unretiring llvm7.0

In March llvm7.0 which had been orphaned for some reason, got retired. Unfortunately I missed the warning mails that Miro sent here. llvm7.0 is needed for aarch64 ghc:8.8, and for ghc-8.8.3 planned for F33. So I would like to unretire llvm7.0. Thanks, Jens ___

[Test-Announce] Fedora 33 Rawhide 20200529.n.2 nightly compose nominated for testing

Announcing the creation of a new nightly release validation test event for Fedora 33 Rawhide 20200529.n.2. Please help run some tests for this nightly compose if you have time. For more information on nightly release validation testing, see: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki

Re: Fwd: Re: late generation of assemble code

On Friday, May 29, 2020 5:15:45 PM MST Colin Walters wrote: > On Fri, May 29, 2020, at 8:01 PM, John M. Harris Jr wrote: > > > > WebAssembly is just in web browsers. It's not for normal software you'd > > install with your package manager. Unless I'm missing something? > > > You are indeed mis

Re: Supporting hibernation in Workstation ed., draft 1

On Friday, May 29, 2020 5:25:23 PM MST Chris Murphy wrote: > On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 6:06 PM John M. Harris Jr > wrote: > > > > > > I'm sorry, but this makes absolutely no sense. > > > Disliking the story is not the same thing as it not making sense. > There isn't much I can do about the former,

Re: new packages review tickets

I'll apologize in advance for rambling, but I've been kicking around ideas in this space for very many years now. > "SJS" == Stephen John Smoogen writes: SJS> Well it is quite clear we are doing something wrong and have been SJS> for as long as the project has been going on. It's true that

Re: Packages that failed to build with Python 3.9

On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 04:17:03PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > I fixed apsw and rebuilt calibre, which needed it. bugzilla2fedmsg I looked at apsw also, but in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1840234 the maintainer wanted to wait for a new release which is prepping upstream. Tha

[Test-Announce] Proposal to CANCEL: 2020-06-01 Fedora QA Meeting

Hi folks! I'm proposing we cancel the QA meeting for Monday. We met this week and I don't have anything urgent new this week. If you're aware of anything important we have to discuss this week, please do reply to this mail and we can go ahead and run the meeting. BTW, if anyone's wondering about

RE: [External] Re: Supporting hibernation in Workstation ed., draft 1

> -Original Message- > From: John M. Harris Jr > Sent: Friday, May 29, 2020 8:06 PM > > On Friday, May 29, 2020 3:58:26 PM MST Chris Murphy wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Fedora Workstation working group has been investigating the working > > state of hibernation (suspend to disk) for about four

Re: Supporting hibernation in Workstation ed., draft 1

On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 6:06 PM John M. Harris Jr wrote: > > I'm sorry, but this makes absolutely no sense. Disliking the story is not the same thing as it not making sense. There isn't much I can do about the former, but if you have a specific area where there is a lack of clarity, I'll try to c

Re: Fwd: Re: late generation of assemble code

On Fri, May 29, 2020, at 8:01 PM, John M. Harris Jr wrote: > WebAssembly is just in web browsers. It's not for normal software you'd > install with your package manager. Unless I'm missing something? You are indeed missing https://webassembly.org/docs/non-web/ https://wasi.dev/ More random l

Re: Supporting hibernation in Workstation ed., draft 1

On Friday, May 29, 2020 3:58:26 PM MST Chris Murphy wrote: > Hi, > > Fedora Workstation working group has been investigating the working > state of hibernation (suspend to disk) for about four months, and has > produced a draft status report on the findings so far. Present status, > impediments to

Re: Fwd: Re: late generation of assemble code

On Friday, May 29, 2020 1:56:16 PM MST Colin Walters wrote: > > Perhaps in Silverblue or other systems not designed to be a general > > purpose operating system? > > What, where did you get that? Silverblue is general purpose. Well, Silverblue is mostly GNOME. It's not meant for servers, etc.

