Re: Any recent changes to the arm builders?

On 8/14/21 12:29 PM, Jeff Law wrote: On 8/14/2021 10:19 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: On Fri, Aug 13, 2021 at 09:34:11PM -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote: Have there been any recent changes to the arm (32bit) builders?  It seems like I'm having much more issues there with builds likely running out of m

Re: Running rawhide mockbuild on Fedora 33 fails with GPG check

Hi, I'm seeing the same problem, for a quick fix, we need update /etc/mock/templates/fedora-rawhide.tpl line 12 with config_opts['releasever'] = '36', as reference [1] ... We need a new mock-core-configs package with configurations for "Fedora 35 branched" some work in progress here [2]  [2]

Re: All COPR rawhide builds have failed

On 14. 08. 21 21:09, Paweł Marciniak wrote: All COPR rawhide builds have failed. It seems to be related to GPG keys. Importing GPG key 0x9867C58F: Userid : "Fedora (35) " Fingerprint: 787E A6AE 1147 EEE5 6C40 B30C DB46 3971 9867 C58F From : /usr/share/distribution-gpg-keys/fedor

Running rawhide mockbuild on Fedora 33 fails with GPG check

Hello. I've tried to run a rawhide mockbuild on Fedoa 33 and I get GPG failures. It worked yesterday. I have the following packages installed: fedora-release-33-4 fedora-repos-33-5 mock-2.12-1.fc33 mock-core-configs-34.6-1.fc33 fedora-gpg-keys-33-5 $ mock -r fedora-rawhide-x86_64 --scrub=all

Re: After branching F36, under Rawhide I can not build packages for F35 for i386 arch, instead of it mock builded packages for F36.

On 8/14/21 7:48 PM, Mikhail Gavrilov wrote: After branching F36, under Rawhide I can not build packages for F35 for i386 arch, instead of it mock builded packages for F36. Mock rebuild output: https://pastebin.com/LmQxFBUN From your log it seems the mock config file "fedora-35-i386.cfg" is s

Re: All COPR rawhide builds have failed

I ran into the same thing, but I assumed it was me doing something wrong since I'm just starting out learning the Fedora Build process, The failures I am seeing are exactly the same as yours: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/q5sys/Fedora-Jam/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/02521113-fedora-

All COPR rawhide builds have failed

All COPR rawhide builds have failed. It seems to be related to GPG keys. Importing GPG key 0x9867C58F: Userid : "Fedora (35) " Fingerprint: 787E A6AE 1147 EEE5 6C40 B30C DB46 3971 9867 C58F From : /usr/share/distribution-gpg-keys/fedora/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-35-primary Key imported succ

Re: Any recent changes to the arm builders?

On 8/14/2021 10:19 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: On Fri, Aug 13, 2021 at 09:34:11PM -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote: Have there been any recent changes to the arm (32bit) builders? It seems like I'm having much more issues there with builds likely running out of memory or similar. Yes. They were mista

After branching F36, under Rawhide I can not build packages for F35 for i386 arch, instead of it mock builded packages for F36.

After branching F36, under Rawhide I can not build packages for F35 for i386 arch, instead of it mock builded packages for F36. Mock rebuild output: https://pastebin.com/LmQxFBUN ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send

Fedora-Rawhide-20210814.n.0 compose check report

No missing expected images. Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check! 4 of 43 required tests failed, 1 result missing openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING** below Unsatisfied gating requirements that could not be mapped to openQA tests: MISSING: fedora.Clou

Fedora-35-20210814.n.0 compose check report

No missing expected images. Failed openQA tests: 23/204 (x86_64), 22/140 (aarch64) New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-35-20210813.n.0): ID: 948316 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_blivet_lvm_ext4 URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/948316 ID: 948370 Test: x86_64 Wo

Re: Any recent changes to the arm builders?

Kevin Fenzi writes: > It makes me wonder if we should consider letting 32bit arm go... > (insert pitchforks and torches). ... or go back to an F32 kernel? - FChE ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to

Re: Any recent changes to the arm builders?

On Fri, Aug 13, 2021 at 09:34:11PM -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote: > Have there been any recent changes to the arm (32bit) builders? It seems > like I'm having much more issues there with builds likely running out of > memory or similar. Yes. They were mistakenly running the normal kernel (so they

Re: Intention to obtain ownership of retired packages

On Sat, Aug 14, 2021 at 10:32 AM JT wrote: > > All, > > The following packages have been orphaned and retired: > fedora-jam-backgrounds: > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/fedora-jam-backgrounds/blob/rawhide/f/dead.package > fedora-jam-kde-theme: > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/fedora-jam

Fedora 35 compose report: 20210814.n.0 changes

OLD: Fedora-35-20210813.n.0 NEW: Fedora-35-20210814.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:3 Dropped images: 4 Added packages: 4 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 146 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 1.82 MiB Size of dropped packages:0 B Size of

Intention to obtain ownership of retired packages

All, The following packages have been orphaned and retired: fedora-jam-backgrounds: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/fedora-jam-backgrounds/blob/rawhide/f/dead.package fedora-jam-kde-theme: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/fedora-jam-kde-theme/blob/rawhide/f/dead.package I took over the Maint

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20210814.n.0 changes

OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20210813.n.0 NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20210814.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:3 Dropped images: 3 Added packages: 4 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 149 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 2.04 MiB Size of dropped packages:0 B

Re: The Death of Java (packages)

* Vitaly Zaitsev via devel: > Building Java apps in your home directory with Internet access is a > trivial task. The official Fedora builds has no network access, so you > need to unbundle all dependencies into a separate packages first. This > is the main problem. In the build-on-demand Java c

Fedora-Cloud-34-20210814.0 compose check report

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-34-20210812.0): ID: 947937 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud URL: https://op

Re: The Death of Java (packages)

Jack Frost wrote: > >I tried to "take" an orphaned package ... can't not a packager, so I > >tried to do a review, and even though I appear to be part of the group, > >I couldn't even access the review build because apparently I don't have > >the rights. [I think this is a misunderstanding. There

Re: Eclipse IDE packages and friends orphaned

On 8/11/21 1:35 PM, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote: *snip* > *List of packages orphaned (all were maintained for the sake of Eclipse > stack):* > * eclipse > * cbi-plugins > * eclipse-ecf > * eclipse-egit > * eclipse-emf > * eclipse-gef > * eclipse-jgit > * eclipse-license > * eclipse-m2e-core > * ecli

Fedora-Cloud-33-20210814.0 compose check report

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-33-20210813.0): ID: 947772 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud URL: https://op