Re: ARM PAC on koji vs COPR

On Wed, 3 Jan 2024 at 15:01, Miroslav Suchý wrote: > Dne 03. 01. 24 v 14:46 Jarek Prokop napsal(a): > > 4. Why do koji and copr have CPU flag set that differs so much? Is our > koji infra OK? > > For convenience of readers: > > Koji: > Flags: fp asimd evtstrm aes pmull sha1 sha2 crc32 atomics fph

Schedule for Thursday's FESCo Meeting (2024-01-04)

Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FESCo meeting Thursday at 17:00UTC in #fedora-meeting-2 on irc.libera.chat. To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto or run: date -d '2024-01-04 17:00 UTC' Links to all issues to be

Re: Are package-owner mail addresses working?

On 03. 01. 24 19:32, Kevin Fenzi wrote: On Wed, Jan 03, 2024 at 09:59:23AM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote: On Wed, Jan 3, 2024 at 8:15 AM Sergio Pascual wrote: El lun, 1 ene 2024 a las 13:49, Mamoru TASAKA () escribió: Sergio Pascual wrote on 2024/01/01 21:36: Hello and happy new year. Ar

Re: ARM PAC on koji vs COPR

Dne 03. 01. 24 v 14:46 Jarek Prokop napsal(a): 4. Why do koji and copr have CPU flag set that differs so much? Is our koji infra OK? For convenience of readers: Koji: Flags: fp asimd evtstrm aes pmull sha1 sha2 crc32 atomics fphp asimdhp cpuid asimdrdm lrcpc dcpop asimddp ssbs Copr: Flags: f

[CoreOS] Fedora CoreOS Meeting Minutes 2024-01-03

Text Log: https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/meeting-1_matrix_fedoraproject-org/2024-01-03/fedora-coreos-meeting.2024-01-03-16.30.log.txt HTML Log: https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/meeting-1_matrix_fedoraproject-org/2024-01-03/fedora-coreos-meeting.2024-01-03-16.30.log.html Text Minutes: https:/

Re: Re: Are package-owner mail addresses working?

On Wed, Jan 03, 2024 at 09:59:23AM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > On Wed, Jan 3, 2024 at 8:15 AM Sergio Pascual wrote: > > > > El lun, 1 ene 2024 a las 13:49, Mamoru TASAKA > > () escribió: > > > > > > Sergio Pascual wrote on 2024/01/01 21:36: > > > > Hello and happy new year. > > > > > > > > A

Re: F40 Change Proposal: Ruby 3.3 (System-Wide)

Just to let everybody know, Ruby 3.3 has landed in Rawhide [1]. The binary packages have been rebuilt, but there might be other compatibility issue. There are also some leftovers: kf5-kross-interpreters / openbabel https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2256645 subversion https:/

Re: Packed relative ELF relocations (DT_RELR) enabled by default in rawhide

It also appears for aarch64. It is an issue because software may use `-Wl,--fatal-warnings` so this warning breaks the build. As an example, pretty much the entire KDE software collection now fails to compile on aarch64 and s390x: https://invent.kde.org/frameworks/extra-cmake-modules/-/blob/04af

License for python-grabbit updated from “MIT” to “MIT AND Unlicense”

The License field for python-grabbit has been updated from “MIT” to “MIT AND Unlicense” to reflect the _version.py file generated by Versioneer 0.29. As described in https://github.com/python-versioneer/python-versioneer#license, the _version.py file generated by Versioneer is under the same l

Re: Packed relative ELF relocations (DT_RELR) enabled by default in rawhide

* Dan Horák: > On Wed, 03 Jan 2024 10:47:12 +0100 > Florian Weimer wrote: > >> This changed was originally planned and approved for Fedora 39. It >> reduces startup time somewhat for large objects with lots of function >> and object pointers in global data. >> >> It should be a transparent chan

Re: F40 Change Proposal: Optimized Binaries for the AMD64 Architecture (System-Wide)

On Sat, Dec 30, 2023 at 08:27:46AM +, Mattia Verga via devel wrote: > Il 28/12/23 18:25, Robert Marcano via devel ha scritto: > > On 12/28/23 12:58 PM, Chris Adams wrote: > >> Once upon a time, Aoife Moloney said: > >>> Systemd will be modified to insert the additional directories into the > >

Re: Are package-owner mail addresses working?

On Wed, Jan 3, 2024 at 8:15 AM Sergio Pascual wrote: > > El lun, 1 ene 2024 a las 13:49, Mamoru TASAKA > () escribió: > > > > Sergio Pascual wrote on 2024/01/01 21:36: > > > Hello and happy new year. > > > > > > Are package-owner mail addresses working? I have send mails to several > > > and they

ARM PAC on koji vs COPR

Hi, recently Ruby 3.3 was released, we have noticed a failure to build on COPR's aarch64: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/jackorp/ruby-builds/fedora-rawhide-aarch64/06848355-ruby/ https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/jackorp/ruby-builds/fedora-rawhide-aarch64/06

Re: Are package-owner mail addresses working?

El lun, 1 ene 2024 a las 13:49, Mamoru TASAKA () escribió: > > Sergio Pascual wrote on 2024/01/01 21:36: > > Hello and happy new year. > > > > Are package-owner mail addresses working? I have send mails to several > > and they return a 550 error message, for example: > > > > 550 5.1.1 : Recipient a

Dist-git decoupling investigation finished

Hi everyone, We would like to inform you thatAdvanced Reconnaissance Crew (ARC) from the CPE team finished research into decoupling dist-git from its pagure-related dependencies. The finished investigation is available here

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20240103.n.0 changes

OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20240102.n.0 NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20240103.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:1 Dropped images: 2 Added packages: 7 Dropped packages:85 Upgraded packages: 170 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 12.83 MiB Size of dropped packages

Re: Packed relative ELF relocations (DT_RELR) enabled by default in rawhide

On Wed, 03 Jan 2024 10:47:12 +0100 Florian Weimer wrote: > This changed was originally planned and approved for Fedora 39. It > reduces startup time somewhat for large objects with lots of function > and object pointers in global data. > > It should be a transparent change, internal to the tool

Re: utf8cpp update to 4.0.5

On Thursday, 23 November 2023 at 17:44, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: > Dear all, > I am in the process of updating utf8cpp (a header only package) > from 3.2.5 to 4.0.2 in rawhide. No rebuilds are necessary immediately, Upstream released 4.0.5 in the meantime, so rebased. > but I did reb

Packed relative ELF relocations (DT_RELR) enabled by default in rawhide

This changed was originally planned and approved for Fedora 39. It reduces startup time somewhat for large objects with lots of function and object pointers in global data. It should be a transparent change, internal to the toolchain. Within glibc itself, we started using this linker feature in

Orphaned packages looking for new maintainers

The following packages are orphaned and will be retired when they are orphaned for six weeks, unless someone adopts them. If you know for sure that the package should be retired, please do so now with a proper reason: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_remove_a_package_at_end_of_life Note: If

Re: F40 Change Proposal: Optimized Binaries for the AMD64 Architecture (System-Wide)

Thanks for pointing this out. This reminds me and I don't think this have been discussed yet, but I guess that we should soon address where e.g. WebAssembly binaries should go. I think we should really consider to establish some generic infrastructure for such cases. Vít Dne 03. 01. 24 v

Re: F40 Change Proposal: Optimized Binaries for the AMD64 Architecture (System-Wide)

Note that mingw-* packages currently in Fedora install into the /usr/i686-w64-mingw32/ or /usr/x86_64-w64-mingw32/ directories. This is a different topic but if each archful package installed its files into a directory containing the arch name, it would allow parallel installability without co