Greetings,
I'm planning to update wlroots in rawhide to 0.18.0[1] by the end of the
week (or at least before the branching). As usual, the update contains
API/ABI breaking changes and soname will be bumped to
libwlroots-0.18.so[^1]. wlroots0.17 compatibility package will be
introduced in the
On Wed, Aug 7, 2024 at 4:38 PM Leigh Scott wrote:
> Does 1.1.14 git snapshot work with older driver releases eg =: 470xx and
> 550xx?
> The last stable release generated negative karma, issues with firefox.
>
> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-d4e659da2c
Seems to be, it also
On Wed, Aug 7, 2024 at 3:31 PM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
>
> There is several "licenses" that are in between. For that Richard proposed to
> use this mapping:
>
> Public domain -> LicenseRef-Callaway-Public-Domain
> Freely redistributable without restrictions ->
> LicenseRef-Callaway-Freely-redistri
Hi all,
My name is Valter Nazianzeno, and my history with Linux is quite extensive,
though I'll spare you the details. However, I've been interested in Fedora for
quite some time now. I've been using Fedora as one of my main OS on many of my
computers, and I would like to give back to the proje
cjs should be treated the same as gjs, it's the same code with renamed files,
the licences haven't been changed.
https://github.com/linuxmint/cjs
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lis
Dne 07. 08. 24 v 11:21 odp. Leigh Scott napsal(a):
gjs
-License:MIT and (MPLv1.1 or GPLv2+ or LGPLv2+)
+# modules/esm/_encoding/util.js and few
other things are MIT
+# modules/script/tweener/equatio
Why is there a difference between gjs and cjs conversion?
gjs
-License:MIT and (MPLv1.1 or GPLv2+ or LGPLv2+)
+# modules/esm/_encoding/util.js and few other
things are MIT
+# modules/scrip
> paintown
> - CC0 and Public Domain and BSD and LGPLv2+
> + CC0-1.0 AND LicenseRef-Fedora-Public-Domain AND License-Callaway-BSD AND
> License-Callaway-LGPLv2+
> - Public Domain
> + LicenseRef-Fedora-Public-Domain
Slightly off-topic, but this package was pulled because of legal issues [0],
a
Dne 07. 08. 24 v 9:30 odp. Miroslav Suchý napsal(a):
3) I first thought that this: atril
- GPLv2+ and LGPLv2+ and MIT
+ GPL-2.0-or-later AND License-Callaway-LGPLv2+ AND License-Callaway-MIT
needs different handling, but then I realized it is likely what we want. It converts GPLv2+ to only pos
All packages with licenses that has 1:1 counterpart in SPDX were converted. What is remaining are licenses that cannot
be converted to SPDX automatically. E.g. BSD in Callaway can be converted to BSD-2-Clause or BSD-3-Clause (and several
others).
We have the agreement (and FESCO decision [1]) t
Hi folks,
Looks like regular nss maintainer may be away and new Firefox requires a higher
nss version than currently built. There is a pull request lined up, so one just
needs to merge, build and create the update in bodhi.
Anyone with sufficient powers around to do this?
Thanks,
--
Bojan
--
I am happy to announce that rawhide ghc has been updated to version 9.6
and Haskell packages have been lifted to Stackage LTS 22 versions at least.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Haskell_GHC_9.6_and_Stackage_22
for more details.
Note there are still a small handful of build failures/d
Simone Caronni wrote:
> Hi Oliver,
> On Fri, Aug 2, 2024 at 10:35 AM Olivier Fourdan ofour...@redhat.com wrote:
> > But there is also more flexibility in having those separate from what
> > ships with the driver, for example, there are currently several issues
> > affecting egl-wayland 1.1.14 and t
I corrected a license tag in perl-Test-Run from
(GPL+ or Artistic) and (GPLv2+ or Artistic) and MIT
to
(GPL-1.0-or-later OR Artistic-1.0-Perl) AND GPL-2.0-only AND MIT
-- Petr
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
--
___
devel mailin
I will try this patch for fc41:
diff --git a/source/backend/CarlaPlugin.hpp b/source/backend/CarlaPlugin.hpp
index fe581bc..215bcd7 100644
--- a/source/backend/CarlaPlugin.hpp
+++ b/source/backend/CarlaPlugin.hpp
@@ -24,7 +24,7 @@
// ---
Dne 07. 08. 24 v 16:06 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
Dne 07. 08. 24 v 15:20 Tom Hughes via devel napsal(a):
On 07/08/2024 12:54, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Wed, Aug 07, 2024 at 01:09:01PM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
With new RPM, I hit the limit in two packages:
https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/p
Dne 07. 08. 24 v 15:20 Tom Hughes via devel napsal(a):
On 07/08/2024 12:54, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Wed, Aug 07, 2024 at 01:09:01PM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
With new RPM, I hit the limit in two packages:
https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/package/rubygem-abrt
https://koschei.fedoraproje
On 07/08/2024 12:54, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Wed, Aug 07, 2024 at 01:09:01PM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
With new RPM, I hit the limit in two packages:
https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/package/rubygem-abrt
https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/package/rubygem-pg
Is it RPM, or is it "rspec"?
