Dne 18. 06. 19 v 2:03 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a):
> On 6/17/19 4:47 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>>> I disagree. I think we need gating to block as much stuff that breaks
>>> things from landing as we can and then we should find that keeping
>>> composes going is much easier on all of
Dne 17. 06. 19 v 21:14 Miro Hrončok napsal(a):
> 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 package should be retired, please do so now with a proper
> reason:
> https://fedoraproject
On 6/17/19 5:08 PM, Ben Cotton wrote:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/xfce-4.14
== Summary ==
Xfce desktop environment has version 4.13.x which is currently
available in Fedora. Significant work has been completed to migrate
the DE to GTK-3 completely. The obvious benefit to this migrati
On 6/16/19 4:40 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote:
I'm about about to start building octave 5.1 and dependent packages in
rawhide. This is a soname and octave api change.
Built in rawhide. Modular updates submitted for F30 and F29.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-MODULAR-2019-917b958a
Dear all,
You are kindly invited to the meeting:
Modularity Team (weekly) on 2019-06-18 from 15:00:00 to 16:00:00 UTC
At fedora-meetin...@irc.freenode.net
The meeting will be about:
Meeting of the Modularity Team.
More information available at: [Modularity Team
Docs](https://docs.pagure.o
On Mon, Jun 17, 2019, at 9:28 PM, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> as of today, builders have been updated (thanks to Kevin) and
> DynamicBuildRequires finally work in Rawhide.
>
> Change Page: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/DynamicBuildRequires
> Example of real build:
> https://koji
On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 3:01 AM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> On 6/17/19 4:47 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> >> I disagree. I think we need gating to block as much stuff that breaks
> >> things from landing as we can and then we should find that keeping
> >> composes going is much easie
Hi folks,
as of today, builders have been updated (thanks to Kevin) and
DynamicBuildRequires finally work in Rawhide.
Change Page: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/DynamicBuildRequires
Example of real build:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1286391
_
On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 8:53 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> On 6/17/19 4:47 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> >> I disagree. I think we need gating to block as much stuff that breaks
> >> things from landing as we can and then we should find that keeping
> >> composes going is much easie
On 6/17/19 4:47 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>> I disagree. I think we need gating to block as much stuff that breaks
>> things from landing as we can and then we should find that keeping
>> composes going is much easier on all of us. Then things can be fixed
>> when gating catches
Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> I disagree. I think we need gating to block as much stuff that breaks
> things from landing as we can and then we should find that keeping
> composes going is much easier on all of us. Then things can be fixed
> when gating catches them and it's on the person who broke things.
On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 4:50 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
> Hey, we have a weird failure with python-sphinx tests described here:
Is texlive-lm installed in the build root?
--
Jerry James
http://www.jamezone.org/
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedorap
On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 12:33 AM Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> Dear ltspfs maintainers,
> please fix https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1675332
Hey Miro,
According to https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ltspfs, this package
has been retired a week ago, after having been orphaned for more than
Hey, we have a weird failure with python-sphinx tests described here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1717670
This is LuaTeX, Version 1.10.0 (TeX Live 2019)
restricted system commands enabled.
(./lualatex/sphinxtests.tex
LaTeX2e <2018-12-01>
luaotfload | main : initialization compl
Dear ltspfs maintainers,
please fix https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1675332
Thanks,
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lis
On 17. 06. 19 21:27, Luis Enrique Bazán De León wrote:
Hi Miro
Can I work on this python-slugify
Sure, request package ownership via: https://pagure.io/releng/issues
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
devel mailing list -- dev
On Mon, Jun 17, 2019, at 2:51 PM, Neal Gompa wrote:
> RPM-OSTree is functionally irrelevant in this discussion,
Changing how we handle the kernel is certainly relevant.
> since it has
> its own behavior patterns and eschews compatibility with the greater
> ecosystem anyway.