Re: Packages that failed to build with Python 3.9

On Fri, 2020-05-29 at 21:59 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > Hello. > > As you might already know, we have recently merged in the Python 3.9 side > tag, > despite several builds have not succeeded. We always aim for some compromise > between having the side tag open for too long and having too many

Supporting hibernation in Workstation ed., draft 1

Hi, Fedora Workstation working group has been investigating the working state of hibernation (suspend to disk) for about four months, and has produced a draft status report on the findings so far. Present status, impediments to support, and importantly, the specifics of how to address those impedi

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

On 30. 05. 20 0:08, Orion Poplawski wrote: On 5/29/20 8:17 AM, Miro Hrončok wrote: 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 fo

Re: Packages that failed to build with Python 3.9

On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 09:59:27PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > coccinelle rjones This one has a bug and an upstream fix already, I "just" have to apply it: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1791765#c10 The only possible problem is it seems to be bundling a Python library whi

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

On 5/29/20 8:17 AM, Miro Hrončok wrote: 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 p

Re: Packages that failed to build with Python 3.9

On 29. 05. 20 22:38, Gwyn Ciesla via devel wrote: ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On Friday, May 29, 2020 2:59 PM, Miro Hrončok wrote: Hello. As you might already know, we have recently merged in the Python 3.9 side tag, despite several builds have not succeeded. We always aim for some comp

Re: Fwd: Re: late generation of assemble code

> Perhaps in Silverblue or other systems not designed to be a general purpose > operating system? What, where did you get that? Silverblue is general purpose. Anyways, my 2c on this topic: Once WebAssembly supports threads (it's coming) there's going to be a lot of interesting discussion abou

Re: Packages that failed to build with Python 3.9

‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On Friday, May 29, 2020 2:59 PM, Miro Hrončok wrote: > Hello. > > As you might already know, we have recently merged in the Python 3.9 side tag, > despite several builds have not succeeded. We always aim for some compromise > between having the side tag open f

Re: Packages that failed to build with Python 3.9

I'm already working on updating freecad to work with VTK 9.0 and hopefully nothing falls apart with Python 3.9 while I'm at it. Thanks, Richard ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedo

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

On Friday, May 29, 2020 1:24:30 AM MST Igor Raits wrote: > On Fri, 2020-05-29 at 01:00 -0700, John M. Harris Jr wrote: > > > On Thursday, May 28, 2020 11:59:41 PM MST Remi Collet wrote: > > > > > Le 29/05/2020 à 06:15, John M. Harris Jr a écrit : > > > > > > > Please do not drop mod_php. It is NO

Re: Fwd: Re: late generation of assemble code

On Friday, May 29, 2020 4:02:40 AM MST Paul Dufresne via devel wrote: > had forgotten to reply also to the list... doing it now: > > [cut the part where it was suggested to make package that contains LLVM > Intermediate Representation bitcode rather than CPU specific assembler] > > > On 2020-05

Re: Self Introduction: Sam Feifer

Welcome Sam, hope to see you around! On Fri, May 29, 2020, 20:30 Samuel Jacob Feifer wrote: > Hi everyone. I am currently a second year computer science student at > Vanderbilt and would love to garner some experience this summer working > with fedora. As my career is quite young, I hope to not

Packages that failed to build with Python 3.9

Hello. As you might already know, we have recently merged in the Python 3.9 side tag, despite several builds have not succeeded. We always aim for some compromise between having the side tag open for too long and having too many failures. The packages, when not rebuilt, are not installable in

Re: fwupd / LVFS RFE: classifying updates?

On 5/22/20 11:42 AM, Richard Hughes wrote: On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 5:58 PM Michel Alexandre Salim wrote: If it's reasonable to have such toggles for fwupdmgr, we're happy to> send a pull request for it. Sure, this seems like a sane request. We already have "--filter" so something like --fi

Self Introduction: Sam Feifer

Hi everyone. I am currently a second year computer science student at Vanderbilt and would love to garner some experience this summer working with fedora. As my career is quite young, I hope to not only become a more confident programmer, but also familiarize myself with how professional program

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

On 2020-05-29 16:39, Miro Hrončok wrote: On 29. 05. 20 16:25, Richard Shaw wrote: On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 9:18 AM Miro Hrončok > wrote:     The side tag has been merged. Thank you all for your patience. Woohoo! So now Python can be rebuilt with the fix for PySide2

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

On Fri, 2020-05-29 at 01:34 +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > This shows all the packages for which you are "owner" / "main admin": > https://src.fedoraproject.org/dashboard/projects?acl=main+admin There is also a way to get the packages for wich another user is the owner? Ciao, A. _

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

On 2020-05-29 01:34, Fabio Valentini wrote: 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 t

Re: Many packages unnecessarily link to libpython

On 2020-05-18 03:53, Honggang LI wrote: On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 02:12:00PM -0400, Charalampos Stratakis wrote: rdma-coredledford honli jwilson rdma-core pyverbs must be linked with libpython38. For example, build]$ nm ./python/pyverbs/mem_alloc.cpython-38-x86_64-linux-gnu.so | g

