On Thu, May 29, 2025 at 3:05 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 28, 2025 at 08:22:45PM +0200, Emmanuel Seyman wrote:
> > * Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek [28/05/2025 15:24] :
> > >
> > > No, I don't think we'll make the issue public. Among other reasons,
> > > there is a lot of dis
Hi all,
The packaging changes related to the "Modular GnuPG Packaging" Change
[0] have landed in rawhide now:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-233d32eb30
The detailed changes can be viewed in the associated Pull Request [1].
Please let me know if you encounter any issues relate
On Sat, May 17, 2025 at 9:00 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> On Sat, May 17, 2025 at 09:52:14AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Sat, 2025-05-17 at 09:17 -0700, Brad Smith wrote:
> > > Sometime ago I asked a similar question on matrix (or IRC?) Fedora
> > > Devel and some very kind person provided t
=
# #meeting:fedoraproject.org: fesco
=
Meeting started by @decathorpe:fedora.im at 2025-05-13 17:01:59
Meeting summary
---
* TOPIC: Init Process (@decathorpe:fedora.im, 17:02:21)
* TOPIC: #3385 Change: Java25 A
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the
FESCo meeting Tuesday at 17:00 UTC in #meeting:fedoraproject.org
on Matrix.
To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto
or run:
date -d '2025-05-13 17:00 UTC'
Links to all issues to be
On Tue, May 6, 2025 at 1:44 PM Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>
> I have a failure in %configure which only happens on i686:
>
> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=2710279
It looks like you're hitting this issue:
https://pagure.io/releng/issue/12726
> > configure: error: C compiler
On Tue, May 6, 2025 at 11:55 AM Michal Schorm wrote:
>
> > Is using %{_libdir}/x/y/z necessary? What are the reasons?
>
> In this particular case, it's the MariaDB stack.
>
> The 'libmariadb.so' is in the '%{_libdir}', but then there are some
> plugins, some restricted plugins, some test plugins,
On Tue, May 6, 2025 at 11:26 AM Pavol Sloboda wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I am currently working on rebasing a package that creates a shared library
> and I want to place it in %{_libdir}/x/y/z. I am using the
> /etc/ld.so.conf.d/%[name}.conf file to do so. My question is:
> Do I have to call ldconfig in
On Mon, May 5, 2025 at 6:06 PM Justin Forbes wrote:
>
> On Sat, May 3, 2025 at 1:20 PM Fabio Valentini wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, May 3, 2025 at 7:15 PM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> > >
> > > Dne 03. 05. 25 v 4:33 odp. Chris Adams napsal(a):
> > > > What
Hi all,
The update to magma 2.9.0 that landed in rawhide a few hours ago
bumped the soname for libmagma.so (from `libmagma.so.2.8.0()(64bit)`
to `libmagma.so.2.9.0()(64bit)`) which was not announced or
coordinated with dependent packages.
The only directly impacted package seems to be "python-tor
On Sat, May 3, 2025 at 7:15 PM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
>
> Dne 03. 05. 25 v 4:33 odp. Chris Adams napsal(a):
> > What do you do with bugs that never get addressed in any way? I've got
> > a few bugs that I've been testing and rolling over to newer Fedora
> > releases for years, with little or no ma
On Wed, Apr 30, 2025 at 10:23 AM Remi Collet wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> See https://github.com/kkos/oniguruma/
>
> => "This project ended on April 24, 2025."
>
> I see some projects using it
> bat
> bfs
> comrak
> git-delta
> jq
> kitutuki
> lino
>
On Tue, Apr 29, 2025 at 9:00 PM Adam Williamson
wrote:
>
> So today I came to update a package I created a couple of years back
> using rpmautospec - python-pyasyncore . When I created the package, I
> had it use %autochangelog :
>
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-pyasyncore/c/4536a3345
On Sun, Apr 27, 2025 at 5:05 PM Björn Persson wrote:
>
> Fabio Valentini wrote:
> > Hum, it appears that the method documented here does not work as I
> > would have expected:
> > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_one_to_many_replacement
> >
On Sun, Apr 27, 2025 at 12:17 PM 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
>
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
On Thu, Apr 24, 2025 at 12:52 AM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> So, some things I wonder about this process (in no particular order):
>
> If this lightweight process is easier, will not people just use it over
> the normal process? So, it will be harder to see who is completely
> unresponsive. There will
On Sat, Apr 19, 2025 at 4:29 PM Björn Persson wrote:
>
> Fabio Valentini wrote:
> > Though it would probably make sense to change the OpenPGP signature
> > verification macros to only depend on gnupg2-verify (or maybe even sqv
> > or sqopv) when that is the only
On Wed, Apr 23, 2025 at 5:17 PM Vít Ondruch wrote:
>
>
> Dne 23. 04. 25 v 10:17 Jiri Vanek napsal(a):
> > Hello!
