Re: Review request: sfsexp - Small Fast S-Expression Library

Michael J Gruber wrote: > It turns out that bodhi applies the same boundary conditions to > "newpackage" updates (no karma for your own update, 7 days minimum to > stable by time). I don't think a new leave package can disturb current > systems much ... A library, in particular, will not receive an

Re: Help needed: Where's the error?

On 6/24/22 08:48, Florian Weimer wrote: * Miro Hrončok: Thanks. I was searching mostly for "error:" and could not find anything. It also helps to invoke make with -O if building with -jN, which for some reason does not happen for this build. Because it uses %cmake_build instead of %make_buil

Fedora-Rawhide-20220624.n.1 compose check report

Missing expected images: Minimal raw-xz armhfp Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check! 2 of 43 required tests failed openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING** below Failed openQA tests: 16/233 (x86_64), 14/163 (aarch64) New failures (same test not failed

[Test-Announce] 2022-06-27 @ 15:00 UTC - Fedora QA Meeting

# Fedora Quality Assurance Meeting # Date: 2022-06-27 # Time: 15:00 UTC (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto) # Location: #fedora-meeting on irc.libera.chat Greetings testers! We didn't meet for a couple of weeks, so let's do a quick check in. I don't really have anything major

Re: List active versions for a package from CLI

On Friday, June 24, 2022 3:47:54 PM CDT Artur Frenszek-Iwicki wrote: > When you go to a package's repo on src.fedoraproject.org, > on the top of the page, you get this nice table that lists > active Fedora and EPEL releases, and for each of those, > prints the package version currently in stable an

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20220624.n.1 changes

OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20220623.n.0 NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20220624.n.1 = SUMMARY = Added images:1 Dropped images: 2 Added packages: 1 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 250 Downgraded packages: 1 Size of added packages: 17.19 KiB Size of dropped packages:0

Re: List active versions for a package from CLI

Just after sending this message, it occurred to me that I could just use the developer tools in the browser to check the URL of the API endpoint being called and then just send a similar request using curl. So it is quite possible that it was, indeed, my memory playing tricks on me, and I used to

List active versions for a package from CLI

When you go to a package's repo on src.fedoraproject.org, on the top of the page, you get this nice table that lists active Fedora and EPEL releases, and for each of those, prints the package version currently in stable and in testing. Now, I could swear that fedpkg had a similar feature. Yet, loo

superlu_dist-8.0.0

Hi all. Next release of superlu_dist will be in Rawhide not before next seven days. All dependent packages will be rebuilt. Changelog: https://github.com/xiaoyeli/superlu_dist/releases/tag/v8.0.0 Regards. -- --- Antonio Trande Fedora Project mailto: sagit...@fedoraproject.org GPG key: 0xCC1CF

Re: Where does "redhat-linux-build" come from?

$ rpmbuild --showrc The definition for %cmake is quite long, but includes this line: %{!?__cmake_in_source_build:-B "%{__cmake_builddir}"} \ %__cmake_builddir is defined as: %{!?__cmake_in_source_build:%{_vpath_builddir}}%{?__cmake_in_source_build:.} And then %_vpath_builddir is defined

Re: F37 proposal: Deprecate openssl1.1 package (System-Wide Change)

Jun 24, 2022 1:59:40 PM Jason Tibbitts : > When a package is deprecated, the intent is that no new dependencies on > any deprecated package would appear in the distribution, either by new > packages or from existing packages adding dependencies.  Of course, I > don't know what actually checks thi

Re: F37 proposal: Deprecate openssl1.1 package (System-Wide Change)

On 6/23/22 08:51, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 23. 06. 22 11:43, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >> I think this is the correct incantation ... >> >> # dnf repoquery --disablerepo=\* --enablerepo=rawhide-source --arch=src >> --whatrequires openssl1.1-devel >> Last metadata expiration check: 0:01:31 ago on T

Re: F37 proposal: Deprecate openssl1.1 package (System-Wide Change)

> Felix Schwarz writes: > imho removing the devel packages is basically the same as removing > openssl1.1 entirely. To me the idea of "deprecation" is to warn users > that something is going away WITHOUT removing functionality > immediately. I just wanted to note, since I haven't noticed it

Re: F37 proposal: Deprecate openssl1.1 package (System-Wide Change)

I support deprecating openssl1.1. We definitely shouldn’t be adding any new packages that depend on it. However, dropping the -devel package is almost as drastic as simply retiring the OpenSSL 1.1 package altogether. Grepping spec files for 'BuildRequires:.*openssl1' turns up the following pac

Re: Where does "redhat-linux-build" come from?

