OLD: Fedora-eln-20250112.n.0
NEW: Fedora-eln-20250113.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 0
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 11
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 0 B
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Size of
On Sun, Jan 12, 2025, at 7:39 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> The
> default configuration file uses
Oops - *my* configuration file uses:
> max_pool_percent=15
> compressor=zstd
> zpool=zsmalloc
> accept_threshold_percent=90
> shrinker_enabled=Y
Default config file uses lzo/zbud, and a higher max p
On Fri, Jan 10, 2025, at 3:28 AM, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> On 09/01/2025 23:42, Chris Murphy wrote:
>> Do I still need to enable zswap with the kernel param? Or can it all be done
>> by the service unit?
>
> No. It will be enabled automatically since the zswap-cli.conf
> configuration
On Sun, Jan 12, 2025 at 4:36 PM Chris Adams wrote:
>
> Once upon a time, Neal Gompa said:
> > For stuff installed into /usr, we
> > should just allow packages to be optionally built with the higher
> > microarchitecture level in addition to the base one and allow DNF to
> > sort and prefer packag
Well, I take that back, there is no second fork, ... just an exec of the
target binary. So, when you launch a program, you would see two exec,
one for the loader itself, and one for the final binary, for what I can
understand.
On 1/12/25 3:54 PM, Carlos Rodriguez-Fernandez wrote:
It looks into
It looks into the cmd line it was invoked with, then generates the path
based on the u-arch, and then exec the actual binary. There are total
two fork/exec: one to launch the hwcaps-loader (what /usr/bin/foo points
to), and the fork-exec that hwcaps-loader does to run the actual binary.
I'm to
On Sunday 12 January 2025 21:25:17 Central European Standard Time Zbigniew
Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > My concern is that this defeats most methods of observability. It's
> > essentially the same as the double-fork problem we used to have with
> > system services. The stub will fork out and exec
Once upon a time, Neal Gompa said:
> For stuff installed into /usr, we
> should just allow packages to be optionally built with the higher
> microarchitecture level in addition to the base one and allow DNF to
> sort and prefer packages accordingly.
Is this not just resurrecting the old i386/i586
On 2025-01-12 10:58, Sérgio Basto wrote:
On Sun, 2025-01-12 at 10:15 -0800, Luya Tshimbalanga wrote:
Hello team,
Blender failed to build due to an issue related to Python rules
changes and an additional
failure from this line:
/builddir/build/BUILD/blender-4.3.2-build/blender-
4.3.2
On Sun, Jan 12, 2025 at 03:16:39PM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 12, 2025 at 2:36 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Jan 12, 2025 at 05:21:18PM +0100, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> > > On 12/01/2025 13:02, Christoph Erhardt wrote:
> > > > 1. Not all packages but o
On Fri, Jan 10, 2025 at 07:44:29PM +, Aoife Moloney via devel-announce
wrote:
> Wiki - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/BootLoaderUpdatesPhase1
> Discussion thread -
> https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/f42-change-proposal-unification-of-boot-loader-updates-phase-1-system-wide/142035
On Sun, Jan 12, 2025 at 2:36 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jan 12, 2025 at 05:21:18PM +0100, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> > On 12/01/2025 13:02, Christoph Erhardt wrote:
> > > 1. Not all packages but only those whose maintainers explicitly opt in.
> >
> > Yes, at the first
Dne 12. 01. 25 v 6:50 odp. Fabio Valentini napsal(a):
Thanks for the reminder - I backported fixes from upstream for all
four of my packages that are in this list, so there will be 51 later
today. 🙂
Thank you.
("neither in SPDX nor in Callaway format" is also a bit of a lie -
these four pack
On Sun, Jan 12, 2025 at 05:21:18PM +0100, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> On 12/01/2025 13:02, Christoph Erhardt wrote:
> > 1. Not all packages but only those whose maintainers explicitly opt in.
>
> Yes, at the first stage. But over time the number of packages can increase
> significantly.
I t
On Sun, 2025-01-12 at 10:15 -0800, Luya Tshimbalanga wrote:
>
> Hello team,
>
> Blender failed to build due to an issue related to Python rules
> changes and an additional
> failure from this line:
>
> /builddir/build/BUILD/blender-4.3.2-build/blender-
> 4.3.2/source/blender/python/gpu/gpu_p
Hello team,
Blender failed to build due to an issue related to Python rules changes
and an additional
failure from this line:
/builddir/build/BUILD/blender-4.3.2-build/blender-4.3.2/source/blender/python/gpu/gpu_py_batch.cc:341:7:
error: cannot convert ‘const char*’ to ‘const char* const*’ in
On Fri, Jan 10, 2025 at 7:08 AM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> Packages that are neither in SPDX nor in Callaway format (highest priority
> for now) - 55 packages:
>
> https://pagure.io/copr/license-validate/blob/main/f/neither-nor-remaining-packagers.txt
Thanks for the reminder - I backported fixes fr
On 12/01/2025 13:02, Christoph Erhardt wrote:
1. Not all packages but only those whose maintainers explicitly opt in.
Yes, at the first stage. But over time the number of packages can
increase significantly.
2. The duplication will affect only the executable ELFs - i.e. the contents of
`/us
On 11. 01. 25 23:02, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
The dependency chains still using python-nose are pretty popular, and
include awscli and Samba. This may not be as easy as it seems at
first glance.
Could you please point out that dependency trees? I see neither package as
affected by nose retire
Hi Vitaly,
if I understand the proposal correctly, the consequences will be far less
dramatic than you believe.
> So all Fedora packages will take 2x (x86_64-v1, x86_64-v2) disk space?
> Am I right?
1. Not all packages but only those whose maintainers explicitly opt in.
2. The duplication will
On Sunday, January 12, 2025, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel <
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> On 10/01/2025 20:28, Aoife Moloney via devel-announce wrote:
>
>> Individual packages can provide already optimized libraries via the
>> glibc-hwcaps mechanism. This approach will be extended to executa
On 10/01/2025 20:28, Aoife Moloney via devel-announce wrote:
Individual packages can provide already optimized libraries via the
glibc-hwcaps mechanism. This approach will be extended to executables.
The package provides an optimized variant of a binary in a different
directory.
So all Fedora p
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20250111.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20250112.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:4
Dropped images: 2
Added packages: 2
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 44
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 371.39 KiB
Size of dropped packages:0
23 matches
Mail list logo