> >
> > Mikolai have summed up nice sumamry :
> > https://github.com/judovana/java25-chancongratualtionsge
>
>
> https://github.com/judovana/java25-change
>
> This is likely the correct
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.
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
>
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
On Thu, Apr 17, 2025 at 1:18 PM Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 15, 2025 at 03:56:28PM -0400, Cole Robinson wrote:
> > On 4/15/25 12:21 PM, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> > > On Tue, Apr 15, 2025, 18:14 Stephen Smoogen > > <mailto:ssmoo...@redhat.com>> w
On Wed, Apr 16, 2025 at 10:04 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 15, 2025 at 06:21:20PM +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> ...snip...
>
> > The only remaining blocker from official Fedora repos, is - to my knowledge
> > - wine, which pulls in 32-bit multilib libraries on x
On Tue, Apr 15, 2025, 18:32 Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 15, 2025 at 12:21 PM Fabio Valentini
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 15, 2025, 18:14 Stephen Smoogen wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, 15 Apr 2025 at 12:10, Daniel P. Berrangé
&
On Tue, Apr 15, 2025, 18:14 Stephen Smoogen wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 15 Apr 2025 at 12:10, Daniel P. Berrangé
> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Apr 15, 2025 at 11:43:38AM -0400, Cole Robinson wrote:
>> >
>> > Has anyone gone through the effort of removing i686 from a wide reaching
>> > non-leaf package? Any adv
On Tue, Apr 15, 2025 at 12:31 AM Michael Catanzaro
wrote:
>
>
> I think the practical effect of the lightweight process will be: new
> contributor likely becomes the de facto maintainer of the package,
> while bug reports continue to be assigned to the non-responsive main
> admin.
>
> Maybe it's b
On Mon, Apr 14, 2025 at 6:19 PM Neal Gompa wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 14, 2025 at 11:57 AM Milan Crha wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 2025-04-14 at 16:48 +0200, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > > Common history was always a thing.
> >
> > Hi,
> > are you sure? The `pkcon update` is not part of the `dnf4 history`
On Mon, Apr 14, 2025 at 6:21 AM Rajeesh K V wrote:
>
> > During the upgrade I've noticed this message output in the console:
> > /usr/sbin cannot be merged, /usr/sbin/arptables points to
> > /etc/alternatives/arptables
> > I assume it's related to
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Unify_b
On Wed, Apr 2, 2025 at 6:58 PM Michel Lind wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2025-04-02 at 11:21 -0500, Michel Lind wrote:
> > On Wed, 2025-04-02 at 10:47 -0500, Michel Lind via Rust wrote:
> > > Dear maintainers,
> > >
> > > Fabio just flagged that below is now broken in Rawhide because
> > > netlink-
> > > pac
On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 6:30 PM Milan Zamazal wrote:
>
> I created side tag f43-build-side-109750 and built libcamera there
> (without libpisp for now).
>
> Wim, would you like to rebuild pipewire-plugin-libcamera there when you
> have some time?
>
> libcamera-apps fails to build due to using depr
On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 9:32 AM Lukas Javorsky wrote:
>
> > Is the main reason lack of maintainers? Many of these C packages work well
> > on constrained and embedded devices.
>
> Yes, nobody wanted to maintain it and the current maintainer doesn't want it
> either.
Lack of maintainer upstream
On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 2:34 PM Marek Blaha wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 1:23 PM Petr Pisar wrote:
> > It looks you are rebasing sdbus-cpp.
> >
> > Then either bundle the old library into the rebased package at build time.
