I noticed this thread, I develop a personal project where I use about 10
C libraries, I noticed that "glfw", "libsodium" and "libevent" do not
have their corresponding mingw packages. I was considering trying to
package them but unifying them with the native packages would be better.
Of course,
Sandro kirjoitti 25.8.2022 klo 1.05:
On 8/24/22 23:43, Otto Liljalaakso wrote:
It looks like a commit was queuing in a pull request for a long time,
then merged after other things had happened in rawhide. Probably a more
correct Git date to use in %changelog would be the commit date instead
of
On 24. 08. 22 22:53, Alasdair G Kergon wrote:
On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 09:50:59PM +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote:
I think some of those *-team / *-sig / *-maint pseudo-group users are
outdated. Most of them probably pre-date the existence of actual
groups, so they are probably all ancient. For exam
ou're
going to revert the brokenness in f38 after it branches off, is ever a
good idea.
Please revert the change and wait for the devel list and FESCo
discussion of the topic before implementing it again.
Ack, will do promptly. My bad.
Reverted in crypto-policies-20220824-2.git2187e9c.fc38,
On 8/24/22 04:07, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
Orion Poplawski wrote:
Does this break ABI?
Yes. They changed functions to take 64-bit integers instead of 32-bit ones.
When called by code compiled against a previous version, the upper half will
be garbage. On some architectures (depending on h
On 8/24/22 23:43, Otto Liljalaakso wrote:
Sandro kirjoitti 24.8.2022 klo 23.50:
Yes, after I talked to him he became aware of the dependency between the
two packages and adopted flare as well.
AFAIK, both packages have been updated to the latest upstream release
now and built successfully. Th
OLD: Fedora-37-20220823.n.0
NEW: Fedora-37-20220824.n.2
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 1
Added packages: 0
Dropped packages:21
Upgraded packages: 17
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 0 B
Size of dropped packages:1.32 MiB
Size of
Sandro kirjoitti 24.8.2022 klo 23.50:
Yes, after I talked to him he became aware of the dependency between the
two packages and adopted flare as well.
AFAIK, both packages have been updated to the latest upstream release
now and built successfully. They should find their way into the
differ
On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 09:50:59PM +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> I think some of those *-team / *-sig / *-maint pseudo-group users are
> outdated. Most of them probably pre-date the existence of actual
> groups, so they are probably all ancient. For example, we removed the
> xgl-maint pseudo-grou
On 8/24/22 21:44, Otto Liljalaakso wrote:
Sandro kirjoitti 24.8.2022 klo 14.33:
On 23-08-2022 16:00, Sandro wrote:
I am interested in adopting the orphaned flare package[1]. It doesn't
appear to have any complicated requirements. My local build on a recent
git clone succeeded without effort.
On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 7:31 PM Mattia Verga via devel
wrote:
>
> Following my comment in
> https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2856#comment-812870 I wrote a simple
> script to check how many users have commit rights onto some project in
> src.fp.o, but aren't (anymore) members of the `packager` group:
Sandro kirjoitti 24.8.2022 klo 14.33:
On 23-08-2022 16:00, Sandro wrote:
I am interested in adopting the orphaned flare package[1]. It doesn't
appear to have any complicated requirements. My local build on a recent
git clone succeeded without effort.
Hello Sandro,
Thank you for taking interes
On Wed, 2022-08-24 at 16:58 +0200, Alexander Sosedkin wrote:
>
> Reverted in crypto-policies-20220824-2.git2187e9c.fc38,
> sorry for the premature jump scare.
openQA caught an interesting consequence of the change while it was
live: it makes PackageKit start crashing. The journal sh
Minutes:
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2022-08-24/fedora_coreos_meeting.2022-08-24-16.32.html
Minutes (text):
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2022-08-24/fedora_coreos_meeting.2022-08-24-16.32.txt
Log:
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2022
Following my comment in
https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2856#comment-812870 I wrote a simple
script to check how many users have commit rights onto some project in
src.fp.o, but aren't (anymore) members of the `packager` group:
```
Found 31 users with commit privileges but not in packager group:
pac
On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 1:00 PM Jilayne Lovejoy wrote:
>
>
>
> On 8/24/22 8:56 AM, Richard Fontana wrote:
> > Cross-posting this to the devel list.
