Fedora rawhide compose report: 20250106.n.0 changes

OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20250105.n.0 NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20250106.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:2 Dropped images: 2 Added packages: 2 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 82 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 352.86 KiB Size of dropped packages:0

Fedora eln compose report: 20250106.n.0 changes

OLD: Fedora-eln-20250105.n.0 NEW: Fedora-eln-20250106.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:0 Dropped images: 0 Added packages: 0 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 77 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 0 B Size of dropped packages:0 B Size of

Re: Retiring GlusterFS in Fedora 42. First Notice

Ian Laurie via devel wrote on Mon, Jan 06, 2025 at 08:57:09AM +1100: > On 4/1/25 09:20, Samuel Sieb wrote: > > Is there some sort of alternative or is this type of storage just not > > interesting anymore? > > Wasn't Ceph distributed file system supposed to replace Gluster? I could > be totally wro

Re: Recommending fedrq for finding dependents in Package Maintainer Docs

Thank you for this helpful addition! On 2025-01-05 21:06, Otto Liljalaakso wrote: Hello all, Already long time ago I observed that Package Update Guide [1] does not give any hint for determining which packages might be affected by an update. To improve this situation a bit, I created a pull

Re: Retiring GlusterFS in Fedora 42. First Notice

On 4/1/25 09:20, Samuel Sieb wrote: Is there some sort of alternative or is this type of storage just not interesting anymore? Wasn't Ceph distributed file system supposed to replace Gluster? I could be totally wrong here. -- Ian Laurie FAS: nixuser | IRC: nixuser TZ: Australia/Sydney -- ___

Re: F42 libtimezone unannounced removal

Michel Lind kirjoitti 18.12.2024 klo 18.56: cc-ing the packaging list - I notice the retirement process currently does not really mention any requirement to check for affected packages / to provide heads-up, which is a bit surprising since we do that (implicitly) for updating packages at least in

Recommending fedrq for finding dependents in Package Maintainer Docs

Hello all, Already long time ago I observed that Package Update Guide [1] does not give any hint for determining which packages might be affected by an update. To improve this situation a bit, I created a pull request[2] recommending using fedrq. Normally, at this point I would just merge my

Re: Help with flexiblas crash on aarch64 in kojij only

On 1/4/25 11:33, Orion Poplawski wrote: Since the latest update to OpenBLAS 0.3.28 in rawhide, FlexiBLAS fails to build in aarch64 because OpenBLAS crashes in the LAPACK- xeigtstc_cec_in test. Note that OpenBLAS itself does not fail only because they don't include LAPACK test suite. See: - Th

Re: Retiring GlusterFS in Fedora 42. First Notice

It's all yours. Have fun. On Sun, Jan 5, 2025 at 6:07 AM Benson Muite wrote: > > > On Sat, Jan 4, 2025, at 9:28 PM, Kaleb Keithley wrote: > > Are you a packager? > > Yes > > What's your FAS ID? > > Fed500 > > > > > On Sat, Jan 4, 2025 at 6:53 AM Benson Muite > > wrote: > > > >> > >> Happy to ma

Re: guayadeque-0.6.2 crashes on Fedora 41 with new version of wxsqlite3-4.10.0

excluding the new cipher scheme AEGIS with ./configure --without-aegis solves the problem. Regards Martin -- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Condu

Re: Retiring GlusterFS in Fedora 42. First Notice

On Sat, Jan 4, 2025, at 9:28 PM, Kaleb Keithley wrote: > Are you a packager? Yes What's your FAS ID? Fed500 > > On Sat, Jan 4, 2025 at 6:53 AM Benson Muite > wrote: > >> >> Happy to maintain it in Fedora while there is activity upstream. >> >> > -- > > Kaleb -- ___

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20250105.n.0 changes

OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20250104.n.0 NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20250105.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:2 Dropped images: 4 Added packages: 4 Dropped packages:3 Upgraded packages: 163 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 15.01 MiB Size of dropped packages