Hi Adam,
also gvfs uses pkexec currently to start gvfsd-admin backend...
Regards
O.
st 26. 1. 2022 v 23:39 odesílatel Adam Williamson
napsal:
>
> Hi folks!
>
> For anyone who hasn't seen it yet - there's quite a kerfuffle today
> about a major security issue in polkit:
>
> https://arstechnica.
On 1/24/22 01:30, Robert-André Mauchin wrote:
Hi,
So I have an annoying bug that started near the beginnings of F35.
My papirus-icon-theme became very slow to install:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2029709#c18
During the installation, all the files are copied, then renamed by rpm
Hi Adam,
thanks for asking this question!
Due to similar horrible bugs before, I have uninstalled sudo and friends, but I
never managed to uninstall pkexec due to those dependencies.
> The issue and some of the comments around it prompted me to wonder -
> why is `pkexec` still a thing? Particul
Updating libvpx in rawhide to 1.11.0 comes with an soname bump to 7.0.0.
Affected Fedora packages:
* baresip
* godot
* gstreamer1-plugins-good
* linphone
* qt5-qtwebengine
* seamonkey
* toxcore
* utox
* xpra
I'm doing a rawhide chain-build since all of these rebuild locally without
issue against
Hi Mark,
> Of course gcc -fsanitize=undefined cannot be used on production code.
Why not? Will it find too many errors?
Kind regards,
Chris
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedora
Hi Florian,
> Yes, I understood that. x86_64 buildroots only have x86_64 packages in
> Koji. You cannot build and run 32-bit binaries (unless you put them
> together completely from scratch, without help from i686 RPM packages).
alright, thank you for clarifying!
Curiously though, the Koji buil
Just to let everybody know, Ruby 3.1 has landed in Rawhide [1]. The
binary packages have been rebuilt, but there might be other
compatibility issue. If you need help fixing your package, please come
to discuss the issue to ruby-sig ML.
Vít
[1] https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-
Hi Kevin,
On January 27, 2022 3:59:04 AM UTC, Kevin Kofler via devel
wrote:
>Hi,
>
>when working on finally fixing Trojitá to build (it had been FTBFS since
>F34, so removal was impending), I have noticed that the Akonadi contacts
>plugin was not getting built because of missing transitive bui
* Christoph Erhardt:
> I'm not actually trying to cross-build mold for i686; my goal is to do a
> regular x86_64 build of mold and to run its complete testsuite.
Yes, I understood that. x86_64 buildroots only have x86_64 packages in
Koji. You cannot build and run 32-bit binaries (unless you pu
On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 1:05 PM Matthew Miller wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 02:21:19PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > My best recollection is that pkexec was kinda a kludge to allow us to
> > get rid of consolehelper: some apps weren't getting rewritten to the
> > Right Way of doing thing
I'm not actually trying to cross-build mold for i686; my goal is to do a
regular x86_64 build of mold and to run its complete testsuite.
Since mold is a linker that supports multiple target architectures, its
testsuite contains a bunch of scripts that explicitly invoke `cc -m32` and
`cc -m32 -st
* Florian Weimer:
> * Christoph Erhardt:
>
>> I'm trying to build mold for epel8. A bunch of mold's unit tests produce
>> statically linked 32-bit binaries, so on x86_64 we need a build dependency
>> on
>> a static multilib glibc.
>>
>> I have learnt that multilib build dependencies are a trick
* Christoph Erhardt:
> I'm trying to build mold for epel8. A bunch of mold's unit tests produce
> statically linked 32-bit binaries, so on x86_64 we need a build dependency on
> a static multilib glibc.
>
> I have learnt that multilib build dependencies are a tricky thing in Koji,
> and
> the
On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 02:21:19PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> My best recollection is that pkexec was kinda a kludge to allow us to
> get rid of consolehelper: some apps weren't getting rewritten to the
> Right Way of doing things under policykit, they still just wanted to
> have the entire ap
Hi list,
I'm trying to build mold for epel8. A bunch of mold's unit tests produce
statically linked 32-bit binaries, so on x86_64 we need a build dependency on
a static multilib glibc.
