* Neal Gompa:
> Some cursory examination of the new x86_64 sublevels seem to indicate
> that x86_64-v2 goes back to roughly 2007~2008, merely cutting off the
> first couple of generations of x86_64 CPUs from Intel and AMD. I
> personally don't have any computers that don't have support for
> x86_6
No missing expected images.
Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check!
6 of 43 required tests failed
openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING**
below
Failed openQA tests: 24/198 (x86_64), 26/134 (aarch64)
New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20
Hello everyone,
My name is Trevor and I was hoping to contribute to the Fedora project
in the form of packaging. I was told the first step would be to
introduce myself here. I have a few years of Linux experience as well as
Rust, Python and C/C++ development. I am, however, completely new to
packa
Hello everyone,
My name is Trevor and I was hoping to contribute to the Fedora project
in the form of packaging. I was told the first step would be to
introduce myself here. I have a few years of Linux experience as well as
Rust, Python and C/C++ development. I am, however, completely new to
packa
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20210613.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20210615.n.1
= SUMMARY =
Added images:1
Dropped images: 1
Added packages: 18
Dropped packages:43
Upgraded packages: 264
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 6.81 MiB
Size of dropped packages
Announcing the creation of a new nightly release validation test event
for Fedora 35 Rawhide 20210615.n.1. 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
On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 9:55 PM Neal Gompa wrote:
> Yeah, I think that proposal was not workable because of AVX2. The
> x86_64-v2 subarch adds SSSE3, SSE4.2, POPCNT, and CMPXCHG16B to the
> current x86_64 baseline. All of these instructions were present in the
> first Intel Macs launched in 2007,
On 5/7/21 10:48 AM, Ben Cotton wrote:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Broken_RPATH_will_fail_rpmbuild
== Summary ==
Enable broken RPATH detection
[https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_brp_buildroot_policy_scripts
buildroot policy] script by default. This will make t
On 15/06/2021 22:54, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 5:50 PM Fabio Valentini wrote:
Different question: How is the runtime CPU feature detection /
dispatch support in glibc coming along? Shouldn't this "work" by now?
No idea, good question, though!
If you mean feature level based
On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 5:50 PM Fabio Valentini wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 11:35 PM Neal Gompa wrote:
> >
> > Hey all,
> >
> > Earlier this week, I was helping with processing features for openSUSE
> > Leap 15.4[1] and I discovered that they're planning on introducing
> > x86_64-v2 to ope
On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 11:35 PM Neal Gompa wrote:
>
> Hey all,
>
> Earlier this week, I was helping with processing features for openSUSE
> Leap 15.4[1] and I discovered that they're planning on introducing
> x86_64-v2 to openSUSE soon. The reference for this change was that
> RHEL 9 is going to
On Tue, 15 Jun 2021 at 17:35, Neal Gompa wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> Earlier this week, I was helping with processing features for openSUSE
> Leap 15.4[1] and I discovered that they're planning on introducing
> x86_64-v2 to openSUSE soon. The reference for this change was that
> RHEL 9 is going to use
Hey all,
Earlier this week, I was helping with processing features for openSUSE
Leap 15.4[1] and I discovered that they're planning on introducing
x86_64-v2 to openSUSE soon. The reference for this change was that
RHEL 9 is going to use x86_64-v2[2]. Additionally, other distributions
have been con
On Tue, Jun 15 2021 at 09:18:34 PM +0200, Dan Horák
wrote:
make sure you have the fedora-packager-kerberos package installed, I
suspect the last update of fedora-packager wasn't right
Whatever is needed for Fedora kerberos to work needs to be a dependency
of gnome-online-accounts, since Fedor
On 08. 06. 21 15:58, Tomas Hrnciar wrote:
Chances are, you already got an automated F35FailsToInstall bugzilla from Miro,
that your package fails to install. It would be really helpful if you could
find the missing dependency and mark the bugzilla for your package dependingon
the bugzilla for t
On 15. 06. 21 22:30, Major Hayden wrote:
but it still feels like obsoleting it might make the most sense and take the
least amount of effort.
