Re: Many packages unnecessarily link to libpython

On 5/31/20 6:37 PM, Honggang LI wrote: We have to compile/build the module before we can import it from a python3 shell. The problem is how to compile the modules without pass "-lpython3.9" or "-lpython3.9d" to the linker (/usr/bin/ld). Do you have a link to a build log? __

[Bug 1842176] perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.20200530 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1842176 Jitka Plesnikova changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Doc Type|---

Re: unretiring llvm7.0

On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 12:44 AM Andy Mender wrote: > If I understand correctly, the sudden disappearance of llvm7.0 means that > now ghc is in danger as a package, because it's missing the toolchain > needed to build & package it? > llvm is only a ghc requirement for arm archs. Currently llvm7.

Re: Packages that failed to build with Python 3.9

Thanks for the follow up! | airinv airrac airtsp rmol sevmgr trademgen All those packages have been successfully rebuilt (after upstream upgrade): * airinv: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-d6b3c81762 * airrac: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-bd268627aa * ai

Re: Many packages unnecessarily link to libpython

On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 10:30:32AM -0700, Gordon Messmer wrote: > On 5/31/20 1:24 AM, Honggang LI wrote: > > As you see, "-lpython3.9" or "-lpython3.9d" library must be provided to > > the linker. Otherwise, a lot of "undefined reference to xxx" error > > messages show up. > > > I'd guess that yo

Re: Packages that failed to build with Python 3.9

> On 31. 05. 20 17:09, Leigh Scott wrote: > > That's up to the maintainer. Seems reasonable to me. Thanks, patch forwarded to https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1792059 ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send

CPE Weekly: 2020-05-31

--- title: CPE Weekly status email tags: CPE Weekly, email --- # CPE Weekly: 2020-05-31 Background: The Community Platform Engineering group is the Red Hat team combining IT and release engineering from Fedora and CentOS. Our goal is to keep core servers and services running and maintained, build

Re: Packages that failed to build with Python 3.9

On 31. 05. 20 17:09, Leigh Scott wrote: On 31. 05. 20 12:49, Leigh Scott wrote: Note that python-setproctitle already failed to built with Python 3.8 and the "fix" was to comment out the tests: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-setproctitle/c/d6d9620c3c4fa076... Hence, it built with Py

Schedule for Mondays's FESCo Meeting (2020-06-01)

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 '2020-06-01 15:00 UTC' Links to all issues to be

Re: Supporting hibernation in Workstation ed., draft 1

On Sat, May 30, 2020 at 9:26 PM Tony Nelson wrote: > > On 20-05-30 21:02:11, Chris Murphy wrote: > ... > > Full disk encryption doesn't adequately secure the hibernation image > > either. Authenticated encryption (signing as well as encryption) is > > needed to verify the image hasn't been tampe

Re: Many packages unnecessarily link to libpython

On 5/31/20 1:24 AM, Honggang LI wrote: As you see, "-lpython3.9" or "-lpython3.9d" library must be provided to the linker. Otherwise, a lot of "undefined reference to xxx" error messages show up. I'd guess that you're seeing "undefined reference" when you use ldd on the so, and that's expecte

Re: unretiring llvm7.0

On Sat, 30 May 2020 18:43:03 +0200, you wrote: >If I understand correctly, the sudden disappearance of llvm7.0 means that >now ghc is in danger as a package, because it's missing the toolchain >needed to build & package it? Don't know anything about ghc to comment on the difficulties, but ghc 8.1

Re: Packages that failed to build with Python 3.9

> On 31. 05. 20 12:49, Leigh Scott wrote: > > Note that python-setproctitle already failed to built with Python 3.8 and the > "fix" was to comment out the tests: > > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-setproctitle/c/d6d9620c3c4fa076... > > Hence, it built with Python 3.9 even if it doesn

Re: Lots of FailsToInstall on rawhide bugs

On 5/30/20 12:46 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote: Folks -    I'm afraid the new FailsToInstall bugs may be a bit much for me. Often it seems: - There is already a FTBFS bug against the package which is the root cause of the FTI. - There was a soname bump in rawide and the builds didn't manage to

Re: How to debug live CD image?