I don't think th
On 6/10/19 3:00 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Martin Kolman wrote:
>> But even for package development and integration you need something that
>> works at least a bit. If you won't get a compose for a few weeks due to
>> the constant breakage you won't get much work done on landing your latest
>> libra
Oh, I forgot to add that related to parallel installations, when
conflicting modules are desired, generally containerization or
virtualization is the recommended solution. However, this is from the RHEL
user persona perspective. We realize that is a very different user persona
from say a develope
On 17. 06. 19 22:12, Fabio Valentini wrote:
- right after the F32 branching (2019-08-13 according to the [schedule]), we
would start with the side tag builds
This is probably a typo, you must mean "just after the F31 branching", right?
Yes! F31 branching.
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +4207779
On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 9:52 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> When I filed the Python 3.8 [change] for Fedora 31, we knew that the schedule
> would be tight.
>
> For that very reason, we have not yet started to build for Python 3.8 in a f31
> side tag, but instead we've only been doing it in
Regarding to a few of the questions about why modularity was created in the
first place (paraphrased), I can offer the following background. Note, I
was not on the team at the very beginning but have been very involved for
the last ~2 years.
Do not consider the following to be formal answers, gui
On 6/1/19 6:40 PM, Scott Talbert wrote:
> Hi,
> ...snip...
I went and did these two:
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/syslinux/pull-request/1
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/linux-atm/pull-request/1
kevin
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
__
On 5/27/19 6:55 AM, Arjun Shankar wrote:
> Hi,
>
> My FAS account is "submachine". I just tried logging into pagure.io, and
> while the login succeeded, immediately after, I got a 404 error page with
> the error 'No user "submachine" found'. All pagure.io URLs lead to the same
> 404, so I can't fi
On 17. 06. 19 21:41, Ben Cotton wrote:
Thanks for bringing this up, Miro.
On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 3:03 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
- there are ~200 build failures that block this, tracked on [bugzilla]
I did a spot check of a few of the BZs and it looks like some of those
build failures are u
Thanks for bringing this up, Miro.
On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 3:03 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
> - there are ~200 build failures that block this, tracked on [bugzilla]
I did a spot check of a few of the BZs and it looks like some of those
build failures are unrelated to Python 3.8 but are due to othe
Hi Miro
Can I work on this python-slugify
FAS lbazan
Cheers,
El lun., 17 jun. 2019 a las 14:14, Miro Hrončok ()
escribió:
> 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 package sho
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 package should be retired, please do so now with a proper reason:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_remove_a_package_at_end_of_life
Note: If
> "JP" == Jens-Ulrik Petersen writes:
JP> Jason, can you explain in more details (bug report is also fine) how
JP> exactly you are installing?
I install a generic minimal system via kickstart (booted using the
Server PXE images and using the Everything repositories) and then after
the reboot
Hello,
When I filed the Python 3.8 [change] for Fedora 31, we knew that the schedule
would be tight.
For that very reason, we have not yet started to build for Python 3.8 in a f31
side tag, but instead we've only been doing it in [copr] so far.
The mass rebuild happens on 2019-07-24, accord
On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 2:29 PM Colin Walters wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jun 17, 2019, at 4:47 AM, Michael Schroeder wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 12:12:01PM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > > I would actually really like to see rpm's multiversioning capabilities
> > > extended to support this.
> >
> > I
On 6/14/19 6:29 AM, Daniel Mach wrote:
Dne 14. 06. 19 v 6:23 Samuel Sieb napsal(a):
After reading the bug report and the discussions, I still don't
understand why dnf is complaining about a conflict with packages
(modules?) that are not installed and are not even trying to be
installed. Can s
On Mon, Jun 17, 2019, at 4:47 AM, Michael Schroeder wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 12:12:01PM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > I would actually really like to see rpm's multiversioning capabilities
> > extended to support this.
