OLD: Fedora-eln-20250331.n.0
NEW: Fedora-eln-20250401.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 0
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 37
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 0 B
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Size of
On Mon, Mar 31 2025 at 08:09:49 PM +00:00:00, Zbigniew
Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
OK, I guess I need to work on my English. You're the second person who
read the abovequoted part in the exact opposite way to what I
intended :(
Hm, well I misread. You didn't write the wrong thing.
But honestly
On Mon, Mar 31, 2025 at 01:39:57PM +0200, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> On 31/03/2025 12:53, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > This is inspired by the discussion in "Reproducible Builds" mailing list,
> > in particular [1].
>
> But auto-generated Git archives are not reproducible. GitHub
On Mon, Mar 31, 2025 at 01:14:42PM +0200, Michael J Gruber wrote:
> > This is only "SHOULD", because sometimes the git tarball is too large
> > or has other deficiencies. Another reason is that the "upstream
> > tarball" may be signed, and that'd be preferred to the unsigned "raw"
> > archive. But
On Mon, Mar 31, 2025 at 12:35:39PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 31, 2025 at 01:14:42PM +0200, Michael J Gruber wrote:
>
> > Let me also mention the case where we have to clean sources (proprietary
> > material) before committing to the look-aside cache. We should document
> > how
On Tue, 2025-03-04 at 16:24 +0100, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
>
> Do you want to make Fedora 42 better? Please spend 1 minute of your
> time and try to run:
>
> dnf --releasever=42 --enablerepo=updates-testing --assumeno --
> best distro-sync
>
Failed to resolve the transaction:
Problem 1: i
On Mon, Mar 31 2025 at 10:53:54 AM +00:00:00, Zbigniew
Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
This is only "SHOULD", because sometimes the git tarball is too large
or has other deficiencies. Another reason is that the "upstream
tarball" may be signed, and that'd be preferred to the unsigned "raw"
archive. B
On Mon, Mar 31, 2025 at 2:04 PM Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 31, 2025 at 01:39:57PM +0200, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> > On 31/03/2025 12:53, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > > This is inspired by the discussion in "Reproducible Builds" mailing list,
> > > in particular [1
Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
>> Let me also mention the case where we have to clean sources (proprietary
>> material) before committing to the look-aside cache. We should document
>> how to do so in spec.
>> Ideally, one could:
>> - get original sources
>> - check upstream's signature
>> - apply th
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20250330.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20250331.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:2
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 5
Dropped packages:11
Upgraded packages: 64
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 3.96 MiB
Size of dropped packages
Dne 31. 03. 25 v 2:14 odp. Vitaly Kuznetsov napsal(a):
Miroslav Suchý writes:
...
Packages that are neither in SPDX nor in Callaway format (highest
priority for now) - 32 packages:
https://pagure.io/copr/license-validate/blob/main/f/neither-nor-remaining-packagers.txt
Most of such packages h
Hello.
DBus activation of systemd units is broken on Fedora 41+ after latest
systemd updates. This breaks some applications that rely on these methods.
Trying to use the
/org/freedesktop/systemd1/org.freedesktop.systemd1.Manager.StartUnit
method throws an error "Interactive authentication re
Tested and gave some karma
Den mån 31 mars 2025 kl 14:05 skrev Fabio Valentini :
>
> Hi all,
>
> I ran a last check for package downgrades from Fedora 41 to 42, and
> submitted a last batch of four updates that were obviously just missed
> by the package maintainers. With the Final Freeze starting
Hi all,
I ran a last check for package downgrades from Fedora 41 to 42, and
submitted a last batch of four updates that were obviously just missed
by the package maintainers. With the Final Freeze starting tomorrow,
they would need some testing and positive karma to land in the F42 GA
repositories
On 31/03/2025 13:44, Cristian Le via devel wrote:
In the case of submodules I have had good experience using `%forgemeta`.
You'll still have to manually track all those submodules commits.
--
Sincerely,
Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.org)
--
___
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek venit, vidit, dixit 2025-03-31 12:53:54:
> tl;dr: change the Packaging Guidelines to recommend the raw "git
> archive" or equivalent over the upstream tarball produced using
> "make dist".
>
> This is inspired by the discussion in "Reproducible Builds" mailing list,
> i
Ralf Corsépius venit, vidit, dixit 2025-03-31 13:14:16:
>
>
> Am 31.03.25 um 12:53 PM schrieb Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek:
> > tl;dr: change the Packaging Guidelines to recommend the raw "git
> > archive" or equivalent over the upstream tarball produced using
> > "make dist".
> I could not disagr
On 31/03/2025 12:53, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
This is inspired by the discussion in "Reproducible Builds" mailing list,
in particular [1].
But auto-generated Git archives are not reproducible. GitHub uses a
dirty hack: on the first download, it caches the tarball on their
resource s
On 31/03/2025 13:32, Leigh Scott wrote:
Using github/gitlab sources is non-starter IMO as they rarely include the
submodules.
They never include submodules.
--
Sincerely,
Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.org)
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@li
Using github/gitlab sources is non-starter IMO as they rarely include the
submodules.
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fe
OLD: Fedora-42-20250330.n.0
NEW: Fedora-42-20250331.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 1
Added packages: 0
Dropped packages:9
Upgraded packages: 76
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 0 B
Size of dropped packages:844.43 KiB
Size of
On Mon, Mar 31, 2025 at 01:14:42PM +0200, Michael J Gruber wrote:
> Let me also mention the case where we have to clean sources (proprietary
> material) before committing to the look-aside cache. We should document
> how to do so in spec.
>
> Ideally, one could:
> - get original sources
> - check
On Mon, Mar 31, 2025 at 12:56 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
>
> tl;dr: change the Packaging Guidelines to recommend the raw "git
> archive" or equivalent over the upstream tarball produced using
> "make dist".
>
> This is inspired by the discussion in "Reproducible Builds" mailing list,
>
Am 31.03.25 um 12:53 PM schrieb Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek:
tl;dr: change the Packaging Guidelines to recommend the raw "git
archive" or equivalent over the upstream tarball produced using
"make dist".
I could not disagree more.
This is inspired by the discussion in "Reproducible Builds" ma
tl;dr: change the Packaging Guidelines to recommend the raw "git
archive" or equivalent over the upstream tarball produced using
"make dist".
This is inspired by the discussion in "Reproducible Builds" mailing list,
in particular [1].
Background: upstreams use version control for their projects,
On 3/28/25 8:30 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
On Fri, Mar 28, 2025 at 02:26:37PM +0100, Michal Schorm wrote:
Hi Zbyszek,
I encountered several things during testing I want to bring up.
1)
The output on Fedora Rawhide always look like this:
| >>> Running unknown scriptlet: mariadb-s
26 matches
Mail list logo
