Fedora-Cloud-33-20210216.0 compose check report

No missing expected images. Soft failed openQA tests: 1/7 (x86_64), 1/7 (aarch64) (Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug) Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-33-20210215.0): ID: 779016 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud URL: https://op

Re: Don't update to the latest f33!

Michael Catanzaro wrote on Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 08:46:57PM -0600: > We removed the fallbacks due to complaints from users who didn't want DNS > ever going to Cloudflare or Google. So the lack of fallback is expected and > should not be reported as a bug. setting DNS= (or DNS="") explicitely should

Re: Ars claims: Fedora 32 is sluggish

Hey Matthew, Could you please try switching to a much stronger CPU governor like `performance` and see if it helps? You could use this tool https://github.com/t0xic0der/switcheroo and run `sudo ./switcheroo -setn performance` to do so. Regards, Akashdeep Dhar __

Re: Don't update to the latest f33!

On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 10:53 am, Dominique Martinet wrote: I think if no IP was successfully parsed the fallback ought to kick in, so it's a systemd-resolved bug -- do you want to report this upstream or shall I now I've had a look? Hi Dominique, We removed the fallbacks due to compla

Re: Fedora 35 Change: rpmautospec - removing release and changelog fields from spec files (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Sun, 14 Feb 2021 at 22:16, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Sun, Feb 14, 2021 at 09:39:01PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote: > > > > That still means a particular change needs to "bump" the release number > to a > > specific value and hence it generates conflicts/mismatch when: > > > > - two or more PRs are

Re: Don't update to the latest f33!

Steve Dickson wrote on Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 09:04:52PM -0500: > > I think if no IP was successfully parsed the fallback ought to kick in, > > so it's a systemd-resolved bug -- do you want to report this upstream or > > shall I now I've had a look? > > Fedora bz or an upstream bz? If is the latter w

Re: Don't update to the latest f33!

On 2/15/21 8:53 PM, Dominique Martinet wrote: > Hi Steve, > > Steve Dickson wrote on Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 08:40:17PM -0500: >> When I have DNS=67.207.67.3,67.207.67.2 I get > > FWIW the man page states it is a space-separated list of IPs, you might > want to try DNS="67.207.67.3 67.207.67.2" >

Re: Don't update to the latest f33!

Hi Steve, Steve Dickson wrote on Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 08:40:17PM -0500: > When I have DNS=67.207.67.3,67.207.67.2 I get FWIW the man page states it is a space-separated list of IPs, you might want to try DNS="67.207.67.3 67.207.67.2" I quickly had a look at the code and I don't think anything ch

Re: Don't update to the latest f33!

On 2/15/21 8:16 PM, Ed Greshko wrote: > On 16/02/2021 09:10, Steve Dickson wrote: >> On 2/15/21 7:55 PM, Ed Greshko wrote: >>> On 16/02/2021 08:50, Steve Dickson wrote: But I think this is the problem... systemctl start systemd-resolved systemctl -o cat status systemd-resolve

Re: Don't update to the latest f33!

On 16/02/2021 09:10, Steve Dickson wrote: On 2/15/21 7:55 PM, Ed Greshko wrote: On 16/02/2021 08:50, Steve Dickson wrote: But I think this is the problem... systemctl start systemd-resolved systemctl -o cat status systemd-resolved Starting Network Name Resolution... Positive Trust Anchors: .

Re: Don't update to the latest f33!

On 2/15/21 7:55 PM, Ed Greshko wrote: > On 16/02/2021 08:50, Steve Dickson wrote: >> But I think this is the problem... >> >> systemctl start systemd-resolved >> systemctl -o cat status systemd-resolved >> Starting Network Name Resolution... >> Positive Trust Anchors: >> . IN DS 20326 8 2 >> e0

Re: Don't update to the latest f33!

On 16/02/2021 08:50, Steve Dickson wrote: But I think this is the problem... systemctl start systemd-resolved systemctl -o cat status systemd-resolved Starting Network Name Resolution... Positive Trust Anchors: . IN DS 20326 8 2 e06d44b80b8f1d39a95c0b0d7c65d08458e880409bbc683457104237c7f8ec8d N

Re: Don't update to the latest f33!

On 2/15/21 7:31 PM, Ed Greshko wrote: > I think I may have sent this off-list > > On 16/02/2021 08:17, Steve Dickson wrote: >> On 2/15/21 7:12 PM, Ed Greshko wrote: >>> On 16/02/2021 06:40, Steve Dickson wrote: I just updated to latest Fedora 33 and I no longer have any DNS name soluti

Re: Don't update to the latest f33!

On 16/02/2021 08:35, Steve Dickson wrote: On 2/15/21 7:24 PM, Ed Greshko wrote: On 16/02/2021 08:17, Steve Dickson wrote: On 2/15/21 7:12 PM, Ed Greshko wrote: On 16/02/2021 06:40, Steve Dickson wrote: I just updated to latest Fedora 33 and I no longer have any DNS name solution. The network

Re: Don't update to the latest f33!