>
> I'd actually prefer to drop the multiversion mode for the kernel a
On Sun, Jun 16, 2019 at 2:53 AM Remi Collet wrote:
>
> Le 14/06/2019 à 20:03, Josh Boyer a écrit :
> > On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 3:50 AM Remi Collet
> > wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> IMHO, having library in modules is an error, this can only raise issues
> >>
> >> Some examples, taken from RHEL-8
> >>
>
On 17. 06. 19 16:28, Florian Weimer wrote:
* Florian Weimer:
diff --git a/macros.python-srpm b/macros.python-srpm
index 514a449..f25189b 100644
--- a/macros.python-srpm
+++ b/macros.python-srpm
@@ -5,6 +5,10 @@
%__python2 /usr/bin/python2
%__python3 /usr/bin/python3
+# This now errors un
* Florian Weimer:
>> diff --git a/macros.python-srpm b/macros.python-srpm
>> index 514a449..f25189b 100644
>> --- a/macros.python-srpm
>> +++ b/macros.python-srpm
>> @@ -5,6 +5,10 @@
>> %__python2 /usr/bin/python2
>> %__python3 /usr/bin/python3
>>
>> +# This now errors unless redefined to user
> diff --git a/macros.python-srpm b/macros.python-srpm
> index 514a449..f25189b 100644
> --- a/macros.python-srpm
> +++ b/macros.python-srpm
> @@ -5,6 +5,10 @@
> %__python2 /usr/bin/python2
> %__python3 /usr/bin/python3
>
> +# This now errors unless redefined to user provided value
> +%__python
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/xfce-4.14
== Summary ==
Xfce desktop environment has version 4.13.x which is currently
available in Fedora. Significant work has been completed to migrate
the DE to GTK-3 completely. The obvious benefit to this migration is
the use of a modern and actively m
* Panu Matilainen:
> On 6/13/19 12:54 PM, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
>> This is wrong (not sure if the culprit)
>>
>> %endif %{__with_rebar3}
>>
>> I would rewrite it to:
>>
>> %endif # __with_rebar3
>
> Actually both are wrong, and rpm >= 4.15 will complain (unlike old
> versions). Rpm only supports c
On Sunday, 16 June 2019 03.09.41 WEST Elliott Sales de Andrade wrote:
> Hi R-interested packagers and others,
>
> So now the question is how to apply this. I expect there are social
> concerns, i.e., discussing with the R maintainer, making a
> Self-contained Change, etc. But for this email, I am
On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 5:35 AM Michael Schroeder wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 12:12:01PM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > I would actually really like to see rpm's multiversioning capabilities
> > extended to support this.
>
> I'd actually prefer to drop the multiversion mode for the kernel and
I'd like to suggest to remove the sysctl function from glibc in rawhide
this week. It's been deprecated upstream, but I think it's more
convenient to us to remove it in a mid-year release cycle, separate from
the GCC rebase.
On some architectures (notable aarch64), the sysctl function is just a
s
On Sa, 08.06.19 15:34, Chris Murphy (li...@colorremedies.com) wrote:
> However, in the failing case, that doesn't happen, and systemd hangs
> indefinitely waiting for it to appear. And in the early debug shell,
> 'blkid' sees it. That means the kernel and libblkid see it. I've got
> no idea why sy
On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 5:35 AM Michael Schroeder wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 12:12:01PM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > I would actually really like to see rpm's multiversioning capabilities
> > extended to support this.
>
> I'd actually prefer to drop the multiversion mode for the kernel and
On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 12:12:01PM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
> I would actually really like to see rpm's multiversioning capabilities
> extended to support this.
I'd actually prefer to drop the multiversion mode for the kernel and
instead add the version to the kernel package name.
Cheers,
Micha
On 14. 06. 19 6:27, Carl George wrote:
I think the best option is to create non-modular compat packages. In my
opinion, modularity makes sense for end user applications, but I'm not sure
what benefits it has for libraries. Libraries tend to work well as compat
packages, so I implemented this
46 matches
Mail list logo