Am 07.08.24 um 14:32 schrieb Julian Sikorski:
Am 06.08.24 um 10:15 schrieb Julian Sikorski:
Am 06.08.24 um 09:37 schrieb Vitaly Kuznetsov:
Julian Sikorski writes:
Am 05.08.24 um 11:07 schrieb Vitaly Kuznetsov:
Julian Sikorski writes:
Hi list,
I recently got curious about unified ker
Am 06.08.24 um 10:15 schrieb Julian Sikorski:
Am 06.08.24 um 09:37 schrieb Vitaly Kuznetsov:
Julian Sikorski writes:
Am 05.08.24 um 11:07 schrieb Vitaly Kuznetsov:
Julian Sikorski writes:
Hi list,
I recently got curious about unified kernel images and what they bring
to the table. Wh
Hi,
when I compile Carla-2.5.8 [2] on Fedora 41, I get the following error message:
Compiling CarlaPluginLADSPADSSI.cpp
g++ CarlaPluginLADSPADSSI.cpp -Wall -Wextra -pipe -DBUILDING_CARLA -MD -MP
-fno-common -fPIC -DPIC -DNDEBUG -O2 -ffast-math -fdata-sections
-ffunction-sections -DBUILDING_CARL
I corrected a perl-Statistics-CaseResampling license from:
(GPL+ or Artistic) and (Copyright Only)
to:
(GPL-1.0-or-later OR Artistic-1.0-Perl) AND BSD-3-Clause
-- Petr
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
--
___
devel mailing list -- de
On Wed, Aug 07, 2024 at 01:09:01PM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> With new RPM, I hit the limit in two packages:
>
> https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/package/rubygem-abrt
>
> https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/package/rubygem-pg
Is it RPM, or is it "rspec"? Seems to be some sort of Ruby tool.
> I
On Wed, 7 Aug 2024 at 07:11, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> With new RPM, I hit the limit in two packages:
>
> https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/package/rubygem-abrt
>
> https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/package/rubygem-pg
>
>
> I have read:
>
>
> https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/367008/why-is-sock
Hi Oliver,
On Fri, Aug 2, 2024 at 10:35 AM Olivier Fourdan wrote:
> But there is also more flexibility in having those separate from what
> ships with the driver, for example, there are currently several issues
> affecting egl-wayland 1.1.14 and the latest driver and fixes are being
> posted to
With new RPM, I hit the limit in two packages:
https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/package/rubygem-abrt
https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/package/rubygem-pg
I have read:
https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/367008/why-is-socket-path-length-limited-to-a-hundred-chars
https://stackoverflow.c
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20240806.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20240807.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:1
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 0
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 113
Downgraded packages: 1
Size of added packages: 0 B
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Size
Thanks for the hint.
Regards
Martin
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List
On Wed, Aug 7, 2024 at 4:49 AM Fabio Valentini wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 7, 2024, 10:28 Neal Gompa wrote:
>>
>> Hey all,
>>
>> pkgconf 2.3.0 just released and the jump from 2.1.1 to 2.3.0 brings
>> with us a soname bump. I will be updating pkgconf and rebuilding
>> dependents in a side-tag, and hope
Announcing the creation of a new nightly release validation test event
for Fedora 41 Rawhide 20240807.n.0. Please help run some tests for this
nightly compose if you have time. For more information on nightly
release validation testing, see:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki
On 07. 08. 24 9:35, Martin Gansser wrote:
HI,
when I compile Carla [1] in Fedora 40, I get the following error messages at
the end.
+ /usr/lib/rpm/check-rpaths
***
*
* WARNING: 'check-rpaths' detected a broken RPATH OR
On Wed, Aug 7, 2024, 10:28 Neal Gompa wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> pkgconf 2.3.0 just released and the jump from 2.1.1 to 2.3.0 brings
> with us a soname bump. I will be updating pkgconf and rebuilding
> dependents in a side-tag, and hopefully get everything done later
> today.
>
> The identified packag
V Wed, Aug 07, 2024 at 04:26:13AM -0400, Neal Gompa napsal(a):
> Hey all,
>
> pkgconf 2.3.0 just released and the jump from 2.1.1 to 2.3.0 brings
> with us a soname bump. I will be updating pkgconf and rebuilding
> dependents in a side-tag, and hopefully get everything done later
> today.
>
> The
Dne 31. 07. 24 v 8:51 odp. Miroslav Suchý napsal(a):
Oh never mind, that is not what you're doing. Still, I am concerned
about any mass replacement of Callaway "with exceptions", since that
could refer to anything, or did you handle this on a
package-by-package basis?
Good point. I will remove
Hey all,
pkgconf 2.3.0 just released and the jump from 2.1.1 to 2.3.0 brings
with us a soname bump. I will be updating pkgconf and rebuilding
dependents in a side-tag, and hopefully get everything done later
today.
The identified packages are:
* build2
* perl-PkgConfig-LibPkgConf
I identified th
HI,
when I compile Carla [1] in Fedora 40, I get the following error messages at
the end.
+ /usr/lib/rpm/check-rpaths
***
*
* WARNING: 'check-rpaths' detected a broken RPATH OR RUNPATH and will cause
* 'rpmbuild
36 matches
Mail list logo