Re: Rawhide broken: crypto-policies

On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 10:25 AM Igor Raits wrote: > This is fixed now. > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1841851 Thank you for the quick response. -- Jerry James http://www.jamezone.org/ ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraprojec

Re: Rawhide broken: crypto-policies

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On Fri, 2020-05-29 at 10:08 -0600, Jerry James wrote: > Trying to build a package just now failed > (https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=45145531): > > Running transaction check > Transaction check succeeded. > Running transaction te

Re: Rawhide broken: crypto-policies

On 29. 05. 20 18:08, Jerry James wrote: Trying to build a package just now failed (https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=45145531): Running transaction check Transaction check succeeded. Running transaction test Transaction test succeeded. Running transaction error: lua script fail

Rawhide broken: crypto-policies

Trying to build a package just now failed (https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=45145531): Running transaction check Transaction check succeeded. Running transaction test Transaction test succeeded. Running transaction error: lua script failed: [string "%prein(crypto-policies-202005

PSA: pytest 5 now finally available in rawhide

Hello, the pytest package (python3-pytest) has been updated to 5.4.2. In case it gives you trouble, you can pin an older version: BuildRrequires: %{py3_dist pytest} < 5 Or: BuildRrequires: python3dist(pytest) < 5 That will give you the python3-pytest4 package (4.6.10 now), not parallely

Re: Fedora 34 System-Wide Change proposal: NSS CK_GCM_PARAMS change

Oops, this reply was supposed to be a "reply list" rather than a "reply". I've incorporated most of your feedback into the Change page now. Thanks. bob On 5/29/20 12:23 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 03:46:25PM -0400, Ben Cotton wrote: https://fedoraproject.o

Re: F30 security update submitted for stable "marked obsolete" instead of being pushed

Miro Hrončok wrote: > AFAIK this was never the case, but I'm not sure. I remember in the past > the updates just kinda stuck in limbo (being pushed to stable for > eternity). At least now they are marked as obsolete. I think there really ought to be a guarantee that everything queued before the d

nauty 2.7 rebuilds

I plan to update nauty from the 2.6 series to the 2.7 series soon. The new version is *almost* backwards compatible with 2.6. However, one member of the optionstruct structure changed size (from 32 bits to 64 bits), so out of an abundance of caution I am going to rebuild all consumers. The packag

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

On 29. 05. 20 16:25, Richard Shaw wrote: On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 9:18 AM Miro Hrončok > wrote: The side tag has been merged. Thank you all for your patience. Woohoo! So now Python can be rebuilt with the fix for PySide2? :) Technically blocked by https://bugz

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

On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 9:18 AM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > The side tag has been merged. Thank you all for your patience. > Woohoo! So now Python can be rebuilt with the fix for PySide2? :) Thanks, Richard ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproj

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 regula

Re: python3-pyparsing: conflicting error

On 29/05/20 15:21 +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote: On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 2:29 PM Jun Aruga wrote: This just happened on Fedora rawhide build now. Could anyone fix it? https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=45138807 https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/8880/45138880/root

Re: python3-pyparsing: conflicting error

On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 2:29 PM Jun Aruga wrote: > > This just happened on Fedora rawhide build now. > > Could anyone fix it? > > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=45138807 > https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/8880/45138880/root.log > > DEBUG util.py:600: No matches

Re: python3-pyparsing: conflicting error

On Fri, 29 May 2020 15:09:34 +0200, Jun Aruga wrote: > I opened the issue ticket for systemtap. > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1841558 Why would you do that? It's "python3" (3.8) -> "python3.9" dependency breakage. ___ devel mailing list

Re: python3-pyparsing: conflicting error

On Fri, 29 May 2020, Jun Aruga wrote: I opened the issue ticket for systemtap. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1841558 I suspect this is probably because of the Python 3.9 rebuild being merged back into rawhide. See the [HEADS UP] thread... __

Re: python3-pyparsing: conflicting error

I opened the issue ticket for systemtap. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1841558 -- Jun | He - His - Him ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code

python3-pyparsing: conflicting error

This just happened on Fedora rawhide build now. Could anyone fix it? https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=45138807 https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/8880/45138880/root.log DEBUG util.py:600: No matches found for the following disable plugin patterns: local, spacewalk

perl-Statistics-Basic license corrected to "LGPLv2 and LGPLv2+"

I corrected perl-Statistics-Basic license from "LGPLv2+" to "LGPLv2 and LGPLv2+". -- Petr signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.