I have learnt that multilib build dependencies are a tricky thing in Koji, and
the only solution I have found
On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 11:37:29AM +0100, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 10:41:36AM +0100, Roberto Ragusa wrote:
> > On 1/22/22 10:05 PM, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> >
> > > So I would give valgrind a 6/6 (100%) score :)
> >
> > But if the compiler starts copying zeros on unin
On Thu, 2022-01-27 at 18:05 +0100, Peter Boy wrote:
>
> > Am 27.01.2022 um 13:14 schrieb rawh...@fedoraproject.org:
> >
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_36_Rawhide_20220127.n.0_Summary
>
> I’m missing Server aarch64 raw-xz. Is it not yet finished or not successful?
You can
> Am 27.01.2022 um 13:14 schrieb rawh...@fedoraproject.org:
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_36_Rawhide_20220127.n.0_Summary
I’m missing Server aarch64 raw-xz. Is it not yet finished or not successful?
___
devel mailing list -
Hello Mark,
On Thursday, January 27, 2022 5:37:29 AM EST Mark Wielaard wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 10:41:36AM +0100, Roberto Ragusa wrote:
> > On 1/22/22 10:05 PM, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > > So I would give valgrind a 6/6 (100%) score :)
> >
> > But if the compiler starts copying zeros on un
On Fri, 2021-10-08 at 12:13 +0200, Konrad Kleine wrote:
> Dear Fedora packagers, developers and users,
>
> we have some good news for you:
>
> We are beginning to build nightly snapshot packages of LLVM for the
> latest
> versions of Fedora Linux (currently 34, 35 and rawhide) for a growing
> lis
On Thursday, 27 January 2022 16.14.36 WET José Abílio Matos wrote:
> $ src/lyx
>
> [1] 61542
>
> src/lyx: /lib64/libstdc++.so.6: version `GLIBCXX_3.4.30' not found (required
> by src/lyx)
>
>
> Any help here?
OK, one option is set the linker path
$ LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/opt/gcc-latest/lib64/ src/ly
On Wednesday, 3 November 2021 13.47.22 WET Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> Nice to see this going public, I will definitely be using it, thanks!
>
> And I'll shamelessly plug my copr with weekly GCC snapshots ;-)
> https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/jwakely/gcc-latest/
Thank you for providing it.
No missing expected images.
Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check!
7 of 43 required tests failed, 5 results missing
openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING**
below
Failed openQA tests: 25/225 (x86_64), 23/148 (aarch64)
New failures (same test not failed i
On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 9:57 AM David Sommerseth wrote:
>
> On 27/01/2022 15:50, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > pkcs11-helper doesn't exist in RHEL/CentOS itself, and it's probably
> > being filtered out in ELN to mimic RHEL. It's shipped in EPEL, so you
> > need an EPEL repository.
>
> Alright, sounds rea
On 27/01/2022 15:50, Neal Gompa wrote:
pkcs11-helper doesn't exist in RHEL/CentOS itself, and it's probably
being filtered out in ELN to mimic RHEL. It's shipped in EPEL, so you
need an EPEL repository.
Alright, sounds reasonable.
ELN won't be very useful for you because it's a stripped comp
On Thu, Jan 27 2022 at 11:37:29 AM +0100, Mark Wielaard
wrote:
If you believe the tools are pretty good for detecting
these issues (and I believe they are, the example given was just
unfortunate because some of the issues weren't actually bad code and
some others were rightfully optimized out, s
On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 9:45 AM David Sommerseth wrote:
>
> On 27/01/2022 15:35, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 9:33 AM David Sommerseth wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I've hit a challenge I've not been able to figure out properly. I'm
> >> putting together a Fedora Copr repo
On 27/01/2022 15:35, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 9:33 AM David Sommerseth wrote:
Hi,
I've hit a challenge I've not been able to figure out properly. I'm
putting together a Fedora Copr repo which should cover most the various
distros supported via Copr- CentOS Stream, EPEL, Fed
On Tue, 2022-01-25 at 09:54 +, Paul Howarth wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I'm the Fedora maintainer of the perl-HTML-Tidy package and its
> underlying library, tidyp.