On 2/15/21 7:25 PM, Sam Varshavchik wrote: >> # cat /run/NetworkManager/no-stub-resolv.conf >> cat: /run/NetworkManager/no-stub-resolv.conf: No such file or directory >> >> Who is suppose to create that? It is on /run so it be created on every >> reboot... > > NetworkManager. Maybe you have /ru

Re: Don't update to the latest f33!

On 2/15/21 7:24 PM, Ed Greshko wrote: > On 16/02/2021 08:17, Steve Dickson wrote: >> On 2/15/21 7:12 PM, Ed Greshko wrote: >>> On 16/02/2021 06:40, Steve Dickson wrote: I just updated to latest Fedora 33 and I no longer have any DNS name solution. The network is up... but... >

Re: Don't update to the latest f33!

I think I may have sent this off-list On 16/02/2021 08:17, Steve Dickson wrote: On 2/15/21 7:12 PM, Ed Greshko wrote: On 16/02/2021 06:40, Steve Dickson wrote: I just updated to latest Fedora 33 and I no longer have any DNS name solution. The network is up... but... $ pingwww.yahoo.com ping:w

Re: Don't update to the latest f33!

Steve Dickson writes: On 2/15/21 6:19 PM, Sam Varshavchik wrote: > Steve Dickson writes: > >> Hello, >> >> I just updated to latest Fedora 33 and >> I no longer have any DNS name solution. >> The network is up... but... >> >> $ ping www.yahoo.com >> ping: www.yahoo.com: Name or service not kno

Re: Don't update to the latest f33!

On 16/02/2021 08:17, Steve Dickson wrote: On 2/15/21 7:12 PM, Ed Greshko wrote: On 16/02/2021 06:40, Steve Dickson wrote: I just updated to latest Fedora 33 and I no longer have any DNS name solution. The network is up... but... $ pingwww.yahoo.com ping:www.yahoo.com: Name or service not know

Re: Don't update to the latest f33!

On 2/15/21 7:12 PM, Ed Greshko wrote: > On 16/02/2021 06:40, Steve Dickson wrote: >> I just updated to latest Fedora 33 and >> I no longer have any DNS name solution. >> The network is up... but... >> >> $ pingwww.yahoo.com >> ping:www.yahoo.com: Name or service not known >> >> I changed nothing!

Re: Don't update to the latest f33!

On 16/02/2021 06:40, Steve Dickson wrote: I just updated to latest Fedora 33 and I no longer have any DNS name solution. The network is up... but... $ pingwww.yahoo.com ping:www.yahoo.com: Name or service not known I changed nothing! How would be the bet way to debug this??? What is the outp

Re: Don't update to the latest f33!

On 2/15/21 6:19 PM, Sam Varshavchik wrote: > Steve Dickson writes: > >> Hello, >> >> I just updated to latest Fedora 33 and >> I no longer have any DNS name solution. >> The network is up... but... >> >> $ ping www.yahoo.com >> ping: www.yahoo.com: Name or service not known >> >> I changed nothi

Re: Don't update to the latest f33!

On 2/15/21 6:00 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > > > On Mon, 15 Feb 2021 at 17:39, Steve Dickson > wrote: > > Hello, > > I just updated to latest Fedora 33 and > I no longer have any DNS name solution. > The network is up... but... > > $ ping w

Re: Don't update to the latest f33!

Steve Dickson writes: Hello, I just updated to latest Fedora 33 and I no longer have any DNS name solution. The network is up... but... $ ping www.yahoo.com ping: www.yahoo.com: Name or service not known I changed nothing! How would be the bet way to debug this??? Inspect what it's your /e

Re: Don't update to the latest f33!

On Mon, 15 Feb 2021 at 17:39, Steve Dickson wrote: > Hello, > > I just updated to latest Fedora 33 and > I no longer have any DNS name solution. > The network is up... but... > > $ ping www.yahoo.com > ping: www.yahoo.com: Name or service not known > > I changed nothing! > > How would be the bet

What to do about EPEL package branch with no active maintainer?

I recently took over Radare2 maintenance for Fedora after it was orphaned, and now noticed it is also packaged in EPEL-8. I am not in a good position to actively maintain the EPEL-8 release. I am not an EPEL user, no interest in EPEL, and and not very comfortable with doing "blind" maintenance by

Don't update to the latest f33!