> On 30 May 2020, at 14:12, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel > wrote: > > On 30.05.2020 15:04, Barry Scott wrote: >> I use the KDE respin and it hangs at the same place. >> I waited over an hour to see if will continue. >> >> How can I help debug this? > > I think that your problem is definitely rel

Re: Supporting hibernation in Workstation ed., draft 1

On 2020-05-30 12:59, Iñaki Ucar wrote: If your swap is in a luks partition with a static passphrase (and secureboot is disabled) then hibernate works just fine. Actually, I can tell that a swap partition as an LVM volume living on a luks encrypted PV works perfectly fine. Regards. -- Robe

Re: PSA: pytest 5 now finally available in rawhide

On 31. 05. 20 14:06, Ian McInerney wrote: On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 4:58 PM Miro Hrončok > wrote: 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: %{p

Re: PSA: pytest 5 now finally available in rawhide

On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 4:58 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > 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 > >

Fedora-Cloud-31-20200531.0 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

Re: Packages that failed to build with Python 3.9

On 29. 05. 20 21:59, 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 failures. ... cinch 

Re: Packages that failed to build with Python 3.9

On 31. 05. 20 13:13, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 01:09:31PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: On 31. 05. 20 13:04, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 10:49:28AM -, Leigh Scott wrote: Even if the package builds it doesn't mean it's functional.

Re: Packages that failed to build with Python 3.9

On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 01:09:31PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 31. 05. 20 13:04, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 10:49:28AM -, Leigh Scott wrote: > > > Even if the package builds it doesn't mean it's functional. > > > > > > $ cinnamon-settings > > > Traceback

Re: Packages that failed to build with Python 3.9

On 31. 05. 20 13:04, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 10:49:28AM -, Leigh Scott wrote: Even if the package builds it doesn't mean it's functional. $ cinnamon-settings Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/share/cinnamon/cinnamon-settings/cinnamon-setting

Re: Packages that failed to build with Python 3.9

On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 10:49:28AM -, Leigh Scott wrote: > Even if the package builds it doesn't mean it's functional. > > $ cinnamon-settings > Traceback (most recent call last): > File "/usr/share/cinnamon/cinnamon-settings/cinnamon-settings.py", line 16, > in > from setproctitle imp

Re: Packages that failed to build with Python 3.9

On 31. 05. 20 12:49, Leigh Scott 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 failures. The packages, wh

Re: 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

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

Hi > -Original Message- > From: Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek > Sent: Sunday, May 31, 2020 6:01 AM > > On Sat, May 30, 2020 at 12:31:26AM +, Mark Pearson wrote: > > > I've just taken a Lenovo T500, installed GNOME Workstation and gone into > > > hibernation. It took about 30 seconds to

Re: Soname bump gloox libgloox.so.13 -> 17

On 5/31/20 12:31 PM, Björn 'besser82' Esser wrote: > Am Sonntag, den 31.05.2020, 11:49 +0200 schrieb Björn 'besser82' Esser: >> Am Sonntag, den 31.05.2020, 11:29 +0200 schrieb David Schwörer: >>> If a proven packager could rebuild 0ad and uwsgi and submit an >>> update, >>> that would be great. >>

Re: Soname bump gloox libgloox.so.13 -> 17

Am Sonntag, den 31.05.2020, 11:49 +0200 schrieb Björn 'besser82' Esser: > Am Sonntag, den 31.05.2020, 11:29 +0200 schrieb David Schwörer: > > If a proven packager could rebuild 0ad and uwsgi and submit an > > update, > > that would be great. > > Done so. Waiting for the builds to finish. Updates

Re: Packaging problem

This flag added by default for security reason. So if you don't want support previous release or have no request to support it you can skip. Or wait answer from upstream. вс, 31 мая 2020 г., 13:27 : > And is applying the workaround just for Fedora 31 tolerated ? > > - Mail original - > D