>
> The upstream maintainer of these packages has now stopped work on
> tidyp, and has archived the upstream repository in a read-on
On Thu, 27 Jan 2022 15:06:31 +0100, František Šumšal wrote:
> I've indeed noticed the other warnings. However, given this mass rebuild was
> done with a new snapshot of gcc-12, the error is probably related to that,
> that's why I pointed out the most severe issue (since it's an error, not
> a war
On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 9:33 AM David Sommerseth wrote:
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I've hit a challenge I've not been able to figure out properly. I'm
> putting together a Fedora Copr repo which should cover most the various
> distros supported via Copr- CentOS Stream, EPEL, Fedora and Fedora ELN.
>
> The cha
Will do so :)
On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 3:35 PM Stephen Gallagher
wrote:
> I am canceling the ELN SIG meeting this week in favor of encouraging
> members to attend Devconf.cz.
>
> Visit https://www.devconf.info/cz/ for more information.
>
> On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 7:00 AM wrote:
> >
> > Dear all,
I am canceling the ELN SIG meeting this week in favor of encouraging
members to attend Devconf.cz.
Visit https://www.devconf.info/cz/ for more information.
On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 7:00 AM wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> You are kindly invited to the meeting:
>ELN SIG on 2022-01-28 from 12:00:00 to
Hi,
I've hit a challenge I've not been able to figure out properly. I'm
putting together a Fedora Copr repo which should cover most the various
distros supported via Copr- CentOS Stream, EPEL, Fedora and Fedora ELN.
The challenge is that for CentOS Stream, the EPEL repository is required
- as
On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 01:58:34PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> Hmm, so it sounds like OCaml was actually broken already. For example,
> if OCaml is linked with -flto or -use-ld=lld, then this should not "leak"
> into extensions. The split between flags which are appropriate to propa
On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 10:17 AM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
wrote:
>
> On 26/01/2022 09:49, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > If your only motivation is to avoid the review, then please don't.
> > Reviews are good. They discover problems with the package (if done
> > properly).
(snip)
> Fedora backgrounds p
On 1/27/22 14:58, Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jan 2022 14:01:40 +0100, František Šumšal wrote:
Looks like the culprit is:
You may have noticed that there are many more compiler errors in the build.log,
but it seems you've missed that the src.rpm builds fine for all other archs.
What gi
On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 2:55 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 11:51:54AM +0100, Iñaki Ucar wrote:
> > On Thu, 27 Jan 2022 at 11:34, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Another concrete proposal:
> > >
> > > Is there a way to scan all binary packages in Fed
On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 12:04:02PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 12:50:33PM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> >
> > Dne 27. 01. 22 v 12:18 Iñaki Ucar napsal(a):
> > >On Thu, 27 Jan 2022 at 12:09, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> > >>
> > >>Dne 27. 01. 22 v 11:19 Iñaki Ucar napsal(a):
>
On Thu, 27 Jan 2022 14:01:40 +0100, František Šumšal wrote:
> Looks like the culprit is:
You may have noticed that there are many more compiler errors in the build.log,
but it seems you've missed that the src.rpm builds fine for all other archs.
What gives?
___
On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 11:51:54AM +0100, Iñaki Ucar wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Jan 2022 at 11:34, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> >
> >
> > Another concrete proposal:
> >
> > Is there a way to scan all binary packages in Fedora to get either a
> > count or list of those packages that contain strings like
>
On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 11:29:13AM +0100, Iñaki Ucar wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Jan 2022 at 11:19, Iñaki Ucar wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 27 Jan 2022 at 10:58, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I think this change should be reverted until a cleaner way can be
> > > > found to implement it.
