On Sat, Mar 23, 2024 at 3:22 AM Kevin Kofler via devel
wrote:
> We will see whether that or redict will get the most attention. Cloud
> companies like Amazon will probably prefer BSD, whereas contributors worried
> about another "Redis, Inc." coming up and taking their forked code
> proprietary t
Neal Gompa wrote:
> It looks like Redis, Inc. has announced that future versions of Redis
> are no longer OSS and will be dual-licensed SSPL and RSAL[1]. Absent a
> fork of Redis coming up, we will likely need to remove Redis from
> Fedora.
>
> All I can say is... :(
Amazon (AWS) is setting up a
On 2024-03-07 04:39, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
Hi,
The effort to make package builds in Fedora reproducible has picked up
steam again.
I gave a talk at SCALE 21x last week covering this work, the current
state and what's coming down the pipe. You can find the recording at
https://ww
With the arrival of GAP 4.13.0 in Rawhide, I find myself in need of 2
more GAP packages (which do some work in C rather than in the GAP
language, for speed):
- gap-pkg-anupq: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2270581
- gap-pkg-fplsa: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2270856
I
I have the same problem for an internal project that I'm working on. Since
some of the crates we use are not yet in Fedora we took the decision to
package them ourselves following the Rust Package Guidelines[1] and submit
them to the distribution.
This is more work but remember that if you create t
On Fri, Mar 22, 2024 at 9:50 AM Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 21, 2024 at 8:00 AM wrote:
> >
> > Dear all,
> >
> > You are kindly invited to the meeting:
> >ELN SIG on 2024-03-22 from 12:00:00 to 13:00:00 US/Eastern
> >At fedora-meet...@irc.libera.chat
> >
> > The meeting will
Hi,
I have updated astyle to the latest 3.4.13 version that changes ABI,
but keeps soname. The 2 dependent packages were successfully rebuilt in
a side-tag.
[dan@talos ~]$ sudo dnf --repoid=rawhide-source --arch=src repoquery
--whatrequires astyle-devel
codeblocks-0:20.03-21.20240128svn13434.fc
On Fri, Mar 22, 2024 at 3:26 PM Ming Lei wrote:
>
> I love this easy way.
>
> But when I try to build in this way, I got the following failure:
>
> Problem 1: nothing provides requested (crate(ilog/default) >= 1.0.1
> with crate(ilog/default) < 2.0.0~)
> Problem 2: nothing provides requested (cr
On Thu, Mar 21, 2024 at 6:27 PM Fabio Valentini wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 21, 2024 at 9:25 AM Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 21, 2024 at 11:04:13AM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> > > Hello Richard and Guys,
> > >
> > > I plan to package rublk to Fedora, and it is one Rust project.
> >
> > H
Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> Once concern I have with this is the use of LGPL 3.0 *only*. This will not
> be compatible with a GPL 4 or newer. (The upgrade clause in the LGPLv2
> that allowed that was unfortunately dropped in the LGPLv3, now you have to
> put the "or later" clause on the LGPLed
On Fri, Mar 22 2024 at 02:44:33 PM +01:00:00, Kevin Kofler via devel
wrote:
Once concern I have with this is the use of LGPL 3.0 *only*. This
will not
be compatible with a GPL 4 or newer. (The upgrade clause in the
LGPLv2 that
allowed that was unfortunately dropped in the LGPLv3, now you have t
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20240321.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20240322.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:2
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 3
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 73
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 161.18 KiB
Size of dropped packages:0
Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> Neal Gompa wrote:
>> I think the immediate fix is pulling in redict once it makes its first
>> release: https://codeberg.org/redict/redict
>
> Once concern I have with this is the use of LGPL 3.0 *only*. This will not
> be compatible with a GPL 4 or newer. (The upg
On Thu, Mar 21, 2024 at 8:00 AM wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> You are kindly invited to the meeting:
>ELN SIG on 2024-03-22 from 12:00:00 to 13:00:00 US/Eastern
>At fedora-meet...@irc.libera.chat
>
> The meeting will be about:
* Schedule the "%{rhel} == 11" mass-rebuild
--
Scott Williams wrote:
> Yeah, I was going to say it depends on the dotnet8 runtime. There are
> containers for it, but that's a lot of extra dependency load.
It is actually already packaged in Fedora:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/dotnet8.0
But yes, it is bloat.
Kevin Kofler
--
___
Neal Gompa wrote:
> I think the immediate fix is pulling in redict once it makes its first
> release: https://codeberg.org/redict/redict
Once concern I have with this is the use of LGPL 3.0 *only*. This will not
be compatible with a GPL 4 or newer. (The upgrade clause in the LGPLv2 that
allowed
Neal Gompa wrote:
> Regular zstd compression is less optimized due to the lack of
> dictionaries, but it's also effectively the fallback path, though much
> faster to decompress while providing pretty good compression (which is
> why we have been gradually switching *everything* to zstd).
"pretty
OLD: Fedora-40-20240321.n.0
NEW: Fedora-40-20240322.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:1
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 5
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 21
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 750.05 MiB
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Size of
For an example of missing critical functionality, see this comment:
https://github.com/systemd/systemd/pull/29539#issuecomment-1760243611
Aside from that, trying to use the pkcs11 and tpm2 providers just ended up with
unintelligible errors being vomited on the console. No, I did not keep a copy
Hi there,
We recently switched mupdf to shared builds because part of the
ecosystem relies on this, and because we finally could get upstream to
version the libs. As a consequence, major mupdf updates will include
an soname bump now, and this is the first one.
I built mupdf in a side-tag for rawh
Le 21/03/2024 à 19:19, Scott Williams a écrit :
can we really continue to ship redis-7 in Fedora 40 if we can't patch and maintain it?
I don't see any problem keeping Redis 7.2
in Fedora 40 and up for a while.
And having some alternatives (keydb...), to be installed
simultenously (especially
21 matches
Mail list logo
