d things
> out with Michel and his packaging yet? "
>
> which I ask here , had I to sort out anything with anyone ?
>
> but anyway I replied to Michel showing that way of set flags is not
> right and his package is incomplete etc etc
>
> 2025-05-07 00:58
s.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 Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://li
1-Nov-2024 15:28 19.33 KB
>
> My goal is that for each of these workaround, to find a solution upstream to
> have a real EPEL 10 package. Normally I already did open the bugzillas for
> all these, and try to follow up when one dependency is made available. For
> some of these pa
sts.fedoraproject.org
>> Do not reply to spam, report it:
>> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
>
> --
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.f
On Wed, Sep 25, 2024 at 11:01 AM Stephen Smoogen wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, 25 Sept 2024 at 11:53, Carl George wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 24, 2024 at 6:25 AM Zdeněk Žamberský wrote:
>>
>> To reiterate from the existing issue, EPEL 10 hasn't launched yet
st Archives:
> >
> > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> > Do not reply to spam, report it:
> > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Stephen Smoogen, Red
(e.g. %pyproject_check_import) MUST be run. This ensures
that missing run-time dependencies fail the build. If you get a FTI
bug for one of your Python packages, it likely means this policy isn't
being followed.
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#_tests
--
Carl G
they don't have
permission to commit to or request branches for? This is a regular
issue for new EPEL major versions, where a maintainer doesn't have
access to request new EPEL branches for all their dependencies.
--
Carl George
--
___
epel-
aproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
--
Carl George
--
__
o 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 Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@
g
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
&
her name we come up with) when I create the #change-proposal tag.
>
> Moving the packaging list is a Packaging Committee decision.
>
> Automated posts can be moved at any time. I can work with the people
> who own the generation of those reports to figure out a good a
o keep the package around.
[0] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2176050
[1]
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/golang-github-deepmap-oapi-codegen/c/2792c7c77ff7815f82a942a944ccf48f0401c0a1?branch=rawhide
--
Carl George
___
devel mailing lis
raproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-i
with the exception flag because it would fall under the second bullet
point for exceptions.
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/ReviewGuidelines/#_package_review_process
If the package is intended to be EPEL-only, make sure to retire the
rawhide branch.
--
Carl George
___
On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 3:59 PM Fabio Valentini wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 26, 2022, 21:20 Demi Marie Obenour wrote:
>>
>> On 8/26/22 06:12, Fabio Valentini wrote:
>> > On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 3:12 AM Carl George wrote:
>> >>
>> >> sqlcipher has be
ild the
new sqlcipher in a side tag and then complete the rebuilds in the side
tag myself via proven packager permissions.
[0] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120882
[1] https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/sqlcipher/pull-request/3
[2] https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/jo
t; Do not reply to spam, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
--
Carl George
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https
I've just orphaned python-pdir2 as I no longer use it. Feel free to
take ownership if you like. Fair warning, it's failing to build for
Python 3.11 in rawhide, and updating to the latest version will
require packaging pdm-pep517.
--
C
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
> ht
ng_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
--
Carl George
___
d
ect/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
--
Ca
perhaps epel-announce) first.
Alternatively, have you considered doing an incompatible update [1] to
version 5? It may already be EOL, but surely that's a better option
than the current version 3 or removing it entirely.
[0]
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maint
would also send an email to epel-devel
beforehand to avoid a quick retire/unretire churn for the packages
other maintainers are interested in keeping around.
--
Carl George
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubs
astructure
Agreed, for quick local builds it's fine to use epel8-next (c8s) to
verify it builds and then submit the koji build to the epel8 (rhel8)
target. If the local build works but the koji build doesn't, you
likely have a candidate for an official epel8-next koji build.
--
Carl George
fers all the architectures that
EPEL does. As far as I can tell, the three most popular (Alma, Rocky,
Oracle) only offer x86_64 and aarch64 but are missing ppc64le and
s390x. That said CentOS Linux 8 doesn't offer s390x either, so we
already have this problem, but switch the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
This does not seem to be the same as Bug 1840113. That was an selinux
issue. This one happens even in permissive mode. Previous directions for
enabling 2fa were:
dnf -y install google-authenticator qrencode
# modify /etc/pam.d/sshd by adding one li
Pull request has been rebased and is ready to be merged. Thanks for
your help with this Richard.
On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 6:59 PM Richard Shaw wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 4:34 PM Carl George wrote:
>>
>> I read the policy [0] as "major (bug | security) fixes&q
tched in F31 as well - so since
> this update fixes it, the update would be suitable for F31.
>
> [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1849735
>
> -Ian
>
> On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 5:01 PM Carl George wrote:
>>
>> F32 is fine by me. Based on the updates polic
2020 at 2:54 PM Richard Shaw wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 2:42 PM Carl George wrote:
>>
>> Yes, the patch is from an upstream pull request [0] that has already
>> been merged to the master branch [1] and is planned to be included in
>> their next release [2] (
link_or_comment
[4] https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/carlwgeorge/mumble-wayland/
On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 6:57 PM Richard Shaw wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 3:30 PM Carl George wrote:
>>
>> Howdy folks,
>>
>> This is a non-responsive maintainer check for fedpop
://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/mumble/c/490fc25a45b4816b73ac2ff5c0954668ae4b723a?branch=master
--
Carl George
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https
I just orphaned the python-mitogen package. I packaged it for my last
job but I no longer use it and I'm not interested in maintaining it
anymore. As best I can tell, nothing else in the distribution
requires or build requires it. It's up for grabs if anyone is
interested.
--
C
the best way to set up
> a PHP site now".