On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 10:41:36AM +0100, Roberto Ragusa wrote:
> On 1/22/22 10:05 PM, Mark Wielaard wrote:
>
> >So I would give valgrind a 6/6 (100%) score :)
>
> But if the compiler starts copying zeros on uninitialized memory,
> valgrind loses any ability to detect the defect in the code.
For
On 1/27/22 06:13, Iker Pedrosa wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 3:32 PM Matt Heon wrote:
We're prepared to handle this already as part of the Podman v4.0
change proposed for F36 elsewhere on this list - bumping to the
new version will pick up support for the breaking changes in t
On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 02:01:40PM +0100, František Šumšal wrote:
> Looks like the culprit is:
>
> In file included from common/mptPathString.cpp:13:
> ./src/mpt/uuid/uuid.hpp: In constructor 'constexpr
> mpt::mpt_libopenmpt::UUID::UUID()':
> ./src/mpt/uuid/uuid.hpp:195:17: error: 'goto' is not a
Looks like the culprit is:
In file included from common/mptPathString.cpp:13:
./src/mpt/uuid/uuid.hpp: In constructor 'constexpr
mpt::mpt_libopenmpt::UUID::UUID()':
./src/mpt/uuid/uuid.hpp:195:17: error: 'goto' is not a constant expression
195 | return;
|
On Thu, 2022-01-27 at 11:09 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 10:32:22AM +0100, Thomas Haller wrote:
> > On Wed, 2022-01-26 at 23:57 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > > A new gcc with most importantly the https://gcc.gnu.org/PR104172
> > > bug (that caused a lot of ppc64le failure
On Tue, 25 Jan 2022 10:04:32 -0800, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> After that we will be done and it will be on maintainers to sort out
> FTBFS issues.
What's up with the armv7hl arch being _the only one_ (!) that failed?
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=81787304
___
On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 1:10 AM Kai A. Hiller wrote:
> Hello :)
>
> I opened two small PRs with spec file changes for dependencies of mine.
> Both maintainers of the projects are active, but I got no response for a
> while now. Concretely, I’d like those changes for the matrix-synapse
> package a
On Thursday, 27 January 2022 at 11:23, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> On 26/01/2022 18:50, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > The problem with this is for folks that have the older backgrounds
> > installed, every time this package is updated all those people will have
> > to uselessly update those older pa
On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 4:50 AM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel <
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> On 27/01/2022 01:30, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > Kaleb tried a ceph build with ppc64le turned back on, but it's failed:
>
Only because I started the ceph build too soon and the new build of fmt
hadn'
Dne 27. 01. 22 v 13:04 Richard W.M. Jones napsal(a):
On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 12:50:33PM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 27. 01. 22 v 12:18 Iñaki Ucar napsal(a):
On Thu, 27 Jan 2022 at 12:09, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 27. 01. 22 v 11:19 Iñaki Ucar napsal(a):
On Thu, 27 Jan 2022 at 10:58, Zbigniew
Hey All,
Kernel 5.16 Test week is happening from 2022-01-23 to 2022-01-29. It's
fairly simple, head over to the wiki [0] and read in detail about the
test week and simply run the test case mentioned in[1] and enter your
results. Justin Forbes, has added a new Kernel Image for testing.
For folks, u
Announcing the creation of a new nightly release validation test event
for Fedora 36 Rawhide 20220127.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
On Thu, 27 Jan 2022 at 12:59, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>
>
> Dne 27. 01. 22 v 12:18 Iñaki Ucar napsal(a):
> > On Thu, 27 Jan 2022 at 12:09, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> >>
> >> Dne 27. 01. 22 v 11:19 Iñaki Ucar napsal(a):
> >>> On Thu, 27 Jan 2022 at 10:58, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> >>> wrote:
> > I t
On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 12:50:33PM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>
> Dne 27. 01. 22 v 12:18 Iñaki Ucar napsal(a):
> >On Thu, 27 Jan 2022 at 12:09, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> >>
> >>Dne 27. 01. 22 v 11:19 Iñaki Ucar napsal(a):
> >>>On Thu, 27 Jan 2022 at 10:58, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
Thinking about this a bit more, the implementation of this feature
simply seems to be wrong. RPM already has a final stage where it
strips ELF files and builds debuginfo. Why wasn't the addition of
package notes done there?