On 6/24/22 11:51 AM, Dan Horák wrote: On Fri, 24 Jun 2022 11:36:18 -0400 "Steven A. Falco" wrote: I'm trying to debug a package that uses cmake to build "out of tree". It looks like the build happens in a directory called "redhat-linux-build". Is there a macro that contains that string?

Re: F37 proposal: Deprecate openssl1.1 package (System-Wide Change)

On 24. 06. 22 17:39, Simo Sorce wrote: Not forever, just until Python 2.7 is removed :D Seriously thou, my proposal is: - deprecate it now - announce it goes away when RHEL 8 maintenance support ends Following the guidelines for deprecated packages: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/p

Re: F37 proposal: Deprecate openssl1.1 package (System-Wide Change)

On Fri, Jun 24, 2022 at 5:14 AM Dmitry Belyavskiy wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jun 22, 2022 at 11:02 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: >> >> On 22. 06. 22 21:05, Vipul Siddharth wrote: >> > We are going to deprecate openssl1.1 package, stop shipping the >> > corresponding devel package, and stop respecting crypto

Re: [Container-sig] About Fedora containers

Sorry, I read this as becoming dependent on GitHub actions for CI and for CD. On Thu, Jun 23, 2022, 4:24 PM Maxwell G via devel < devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote: > On Thursday, June 23, 2022 1:50:09 PM CDT Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > Not sure what github has to do with things here? > > Lumír sai

Re: Where does "redhat-linux-build" come from?

On Fri, 24 Jun 2022 11:36:18 -0400 "Steven A. Falco" wrote: > I'm trying to debug a package that uses cmake to build "out of tree". It > looks like the build happens in a directory called "redhat-linux-build". Is > there a macro that contains that string? [dan@talos linux]$ rpmbuild --eval %

Re: F37 proposal: Deprecate openssl1.1 package (System-Wide Change)

On Fri, 2022-06-24 at 11:42 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 24. 06. 22 11:23, Dmitry Belyavskiy wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Jun 24, 2022 at 11:20 AM Daniel P. Berrangé > > wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jun 24, 2022 at 11:13:13AM +0200, Dmitry Belyavskiy wrote: > > >

Where does "redhat-linux-build" come from?

I'm trying to debug a package that uses cmake to build "out of tree". It looks like the build happens in a directory called "redhat-linux-build". Is there a macro that contains that string? Steve ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedorap

[Reminder] CfP open for Nest with Fedora

Hi there Fedorans, It's time to submit your proposals for Nest with Fedora! The event will be held virtually on August 4th, 5th, and 6th. This is a great opportunity to share what you have been doing in the project and connect with your fellow Fedorans :) *The final deadline for the CfP is July 8

Re: Help needed: Where's the error?

* Miro Hrončok: > On 24. 06. 22 16:30, Florian Weimer wrote: >> * Miro Hrončok: >> >>> Hello. >>> >>> Could you help me find the error in the build.log? >>> >>> Here in this PR's CI build: >>> >>> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-pyside2/pull-request/9 >>> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/

Re: F37 proposal: RPM Macros for Build Flags (System-Wide Change proposal)

On 6/24/22 01:32, Florian Weimer wrote: * Tom Stellard: On 6/7/22 02:18, Florian Weimer wrote: * Ben Cotton: This change will add new macros which will make it easier for packages to add and remove their own compiler flags. This strategy is already used to some extent with feature macros li

Re: Help needed: Where's the error?

On 24. 06. 22 16:30, Florian Weimer wrote: * Miro Hrončok: Hello. Could you help me find the error in the build.log? Here in this PR's CI build: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-pyside2/pull-request/9 https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=88664870 Anything but ppc64le

Re: Help needed: Where's the error?

* Miro Hrončok: > Hello. > > Could you help me find the error in the build.log? > > Here in this PR's CI build: > > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-pyside2/pull-request/9 > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=88664870 > > Anything but ppc64le. > > The build ends with: > >

Re: Help needed: Where's the error?

On 24. 06. 22 16:14, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: On Fri, Jun 24, 2022 at 04:06:05PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: Hello. Could you help me find the error in the build.log? Here in this PR's CI build: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-pyside2/pull-request/9 https://koji.fedoraproject.org/ko

Re: Help needed: Where's the error?

On Fri, Jun 24, 2022 at 04:06:05PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > Hello. > > Could you help me find the error in the build.log? > > Here in this PR's CI build: > > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-pyside2/pull-request/9 > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=88664870 > > A

Help needed: Where's the error?