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 11:41 PM Maxwell G wrote:
> >> Hi Legal folks,
> >>
> >> Can you please consider removing the following rule?
> >>
>
On 8/24/22 8:56 AM, Richard Fontana wrote:
Cross-posting this to the devel list.
On Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 11:41 PM Maxwell G wrote:
Hi Legal folks,
Can you please consider removing the following rule?
Fedora package maintainers are expected to announce upstream license
changes that they be
Just to chime in from a releng perspective here...
IMHO you should do builds for f38 now also (either by making a side tag
and bootstrapping them just like was done for f37, or tagging f37 builds
you need into the f38 sidetag).
While it's technically possible to push the f37 builds into rawhide
ou're
going to revert the brokenness in f38 after it branches off, is ever a
good idea.
Please revert the change and wait for the devel list and FESCo
discussion of the topic before implementing it again.
Ack, will do promptly. My bad.
Reverted in crypto-policies-20220824-2.git2187e9c.fc
What do I do now? Just keep it as it is?
> > > Revert, somehow initiate the approval early and unrevert once I have one?
> >
> > I don't think keeping rawhide/f38 intentionally broken, even if you're
> > going to revert the brokenness in f38 aft
Cross-posting this to the devel list.
On Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 11:41 PM Maxwell G wrote:
>
> Hi Legal folks,
>
> Can you please consider removing the following rule?
>
> > Fedora package maintainers are expected to announce upstream license
> > changes that they become aware of on the Fedora devel
V Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 09:55:39AM -0400, Neal Gompa napsal(a):
> Hey all,
>
> I'm updating ffmpeg to 5.1 to synchronize with third-party
> repositories that use this version for F37+. Because there were some
> failed builds from the F37 mass build due to bootstrap cycles, I'm
> using this as an op
I have tried to create a package for that, including rpm-macros to
easily remove conflicting installed icons.
Here it is:
https://lyessaadi.fedorapeople.org/icon-development-kit-2022.08.18-1.fc38.src.rpm
Should I submit that for review and change conflicting packages? Or
should we instead in
On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 4:32 PM Fabio Valentini wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 4:28 PM Alexander Sosedkin
> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 4:18 PM Vít Ondruch wrote:
> > >
> > > Alexander,
> > >
> > > Would you mind to comment on your intentions with:
> > >
> > > https://src.fedorap
On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 4:28 PM Alexander Sosedkin wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 4:18 PM Vít Ondruch wrote:
> >
> > Alexander,
> >
> > Would you mind to comment on your intentions with:
> >
> > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/crypto-policies/c/2f33ffcfa7192037f969c6a28e092aca767a1415?bran
On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 4:18 PM Vít Ondruch wrote:
>
> Alexander,
>
> Would you mind to comment on your intentions with:
>
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/crypto-policies/c/2f33ffcfa7192037f969c6a28e092aca767a1415?branch=rawhide
>
> which just landed in Fedora and broke Ruby test suite (even
V Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 03:00:23PM +0200, Iñaki Ucar napsal(a):
> On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 at 12:39, Petr Pisar wrote:
> >
> > > So if the rawhide rebuild can be based on the result of the F37 side tag,
> > > then bootstrapping etc. is not required, and the rebuild is fast and
> > > straightforward. Mor
Alexander,
Would you mind to comment on your intentions with:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/crypto-policies/c/2f33ffcfa7192037f969c6a28e092aca767a1415?branch=rawhide
which just landed in Fedora and broke Ruby test suite (even more then it
was broken before):
https://koschei.fedoraprojec
On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 03:57:37PM +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 3:49 PM Daniel P. Berrangé
> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Feb 20, 2022 at 10:13:18PM +0100, Sandro Mani wrote:
> > > Hi
> > >
> > > Following recent discussions and to reduce the maintenance burden, I'm
> > > pla
On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 3:49 PM Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
>