So my concrete proposal:
- Revert this change now
- Move the change
Dear all,
You are kindly invited to the meeting:
ELN SIG on 2022-01-28 from 12:00:00 to 13:00:00 US/Eastern
At fedora-meet...@irc.libera.chat
The meeting will be about:
Source: https://calendar.fedoraproject.org//meeting/10133/
___
devel maili
Dne 27. 01. 22 v 12:18 Iñaki Ucar napsal(a):
On Thu, 27 Jan 2022 at 12:09, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 27. 01. 22 v 11:19 Iñaki Ucar napsal(a):
On Thu, 27 Jan 2022 at 10:58, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
I think this change should be reverted until a cleaner way can be
found to implement i
On Thu, 2022-01-27 at 11:09 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 10:32:22AM +0100, Thomas Haller wrote:
> > On Wed, 2022-01-26 at 23:57 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > > A new gcc with most importantly the https://gcc.gnu.org/PR104172
> > > bug (that caused a lot of ppc64le failure
On 27. 01. 22 1:08, Kai A. Hiller wrote:
Hello :)
I opened two small PRs with spec file changes for dependencies of mine. Both
maintainers of the projects are active, but I got no response for a while now.
Concretely, I’d like those changes for the matrix-synapse package and the two
PRs and m
On Thu, 27 Jan 2022 at 12:09, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>
>
> Dne 27. 01. 22 v 11:19 Iñaki Ucar napsal(a):
> > On Thu, 27 Jan 2022 at 10:58, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> > wrote:
> >>> I think this change should be reverted until a cleaner way can be
> >>> found to implement it.
> >> I'm all for making
Hi,
On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 3:32 PM Matt Heon wrote:
> We're prepared to handle this already as part of the Podman v4.0 change
> proposed for F36 elsewhere on this list - bumping to the new version will
> pick up support for the breaking changes in the library, and as long as we
> trigger a Podm
Dne 27. 01. 22 v 11:19 Iñaki Ucar napsal(a):
On Thu, 27 Jan 2022 at 10:58, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
I think this change should be reverted until a cleaner way can be
found to implement it.
I'm all for making better, but please make concrete proposals.
Here's a concrete proposal:
-
Dne 27. 01. 22 v 11:28 Richard W.M. Jones napsal(a):
Another concrete proposal:
Is there a way to scan all binary packages in Fedora to get either a
count or list of those packages that contain strings like
"-Wl,-dT,/builddir/". This will give us numbers on how bad the
problem is.
If this w
On Thu, 27 Jan 2022 at 11:34, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>
>
> Another concrete proposal:
>
> Is there a way to scan all binary packages in Fedora to get either a
> count or list of those packages that contain strings like
> "-Wl,-dT,/builddir/". This will give us numbers on how bad the
> problem
Hi,
On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 10:41:36AM +0100, Roberto Ragusa wrote:
> On 1/22/22 10:05 PM, Mark Wielaard wrote:
>
> > So I would give valgrind a 6/6 (100%) score :)
>
> But if the compiler starts copying zeros on uninitialized memory,
> valgrind loses any ability to detect the defect in the code
Am 27.01.22 um 10:46 schrieb Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek:
But the problem is more general than this too. It also turns up in
some *.pc (pkgconf) files.
That's a bug too.
I think this change should be reverted until a cleaner way can be
found to implement it.
I'm all for making better, but
On Thu, 27 Jan 2022 at 11:19, Iñaki Ucar wrote:
>
> On Thu, 27 Jan 2022 at 10:58, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> wrote:
> >
> > > I think this change should be reverted until a cleaner way can be
> > > found to implement it.
> > I'm all for making better, but please make concrete proposals.
