It was orphaned recently. Anybody care to pick it up? :)
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/tmuxinator
Dusty
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Cond
The latest release of Frama-C needs ocaml-ppx-deriving, which in turn
needs two other packages we don't have in Fedora. I'm willing to swap
reviews for the following:
ocaml-ppxfind:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1798796
ocaml-ppx-tools:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1
Oh, and to answer your other point:
Lukas Brabec wrote:
> It is pretty common for us in Fedora QA (well, I'm quite biased in this
> case).
> And no, we cannot compose our images, we have to test the exact same
> images that will be shipped. We cannot test custom images and pretend
> the results ar
Kamil Paral wrote:
> I have already responded to your exaggerated numbers once, and you didn't
> even reply. "Hours of difference" for "a few percent increase", let's say
> 3 hours for 3 percent increase, means 100 hours total download time.
> That's over 4 days of non-stop download. I don't consid
Lukas Brabec wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 4:44 PM Kevin Kofler
> wrote:
>> given fixed-size physical media or not. The original change proposal of
>> trying to minimize the size might actually make at least the smaller
>> spins fit on a DVD again.
>
> All current Fedora spins [1] are well with
On Mon, Feb 03, 2020 at 11:45:38AM -0500, John Florian wrote:
> On 2020-01-30 20:42, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > I fear it's just bad timing + the external rhel8 repo we have only keeps
> > the newest packages (epel7 repos keep the old packages around too).
> >
> > koji has no way to know that an exter
On Wed, Feb 05, 2020 at 06:19:08AM +0100, Clement Verna wrote:
> On Tue, 4 Feb 2020 at 20:55, Mattia Verga via devel <
> devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:
>
> > Il 04/02/20 10:29, Miroslav Suchý ha scritto:
> > >
> > > People are asking for this for years. No one ever had time to do this.
> >
On 05. 02. 20 19:04, Oliver Gutierrez wrote:
Hi there. As Alberto has stated, I was on paternity leave and I will be back to
work tomorrow.
Anyway, I'm completely ok with continue with packaging of fleet commander. I
know the process and was doing it for the last versions indeed.
Giving rpms
On 05. 02. 20 18:48, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
I filed ticket https://pagure.io/releng/issue/9197 to request that glob2 be
unretired. The ticket is closed as completed, but the f32 branch still appears
as a dead package. Am I supposed to fix this, more time is needed for the
process to really fini
Dave Love wrote on 2020/02/06 1:07:
I assume this -- currently breaking procenv, as that uses -Werror -- has
the same cause, as it shows up under the same circumstances:
In function 'strncat',
inlined from 'appendn' at string-util.c:111:2,
inlined from 'appendn' at string-util.c
Hi there. As Alberto has stated, I was on paternity leave and I will be
back to work tomorrow.
Anyway, I'm completely ok with continue with packaging of fleet commander.
I know the process and was doing it for the last versions indeed.
The fleet-commander package is the first we created and has n
On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 12:13 PM Neal Gompa wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 11:57 AM Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> >
> >
> > Fedora has been part of an GPG sks service[1] for a number of years running
> > off of keys.fedoraproject.org. Last year, there were a number of attacks
> > made on the
I filed ticket https://pagure.io/releng/issue/9197 to request that
glob2 be unretired. The ticket is closed as completed, but the f32
branch still appears as a dead package. Am I supposed to fix this,
more time is needed for the process to really finish or did something
get missed?
P.S. glob2
On Wed, Feb 05, 2020 12:32:57 +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> In Fedora 32, we have updated Python to 3.8:
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Python3.8
>
> There are last 13 packages that were still not successfully rebuilt with
> Python 3.8 and they require Python 3.7 at run-time, causing b
On Wed, Feb 05, 2020 at 05:13:27PM +, Dave Love wrote:
> GCC doesn't document the targets for which -fno-common produces better
> code. Can someone say for which of the Fedora ones it makes a
> difference?
E.g. on any that is capable of vectorization.
Common vars can't have alignment increase
GCC doesn't document the targets for which -fno-common produces better
code. Can someone say for which of the Fedora ones it makes a
difference?
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fed
On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 11:57 AM Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>
>
> Fedora has been part of an GPG sks service[1] for a number of years running
> off of keys.fedoraproject.org. Last year, there were a number of attacks made
> on the service which due to its 'write-only' nature makes it impossible
Fedora has been part of an GPG sks service[1] for a number of years running
off of keys.fedoraproject.org. Last year, there were a number of attacks
made on the service which due to its 'write-only' nature makes it
impossible to clean up [2] [3]. When the attacks came up, and it was clear
it was no
Hi
I'm planing to retire sflphone (predecessor of ring.cx), since it's
completely dead upstream (you won't even find the repo or sources
anymore), and is now FTBFS due to recent pjproject changes. If someone
wants to pick it up, please let me know, otherwise I'll retire it in one
weeks time (
I assume this -- currently breaking procenv, as that uses -Werror -- has
the same cause, as it shows up under the same circumstances:
In function 'strncat',
inlined from 'appendn' at string-util.c:111:2,
inlined from 'appendn' at string-util.c:80:1,
inlined from 'append' at str
On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 4:44 PM Kevin Kofler wrote:
> And on a slow enough connection (e.g., dial-up, which is still common in
> large parts of the world), "a few percent increase or decrease" in
> download
> time can mean hours of difference, much more than even 30-40% of install
> time.