> > I.e. in sdbus-cpp.spec do:
> >
> > BuildRequires: sdbus-cpp
On Tue, Apr 1, 2025 at 9:31 PM Fabio Valentini wrote:
>
> =
> # #meeting:fedoraproject.org: fesco
> =
>
> Meeting started by @decathorpe:fedora.im at 2025-04-01 17:01:10
Forgot to include links to the min
=
# #meeting:fedoraproject.org: fesco
=
Meeting started by @decathorpe:fedora.im at 2025-04-01 17:01:10
Summaries for individual topics provided by decathorpeLLM. 😉
Meeting summary
---
* TOPIC: Roll Call (@decath
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the
FESCo meeting Tuesday at 17:00 UTC in #meeting:fedoraproject.org
on Matrix.
To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto
or run:
date -d '2025-04-01 17:00 UTC'
Links to all issues to be
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 Mon, Mar 24, 2025 at 2:17 PM Sandro Mani wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> A while back I updated the mingw-qt5 packages to 5.15.16 in the
> f42-build-side-103601 side tag, but then apparently forgot to submit the
> update. Now it looks like the side-tag is expired, and while the builds
> are still around, I c
Hi all,
I've been working on the Rust dependencies for GNOME 48 (both updating
existing packages and submitting new ones through review). There's now
only three reviews left that block updates for loupe (Image Viewer)
48.0, snapshot (Camera) 48.0, and glycin (sandboxed image loader)
1.2.0:
- rust
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 5:01 PM Fabio Valentini wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> It's this time of the year again. Looks like there's quite a few
> updates that were submitted to Fedora 41 but not to Fedora 42 and / or
> Rawhide.
>
> Some seem to be either caused by
On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 11:14 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 09:13:44PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > cmake-3.31.6-1.fc43 /
> > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=2665333
> > is the latest cmake-3.x build and koji shows it doesn't have any tag
On Mon, Mar 17, 2025 at 6:00 PM Richard Hughes via devel
wrote:
>
> On Monday, 17 March 2025 at 16:45, Gary Buhrmaster
> wrote:
> > git commit —allow-empty -m 'Rebuild for foolib 3.14'
>
> Yes, I guess that works -- thanks. On doing so, I got:
>
> DEBUG util.py:459: Problem: package git-core-2.
On Fri, Mar 14, 2025 at 12:37 PM Fabio Valentini wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 13, 2025 at 6:41 PM Michael Catanzaro
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Fabio is going to handle builds. Thank you, Fabio!
>
> I have rebuilt all packages in the list except for three:
>
> - telegr
On Thu, Mar 13, 2025 at 6:41 PM Michael Catanzaro wrote:
>
>
> Fabio is going to handle builds. Thank you, Fabio!
I have rebuilt all packages in the list except for three:
- telegram-desktop is in rpmfusion and needs to be handled there,
after this update lands.
- chromium fails to build on ppc6
On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 4:51 PM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
>
> Dne 02. 01. 25 v 7:08 odp. Steve Grubb napsal(a):
>
> Hello,
>
> I would recommend a change to the testing description. See below...
>
> On Tuesday, December 24, 2024 11:01:11 AM EST Aoife Moloney via devel-
> announce wrote:
>
> Wiki - htt
Hi all,
I'm going to update cargo-c to the latest version (0.10.11) in Fedora,
EPEL 10, and EPEL 9-Next very soon.
This version of cargo-c will be required for compiling any Rust crates
that rely on the Rust 2024 Edition, which is supported in Rust 1.85+
(already stable in Fedora 40+, and pending
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 8:32 PM Michael Catanzaro wrote:
>
> I'm pretty concerned that we have no automation to catch these
> problems. Would we have even noticed if not for you manually checking
> and complaining here on devel@?
Probably not. Which is why I do this kind of thing twice a year :)
On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 4:44 PM Michel Lind wrote:
>
> > * support for signing with Sequoia-sq as an alternative to GnuPG
>
> Is this not already supported in the current RPM? I seem to remember dealing
> with issues due to us using sequoia-sq and it being stricter with some non
> compliant sign
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 5:12 PM Michael J Gruber wrote:
>
> Fabio Valentini venit, vidit, dixit 2025-03-11 17:01:15:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > It's this time of the year again. Looks like there's quite a few
> > updates that were submitted to Fedora 41 b
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 5:03 PM Matthew Miller wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 10:44:48AM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > > What's going on there? Did the bot bug out? Or is the Red Hat security
> > > team shutting down? I'm very confused.
