Re: late generation of assemble code

On Thursday, May 28, 2020 9:41:54 PM MST Paul Dufresne via devel wrote: > On 2020-05-28 7:36 a.m., Dridi Boukelmoune wrote: > > On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 12:07 PM Jan Kratochvil > > > > wrote: > >> On Sun, 24 May 2020 05:21:05 +0200, Paul Dufresne via devel wrote: > >>> The idea was to push code ge

Re: late generation of assemble code

On 2020-05-28 7:36 a.m., Dridi Boukelmoune wrote: On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 12:07 PM Jan Kratochvil wrote: On Sun, 24 May 2020 05:21:05 +0200, Paul Dufresne via devel wrote: The idea was to push code generation as near as possible of code execution. Because at execution time, you know what are t

Re: Fedora 33 Self-Contained Change proposal: Drop mod_php

On Thursday, May 28, 2020 12:53:26 PM MST Ben Cotton wrote: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/drop_mod_php > > == Summary == > mod_php (apache2handler) is an optional httpd module to execute PHP > scripts, not used. > > == Owner == > * Name: [[User:Remi| Remi Collet]] > * Email: remi at fe

Re: How to determine maintainer of a package en mass?

On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 1:16 AM Richard Shaw wrote: > > Specifically, I would like a way to determine which packages I am the sole > maintainer of or the main maintainer. > > Long story short, I've been spending far too much time on packaging work and > it's taking away from $LIFE, $DAYJOB, and

How to determine maintainer of a package en mass?

Specifically, I would like a way to determine which packages I am the sole maintainer of or the main maintainer. Long story short, I've been spending far too much time on packaging work and it's taking away from $LIFE, $DAYJOB, and other hobbies I used to enjoy. I need to offload the primary maint

Re: [HEADS UP] Fedora 33 Python 3.9 rebuilds have started in a side tag

On Fri, 2020-05-29 at 00:12 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 28. 05. 20 8:33, Adam Williamson wrote: > > On Wed, 2020-05-27 at 10:27 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > > > Hah, so it seems you're ahead of me =) > > > > > > The live image build finally finished, but when I booted it to check > > > it,

Re: [HEADS UP] Fedora 33 Python 3.9 rebuilds have started in a side tag

On 28. 05. 20 8:33, Adam Williamson wrote: On Wed, 2020-05-27 at 10:27 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: Hah, so it seems you're ahead of me =) The live image build finally finished, but when I booted it to check it, I found it includes both python3-3.8.3-1.fc33 and python3.9- 3.9.0~b1-1.fc33.x86_

Re: Many packages unnecessarily link to libpython

On 15/05/20 14:12 -0400, Charalampos Stratakis wrote: Hello everyone, As of Python 3.8, python C extensions modules should not link to libpython, unless they embed the interpreter in their code. Relevant upstream PR: https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/12946 If your package links to libpyth

Re: Many packages unnecessarily link to libpython

Thanks Charalampos, On Fri, May 15, 2020 14:12:00 -0400, Charalampos Stratakis wrote: > nest ankursinha I've filed an issue upstream: https://github.com/nest/nest-simulator/issues/1630 I'll update the packages once I've heard from them. -- Thanks, Regards, Ankur Sinha "Francisc

Fedora 33 Self-Contained Change proposal: Drop mod_php

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/drop_mod_php == Summary == mod_php (apache2handler) is an optional httpd module to execute PHP scripts, not used. == Owner == * Name: [[User:Remi| Remi Collet]] * Email: remi at fedoraproject dot org == Detailed Description == By default php-fpm is used fo

Fedora 33 Self-Contained Change proposal: No more automagic Python bytecompilation phase 3

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/No_more_automagic_Python_bytecompilation_phase_3 == Summary == See [[Changes/No_more_automagic_Python_bytecompilation]] and [[Changes/No_more_automagic_Python_bytecompilation_phase_2]]. Now, %global _python_bytecompile_extra 1 won't be allowed anymore and rai

Fedora 34 System-Wide Change proposal: NSS CK_GCM_PARAMS change

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/NssGCMParams == Summary == Because of changes to the PKCS #11 spec in PKCS #11 v3.0, NSS needs to change the definition of CK_GCM_PARAMS in a source incompatible way. Upstream made this change in NSS 3.52. == Owner == * Name: [[User:rrelyea| Bob Relyea]] * E

