 02.02.2019, 07:05 -0600 schrieb Richard Shaw: > I noticed a warning on one of my packages that the appdata file was > marked as executable. The source file is not, its 644, but I use the > install command to install it to the metainfo directory. > > Does "install" install files as

Re: install command nit

On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 8:16 AM Florian Weimer wrote: > * Richard Shaw: > > > Does "install" install files as executable by default or is something > > else going on here? > > According to the manual page, the install program uses 0755 by default: > >-m, --mode=MODE > set per

Re: install command nit

* Richard Shaw: > Does "install" install files as executable by default or is something > else going on here? According to the manual page, the install program uses 0755 by default: -m, --mode=MODE set permission mode (as in chmod), instead of rwxr-xr-x I don't think this i

Re: Removal of glibc-langpacks-all -> 1.0?kB

* Mamoru TASAKA: > Well, I don't know well.. So what fwupd seems to be doing here is like: > > $ echo -e "1.0\xc2\xa0kB" > a.txt > $ echo -e "1.0 kB" > b.txt > $ diff -uNp a.txt b.txt > > and my console (gnome-terminal) says: > > --- a.txt 2019-02-02 21:03:43.855731848 +0900 > +++ b.txt 20

Re: Camotics fails with default Fedora flags GCC9 (cbang)

On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 7:02 AM Samuel Rakitničan < srakitni...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > > On Sat, Feb 02, 2019 at 08:57:42AM -, Samuel Rakitničan wrote: > > > > Guess the important question is, is the warning correct or not? > > If it is correct, certainly fix the code, if it is a false pos

install command nit

I noticed a warning on one of my packages that the appdata file was marked as executable. The source file is not, its 644, but I use the install command to install it to the metainfo directory. Does "install" install files as executable by default or is something else going on here? Adding -m 064

Re: Orphaned packages need new maintainers (will be retired in 3 weeks)

On 02. 02. 19 12:29, Jens-Ulrik Petersen wrote: Sigh, I just saw this... I have been super-busy and missed the mails unfortunately. On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 9:16 PM Miro Hrončok > wrote: The following packages are orphaned and will be retired when they are o

Re: Removal of glibc-langpacks-all -> 1.0?kB

Hi: Florian Weimer wrote on 2019/02/02 20:37: * Mamoru TASAKA: Richard Hughes wrote on 2019/02/02 17:11: Hi all, One of my package builds (fwupd) in F30 is failing in the unit tests, with this failure comparing the expected output of a to_string() function: - Size: 1.0 kB +

[Bug 1671825] perl-DBIx-QueryLog-0.42 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1671825 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |MODIFIED --- Comment #1 from F

[Bug 1671825] perl-DBIx-QueryLog-0.42 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1671825 --- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System --- perl-DBIx-QueryLog-0.42-1.fc28 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 28. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-57384d3e2b -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the C

[Bug 1612875] perl-DBIx-QueryLog-0.41-8.fc28 FTBFS: Argument list too long

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1612875 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System --- perl-DBIx-QueryLog-0.42-1.fc28 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 28. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-57384d3e2b -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the C

[Bug 1671825] perl-DBIx-QueryLog-0.42 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1671825 --- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System --- perl-DBIx-QueryLog-0.42-1.el7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 7. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-9c5328751c -- You are receiving this mail because: You are

Re: Camotics fails with default Fedora flags GCC9 (cbang)

> On Sat, Feb 02, 2019 at 08:57:42AM -, Samuel Rakitničan wrote: > > Guess the important question is, is the warning correct or not? > If it is correct, certainly fix the code, if it is a false positive, either > find a workaround, turn the warning off (locally or globally) or don't build > wi

[Bug 1612875] perl-DBIx-QueryLog-0.41-8.fc28 FTBFS: Argument list too long

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1612875 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |MODIFIED --- Comment #3 from F

Re: Removal of glibc-langpacks-all -> 1.0?kB

On Sat, 2 Feb 2019 at 10:29, Mamoru TASAKA wrote: > It may be wrong, however as fwupd-1.2.4 uses g_format_size(), I guess that > this failure is due to recent g_format_size() output change (in glib2-2.59.X): Aha! Thanks, that sounds exactly right. Much appreciated. Richard. _

Re: Removal of glibc-langpacks-all -> 1.0?kB

* Mamoru TASAKA: > Richard Hughes wrote on 2019/02/02 17:11: >> Hi all, >> >> One of my package builds (fwupd) in F30 is failing in the unit tests, >> with this failure comparing the expected output of a to_string() >> function: >> >> - Size: 1.0 kB >> + Size: 1.0

Re: Orphaned packages need new maintainers (will be retired in 3 weeks)

Sigh, I just saw this... I have been super-busy and missed the mails unfortunately. On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 9:16 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > The following packages are orphaned and will be retired when they > are orphaned for six weeks, unless someone adopts them. If you know for > sure that the p

Re: Camotics fails with default Fedora flags GCC9 (cbang)

On Sat, Feb 02, 2019 at 08:57:42AM -, Samuel Rakitničan wrote: > With a new version of GCC errors are blocking the build at various places. > Not sure how serious the issue is. Should I just add the compiler flags > to get through the build? Guess the important question is, is the warning co

Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: MongoDB Removal

On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 04:03:17PM -0500, John Harris wrote: > Even taken to an extreme, it would likely be sufficient to link to Fedora's > sources on any software used to provide MongoDB as a service, assuming their > service itself is free software. As I understand it, the requirement is not

Re: Removal of glibc-langpacks-all -> 1.0?kB

Richard Hughes wrote on 2019/02/02 17:11: Hi all, One of my package builds (fwupd) in F30 is failing in the unit tests, with this failure comparing the expected output of a to_string() function: - Size: 1.0 kB + Size: 1.0?kB I assume it's due to the removal of

Camotics fails with default Fedora flags GCC9 (cbang)

Hi, With a new version of GCC errors are blocking the build at various places. Not sure how serious the issue is. Should I just add the compiler flags to get through the build? Upstream issue: https://github.com/CauldronDevelopmentLLC/cbang/issues/29#issuecomment-459673777 _

Is system-config-users maintained or not?

Hi, it seems system-config-users is broken [1], and appears to have no upstream [2]. Do we maintain it at this point at all? Should it be retired "for safety"? [1] https://bugz.fedoraproject.org/system-config-users [2] https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/system-config-users/blob/master/f/syste

Removal of glibc-langpacks-all -> 1.0?kB

Hi all, One of my package builds (fwupd) in F30 is failing in the unit tests, with this failure comparing the expected output of a to_string() function: - Size: 1.0 kB + Size: 1.0?kB I assume it's due to the removal of glibc-langpacks-all from the buildroot. I't