I agree.
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedorap
On 6/14/21 8:30 AM, Miro Hrončok wrote:
2) How do I convert the python-azure-sdk package into a no-files
metapackage that brings in all of the SDK components?
I. Bump the metadata to a newer version-release (artificial?).
II. Remove all sources and contents of %prep/%build/%install.
I
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 2/42 (x86_64)
ID: 908853 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_notifications_live
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/908853
ID: 908866 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso apps_startstop
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/908866
Passe
On 6/14/21 7:40 AM, Major Hayden wrote:
3) How should I go about getting these smaller packages reviewed?
The majority of them are almost identical.
All of the Azure SDK components are up for review[0].
It's a lot to review (about 83 packages), but almost all of them are
identical ex
On Tue, 15 Jun 2021 10:59:32 -0700
Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 01:51:01PM -, Yaroslav Sidlovsky wrote:
> > Hello there!
> >
> > I've using this guide:
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/Kerberos.
> > When I'm trying to execute command `kinit -n @FEDORAPROJECT
On 2021-06-08 14 h 30, Michael Jeanson wrote:
I have started the process to update userspace-rcu to 0.13 in rawhide
which implies a soname bump to 8.
From what I understand, the following packages will need to be rebuilt:
device-mapper-multipath
glusterfs
knot
libntirpc
lttng-tools
lttng-ust
On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 01:51:01PM -, Yaroslav Sidlovsky wrote:
> Hello there!
>
> I've using this guide: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/Kerberos.
> When I'm trying to execute command `kinit -n @FEDORAPROJECT.ORG -c
> FILE:$HOME/armor.ccache`, I see this error:
> ```
> Password
Hello there!
I've using this guide: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/Kerberos.
When I'm trying to execute command `kinit -n @FEDORAPROJECT.ORG -c
FILE:$HOME/armor.ccache`, I see this error:
```
Password for WELLKNOWN/anonym...@fedoraproject.org:
^C
```
A week ago I was able to login
On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 12:50:03PM +0200, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 15. 06. 21 2:11, Neal Gompa wrote:
It's not terribly different from how organizations may have private
Python package indexes that may use whatever names they want for
Python software they build and release.
I agree, in fact, I
On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 05:56:54PM +0200, Christoph Karl wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On 04.06.21 at 19:11 Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > Release engineering has just enabled a cron job to remove koji side tags
> > that are older than 30 days or have no builds tagged into them.
>
> Is this 30 days after creating or
On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 05:03:36PM +0200, Jakub Kadlcik wrote:
> Hello fellow Fedora people,
>
> Inspired by @msuchy's Flock 2016 presentation, I
> would like to tackle one of the topics discussed there - The
> discoverability of Fedora sponsors for newcomers.
Thanks for taking this on! :)
> I
On 15. 06. 21 19:34, Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden wrote:
And for those of us who also maintain packages for EL7/8, what's the
availability of these macros?
Whenever technically possible, we add our new Python macros to EPEL 7+.
Sometimes, we even backport them to plain RHEL 8+.
This can (and wil
===
#fedora-meeting: FESCO (2021-06-15)
===
Meeting started by sgallagh[m] at 17:00:04 UTC. The full logs are
available at
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2021-06-15/fesco.2021-06-15-17.00.log.html
.
Meeting summa
On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 01:51:12PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 15. 06. 21 13:46, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
If that is not possible with reasonable effort,
at least a basic smoke test (such as importing the packaged module)
*MUST* be run in `+%check+`.
A simple scriplet should be introd
Petr Viktorin writes:
> On 14. 06. 21 17:52, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
>> On 14.06.2021 15:32, Ben Cotton wrote:
>>> Running upstream tests is mandatory.
