Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FPC
meeting Thursday at 2021-04-08 16:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on
irc.freenode.net.
Local time information (via. uitime):
= Day: Thursday ==
2021-04-08 09:00 PDT US/Pacific
2021-04-08 1
Dear all,
I'm finding I don't have the time to maintain fbreader (an ebook
reader) - and I don't use it anymore these days.
I also maintain libunibreak as a fbreader dependency, so I'm also
orphaning it.
Looks like coolreader is the only other user of libunibreak at the
moment, cc:ing its mainta
On Tue, Apr 06, 2021 at 10:28:08AM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 06, 2021 at 12:42:33PM +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> > - icedtea-web-0:2.0.0-pre.2.alpha13.patched1.fc33 >
> > icedtea-web-0:2.0.0-pre.0.3.alpha16.patched1.fc34.3
> >
> > Versioning snafu - alpha 13 should not sort hig
On Wed, Apr 7, 2021 at 4:33 PM Ben Cotton wrote:
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/DebuginfodByDefault
>
> == Summary ==
> Fedora users / developers who need to debug/trace distro binaries can
> make use of the recently activated elfutils-debuginfod servers to
> automatically fetch debugg
Greetings,
wlroots 0.13.0 and sway 1.6 have been released today. As usual, the
update is API and ABI breaking and all dependent packages must be
rebuilt. For all the dependents I identified either upstream patches or
ETA for the new release and have successful copr builds.
I'm planning to cr
Hi,
Workstation working group discussed this at a recent meeting, and
reached no decision. There's general agreement that a time based
limitation should apply rather than disk usage limit, to make the
retention more predictable. I think this can work by default for all
Fedora editions and spins. C
Panu Matilainen wrote:
> I'm starting to think the right thing to do is to move %check to run
> after %build rather than %install.
Here's one thing that would be affected by such a change:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Ada/#_runpaths
Our Ada packaging policy has a re
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Change/CyrusSaslBerkeleyDBtoGdbm
== Summary ==
cyrus-sasl package was built with libdb requirement, now it is replaced by gdbm.
== Owner ==
* Name: [[User:Dbelyavs| Dmitry Belyavskiy]]
* Email: dbely...@redhat.com
== Detailed Description ==
This change switches t
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/DebuginfodByDefault
== Summary ==
Fedora users / developers who need to debug/trace distro binaries can
make use of the recently activated elfutils-debuginfod servers to
automatically fetch debugging data and source code, instead of having
to use `# sudo dnf`
On Wed, Apr 07, 2021 at 09:07:53PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 06, 2021 at 12:42:33PM +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> > - virt-dib-1:1.44.1-1.fc33 > virt-dib-0:1.45.3-3.fc34
> >
> > This subpackage seems to have been accidentally dropped from F34+ when
> > it was dropped for RHE
On Tue, Apr 06, 2021 at 12:42:33PM +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> - virt-dib-1:1.44.1-1.fc33 > virt-dib-0:1.45.3-3.fc34
>
> This subpackage seems to have been accidentally dropped from F34+ when
> it was dropped for RHEL 9?
What happened here was part of libguestfs (Epoch 1) was split into a
sep
I intend to disable the `fedora_requires_release_note` flag in
Bugzilla. These days, the Release Notes are mostly built via issues
against the Release Notes repo[1] on Pagure. Removing unused flags
simplifies the BZ experience for users and prevents the Docs team from
having to look in multiple pla
Hi,
On Sat, 2021-02-20 at 10:49 +0100, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> Do you want to make Fedora 34 better? Please spend 1 minute of your
> time and try to run:
>
># Run this only if you use default Fedora modules
># next time you run any DNF command default modules will be
> enabled again
>
This is not the place for this, even if it were intended to start a
good-faith discussion, which this clearly isn't.
