čt 14. 7. 2022 v 19:29 odesílatel Vitaly Zaitsev via devel <
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> napsal:
> On 14/07/2022 14:59, Jan Grulich wrote:
> > This means that all the upcoming releases of Qt 5 are meant to be bugfix
> > releases and therefore no API/ABI changes are expected. For that reason
> >
Hi everyone.
My name is Rommel, I work at Aiven, and we are looking at packaging the
open source libraries we use.
Here is my first review https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2107403
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To uns
On Thu, 2022-07-14 at 12:58 -0500, Maxwell G via devel wrote:
> +ntfs2btrfs
I just rebuilt this one in the sidetag.
Cheers
Davide
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
On 22/07/14 03:29PM, Mark E. Fuller wrote:
> Can anyone advise as to what the policy should be when a package is reviewed
> and approved but never imported?
I already answered Mark's question on Matrix, but for the benefit of
everyone else, there is a policy here:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/e
On 22/07/14 07:32PM, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> On 11/07/2022 18:21, Ben Beasley wrote:
> > I don’t believe this list is nearly complete. Two packages I maintain
> > that would be affected (fmidi and giada) are absent from the list.
>
> It's very strange:
>
> $ dnf repoquery -q --releasev
On 12/07/2022 22:13, Ben Beasley wrote:
Both bear and fmidi are now rebuilt into the side tag. I defined the
preprocessor macro FMT_DEPRECATED_OSTREAM as a temporary workaround
(noting that this will not be available in fmt 10.0).
It was fixed by upstream[1]. I think maintainer should backport
On 11/07/2022 18:50, Ben Beasley wrote:
If that FTBFS rate is typical of the full set of affected packages, then
merging the side tag without resolving the API incompatibilities in
dependent packages will be pretty disruptive to Rawhide as a whole.
I want to merge everything before the Fedora
On 11/07/2022 18:21, Ben Beasley wrote:
I don’t believe this list is nearly complete. Two packages I maintain
that would be affected (fmidi and giada) are absent from the list.
It's very strange:
$ dnf repoquery -q --releasever=rawhide --disablerepo="*"
--qf="%{name}" --enablerepo=fedora-sou
On 14/07/2022 14:59, Jan Grulich wrote:
This means that all the upcoming releases of Qt 5 are meant to be bugfix
releases and therefore no API/ABI changes are expected. For that reason
we have decided to no longer depend on the exact version of Qt that apps
were built against.
Are you sure? T
Missing expected images:
Minimal raw-xz armhfp
Compose PASSES proposed Rawhide gating check!
All required tests passed
Failed openQA tests: 13/239 (x86_64), 80/167 (aarch64)
New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20220713.n.0):
ID: 1325161 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2
On 7/11/22 07:31, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
On Thu, Jul 7, 2022 at 4:15 AM Jerry James wrote:
The various ANTLR packages will be impacted by
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Drop_i686_JDKs. The parser
Thanx a lot for sharing the thoughts.
generators, which are written in Java, will
Hi,
I'm now working on Qt 5.15.5 update in Rawhide. As you probably know, Qt
5.15 is the last major release of Qt 5 and all the development is now
focused to Qt 6. This means that all the upcoming releases of Qt 5 are
meant to be bugfix releases and therefore no API/ABI changes are expected.
For t
Can anyone advise as to what the policy should be when a package is
reviewed and approved but never imported?
This is the second one of these I have come across recently:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2031922 was
approved ~5 months ago and has gone nowhere since and it is
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20220713.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20220714.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:1
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 3
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 87
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 10.84 MiB
Size of dropped packages:0 B
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 8/8 (aarch64)
New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-Cloud-35-20220713.0):
ID: 1324961 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1324961
ID: 1324962 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 8/8 (aarch64)
New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-Cloud-36-20220713.0):
ID: 1324887 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1324887
ID: 1324888 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base
16 matches
Mail list logo