> On Sun, Feb 20, 2022 at 10:13:18PM +0100, Sandro Mani wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > Following recent discussions and to reduce the maintenance burden, I'm
> > planning to start merging native and mingw packages. Initially, I'll be
> > looking a
Hey all,
I'm updating ffmpeg to 5.1 to synchronize with third-party
repositories that use this version for F37+. Because there were some
failed builds from the F37 mass build due to bootstrap cycles, I'm
using this as an opportunity to clean that up too. There is also some
ELN fallout to deal with
On Sun, Feb 20, 2022 at 10:13:18PM +0100, Sandro Mani wrote:
> Hi
>
> Following recent discussions and to reduce the maintenance burden, I'm
> planning to start merging native and mingw packages. Initially, I'll be
> looking at these packages where I maintain both variants:
I've done the same wit
On 24/08/2022 08:21, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
Seen at least on F36 x86_64: The package
libreoffice-postgresql-7.3.4.2-4.fc36.x86_64 (built 2022-07-12) contains
a library /usr/lib64/libreoffice/program/libpostgresql-sdbc-impllo.so
that links against libpq (built with -lpq), so the library has
On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 at 12:39, Petr Pisar wrote:
>
> > So if the rawhide rebuild can be based on the result of the F37 side tag,
> > then bootstrapping etc. is not required, and the rebuild is fast and
> > straightforward. More so if no commits are needed.
> >
> This optimization is also possible.
On 23-08-2022 16:00, Sandro wrote:
I am interested in adopting the orphaned flare package[1]. It doesn't
appear to have any complicated requirements. My local build on a recent
git clone succeeded without effort.
I became aware of the package being orphaned by the announcement sent a
couple of
V Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 10:58:00AM +0200, Iñaki Ucar napsal(a):
> On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 at 10:49, Petr Pisar wrote:
> >
> > V Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 08:16:00PM +0200, Iñaki Ucar napsal(a):
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > We have a new R version sitting on a side tag (f37-build-side-55653)
> > > for a few wee
On 24. 08. 22 12:15, Iñaki Ucar wrote:
On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 at 12:04, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 24. 08. 22 10:58, Iñaki Ucar wrote:
Thanks. The main issue is that there are circular dependencies, and it
requires bootstrapping in some cases and disabling the checks in
others, and then another pass
On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 at 12:04, Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> On 24. 08. 22 10:58, Iñaki Ucar wrote:
> > Thanks. The main issue is that there are circular dependencies, and it
> > requires bootstrapping in some cases and disabling the checks in
> > others, and then another pass to reenable everything. So
Orion Poplawski wrote:
> Does this break ABI?
Yes. They changed functions to take 64-bit integers instead of 32-bit ones.
When called by code compiled against a previous version, the upper half will
be garbage. On some architectures (depending on how exactly arguments are
passed, but they will
Elliott Sales de Andrade wrote:
> Icons are not code.
Even if they are compiled into a code binary as a resource file (as seem to
be often done in this case)?
Kevin Kofler
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe s
On 24. 08. 22 10:58, Iñaki Ucar wrote:
Thanks. The main issue is that there are circular dependencies, and it
requires bootstrapping in some cases and disabling the checks in
others, and then another pass to reenable everything. So if the
rawhide rebuild can be based on the result of the F37 side
On Wed, Aug 24, 2022, at 11:56, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> That was exactly my point though. If nobody finds CVEs, then nobody has to
> fix them. We can only fix what we know about, and blackhats can only attack
> what they know about.
The fact that there are no new CVEs (and therefore fixe
On 8/24/22 05:56, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
>> pcre will also have a drop in found CVEs simply because far fewer people
>> will be bothering to look at the old code. If no one is looking for bugs
>> then none are going to be reported :-)
>
> That was exactly my poin
Lukas Javorsky wrote:
> Anyway, the main idea behind this change is to prevent any new packages
> coming to Fedora 38 to require the old pcre package and forward them to
> use the newer version of it *pcre2*.
