(hmm, never seemed to get the first mail...)
Just recaping infos I got/researched for nixos.
Fabio Valentini wrote on Fri, Nov 04, 2022 at 04:32:35PM +0100:
>> I was NOT able to build following packages with libbpf 1.0:
>>
>>- bcc (needs 0.25 update first)
note bcc upgrade in turns breaks go
On Fri, 2022-11-04 at 22:33 +0100, Peter Boy wrote:
> I just tested installation of the various Fedora Server Edition installation
> media as of F37 rc 1.6.
>
> Arm image, Server KVM image and Server standard install (DVD) installed
> kernel 6.0.6-300.fc37. Only net install installed kernel 5.19
On Fri, Nov 4, 2022 at 8:24 AM Matthew Miller wrote:
> This is particulary nice for Fedora, since v6 includes our new logo!
Great! Do you happen to be a web developer, or play one on TV? :-)
--
Jerry James
http://www.jamezone.org/
___
devel mailing li
On Tue, Nov 1, 2022 at 1:37 AM Matthias Runge wrote:
> As a former contributor to those packages, your assumption is correct.
> python-XStatic-Font-Awesome can go away; I'll sync with Radomir on that
> note.
Great! One less package for me to worry about. :-)
> If someone relies on fontawesome-f
I just tested installation of the various Fedora Server Edition installation
media as of F37 rc 1.6.
Arm image, Server KVM image and Server standard install (DVD) installed kernel
6.0.6-300.fc37. Only net install installed kernel 5.19.16-301.fc37 (which was
installed by rc 1.4 or 1.5 if I remem
On Fri, 2022-11-04 at 09:10 +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Stephen Smoogen:
>
> > On Thu, 3 Nov 2022 at 12:24, Gary Buhrmaster
> > wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 3, 2022 at 3:57 PM Adam Williamson
> > wrote:
> >
> > > there, I did it for free. Took one minute.
> >
> > Clearly it should be
On 11/4/22 1:10 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> Another hard one is rust, which has hashed sonames like
> /usr/lib64/libstd-09076360fd960627.so. The hash is only known after
> building the package because that fixes the ephemeral ABI.
Right... I could glob a little more specifically for the few libXY
Action summary
Accepted blockers
-
1. gnome-calendar — Editing the recurring event freezes Calendar. — VERIFIED
ACTION: (none)
2. kernel — No video on Raspberry Pi 4 with kernel 5.19.15 and 5.19.16
(testing) — ASSIGNED
ACTION: Kernel maintainers to build upda
On Thu, Nov 3, 2022 at 11:40 AM Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 3, 2022 at 8:09 AM wrote:
> >
> > Dear all,
> >
> > You are kindly invited to the meeting:
> >ELN SIG on 2022-11-04 from 12:00:00 to 13:00:00 US/Eastern
> >At fedora-meet...@irc.libera.chat
> >
> > The meeting will b
On Thu, Nov 3, 2022 at 9:21 AM Ondrej Pohorelsky wrote:
>
> I'm not really sure why upstream did this.
> I'll take a look and submit a patch to upstream. Thanks for pointing it out.
It looks like you were able to resolve this upstream, thanks for that!
https://github.com/breezy-team/breezy/commit
On Fri, Nov 04, 2022 at 09:59:46AM +0100, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> hi,
> I'm upgrading libbpf to 1.0 and because it's changing the soname it
> requires changes in dependent packages.
>
> You're receiving this email because you're maintainer of one of those
> packages (if not please kindly forward this
On Fri, Nov 4, 2022 at 9:59 AM Jiri Olsa wrote:
>
> hi,
> I'm upgrading libbpf to 1.0 and because it's changing the soname it
> requires changes in dependent packages.
(snip)
> I was NOT able to build following packages with libbpf 1.0:
>
>- bcc (needs 0.25 update first)
>- bpftrace (nee
On Tue, Nov 01, 2022 at 01:30:01PM -0500, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
> I've finally gotten round to doing some polishing and getting it
> packaged:
> - updates for Fedora 36, 37, and Rawhide:
> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/?search=rust-update-set-0.0.1&packages=python-rust-update-set
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20221103.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20221104.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 5
Dropped packages:4
Upgraded packages: 80
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 39.16 MiB
Size of dropped packages
On Tue, Nov 01, 2022 at 08:22:55PM -0400, Ben Cotton wrote:
> I'm happy to make this the Fedora Program Manager's responsibility,
> but if RelEng wants to own that, that's fine too. In fact, if it
> doesn't cause RelEng to break into a cold sweat, I'd be happy to be
> added as a maintainer to make
On Tue, Nov 01, 2022 at 09:18:19AM -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
> > Would it make sense to have a Fedora Objective (at the Council level) around
> > this?