> >
> > The team isn't shutting down -- I just talked
Hi all,
It's this time of the year again. Looks like there's quite a few
updates that were submitted to Fedora 41 but not to Fedora 42 and / or
Rawhide.
Some seem to be either caused by confusion about the ongoing freeze,
but a lot are just ... missing. And packit seems to be a major
offender her
Hi all,
I just started looking at my emails today and it looks like the OSIDB
Bzimport bot closed *all* (or at least almost all) open security
issues in bugzilla as "CLOSED WONTFIX".
What's going on there? Did the bot bug out? Or is the Red Hat security
team shutting down? I'm very confused.
Fab
On Thu, Mar 6, 2025 at 8:25 PM Quentin Deslandes wrote:
>
> Hi Folks,
>
> My name is Quentin Deslandes, I'm a software engineer based in France.
>
> My day-to-day job is to develop bpfilter
> (https://github.com/facebook/bpfilter),
> which I recently submitted the package for. bpfilter is a tool
On Mon, Mar 3, 2025 at 6:35 PM Ben Beasley wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 3, 2025, at 12:28 PM, Petr Pisar wrote:
> > RPM poorly handles changing symlinks to directories (or vice versa?). This
> > shortcoming can be mitigated with an RPM scriptlet, but scriptlets are frown
> > by OSTree distribution syste
On Sun, Feb 23, 2025 at 11:17 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
>
> I still think we should always require a changelog entry, so that that
> the reason for the rebuild is always explicit.
>
> (In the normal case, there should never be a need for "trivial"
> rebuilds, and rebuilds should be for
On Fri, Feb 21, 2025 at 5:13 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> On 21. 02. 25 12:41, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 20, 2025 at 1:17 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
> >>
> >> Hello.
> >>
> >> With the recent discussions about provenpackagers in Fedora, I r
On Thu, Feb 20, 2025 at 1:17 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> Hello.
>
> With the recent discussions about provenpackagers in Fedora, I recently got an
> idea.
>
> One of the common needs for provenpackagers is to simply "bump and rebuild" a
> set of dependencies.
>
> All packagers are already able to b
On Wed, Feb 5, 2025 at 2:21 PM Fabio Valentini wrote:
>
> Otherwise I plan to retire any Rust packages that are
> - library-only / source-only and
> - have been unused leaf packages for 365+ days and
> - have no documented reason for why they are still needed
> before the F42
On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 10:25 AM Jiri Vanek wrote:
>
> The scriplets were chose, as they are always noticed. And I would sleep more
> easily, if I would know that people moved non system jdk to temurins rather
> sooner then late.
But .. they're just not.
People will only see them if they run `
On Mon, Feb 10, 2025 at 11:48 PM Tom Rix wrote:
>
> I am glad the gcc change came in before the branch.
> But I would rather it have come into rawhide after the branch so the last
> weeks before the branch could have been spent on testing for F42 rather than
> scrambling to kludge/fix a lot of #
On Fri, Feb 7, 2025 at 10:56 PM Chris Adams wrote:
>
> Why is updating a Fedora 41 system with java-11-openjdk installed
> getting deprecation notices for a Fedora 42 change? I got:
>
> The java-11-openjdk package is deprecated and may no longer receive
> updates. Since f42 install adoptium-
On Fri, Feb 7, 2025, 05:20 Richard Shaw wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 6, 2025 at 6:16 PM Fabio Valentini
> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Feb 6, 2025 at 11:37 PM Richard Shaw
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > It seems to be the only reason for FTBFS. A single test is failing.
>>
On Thu, Feb 6, 2025 at 11:37 PM Richard Shaw wrote:
>
> It seems to be the only reason for FTBFS. A single test is failing. Upstream
> has no interest in supporting 32bit anymore, which I think makes sense.
>
> For posterity here are the potential affected packages:
>
> $ fedrq whatrequires-src -
On Wed, Feb 5, 2025 at 2:51 PM Ben Beasley wrote:
>
> It seems like the inclusion of rust-smallvec on this list might have
> been an error, since "fedrq wr rust-smallvec*-devel" gives a very large
> number of results that aren’t subpackages of rust-smallvec itself.