Hello, I just updated to latest Fedora 33 and I no longer have any DNS name solution. The network is up... but... $ ping www.yahoo.com ping: www.yahoo.com: Name or service not known I changed nothing! How would be the bet way to debug this??? steved. ___

Re: Fedora 35 Change proposal: POWER 4k page size (System-Wide Change proposal)

On 15/02/2021 19:47, Gary Buhrmaster wrote: > On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 6:39 PM Dan Horák wrote: > >> The open question still is whether we should try to keep 64k as default >> as it would allow to find the remaining bugs and offer 4k kernel variant >> (COPR for ppc64le should be coming back soon

Re: Fedora 35 Change proposal: POWER 4k page size (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 6:39 PM Dan Horák wrote: > The open question still is whether we should try to keep 64k as default > as it would allow to find the remaining bugs and offer 4k kernel variant > (COPR for ppc64le should be coming back soon), similar for the > installer (a new remix/spin). Af

Re: Fedora 35 Change proposal: POWER 4k page size (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Fri, 12 Feb 2021 11:20:21 -0500 Ben Cotton wrote: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Power4kPageSize > > == Summary == > > On ppc64le, the kernel is currently compiled for 64k page size. > > This change proposes using the more common 4k page size. > > Some HPC workloads may be disadv

Re: Copr in 2020 and outlook for 2021

On Sat, Feb 13, 2021 at 3:06 PM Ken Dreyer wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 9:52 AM Miroslav Suchý wrote: > > * Contribute to fedpkg/koji to have machine-readable output. > > There is a "--json" argument to "koji call", and that produces > machine-readable output for individual Koji RPCs. > > I

Fedora-IoT-34-20210215.0 compose check report

Missing expected images: Iot dvd aarch64 Iot dvd x86_64 Failed openQA tests: 1/16 (x86_64), 2/15 (aarch64) Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-IoT-34-20210214.2): ID: 778624 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso base_services_start URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/778624 ID: 7786

Fedora-34-20210215.n.0 compose check report

Missing expected images: Minimal raw-xz armhfp Xfce raw-xz armhfp Failed openQA tests: 32/183 (x86_64), 28/124 (aarch64) New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-34-20210214.n.0): ID: 778248 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_login URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/778248 ID:

Re: Fedora 35 Change: rpmautospec - removing release and changelog fields from spec files (System-Wide Change proposal)

On 12.02.2021 17:20, Ben Cotton wrote: With it, the content of the `Release` and `%changelog` fields in spec files can be auto-generated, either locally or in the builder using the information present in the git repo (in the form of git tags). Great. Finally. +1 for this change. Thanks. -- Sin

CPE Weekly: 2021-02-14

Hi Everyone, If you would like to see this report and toggle to the section you are most interested in, I would suggest visiting this link https://hackmd.io/8iV7PilARSG68Tqv8CzKOQ?view and use the header bar on your left to skip to where you want to go! ## Initiative FYI Links Initiatives repo h

Fedora 34 compose report: 20210215.n.0 changes

OLD: Fedora-34-20210214.n.0 NEW: Fedora-34-20210215.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:0 Dropped images: 2 Added packages: 0 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 60 Downgraded packages: 1 Size of added packages: 0 B Size of dropped packages:0 B Size of

Re: Fedora 35 Change: rpmautospec - removing release and changelog fields from spec files (System-Wide Change proposal)

Dne 14. 02. 21 v 19:45 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a): So, I am a bit leary of this change for the same reason that I was for the last few changes like this. Namely, we are building out own layer on top of rpm to make our lives easier, when we probibly should try and just improve rpm to do this for everyo

Plan to retire engrid

Hi I'll be retiring engrid by the end of the week unless someone wants to pick it up. It fails to build against VTK9, last commit upstream was in 2017. If someone want's to take it, please let me know. Thanks Sandro ___ devel mailing list -- devel@

Re: Fedora's GPG key in DNS(SEC)

Hi, if you approach the question of where to anchor your trust from too broad perspective you end up with no other option but throwing your computer out of the window (joking, don't do that). This system has other advantages as well: * it can automatically install keys for 3rd party repos an

Unretiring perl-Crypt-PBKDF2

The perl-Crypt-PBKDF2 package was retired about a year ago due to having been orphaned for 6+ weeks. I'm unretiring it because it's a dependency for updating perl-Crypt-CBC. Review request: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1928111 Releng ticket: https://pagure.io/releng/issue/10016 Pa

Fedora-Cloud-32-20210215.0 compose check report

No missing expected images. Soft failed openQA tests: 1/7 (x86_64), 1/7 (aarch64) (Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug) Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-32-20210214.0): ID: 777950 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud URL: https://op

Next Open NeuroFedora Meeting: 1300 UTC on Monday, 15 February (Today)

Hello everyone, Please join us at the next Open NeuroFedora team meeting on Monday 15 February at 1300UTC in #fedora-neuro on IRC (Freenode). The meeting is a public meeting, and open for everyone to attend. You can join us over: IRC: https://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=#fedora-neuro or Matri