Re: Packaging problem

And is applying the workaround just for Fedora 31 tolerated ? - Mail original - De: "Vascom" À: "Development discussions related to Fedora" Envoyé: Dimanche 31 Mai 2020 12:13:58 Objet: Re: Packaging problem I think Qt will not be upgraded in F31. You can just skip build for F31 and

Re: Packaging problem

I think Qt will not be upgraded in F31. You can just skip build for F31 and make package for F32 and rawhide only. вс, 31 мая 2020 г., 13:08 : > I tested with Fedora 31 and, it hangs. > I works fine with Fedora 32. > > I report this problem to Jamulus or to Qt ? I think this problem is > already

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20200530.n.0 changes

OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20200529.n.2 NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20200530.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:2 Dropped images: 1 Added packages: 3 Dropped packages:1 Upgraded packages: 168 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 101.94 MiB Size of dropped packages:23

Re: Packaging problem

I tested with Fedora 31 and, it hangs. I works fine with Fedora 32. I report this problem to Jamulus or to Qt ? I think this problem is already fixed on Fedora 32. Does a Qt5 update is programmed for Fedora 31 ? - Mail original - De: "Vascom" À: "Development discussions related to Fedo

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

On Sat, May 30, 2020 at 12:31:26AM +, Mark Pearson wrote: > > I've just taken a Lenovo T500, installed GNOME Workstation and gone into > > hibernation. It took about 30 seconds to boot back in, but I was right > > where I > > left off. What exactly is broken, and for what portion of users? > >

Re: Supporting hibernation in Workstation ed., draft 1

On Sat, May 30, 2020 at 11:34:38AM +0200, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > Also I had to do 'echo freeze >/sys/power/state' for s2idle as systemctl has > no such option (nor there is any GUI option for s3idle AFAIK). SuspendState=freeze can be set through a configuration file. See systemd-sleep.conf(5). Z

Re: Packaging problem

You should report upstream about the problem and fix code. вс, 31 мая 2020 г., 12:49 : > Hello again ! > > I've got a new problem: a gcc flags trigger a problem during generation of > an object file. > The application is based on Qt5. The problematic file is produced from a > moc generated file.

Re: Soname bump gloox libgloox.so.13 -> 17

Am Sonntag, den 31.05.2020, 11:29 +0200 schrieb David Schwörer: > If a proven packager could rebuild 0ad and uwsgi and submit an update, > that would be great. Done so. Waiting for the builds to finish. Updates will be pushed asap then. Cheers Björn signature.asc Description: This is a digit

Re: Packaging problem

Hello again ! I've got a new problem: a gcc flags trigger a problem during generation of an object file. The application is based on Qt5. The problematic file is produced from a moc generated file. The flag in question: -fcf-protection The solution I found is to send a custom set of flags to qm

Re: Soname bump gloox libgloox.so.13 -> 17

On 5/17/20 12:00 AM, David Schwörer wrote: > Hi, > > I am going to update gloox to the newest version. > > I am going to build in the side tag f33-build-side-23466 > > 0ad and uwsgi need to be rebuild. > > $ dnf repoquery --whatrequires gloox-devel --repo=rawhide-source > 0ad-0:0.0.23b-13.fc33.

Re: new packages review tickets

Thanks for all the comments and ideas you posted. I have opened a pull request [1] to automate some of the processes against review-stats. If accepted it will: - Set NEEDINFO against submitter on tickets not assigned and not updated for more than one year - Set NEEDINFO against reviewer on tick

Re: Packages that failed to build with Python 3.9

On 30. 05. 20 11:56, Ján ONDREJ (SAL) wrote: Ahoj, Hey. I'll try to answer. som trocha zmateny z tych hlaseni. Je skoda, ze bugzilla priamo neobsahuje link na failed build. The bugzillas don't contain the failed build link, because they are primarily "fails to install" and not "fails to

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

On Fri, 29 May 2020 16:55:37 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote: > 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 th

Re: Many packages unnecessarily link to libpython

On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 06:47:35PM +0200, Petr Viktorin wrote: > > > 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

Fedora-Cloud-32-20200531.0 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: 608243 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/608243 -- Mail generated by check-compose: https://pagure.i