>>
>> What about tests that require network access?
>
>
> Thanks for this and all the other concerns about mandatory tests!
> I updated
Hi!
On 04.06.21 at 19:11 Kevin Fenzi wrote:
Release engineering has just enabled a cron job to remove koji side tags
that are older than 30 days or have no builds tagged into them.
Is this 30 days after creating or last write access or last read access?
Thank you
Best Regards
Christoph
_
On 15. 06. 21 13:48, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 6:50 AM Petr Viktorin wrote:
Hi Neal,
We had this conversation in the past (and you can see it in the change).
I don't think I can convince you, but I'll reiterate since it's new for
devel@.
Unlike the "mandatory tests" issue else
thanks for your information.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines
It should be fixed
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-f90ebff42e
aom has been untagged from overrides.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Cod
On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 10:09 AM Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 15. 06. 21 16:00, Kaleb Keithley wrote:
> >
> > There have been no updates since 2018.
> >
> > If someone else wants to take it over I'm happy to transfer it to them.
> >
> > Otherwise I will retire it in one week's time.
>
> Hey Kaleb.
>
On 15. 06. 21 16:00, Kaleb Keithley wrote:
There have been no updates since 2018.
If someone else wants to take it over I'm happy to transfer it to them.
Otherwise I will retire it in one week's time.
Hey Kaleb.
Consider orphaning it today instead. The package will be availabe for taking
f
Hi,
I tried to build Carla for f33 on koji, but hist fails with this error message
[1]:
DEBUG util.py:444: No matches found for the following disable plugin patterns:
local, spacewalk
DEBUG util.py:446: Package make-1:4.3-2.fc33.x86_64 is already installed.
DEBUG util.py:444: Error:
DEBUG u
On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 7:00 AM wrote:
>
> You are kindly invited to the meeting:
>Prioritized bugs and issues on 2021-06-16 from 11:00:00 to 12:00:00
> America/Indiana/Indianapolis
>At fedora-meetin...@libera.chat
>
> More information available at:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US
There have been no updates since 2018.
If someone else wants to take it over I'm happy to transfer it to them.
Otherwise I will retire it in one week's time.
--
Kaleb
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email
On 14. 06. 21 21:00, Miro Hrončok wrote:
I tentatively agree with the idea of requiring an “import foo.bar” smoke test
in cases where the upstream tests cannot be used, especially since
pyproject-rpm-macros with %pyproject_buildrequires makes it much easier to
add runtime dependencies as BR’s
On 15. 06. 21 13:46, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
If that is not possible with reasonable effort,
at least a basic smoke test (such as importing the packaged module)
*MUST* be run in `+%check+`.
A simple scriplet should be introduced I think:
%check
%do_import_test
Already on it:
https://
On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 6:50 AM Petr Viktorin wrote:
>
> Hi Neal,
> We had this conversation in the past (and you can see it in the change).
> I don't think I can convince you, but I'll reiterate since it's new for
> devel@.
>
> Unlike the "mandatory tests" issue elsewhere in this thread, using th
On 15.06.2021 13:33, Petr Viktorin wrote:
If a test suite exists upstream,
it *SHOULD* be run in the `+%check+` section.
LGTM now. Many thanks.
If that is not possible with reasonable effort,
at least a basic smoke test (such as importing the packaged module)
*MUST* be run in `+%check+`.
A
On 15. 06. 21 13:32, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
On ti, 15 kesä 2021, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 14. 06. 21 20:09, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
On ma, 14 kesä 2021, Ben Cotton wrote:
[...]
PyPI Parity
Machine-readable metadata (''distribution'' names in
dist-info directories on disk and the
On 14. 06. 21 17:52, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
On 14.06.2021 15:32, Ben Cotton wrote:
Running upstream tests is mandatory.
What about tests that require network access?
Thanks for this and all the other concerns about mandatory tests!