Fedora-Cloud-31-20200529.0 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

Rebuilt for OpenCV 4.3.0 in rawhide

Hello there, There is an update to opencv 4.3.0 in preparation for rawhide. This will be handled in a side tag along with the rebuild of the all dependencies. (fedpkg build --target=f33-build-side-24026) This was evaluated ahead,so it should lead to issue. https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/

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

On 29. 05. 20 13:07, Jonathan Wakely wrote: On 29/05/20 12:17 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: On 29. 05. 20 11:49, Jonathan Wakely wrote: On 29/05/20 09:34 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: On 29. 05. 20 9:32, Felix Schwarz wrote: Am 29.05.20 um 09:19 schrieb Miro Hrončok: The side tag is being merged

[Bug 1841308] remove hardcoded requirement for Crypt::Random

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1841308 Paul Howarth changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1841514 Referenced Bugs: https://bu

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

On 29/05/20 12:17 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: On 29. 05. 20 11:49, Jonathan Wakely wrote: On 29/05/20 09:34 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: On 29. 05. 20 9:32, Felix Schwarz wrote: Am 29.05.20 um 09:19 schrieb Miro Hrončok: The side tag is being merged right now. Thank you for all the work (also

Fwd: Re: late generation of assemble code

had forgotten to reply also to the list... doing it now: [cut the part where it was suggested to make package that contains LLVM Intermediate Representation bitcode rather than CPU specific assembler] On 2020-05-29 1:01 a.m., John M. Harris Jr wrote: Paul, What benefit do you see in the over

Fedora-Cloud-32-20200529.0 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: 607016 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/607016 -- Mail generated by check-compose: https://pagure.i

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

On 29. 05. 20 11:49, Jonathan Wakely wrote: On 29/05/20 09:34 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: On 29. 05. 20 9:32, Felix Schwarz wrote: Am 29.05.20 um 09:19 schrieb Miro Hrončok: The side tag is being merged right now. Thank you for all the work (also in advance with all the alpha/beta versions)

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

On 29/05/20 09:34 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: On 29. 05. 20 9:32, Felix Schwarz wrote: Am 29.05.20 um 09:19 schrieb Miro Hrončok: The side tag is being merged right now. Thank you for all the work (also in advance with all the alpha/beta versions) :-) Seems like quite a few Python packages

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

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On Fri, 2020-05-29 at 01:00 -0700, John M. Harris Jr wrote: > On Thursday, May 28, 2020 11:59:41 PM MST Remi Collet wrote: > > Le 29/05/2020 à 06:15, John M. Harris Jr a écrit : > > > > > Please do not drop mod_php. It is NOT the case that "php-fpm

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

On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 4:01 AM John M. Harris Jr wrote: > > On Thursday, May 28, 2020 11:59:41 PM MST Remi Collet wrote: > > Le 29/05/2020 à 06:15, John M. Harris Jr a écrit : > > > > > Please do not drop mod_php. It is NOT the case that "php-fpm is already > > > used but most users of httpd and

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

On Thursday, May 28, 2020 11:59:41 PM MST Remi Collet wrote: > Le 29/05/2020 à 06:15, John M. Harris Jr a écrit : > > > Please do not drop mod_php. It is NOT the case that "php-fpm is already > > used but most users of httpd and nginx without any issue." > > > php-fpm is the default configurati

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

On 29. 05. 20 9:32, Felix Schwarz wrote: Am 29.05.20 um 09:19 schrieb Miro Hrončok: The side tag is being merged right now. Thank you for all the work (also in advance with all the alpha/beta versions) :-) Seems like quite a few Python packages were rebuilt in rawhide during your mass rebui

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

Am 29.05.20 um 09:19 schrieb Miro Hrončok: > The side tag is being merged right now. Thank you for all the work (also in advance with all the alpha/beta versions) :-) Seems like quite a few Python packages were rebuilt in rawhide during your mass rebuild. Did that happen in the past as well? (I

Re: Fedora 34 System-Wide Change proposal: NSS CK_GCM_PARAMS change

On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 03:46:25PM -0400, Ben Cotton wrote: > 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 c

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 regula

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

Le 29/05/2020 à 06:15, John M. Harris Jr a écrit : > Please do not drop mod_php. It is NOT the case that "php-fpm is already used > but most users of httpd and nginx without any issue." php-fpm is the default configuration for httpd and nginx for few versions nginx ONLY uses php-fpm mod_php is