You are correct, this should ha
Hi all,
In an effort to keep the stack of Rust crate packages in good shape in
Fedora, I'm regularly checking for library-only packages that have
been unused for extended periods of time (usually 365+ days, i.e. two
full release cycles).
Dropping packages like this reduces the maintenance effort
On Wed, Feb 5, 2025 at 1:26 PM Artur Frenszek-Iwicki
wrote:
>
> We're currently in the middle of F42 branching + related freeze.
>
> > All builds that will be running at that time for the rawhide will be
> > canceled and can be resubmitted by maintainers after the branching.
> >
> > All rawhide up
On Mon, Feb 3, 2025 at 9:19 PM Łukasz Wojniłowicz
wrote:
>
> Hi all,
> according to
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Package_review_policy/#submitter_not_responding
>
> "When the submitter of a review ticket has not responded to comments for one
> month, a comment is added to the tic
On Thu, Jan 30, 2025 at 9:18 PM Sérgio Basto via devel
wrote:
>
> Hi,
> I will start a mass rebuild [1] in a side-tag, very soon, please let me
> know we have any objection that prevent to proceeding.
>
> Best regards,
>
> [1]
> dnf repoquery --repoid=rawhide --whatrequires "libjxl*" --qf
> "%{re
On Thu, Jan 30, 2025 at 4:11 PM Eike Rathke wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Monday, 2025-01-27 19:03:35 +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote:
>
> > In an effort to avoid the large amount of breakage during the mass
> > rebuild that happened with GCC 15 and Go 1.24 landing only *hours
On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 8:02 PM Michal Schorm wrote:
>
> Does this RFC include an obligation for the 'major toolchain upgrades'
> Fedora Change owners to rebuild the dependent packages ?
No, but this is already happening to some degree.
For example, test builds with GCC snapshots were actually ha
Hi all,
For reference, this has been discussed at the last FPC meeting:
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/meeting-1_matrix_fedoraproject-org/2025-01-23/fpc.2025-01-23-17.00.log.html
And I filed a corresponding RFC with FESCo here:
https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3347
In an effort to avoid the larg
On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 3:32 AM Ian McInerney via devel
wrote:
>
> Were the FTBFS bugs filed differently this time? It appears that there were
> actually two FTBFS bugs filed against Audacity
> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2339522 and
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?i
On Sun, Jan 26, 2025 at 7:26 PM Björn Persson wrote:
>
> Fabio Valentini wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 26, 2025 at 4:40 PM Stephen Gallagher
> > wrote:
> > > It's possible that I'm in the minority here, but I honestly don't think
> > > anything shou
On Sun, Jan 26, 2025 at 4:40 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 12:24 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
>>
>> On 24. 01. 25 22:13, Adam Williamson wrote:
>> > Note that side tags aren't the only issue. Sometimes a maintainer
>> > commits a bump to git but doesn't build it in a side
On Sun, Jan 26, 2025 at 2:27 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jan 26, 2025 at 12:36:33PM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> > Wouldn't the config-file-as-separate-source-file approach would be
> > more or less backwards compatible,
> > whereas creating
On Sun, Jan 26, 2025 at 1:03 AM Jan Drögehoff wrote:
>
> Fabio Valentini wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 10:23 PM Jan Drögehoff sentrycraft...@gmail.com
> > wrote:
> > > I'm generally in favor of this, especially since it would establish a
> > > stat
On Sun, Jan 26, 2025 at 11:08 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 04:32:54PM +, Gary Buhrmaster wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 11:05 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Updated diff:
> >
> > > Zbyszek
> >
> > I have a preference for seein
On Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 10:13 PM Adam Williamson
wrote:
>
> Note that side tags aren't the only issue. Sometimes a maintainer
> commits a bump to git but doesn't build it in a side tag or rawhide,
> for whatever reason. Sometimes a package is *built*, but gated from
> Rawhide by automated tests, b
On Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 10:23 PM Jan Drögehoff wrote:
>
> I'm generally in favor of this, especially since it would establish a status
> quo that could benefit other languages where the usual way of dealing with
> dependencies is incompatible with distributions.
You are aware that 1) this reque
On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 8:00 PM Didier Fabert wrote:
>
> Hi there,
>
> I try to fix a ftbfs for netdata package and I don't know where exactly
> was the problem.