Re: [EPEL-devel] Re: Soname bump of libb2 on F31/EPEL7

I can't; Bodhi says i have not commit access to your packages. On 28/05/20 19:44, Mukundan Ragavan wrote: > > On 5/26/20 1:49 PM, Antonio T. sagitter wrote: >> Mukundan, your package misses. >> Please, rebuild `gtkhash` against `libb2-0.98.1` or let me commit >> changes to it. >> > Hi Antonio, > >

Re: [EPEL-devel] Re: Soname bump of libb2 on F31/EPEL7

On 5/26/20 1:49 PM, Antonio T. sagitter wrote: > Mukundan, your package misses. > Please, rebuild `gtkhash` against `libb2-0.98.1` or let me commit > changes to it. > Hi Antonio, This is done. Please add gtkhash to your update as well. https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=45107

Re: Package Review for Mudita24

On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 11:06 AM wrote: > A week ago I requested a package review for Mudita24 > (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1836540), and Artur Iwicki > stepped-up and did a little bit of review. However, I have not heard from him > for a week now. > > If anyone else can step-

Re: [HEADS UP] F33 Boost 1.73.0 rebuilds starting in a side tag

On 28/05/20 09:44 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: I'm starting the rebuilds for Boost 1.73.0 and packages that depend on it, using the f33-boost side tag. If you see "Rebuilt for Boost 1.73.0" in the changelog for one of your packages, please do not make another update. Instead co-ordinate with me

Re: new packages review tickets

Il 28/05/20 19:04, Fabio Valentini ha scritto: > > Since bugzilla keeps track of which user set which flag, do you maybe > need to specify which user's needinfo flag you want to clear? > > Fabio > I'm already passing all the flag object properties, id included: >>> bug = bz.getbug(1730464) >>> f

Re: new packages review tickets

On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 6:58 PM Mattia Verga via devel wrote: > > Il 24/05/20 15:41, Igor Raits ha scritto: > > > > This is great idea! If you need any help with bugzilla API or anything > > like that - let me know. > > > > > Yeah, I think I need some help in getting flags resetted. > > I would li

Package Review for Mudita24

Hi everyone, A week ago I requested a package review for Mudita24 (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1836540), and Artur Iwicki stepped-up and did a little bit of review. However, I have not heard from him for a week now. If anyone else can step-in, I’d be grateful. For a little back

Re: new packages review tickets

Il 24/05/20 15:41, Igor Raits ha scritto: > > This is great idea! If you need any help with bugzilla API or anything > like that - let me know. > > Yeah, I think I need some help in getting flags resetted. I would like to reset the 'needinfo' flag and the 'fedora-review' flag. Accordingly to htt

Re: [HEADS UP] Fedora 33 Python 3.9 rebuilds have started in a side tag

On 22. 05. 20 3:06, Miro Hrončok wrote: Hello, in order to deliver Python 3.9, we are running a coordinated rebuild in a side tag. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Python3.9 If you see a "Rebuilt for Python 3.9" (or similar) commit in your package, please don't rebuild it in regular raw

Re: Schedule for Thursday's FPC Meeting (2020-05-28 16:00 UTC)

On 28. 05. 20 8:08, James Antill wrote: Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FPC meeting Thursday at 2020-05-28 16:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on irc.freenode.net. I ma sorry, but I am too tired to attend. The Python 3.9 rebuilds are draining all my energy :( -- M

Re: [HEADS UP] Fedora 33 Python 3.9 rebuilds have started in a side tag

On 22. 05. 20 3:06, Miro Hrončok wrote: Hello, in order to deliver Python 3.9, we are running a coordinated rebuild in a side tag. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Python3.9 If you see a "Rebuilt for Python 3.9" (or similar) commit in your package, please don't rebuild it in regular raw

Re: [HEADS UP] F33 Boost 1.73.0 rebuilds starting in a side tag

On 28/05/20 14:21 +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote: On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 2:16 PM Jonathan Wakely wrote: I've literally just started. The new boost hasn't even finished yet: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=45094034 I wonder if this build is actually broken and if it will eve

Re: [HEADS UP] F33 Boost 1.73.0 rebuilds starting in a side tag

On 28. 05. 20 14:21, Fabio Valentini wrote: On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 2:16 PM Jonathan Wakely wrote: I've literally just started. The new boost hasn't even finished yet: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=45094034 I wonder if this build is actually broken and if it will ever fi