>
> Yep, migration needs work. Acknowledged. The same could be said of
> changing an init system, changing a default syslog implementation,
> changing the way a database server is configured, changing the defaults
> for a proxy server's
ailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
--
Carl George
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedo
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1833855
--
Carl George
___
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/co
> Or you think changing huge pieces of infrastructure, and working for
> 3+ years on a project (modularity) was done just to have 3 versions of
> Node.js available?
Of course not. Modularity is a great fit to provide multiple versions many
applications (in one repository), such as php, mariadb,
> So what is the point of modules then? If we want just multiple
> versions of a few applications, we can just have few repositories.
Add another repository for every alternate version (stream) doesn't scale.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedorap
a modular libgit2 help me
understand. Given the current issues, this seems like a reasonable solution.
If other agree, I'm happy to submit these compat packages for review.
Carl George
Rackspace
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedor
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
I am trying a scratch build of libpst, and I don't understand the
error.
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=35373272
This package uses boost-python3. On x86, the build log contains:
make[2]: Entering directory
'/builddir/build/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Problem 1: package passivetex-1.25-23.fc28.noarch requires xmltex >=
20020625-10, but none of the providers can be installed
- package texlive-xmltex-7:20170520-29.fc28.noarch obsoletes texlive-
xmltex-bin < 7:20170520 provided by texlive-xmltex-
/show_bug.cgi?id=1339379
Carl George
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
ghemical
libghemical
liboglappth
mopac7
mpqc
I hope someone is able to pick them up.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAlJm7LYACgkQL6j7milTFsEY/ACbBCxTi5Z21XwHMIPOTPSMK/4I
ywsAoIEwfZ9J+r63sFe56r1u00TScDXi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I am working on packaging logstash
http://www.logstash.net/
but the build procedure described here
https://github.com/logstash/logstash/wiki/
Building-and-running-logstash-from-source
seems to be incompatible with Fedora packaging. How do other jru
Could you provide a link to that discussion?
Thanks
2012/11/9 Adam Williamson
> On Sat, 2012-11-10 at 01:12 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > It's not one of our supported upgrade mechanisms, and there appears to
> > > be no chance of that changing.
> >
> > That's the
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=847644
?
2012/8/13 Jesse Keating
> On 08/13/2012 04:49 AM, Petr Schindler wrote:
>
>> there is missing boot parameter, so you won't be able to boot TC1. You
>> can add 'root=live:CDLABEL=Fedora\**x2018-Alpha-TC1\x20x86_64' to boot
>> line to boot this
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, 2011-09-17 at 14:00 -0400, Paul Wouters wrote:
> You can find source and package pre-releases at:
> ftp://ftp.xelerance.com/dnssec-trigger/
At least for Fedora 15:
BuildRequires: glib-devel, gtk2-devel, ldns-devel
and in %install
mkdir -p %
On 5/4/11 1:31 PM, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
> Dmitry Butskoy writes:
>
>> Genes MailLists wrote:
>> > On 05/04/2011 11:43 AM, Honza Horak wrote:
>> >
>> >If I recall correctly - the old sendmail way was /etc/aliases - the
>> > new sendmail way is /etc/mail/aliases .. as far as I know that has the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 2011-04-01 at 11:38 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> http://serverbeach1.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/15-Beta.TC1/Live/
> Now we can get down to the desktop validation testing:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_15_Beta_TC
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
I'm using the en_ca locale if that make any difference.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iF4EAREIAAYFAky3f+4ACgkQIqo66BA244QKVAEA0cNALBxNi8NaA4eu+3HvDC/v
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> > > desktop-i386-20100916.15.iso fails to boot from cd on dell
> dimension
> > > 2350. Does it work for other folks?
> >
> > Do you have some more symptoms you can tell us? I did a local
> compose from
> > around the same time and it worked on a USB
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
desktop-i386-20100916.15.iso fails to boot from cd on dell dimension
2350. Does it work for other folks?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFMk7CjL6j7milTFsERAhItAJ0Tx+fLkRQwUFcwOtsObwsQIscN1QCcDfeJ
pSAP+UAIGMv6qwZO
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I have a package (ghemical) which requires a courier 12 font for use in
its xwindow gui. I clearly need some dependency that will drag in
xorg-x11-fonts-ISO8859-1-100dpi
or
xorg-x11-fonts-ISO8859-1-75dpi
but those probably depend on the actual user's
Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Mon, 02 Aug 2010 14:20:40 -0400
> "Carl G."
wrote:
>
>> Well, i'm happy to be a bug
triager so
>> you can get "real work" done. /s
>>
>> Let me know if you
need some help to
>> make the stats looks pretty
Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Mon, 02.08.10 17:01, Mike Prispan
(fr.p...@gmail.com) wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> maybe I'm wrong (I guess I
am), but is PulseAudio really dead? What lead
>> me to this conclusion?
Well look at this:
>> * Fedora has 201 NEW/ASSIGNED bugs right now [1]
>>
* there was
Pádraig Brady wrote:
>Nobody I know enables SELinux.
>smolt says about half leave it enabled:
>http://smolts.org/static/stats/stats.html
>But I'm guessing a lot of experienced users/devs
>disable it given previous experiences...
It's closer to 70% actually, also consider the 18.7% being market a
.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 3:34 PM, Carl Gaudreault
> wrote:
>>>So It seems Carl G. has been closing several bugs across
multiple
>>>components without comment recently. Hmm.Not cool.
>>
>> -jef
>>
>> I gave the reason why i
>So It seems Carl G. has been closing several bugs across multiple
>components without comment recently. Hmm.Not cool.
-jef
I gave the reason why i closed it.
Also, RHBZ number you are referring to?
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
--
devel m
Hey, can someone take a look at this bug report on Bugzilla ?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=556073
Carl
Quoted from Michael Schwendt :
The package is in need of an update because it does not adhere to
the guidelines for packaging static libraries:
http://fedoraproject.org
60 matches
Mail list logo