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-
https://gnu.support/richard-stallman/Ludovic-Court%C3%A8s-Guix-is-accusing-Stallman-of-Thoughtcrime-on-his-own-domain-GNU-org.html
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
I just picked up this package after it was orphaned. The upstream license
changed to MIT to GPLv3 in release 2.4; the previous maintainer missed the
change, so the RPMs in all current Fedora releases have the incorrect License
field. (The version in EPEL8 is old enough to be correct.)
I will b
Hi everyone,
It's that time! The Fedora Linux 34 Final Go/No-Go[1] meeting is
scheduled for Thursday 15 April at 1700 UTC in #fedora-meeting-1. At
this time, we will determine the status of F34 for the 20 April
preferred target date. For more information about the Go/No-Go
meeting, see the wiki[2]
* Colin Walters:
> On Tue, Apr 6, 2021, at 4:30 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> * Ondrej Mosnacek:
>>
>> > Kernel 5.12 added support to SELinux for controlling access to the
>> > userfaultfd interface [1][2] and we'd like to implement this in
>> > Fedora's selinux-policy. However, once we add the co
Dne 07. 04. 21 v 11:05 Panu Matilainen napsal(a):
On 4/7/21 11:45 AM, Panu Matilainen wrote:
On 4/6/21 7:40 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 06. 04. 21 v 16:02 Panu Matilainen napsal(a):
On 4/6/21 1:36 PM, Miro Hrončok wrote:
For example, what is common for Python "namepsace" packages, e.g.
pkg_n
Missing expected images:
Xfce raw-xz armhfp
Minimal raw-xz armhfp
Failed openQA tests: 22/189 (x86_64), 15/127 (aarch64)
New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-34-20210406.n.0):
ID: 846736 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_role_deploy_domain_controller
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproj
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 1/16 (x86_64), 4/15 (aarch64)
Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-IoT-34-20210406.0):
ID: 847045 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso base_services_start
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/847045
ID: 847051 Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd
On Tue, Apr 6, 2021, at 4:30 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Ondrej Mosnacek:
>
> > Kernel 5.12 added support to SELinux for controlling access to the
> > userfaultfd interface [1][2] and we'd like to implement this in
> > Fedora's selinux-policy. However, once we add the corresponding class
> > t
On Tue, Apr 6, 2021 at 10:30 PM Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Ondrej Mosnacek:
>
> > Kernel 5.12 added support to SELinux for controlling access to the
> > userfaultfd interface [1][2] and we'd like to implement this in
> > Fedora's selinux-policy. However, once we add the corresponding class
> > to t
On Tue, Apr 6, 2021 at 7:33 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 06, 2021 at 06:57:27PM +0200, Ondrej Mosnacek wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Kernel 5.12 added support to SELinux for controlling access to the
> > userfaultfd interface [1][2] and we'd like to implement this in
> > Fedora
On 4/7/21 2:21 PM, Tomas Orsava wrote:
On 4/7/21 12:45 PM, Panu Matilainen wrote:
On 4/7/21 1:12 PM, Tomas Orsava wrote:
On 4/7/21 11:38 AM, Panu Matilainen wrote:
On 4/7/21 12:06 PM, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 07. 04. 21 10:45, Panu Matilainen wrote:
I'm starting to think the right thing to do i
OLD: Fedora-34-20210406.n.0
NEW: Fedora-34-20210407.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 7
Added packages: 6
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 62
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 3.33 MiB
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Size of
On Wed, Apr 7, 2021 at 8:12 AM Clement Verna wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, 6 Apr 2021 at 12:58, Peter Robinson wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 6, 2021 at 11:36 AM Neal Gompa wrote:
>> >
>> > On Tue, Apr 6, 2021 at 3:23 AM Clement Verna
>> > wrote:
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Mon, 5 Apr 2021 at 20:30, Dan
I'm still working on the package but just wanted to give everyone a heads
up and potentially find a reviewer when I'm ready :)
This package includes the functions of libHalf from ilmbase and may need to
obsolete that package, still need to dig in a bit more.