Re: [HEADS UP] F33 Boost 1.73.0 rebuilds starting in a side tag

On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 2:16 PM Jonathan Wakely wrote: > I've literally just started. The new boost hasn't even finished yet: > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=45094034 I wonder if this build is actually broken and if it will ever finish: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/ta

Re: [HEADS UP] F33 Boost 1.73.0 rebuilds starting in a side tag

OK I just write it because you request report about "I don't see changes in changelog". чт, 28 мая 2020 г., 15:16 Jonathan Wakely : > On 28/05/20 14:47 +0300, Vascom wrote: > >Hi. > > > >pulseeffects package depends on boost and I don't see changes in > changelog. > > I've literally just started

Re: [HEADS UP] F33 Boost 1.73.0 rebuilds starting in a side tag

On 28/05/20 14:47 +0300, Vascom wrote: Hi. pulseeffects package depends on boost and I don't see changes in changelog. I've literally just started. The new boost hasn't even finished yet: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=45094034 Do you need to update pulseeffects? If not,

Re: Packages still using %{?_smp_mflags} manually?

On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 10:01 AM Tom Stellard wrote: > On 05/27/2020 07:47 AM, Richard Shaw wrote: > > On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 9:44 AM Tom Stellard > wrote: > > > > > > Also, I used to use %make_build without the {}, but someone > suggested[1] I > > add the {}

Re: [HEADS UP] F33 Boost 1.73.0 rebuilds starting in a side tag

Hi. pulseeffects package depends on boost and I don't see changes in changelog. чт, 28 мая 2020 г., 11:45 Jonathan Wakely : > I'm starting the rebuilds for Boost 1.73.0 and packages that depend on > it, using the f33-boost side tag. > > If you see "Rebuilt for Boost 1.73.0" in the changelog for

Re: late generation of assemble code

On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 12:07 PM Jan Kratochvil wrote: > > On Sun, 24 May 2020 05:21:05 +0200, Paul Dufresne via devel wrote: > > The idea was to push code generation as near as possible of code execution. > > Because at execution time, you know what are the specific features of the > > CPU, and w

Fedora-Cloud-32-20200528.0 compose check report

No missing expected images. Soft failed openQA tests: 1/1 (x86_64) (Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug) ID: 606679 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/606679 -- Mail generated by check-compose: https://pagure.i

Fedora-Cloud-31-20200528.0 compose check report

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

[HEADS UP] F33 Boost 1.73.0 rebuilds starting in a side tag

I'm starting the rebuilds for Boost 1.73.0 and packages that depend on it, using the f33-boost side tag. If you see "Rebuilt for Boost 1.73.0" in the changelog for one of your packages, please do not make another update. Instead co-ordinate with me to use the side tag for your update (if your pac

Re: Single-threaded OpenBLAS is not thread-safe

On Thu, 28 May 2020 at 10:04, Susi Lehtola wrote: > > The correct case is to use the OpenMP flavor of OpenBLAS to avoid these > issues. If you use the OpenMP library in a sequential program, the BLAS > runs in parallel, and if you use the OpenMP library in an OpenMP > parallel program the BLAS run

Re: [HEADS UP] Fedora 33 Python 3.9 rebuilds have started in a side tag

On 28. 05. 20 0:42, Miro Hrončok wrote: On 27. 05. 20 20:24, Miro Hrončok wrote: I'm currently trying to build a live image, but it's running insanely slow for some reason, mock in general on my Rawhide box seems to be really slow and I'm not sure why. If it ever finishes I'll try it. But so far

Re: Single-threaded OpenBLAS is not thread-safe

On Wed, 27 May 2020 12:29:36 +0200 Iñaki Ucar wrote: > Hi, > > I wanted to bring some attention to this in devel, not only to > openblas' maintainer (in CC), because there have been some discussions > around BLAS/LAPACK in the past here. > > As Dave Love pointed out in a previous discussion, gen

Re: [EPEL-devel] Re: Soname bump of libb2 on F31/EPEL7

On Thu, 28 May 2020 at 02:26, Petr Pisar wrote: > > On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 05:22:04PM -0400, Mukundan Ragavan wrote: > > Scratch build of gtkhash does not appear to pull in libb2-0.98.1. Has > > the buildroot override expired? > > > > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=45077601 >