I updated the proposal to mane them not mandatory,
On ti, 15 kesä 2021, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 14. 06. 21 20:09, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
On ma, 14 kesä 2021, Ben Cotton wrote:
[...]
PyPI Parity
Machine-readable metadata (''distribution'' names in
dist-info directories on disk and the corresponding
python3.Xdist(foo) RPM provides)
On 14.06.2021 22:33, Dan Čermák wrote:
I would then suggest to change the wording from "Running upstream tests
is mandatory." to "Upstream tests SHOULD be run unless there are
compelling reasons. In that case basic smoke tests MUST be added to
%check".
+1 for this.
--
Sincerely,
Vitaly Zaits
On 15.06.2021 10:14, Vít Ondruch wrote:
I think that "use your bests judgement" still applies. So whatever is in
guidelines should be respected, but sometimes there needs to be exceptions.
The word "MUST" should be replaced by "SHOULD" then.
If upstream tests works fine, I always enable them,
On Wed, 09 Jun 2021 10:41:59 +0100
Sérgio Basto wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In resume you are rindolf and don't have access to fedora anymore ? and
> you want that someone update it for you ?
> I can happily do that, if you give me permissions in fortune-mod , as
> you know my fas name is sergiomb , can y
I'll address the larger "mandatory tests" issue later; thanks for all
your concerns!
This point deserves a reply on its own:
On 14. 06. 21 19:35, Benjamin Beasley wrote:
[...]
It’s also not clear to me why the Python guidelines should be so much stricter
than the overall Fedora guidelines
(ht
On 14. 06. 21 20:09, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
On ma, 14 kesä 2021, Ben Cotton wrote:
[...]
PyPI Parity
Machine-readable metadata (''distribution'' names in
dist-info directories on disk and the corresponding
python3.Xdist(foo) RPM provides) will match the Python
Package Index (PyPI).
Hi Neal,
We had this conversation in the past (and you can see it in the change).
I don't think I can convince you, but I'll reiterate since it's new for
devel@.
Unlike the "mandatory tests" issue elsewhere in this thread, using the
PyPI namespace is the main point of the change. I can't take
On 02. 06. 21 16:57, Ben Cotton wrote:
*
[https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/ksurma/pygments-2.9.0/package/python-sphinx-click/
python-sphinx-click]
Fixed.
*
[https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/ksurma/pygments-2.9.0/package/python-myst-parser
python-myst-parser]
Fixed.
--
Miro
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 8/8 (x86_64)
Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-Cloud-34-20210614.0):
ID: 908223 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 base_package_install_remove
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/908223
ID: 908224 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-
On 14. 06. 21 17:39, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
Questions, questions ...
These new guidelines seem to be fine for pure Python packages, but I'm
maintaining a couple of packages where Python bindings are built as
subpackages of existing C libraries:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/libnbd
https
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the
FESCo meeting Tuesday at 17:00UTC in #fedora-meeting on
irc.libera.chat.
To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto
or run:
date -d '2021-06-15 17:00 UTC'
Links to all issues to be d
On 15. 06. 21 3:06, Miro Hrončok wrote:
Hello Fedorans.
I wanted to NEEDINFO Brett, but Bugzilla says:
You can't ask Brett Lentz because that account is disabled.
Do you know any alternate ways to contact them?
Hey Brett.
Are you still interested in maintaining your Fedora packages? It see
Dne 14. 06. 21 v 19:30 Vitaly Zaitsev via devel napsal(a):
On 14.06.2021 19:16, Miro Hrončok wrote:
That is exactly the thing we need to avoid. Python packages without
tests always cause trouble when we measure impact of our changes.
E.g. when we continuously rebuild packages with the next Pyt
No missing expected images.
Soft failed openQA tests: 1/8 (x86_64), 1/8 (aarch64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)
Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-33-20210614.0):
ID: 908100 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL: https://op
59 matches
Mail list logo