As I have stated several times, I do not see this process as a productive or
useful thin
Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> pcre will also have a drop in found CVEs simply because far fewer people
> will be bothering to look at the old code. If no one is looking for bugs
> then none are going to be reported :-)
That was exactly my point though. If nobody finds CVEs, then nobody has to
fix t
Thank you for all of your feedback.
As Zbyszek mentioned, this change is only about the *deprecation*, not the
*retirement*.
This means that if the pcre is deprecated, no new package will be allowed
to require it. Also, it would mean that all of the existing packages will
be notified about this de
Le 24/08/2022 à 09:47, Vít Ondruch a écrit :> Shouldn't we have shared
"Icon Library" package, which would solve the
conflicts?
Yes, this is what I'm also proposing, and what I think is probably the
most painless solution. Additionally, since packages like
gnome-control-center install icons
And now with the attachments... Classic.
On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 at 11:28, Iñaki Ucar wrote:
>
> On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 at 10:59, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 10:39 AM Petr Pisar wrote:
> > >
> > > V Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 08:16:00PM +0200, Iñaki Ucar napsal(a):
> > > > Hi all,
On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 at 10:59, Fabio Valentini wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 10:39 AM Petr Pisar wrote:
> >
> > V Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 08:16:00PM +0200, Iñaki Ucar napsal(a):
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > We have a new R version sitting on a side tag (f37-build-side-55653)
> > > for a few weeks n
On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 10:58 AM Iñaki Ucar wrote:
>
> On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 at 10:49, Petr Pisar wrote:
> >
> > V Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 08:16:00PM +0200, Iñaki Ucar napsal(a):
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > We have a new R version sitting on a side tag (f37-build-side-55653)
> > > for a few weeks now, w
On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 at 10:49, Petr Pisar wrote:
>
> V Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 08:16:00PM +0200, Iñaki Ucar napsal(a):
> > Hi all,
> >
> > We have a new R version sitting on a side tag (f37-build-side-55653)
> > for a few weeks now, where packages are being rebuilt as time permits.
> > Unfortunately,
On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 10:39 AM Petr Pisar wrote:
>
> V Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 08:16:00PM +0200, Iñaki Ucar napsal(a):
> > Hi all,
> >
> > We have a new R version sitting on a side tag (f37-build-side-55653)
> > for a few weeks now, where packages are being rebuilt as time permits.
> > Unfortunatel
Dne 24. 08. 22 v 2:55 Lyes Saadi napsal(a):
Hello devel,
I recently packaged blackbox-terminal, but, someone packaging another
app, extension-manager noticed that his package conflicted with mine,
and a `dnf whatprovides` later noticed that it also conflicted with
cozy*. I soon discovered th
V Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 08:16:00PM +0200, Iñaki Ucar napsal(a):
> Hi all,
>
> We have a new R version sitting on a side tag (f37-build-side-55653)
> for a few weeks now, where packages are being rebuilt as time permits.
> Unfortunately, F37 is not rawhide anymore, so the question is whether
> this
On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 at 04:56, Maxwell G wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, August 23, 2022 1:16:00 PM CDT Iñaki Ucar wrote:
> > We have a new R version sitting on a side tag (f37-build-side-55653)
> > for a few weeks now, where packages are being rebuilt as time permits.
>
> Can this perhaps be handled differ
On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 05:14:33AM +0200, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> Ben Cotton wrote:
> > == Summary ==
> > Upstream stopped the support for the old 'pcre' package. It only
> > supports the new 'pcre2' version, so Fedora should deprecate it so it
> > could later be retired and removed from Fe
On Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 03:42:30PM -0400, Ben Cotton wrote:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PcreDeprecation
>
> This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes
> process, proposals are publicly announced in order to receive
> community feedback. This proposal will only be imple
On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 05:14:33AM +0200, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> Ben Cotton wrote:
> > == Summary ==
> > Upstream stopped the support for the old 'pcre' package. It only
> > supports the new 'pcre2' version, so Fedora should deprecate it so it
> > could later be retired and removed from Fe
58 matches
Mail list logo
