Re: Orphaned packages looking for new maintainers

On Sunday, March 23, 2025 10:12:09 AM Central Daylight Time maxwell--- via devel-announce wrote: > IMPORTANT NOTE: I forgot to process the orphaned packages and send the > report that was due the second week of March, so some packages have been > orphaned for more than six weeks but were not annou

Fedora eln compose report: 20250419.n.0 changes

OLD: Fedora-eln-20250418.n.0 NEW: Fedora-eln-20250419.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:0 Dropped images: 0 Added packages: 1 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 19 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 30.89 KiB Size of dropped packages:0 B Size of

Re: orphaning some packages

On 2025-04-18 18:59, Sérgio Basto via devel wrote: Hi, I need to reduce my workload so some packages with impact but I have nothing to do with it: - bc - gflags - gperf I've picked these up, thanks! Cheers Davide -- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@

Re: orphaning some packages

On Fri, Apr 18, 2025 at 10:01 PM Sérgio Basto via devel wrote: > > Hi, > I need to reduce my workload > [...] > [...] > - libcomps > - atf > - libphonenumber > [...] > > - tofrodos > - smb4k > Thanks for maintaining them, I grabbed these as I need/use them in various contexts. -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Al

orphaning some packages

Hi, I need to reduce my workload so some packages with impact but I have nothing to do with it: - bc - gflags - gperf - libcomps - atf - libphonenumber Package that I don't use anymore or obsoleted : - tofrodos - rawstudio - smb4k Package that give to much work ; - ogre Best regards, -- S

Re: F43 Change Proposal: Modular GnuPG packaging (self-contained)

On Fri, Apr 18, 2025 at 7:47 PM Björn Persson wrote: > > Fabio Valentini wrote: > > Do you have any opinion on which new optional subpackages should or > > should not get pulled in by default on new installs? > > I'm not familiar with all the components either. One thing I notice is > that treatin

Re: F42 upgrade and email problems

Yes it is related to the consolidation of bin/sbin, I solve this problem with sudo update-alternatives --set mta /usr/bin/sendmail.postfix Le 18/04/2025 à 21:15, Peter Robinson a écrit : On Thu, 17 Apr 2025 at 14:30, Steven A. Falco > wrote: After updating

Re: F42 upgrade and email problems

On Thu, 17 Apr 2025 at 14:30, Steven A. Falco wrote: > After updating to f42 I noticed that I could not send email from the > command line: > > $ mail root@localhost > Subject: test > To: root@localhost > test > ^D > s-nail: Cannot start /usr/sbin/sendmail: executable not found (adjust > *mta* va

Re: rpm-ostree/bootc uid/gid drift problem

On Fri, Apr 18, 2025 at 02:34:33PM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Fri, Apr 18, 2025 at 2:24 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek > wrote: > > > > On Thu, Apr 17, 2025 at 06:52:43PM +0200, Alexander Sosedkin wrote: > > > The problem stems entirely from UIDs and GUDs being numbers > > > and not strings. I

Re: F43 Change Proposal: Modular GnuPG packaging (self-contained)

On Fri, 18 Apr 2025 15:49:29 +0200, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Fri, Apr 18, 2025 at 9:37 AM Fabio Valentini wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 16, 2025 at 9:09 PM Björn Persson wrote: > > > > > > > On upgrade to Fedora 43, some non-essential GnuPG utilities will no > > > > longer be available by default, and ins

Re: rpm-ostree/bootc uid/gid drift problem

On Fri, Apr 18, 2025 at 2:24 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 17, 2025 at 06:52:43PM +0200, Alexander Sosedkin wrote: > > The problem stems entirely from UIDs and GUDs being numbers > > and not strings. I see this as a peculiarity of some of the filesystems, > > you target. Sa

Re: rpm-ostree/bootc uid/gid drift problem

On Thu, Apr 17, 2025 at 06:52:43PM +0200, Alexander Sosedkin wrote: > The problem stems entirely from UIDs and GUDs being numbers > and not strings. I see this as a peculiarity of some of the filesystems, > you target. Say, tar is a filesystem that does not have this problem. > The specific dynamic

Re: F43 Change Proposal: Modular GnuPG packaging (self-contained)

Fabio Valentini wrote: > Do you have any opinion on which new optional subpackages should or > should not get pulled in by default on new installs? I'm not familiar with all the components either. One thing I notice is that treating keyboxd as optional seems questionable. The manual says it will b

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20250417.n.0 changes

OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20250416.n.0 NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20250417.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:4 Dropped images: 0 Added packages: 5 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 116 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 252.45 KiB Size of dropped packages:0

Re: F43 Change Proposal: Modular GnuPG packaging (self-contained)

On Fri, Apr 18, 2025 at 3:50 PM Neal Gompa wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 18, 2025 at 9:37 AM Fabio Valentini wrote: > > > > On Wed, Apr 16, 2025 at 9:09 PM Björn Persson wrote: > > > > > > > On upgrade to Fedora 43, some non-essential GnuPG utilities will no > > > > longer be available by default, and

Re: F43 Change Proposal: Modular GnuPG packaging (self-contained)

On Wed, Apr 16, 2025 at 9:09 PM Björn Persson wrote: > > > On upgrade to Fedora 43, some non-essential GnuPG utilities will no > > longer be available by default, and instead moved to the optional > > `gnupg2-g13`, `gnupg2-utils`, and `gnupg2-wks` packages. > > In the merge request I see "Recommen

Re: F43 Change Proposal: Modular GnuPG packaging (self-contained)

On Fri, Apr 18, 2025 at 10:05 AM Fabio Valentini wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 18, 2025 at 3:50 PM Neal Gompa wrote: > > > > On Fri, Apr 18, 2025 at 9:37 AM Fabio Valentini > > wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 16, 2025 at 9:09 PM Björn Persson wrote: > > > > > > > > > On upgrade to Fedora 43, some non-

Re: F43 Change Proposal: Modular GnuPG packaging (self-contained)

On Fri, Apr 18, 2025 at 9:37 AM Fabio Valentini wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 16, 2025 at 9:09 PM Björn Persson wrote: > > > > > On upgrade to Fedora 43, some non-essential GnuPG utilities will no > > > longer be available by default, and instead moved to the optional > > > `gnupg2-g13`, `gnupg2-utils`,

orphaned netdata

Hi, Because netdata seems to be more and more attracted by the dark side way of closed sources, I don't want to maintain this package anymore, so I'm going to orphan it. Actual bugs are about: * new version available: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2353490 * can't fix this on

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20250418.n.0 changes

OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20250417.n.0 NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20250418.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:2 Dropped images: 2 Added packages: 4 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 54 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 5.08 MiB Size of dropped packages:0 B