>
> He
Another concrete proposal:
Is there a way to scan all binary packages in Fedora to get either a
count or list of those packages that contain strings like
"-Wl,-dT,/builddir/". This will give us numbers on how bad the
problem is. I suspect it's quite widespread.
Rich.
--
Richard Jones, Virtua
On 26/01/2022 19:53, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
"used" in the sense of being used by any
account on the system, rather than in the dependency sense.
Both KDE and GNOME can handle the missing background file situation.
They will automatically switch to fallback (default).
--
Sincerely,
Vital
On 26/01/2022 18:50, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
The problem with this is for folks that have the older backgrounds
installed, every time this package is updated all those people will have
to uselessly update those older packages. ;(
1. Deltarpm can handle this situation as JPEG/PNG files will be the sa
On Thu, 27 Jan 2022 at 10:58, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
>
> > I think this change should be reverted until a cleaner way can be
> > found to implement it.
> I'm all for making better, but please make concrete proposals.
Here's a concrete proposal:
- Copy %build_*flags to another private
> BTW, bonus follow-up to this: as part of researching the background of
> polkit, I noticed that we never actually entirely got done moving off
> usermode :( There are still over a dozen packages in the distro that
> require it:
>
> anaconda-live-0:36.15-1.fc36.x86_64
> beesu-0:2.7-40.fc35.x86_64
On 26/01/2022 23:57, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
A new gcc with most importantly thehttps://gcc.gnu.org/PR104172
And another regression on x86_64 was introduced:
-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE not defined
-D_GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS not defined
Reported: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2047148
--
Sincerely
On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 10:32:22AM +0100, Thomas Haller wrote:
> On Wed, 2022-01-26 at 23:57 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > A new gcc with most importantly the https://gcc.gnu.org/PR104172
> > bug (that caused a lot of ppc64le failures) fixed and various other
> > fixes (e.g. std::basic_string(std
On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 09:46:59AM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 09:05:32AM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> >
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2043092
> >
> > This is not about the feature itself but about the way it has been
> > implemented
On 27/01/2022 01:30, Adam Williamson wrote:
Kaleb tried a ceph build with ppc64le turned back on, but it's failed:
I'm working on fixing fmt.
--
Sincerely,
Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.org)
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.o
On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 09:05:32AM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2043092
>
> This is not about the feature itself but about the way it has been
> implemented.
>
> During builds LDFLAGS is modified so it contains a build path,
> something like:
>
On Thu, 27 Jan 2022 at 10:13, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2043092
>
> This is not about the feature itself but about the way it has been
> implemented.
>
> During builds LDFLAGS is modified so it contains a build path,
> something like:
>
>
> -Wl,
On 1/22/22 10:05 PM, Mark Wielaard wrote:
So I would give valgrind a 6/6 (100%) score :)
But if the compiler starts copying zeros on uninitialized memory,
valgrind loses any ability to detect the defect in the code.
Regards.
--
Roberto Ragusamail at robertoragusa.it
___
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-34-20220126.0):
ID: 1114058 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL: https://op
On Wed, 2022-01-26 at 23:57 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> A new gcc with most importantly the https://gcc.gnu.org/PR104172
> bug (that caused a lot of ppc64le failures) fixed and various other
> fixes (e.g. std::basic_string(std::nullptr_t) = deleted only done
> for C++23 etc.) is now in r
(Sent too soon)
On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 09:05:32AM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> I think this change should be reverted until a cleaner way can be
> found to implement it.
And do we have a way to scan all binary packages looking for the build
path so we can find out which ones will need to b
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2043092
This is not about the feature itself but about the way it has been
implemented.
During builds LDFLAGS is modified so it contains a build path,
something like:
-Wl,-dT,/builddir/build/BUILD/.package_note-rubygem-nio4r-2.5.2-6.fc36.x86_64.ld
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 1/8 (aarch64)
New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-Cloud-35-20220126.0):
ID: 1114050 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1114050
Soft failed openQA tests: 1/8 (x86_64)
86 matches
Mail list logo