I have
On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 2:55 PM Mario Torre wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 2:41 PM Fabio Valentini wrote:
> > > > Currently impossible due to completely broken Java stack in Fedora.
> > >
> > > When I read this I'm always puzzled by the negativity.
> > >
> > > What is "completely broken" exactl
On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 2:41 PM Fabio Valentini wrote:
> > > Currently impossible due to completely broken Java stack in Fedora.
> >
> > When I read this I'm always puzzled by the negativity.
> >
> > What is "completely broken" exactly that you need? Things seem to work
> > quite well.
>
> The prob
On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 2:28 PM Mario Torre wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 9:22 AM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
> wrote:
> >
> > On 05.02.2020 05:05, Code Zombie wrote:
> > > Is Fedora considering to add it to its packages? Does anyone already
> > > plan to maintain it or can I take it over?
(snip
On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 9:22 AM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
wrote:
>
> On 05.02.2020 05:05, Code Zombie wrote:
> > Is Fedora considering to add it to its packages? Does anyone already
> > plan to maintain it or can I take it over?
>
> Currently impossible due to completely broken Java stack in Fedora.
On 05.02.2020 10:11, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote:
> We (Eclipse maintainers in Fedora) are looking into using Flatpak
> instead (https://flathub.org/apps/details/org.eclipse.Java)
Then start building Fedora native flatpaks. Flatpak != Flathub. Flathub
is a third-party repository.
--
Sincerely,
V
On Wed., Feb. 5, 2020, 6:33 a.m. Miro Hrončok, wrote:
> In Fedora 32, we have updated Python to 3.8:
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Python3.8
>
> There are last 13 packages that were still not successfully rebuilt with
> Python
> 3.8 and they require Python 3.7 at run-time, causing br
In Fedora 32, we have updated Python to 3.8:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Python3.8
There are last 13 packages that were still not successfully rebuilt with Python
3.8 and they require Python 3.7 at run-time, causing broken dependencies. The
packages are not installable. I don't thin
On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 12:01 PM Code Zombie wrote:
> The flatpak packages seem huge in size (at least that's what is shown in
> the Gnome Software application).
>
Size of an rpm may look small(ish) but that's thanks to much from the
overall size being moved in other RPMs it depends on. Also if y
No missing expected images.
Passed openQA tests: 1/1 (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
> Currently at its version 11.2, Apache NetBeans is a great piece of
> development software. Is Fedora considering to add it to its packages?
> Does
> anyone already plan to maintain it or can I take it over?
On the fedora docs they said to use the executable
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/NetBea
The flatpak packages seem huge in size (at least that's what is shown in
the Gnome Software application). Also, for one, Flatpak version of Eclipse
does not support built-in support.
On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 4:12 AM Aleksandar Kurtakov
wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 6:07 AM Code Zombie
> wro
On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 6:07 AM Code Zombie wrote:
> Currently at its version 11.2, Apache NetBeans is a great piece of
> development software. Is Fedora considering to add it to its packages? Does
> anyone already plan to maintain it or can I take it over?
>
We (Eclipse maintainers in Fedora) ar
On Wed, 5 Feb 2020 at 10:03, Code Zombie wrote:
>
> What do you mean? The source code built successfully on my Fedora 31 system
> with JDK 11 (using ant).
The point is that Java apps usually contain many bundled libraries
that need to be unbundled and packaged independently. Given the
current st
On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 5:55 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> So, I propose:
> reduce install time
> reduce image size
> reduce compose time
+1 Sounds very reasonable.
On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 1:22 PM Kamil Paral wrote:
> ...
>
Exactly what Kamil wrote. Few percent grow is negligible, but install time
Am 05.02.20 um 09:55 schrieb Code Zombie:
> What do you mean? The source code built successfully on my Fedora 31 system
> with JDK 11 (using ant).
I don't know the Netbeans code but in Fedora we need to build each package
from source (no precompiled jars). That means we also need to ship *all*
de
What do you mean? The source code built successfully on my Fedora 31 system
with JDK 11 (using ant).
On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 3:22 AM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel <
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> On 05.02.2020 05:05, Code Zombie wrote:
> > Is Fedora considering to add it to its packages? Does
El mié., 5 feb. 2020 9:28, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel <
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> escribió:
> On 05.02.2020 05:05, Code Zombie wrote:
> > Is Fedora considering to add it to its packages? Does anyone already
> > plan to maintain it or can I take it over?
>
> Currently impossible due to completel
On Wed, Feb 5, 2020, 02:38 Sérgio Basto wrote:
> Hi,
> Packages gpm, VirtualBox and webalizer have the building problem as
> described for gpm in [1] , but VirtualBox have thousands of lines with
> this error , I'd like disable this check on VirtualBox until VirtualBox
> fix it ,
> the author of
On 05.02.2020 05:05, Code Zombie wrote:
> Is Fedora considering to add it to its packages? Does anyone already
> plan to maintain it or can I take it over?
Currently impossible due to completely broken Java stack in Fedora.
--
Sincerely,
Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.org)
No missing expected images.
Passed openQA tests: 1/1 (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
41 matches
Mail list logo