>
> Probably?
>
> I would say actually that this proposal is not even the end. I cut out a
> part due to objections/concerns, but I personall
On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 12:23:02PM -0600, Jerry James wrote:
> package. Version 6.x has backwards compatibility helpers for both 4.x
> and 5.x, so I would like to see fontawesome-fonts upgraded to 6.x and
> the fontawesome5-fonts package retired. There are a few hurdles to
This is particulary ni
Iñaki Ucar wrote:
> Packages using Qt private headers usually raise a FTI bug report.
> Wasn't this the case with this update?
It used to be, but the patch that made it so was dropped 4 months ago:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/qt5-qtbase/c/5ada0f5c5e88dcca0a367c8c82a2c89e99c70dbb?branch=rawh
Matthew Miller wrote:
> Or, for example, if we had a "personal productivity apps" module, and you
> had KDE Plasma installed, you'd get a KDE-flavored set of these apps,
> while if you had GNOME Shell you'd get gtk ones. :)
Indeed, intents sounds like something we would want in more places, not
f
Stephen Smoogen wrote:
> I came to the conclusion that even `%{bindir}/ansible*` would be against
> this as you would still miss
> a) if ansible-foobaz had been added to the package when it had not been
> there before
> b) if ansible-foobaz was in a different package and you have an
> unintentional
Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> On 03/11/2022 17:01, Gary Buhrmaster wrote:
>> As I recall(*), there are spec files that just
>> find the various installed files (categorized
>> as needed), and then use the -f option
>> on the %files section.
>
> IMO, such behavior should be strictly prohibited.
I think the need to find such attempts is a clear indication there is
something wrong with the design of current implementation.
If there are binaries with different build results, I think some code
should be refactored out of the binary itself. The common parts can
remain, but hardware specif
OLD: Fedora-37-20221103.n.1
NEW: Fedora-37-20221104.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:1
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 0
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 0
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 0 B
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Size of upgraded
Possibly in one of the future versions. I am not even sure at this
point how well (if at all) glamor support works with xorgxrdp.
--
Bojan
-Original Message-
From: Hans de Goede
To: Development discussions related to Fedora
Cc: Bojan Smojver
Subject: Re: Building two conflicting binar
It was for packaging xorgxrdp with glamor support. Submitted to bodhi now, so
all good.
--
Bojan
4 Nov 2022 7:38:17 pm Hans de Goede :
Hi,
On 11/3/22 21:31, Bojan Smojver via devel wrote:
> This may be a trivial question, but my friend Google is not sh
Hi Again,
On 11/3/22 21:31, Bojan Smojver via devel wrote:
> This may be a trivial question, but my friend Google is not showing me any
> obvious answers, so I will ask here at my own peril.
>
> Say one needs to configure and build the same source with two (or more)
> different sets of options
Hi,
On 11/3/22 21:31, Bojan Smojver via devel wrote:
> This may be a trivial question, but my friend Google is not showing me any
> obvious answers, so I will ask here at my own peril.
>
> Say one needs to configure and build the same source with two (or more)
> different sets of options that g
On 03/11/2022 21:31, Bojan Smojver via devel wrote:
Say one needs to configure and build the same source with two (or more)
different sets of options that generate different binary RPMs, but which
have files in exactly the same place. This is to support different
hardware. The end result would
On 03/11/2022 22:14, Bojan Smojver via devel wrote:
PS. I am aware of the alternatives approach, but looking to see whether
there is something that rpm specs have natively for this.
You can't use alternatives on immutable Fedora versions.
--
Sincerely,
Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.org)
* Stephen Smoogen:
> On Thu, 3 Nov 2022 at 12:24, Gary Buhrmaster
> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 3, 2022 at 3:57 PM Adam Williamson
> wrote:
>
> > there, I did it for free. Took one minute.
>
> Clearly it should be submitted as a PR to the kernel package.
>
> And another for the glibc package (t
Hi Simo,
On Fri, 14 Oct 2022 22:36:09 +0200,
Neal H. Walfield wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Oct 2022 18:28:01 +0200,
> Simo Sorce wrote:
> > At this time, as far as I know, there is no OpenPGP work of any kind on
> > supporting PQC algorithms.
>
> The German BSI contracted MTG AG to design and implement PQ
31 matches
Mail list logo