Hello. Could you help me find the error in the build.log? Here in this PR's CI build: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-pyside2/pull-request/9 https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=88664870 Anything but ppc64le. The build ends with: gmake[2]: Leaving directory '/buildd

Re: F37 proposal: Deprecate openssl1.1 package (System-Wide Change)

On Fri, Jun 24, 2022 at 02:06:14PM +0200, Tomáš Orsava wrote: > Hi Richard, > porting Python 2.7 to openssl 3.0 doesn't really make sense to me. > > We ship Python 2.7 so that developers can test code that needs to work on > Python 2.7 in various deployments like old CentOS/RHEL/etc. Fedora aims t

Re: F37 proposal: Deprecate openssl1.1 package (System-Wide Change)

Hi Richard, porting Python 2.7 to openssl 3.0 doesn't really make sense to me. We ship Python 2.7 so that developers can test code that needs to work on Python 2.7 in various deployments like old CentOS/RHEL/etc. Fedora aims to be a developer-friendly distro and so we want to provide the tools

Re: F37 proposal: Deprecate openssl1.1 package (System-Wide Change)

On Fri, Jun 24, 2022 at 01:37:16PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 24. 06. 22 13:11, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > >On Thu, Jun 23, 2022 at 10:43:45AM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > >>python2.7-0:2.7.18-22.fc37.src > > > >Vaguely seeing if it's feasible to backport the OpenSSL 3 support to > >Pyt

Re: F37 proposal: Deprecate openssl1.1 package (System-Wide Change)

On 24. 06. 22 13:11, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: On Thu, Jun 23, 2022 at 10:43:45AM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: python2.7-0:2.7.18-22.fc37.src Vaguely seeing if it's feasible to backport the OpenSSL 3 support to Python 2.7. This branch gets quite far: https://github.com/rwmjones/cpython/t

Re: F37 proposal: Deprecate openssl1.1 package (System-Wide Change)

Dear Richard, If the only problem is legacy (and unsafe) ciphersuites, loading the legacy provider will solve this problem. On Fri, Jun 24, 2022 at 1:11 PM Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Thu, Jun 23, 2022 at 10:43:45AM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > python2.7-0:2.7.18-22.fc37.src > > Vagu

Re: F37 proposal: Deprecate openssl1.1 package (System-Wide Change)

On Thu, Jun 23, 2022 at 10:43:45AM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > python2.7-0:2.7.18-22.fc37.src Vaguely seeing if it's feasible to backport the OpenSSL 3 support to Python 2.7. This branch gets quite far: https://github.com/rwmjones/cpython/tree/python-2.7-openssl-3 Only one test fails, te

CPE Weekly Update – Week 25 2022

Hi everyone, This is a weekly report from the CPE (Community Platform Engineering) Team. If you have any questions or feedback, please respond to this report or contact us on #redhat-cpe channel on libera.chat (https://libera.chat/). Week: 20th - 24th June 2022 If you wish to read this in form o

Re: Fedora Hatch Cork, Ireland - July 13th & 14th

Happy Friday Fedora Friends! :) There is still time to submit a talk to speak at Fedora Hatch Cork on July 13th in our repo and get your free ticket if you want to attend and not speak on our eventbrite site

Re: F37 proposal: Deprecate openssl1.1 package (System-Wide Change)

On 24. 06. 22 11:23, Dmitry Belyavskiy wrote: On Fri, Jun 24, 2022 at 11:20 AM Daniel P. Berrangé > wrote: On Fri, Jun 24, 2022 at 11:13:13AM +0200, Dmitry Belyavskiy wrote: > On Wed, Jun 22, 2022 at 11:02 PM Miro Hrončok mailto:mhron...@redhat.com>> wrote

Re: F37 proposal: Deprecate openssl1.1 package (System-Wide Change)

Am 24.06.22 um 11:27 schrieb Florian Weimer: * Felix Schwarz: Are these Python 2.7 dependencies only used at build time? In that case Fedora could maybe announce that openssl1.1 might not get the full security suport so the burden for openssl1.1 packagers is lower without removing the functiona

Re: F37 proposal: Deprecate openssl1.1 package (System-Wide Change)

Am 24.06.22 um 11:23 schrieb Dmitry Belyavskiy: What I'm afraid of is that if we just declare the deprecation, we will stay with this package forever. Well, RHEL 7 maintenance support 2 phase ends in June 2024. I'd expect that we should be able to drop Python 2.7 from Fedora at that point at l

Re: F37 proposal: Deprecate openssl1.1 package (System-Wide Change)

On 24. 06. 22 11:27, Florian Weimer wrote: * Felix Schwarz: Are these Python 2.7 dependencies only used at build time? In that case Fedora could maybe announce that openssl1.1 might not get the full security suport so the burden for openssl1.1 packagers is lower without removing the functionali