Thanks,
Richard
__
On Tue, 6 Apr 2021 at 12:58, Peter Robinson wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 6, 2021 at 11:36 AM Neal Gompa wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 6, 2021 at 3:23 AM Clement Verna
> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, 5 Apr 2021 at 20:30, Daniel Walsh wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On 4/3/21 02:34, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
> > >
Missing expected images:
Minimal raw-xz armhfp
Xfce raw-xz armhfp
Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check!
7 of 43 required tests failed, 4 results missing
openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING**
below
Failed openQA tests: 23/189 (x86_64), 19/127 (aarch64
Announcing the creation of a new nightly release validation test event
for Fedora 34 Branched 20210407.n.0. 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
Missing expected images:
Iot dvd aarch64
Iot dvd x86_64
Failed openQA tests: 2/16 (x86_64), 3/15 (aarch64)
Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-IoT-35-20210406.0):
ID: 846693 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso base_services_start
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/846693
ID: 8466
On 4/7/21 12:45 PM, Panu Matilainen wrote:
On 4/7/21 1:12 PM, Tomas Orsava wrote:
On 4/7/21 11:38 AM, Panu Matilainen wrote:
On 4/7/21 12:06 PM, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 07. 04. 21 10:45, Panu Matilainen wrote:
I'm starting to think the right thing to do is to move %check to
run after %build ra
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20210406.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20210407.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:2
Dropped images: 5
Added packages: 10
Dropped packages:1
Upgraded packages: 248
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 4.81 MiB
Size of dropped packages
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 1/7 (aarch64)
New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-Cloud-32-20210406.0):
ID: 846664 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/846664
Soft failed openQA tests: 1/7 (x86_64)
(
On 4/7/21 1:12 PM, Tomas Orsava wrote:
On 4/7/21 11:38 AM, Panu Matilainen wrote:
On 4/7/21 12:06 PM, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 07. 04. 21 10:45, Panu Matilainen wrote:
I'm starting to think the right thing to do is to move %check to run
after %build rather than %install. That would completely el
On 4/7/21 11:38 AM, Panu Matilainen wrote:
On 4/7/21 12:06 PM, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 07. 04. 21 10:45, Panu Matilainen wrote:
I'm starting to think the right thing to do is to move %check to run
after %build rather than %install. That would completely eliminate
arguments over what is proper u
On 4/7/21 12:06 PM, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 07. 04. 21 10:45, Panu Matilainen wrote:
I'm starting to think the right thing to do is to move %check to run
after %build rather than %install. That would completely eliminate
arguments over what is proper use and should this or that be done etc.
Th
On 07. 04. 21 10:45, Panu Matilainen wrote:
I'm starting to think the right thing to do is to move %check to run after
%build rather than %install. That would completely eliminate
arguments over what is proper use and should this or that be done etc.
This is what I don't understand: The curren
On 4/7/21 11:45 AM, Panu Matilainen wrote:
On 4/6/21 7:40 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 06. 04. 21 v 16:02 Panu Matilainen napsal(a):
On 4/6/21 1:36 PM, Miro Hrončok wrote:
For example, what is common for Python "namepsace" packages, e.g.
pkg_name.foo.
1) We want to test installed files, not w
On 4/6/21 7:40 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 06. 04. 21 v 16:02 Panu Matilainen napsal(a):
On 4/6/21 1:36 PM, Miro Hrončok wrote:
For example, what is common for Python "namepsace" packages, e.g.
pkg_name.foo.
1) We want to test installed files, not what is in $PWD, so we set
PYTHONPATH to
%{
Thanks, added you both. Anyone with direct feedback from people using it
is quite welcome.
On 3/31/21 7:38 PM, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
> Hi Petr,
>
> On Wed, 2021-03-31 at 14:12 +0200, Petr Menšík wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> strongswan and NetworkManager-strongswan packages were passed to me
>>
Hello,
I was torn whether to share this here or not. I don't want to be the one who
always complains about things, but at the end I've decided that without honest
feedback, there cannot be progress (and I've realized I already am that guy).
Please don't take this feedback personally, I know th
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-33-20210406.0):
ID: 846159 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL: https://op
44 matches
Mail list logo