Re: F37 proposal: Deprecate openssl1.1 package (System-Wide Change)

* Felix Schwarz: > Are these Python 2.7 dependencies only used at build time? In that > case Fedora could maybe announce that openssl1.1 might not get the > full security suport so the burden for openssl1.1 packagers is lower > without removing the functionality? I'm pretty sure it's used for Pyt

Re: F37 proposal: Deprecate openssl1.1 package (System-Wide Change)

On Fri, Jun 24, 2022 at 11:20 AM Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > On Fri, Jun 24, 2022 at 11:13:13AM +0200, Dmitry Belyavskiy wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 22, 2022 at 11:02 PM Miro Hrončok > wrote: > > > > > On 22. 06. 22 21:05, Vipul Siddharth wrote: > > > > We are going to deprecate openssl1.1 package, s

Re: F37 proposal: Deprecate openssl1.1 package (System-Wide Change)

On Fri, Jun 24, 2022 at 11:13:13AM +0200, Dmitry Belyavskiy wrote: > On Wed, Jun 22, 2022 at 11:02 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > > On 22. 06. 22 21:05, Vipul Siddharth wrote: > > > We are going to deprecate openssl1.1 package, stop shipping the > > > corresponding devel package, and stop respecting

Re: F37 proposal: Deprecate openssl1.1 package (System-Wide Change)

Am 24.06.22 um 11:13 schrieb Dmitry Belyavskiy: I'm not sure that if we don't remove the devel package, we will provide strong enough motivation to get rid of the deprecating packages. imho removing the devel packages is basically the same as removing openssl1.1 entirely. To me the idea of "de

Re: F37 proposal: Deprecate openssl1.1 package (System-Wide Change)

On 24. 06. 22 11:13, Dmitry Belyavskiy wrote: On Wed, Jun 22, 2022 at 11:02 PM Miro Hrončok > wrote: On 22. 06. 22 21:05, Vipul Siddharth wrote: > We are going to deprecate openssl1.1 package, stop shipping the > corresponding devel package, and stop

Re: F37 proposal: Deprecate openssl1.1 package (System-Wide Change)

On Wed, Jun 22, 2022 at 11:02 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 22. 06. 22 21:05, Vipul Siddharth wrote: > > We are going to deprecate openssl1.1 package, stop shipping the > > corresponding devel package, and stop respecting crypto policies in > > openssl1.1 package itself. > > +1 to deprecating it >

Fedora-IoT-36-20220624.0 compose check report

No missing expected images. Failed openQA tests: 1/15 (aarch64) Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-IoT-36-20220618.0): ID: 1305750 Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_clevis@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1305750 Passed openQA tests: 14/15 (aarch64), 15/15 (x86_64)

Re: Review request: sfsexp - Small Fast S-Expression Library

So, thanks to the good and fast review sfsexp is in rawhide now. Hooray! It turns out that bodhi applies the same boundary conditions to "newpackage" updates (no karma for your own update, 7 days minimum to stable by time). I don't think a new leave package can disturb current systems much ... A

Fedora-Cloud-35-20220624.0 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-35-20220623.0): ID: 1305771 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud URL: https://op

Meld directory compare still broken in f36

Hi, meld directory compare in f36 is broken. I opened a bug report last month: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2091377 Some days later, kiilerix provided a PR to fix this issue: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/meld/pull-request/6 The PR has been accepted but a new package hasn

Re: F37 proposal: RPM Macros for Build Flags (System-Wide Change proposal)

* Tom Stellard: > On 6/7/22 02:18, Florian Weimer wrote: >> * Ben Cotton: >> >>> This change will add new macros which will make it easier for packages >>> to add and remove their own compiler flags. This strategy is already >>> used to some extent with feature macros like %{_lto_cflags}, >>> %{

Re: [Fedora-packaging] Re: [RFC] Build tag in RPM: from NVR to NVRB

On 24. 06. 22 9:30, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: On Thursday, 23 June 2022 at 15:01, Miro Hrončok wrote: On 23. 06. 22 14:24, Aleksandra Fedorova wrote: 2) A packager rebuilds packages from Fedora dist-git in a Copr repo, what will be the value of the build tag? How will the Copr build

Fedora-Cloud-36-20220624.0 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-36-20220623.0): ID: 1305725 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud URL: https://op

Re: [Fedora-packaging] Re: [RFC] Build tag in RPM: from NVR to NVRB

On Thursday, 23 June 2022 at 15:01, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 23. 06. 22 14:24, Aleksandra Fedorova wrote: > > > 2) A packager rebuilds packages from Fedora dist-git in a Copr repo, what > > > will > > > be the value of the build tag? How will the Copr build sort over the > > > official > > > Fedo