>
> I enabled 2 flags:
> - # Workaround for Missing build-id on go.d.plugin
>%global _missing_build_ids_terminate_build 0
> - # We u
Hi all,
The Change Proposal to retire zbus v1 in Fedora 42 has been approved
for a while:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/RetireZbusV1
I waited with acting on it until after the mass rebuild to not cause
unnecessary FTBFS issues. I plan to retire the packages that make up
zbus v1 in approx
Hi all,
With this Change Proposal having been approved by FESCo:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Retire_PyO3_v0.19,_v0.20,_and_v0.21
I am putting things in motion for the retirement of all packages for
PyO3 v0.19, v0.20, and v0.21.
Three of the five packages that were listed as affected w
On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 12:32 AM Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>
> I don't think supply chain security was really mentioned in the thread
> yet (apologies if it was - I only scanned it).
>
> There's a real danger that if we forgo responsibility for reviewing
> packages to another project, then someone
On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 3:08 PM Jan Drögehoff wrote:
>
> Fabio Valentini wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:52 AM Daniel P. Berrangé berra...@redhat.com
> > wrote:
> > > An increasingly large part of the ecosystem is working and deploying
> > > a way that
On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:52 AM Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
>
> An increasingly large part of the ecosystem is working and deploying
> a way that Fedora (and derivative distros) are relegated to only
> delivering what's illustrated as Ring 1. This is especially the case
> in the CoreOS/SilverBlue s
On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Ondrej Mosnáček wrote:
>
> On Tue, 21 Jan 2025 at 21:42, maxwell--- via devel-announce
> wrote:
> >
> > Report started at 2025-01-21 20:00:10 UTC
> >
> > The following packages are orphaned and will be retired when they
> > are orphaned for six weeks, unless someon
On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 9:07 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
>
> Consider https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/mass-rebuild/f42-failures.html:
> there are 7 failed rust packages there. Part of the reason is that
> by not bundling we don't have a long tail of old versions stashed
> in other pro
On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 7:46 PM Chris Adams wrote:
>
> Once upon a time, Samyak Jain via devel-announce
> said:
> > Per the Fedora Linux f42 schedule [1] we started a mass rebuild for
> > Fedora Linux f42 on 2025-01-15. We did a mass rebuild for Fedora Linux
> > 42 for the changes listed in:
> >
On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 5:13 PM Jan Drögehoff wrote:
>
> What is a "reasonable" language ecosystem here?
> Rust sure isn't, I can see at least 6 (0.9, 0.11, 0.12, 0.13, 0.14, 0.15)
> versions of the rust-hashbrown package in Fedora 41 which all need to be
> maintained separately and if someone w
On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 4:45 PM Maxwell G wrote:
>
> On 1/21/25 7:09 AM, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> >> But rebuilds can be automated. Generating patches for vendored
> >> dependencies may be possible to some extent (but of course the vendored
> >> package varia
On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:30 PM Stephen Smoogen wrote:
>
> 1. Koschei is under resourced and turning it on for every package would
> pretty much make it a 'why is nothing working in Fedora' like every other
> good idea we add to the build system.
> 2. Getting it resourced would require planning
On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:23 PM Michael Catanzaro wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 21 2025 at 05:13:07 AM -05:00:00, Neal Gompa
> wrote:
> > We know it's possible because this is how openSUSE works today. They
> > never schedule mass builds because they always happen automatically
> > with the right condit
On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:08 AM Florian Weimer wrote:
>
> * Gerd Hoffmann:
>
> >> We would also need to consider what our committement is to security
> >> updates when apps are bundling stuff, as the same reasons that make
> >> unbundling huard, also make fixing security issues hard.
> >
> > Note
On Mon, Jan 20, 2025 at 8:02 AM Mikel Olasagasti wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Go-SIG has raised a ticket with FESCo [1] to propose a significant
> shift in Fedora's packaging approach for Go dependencies: moving to
> vendoring/bundling by default. This would represent a major departure
> from our current gu
On Mon, Jan 20, 2025, 12:27 Andreas Schneider wrote:
> On Wednesday, 15 January 2025 22:31:22 CET Jerry James wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 2:34 AM Andreas Schneider
> wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, 15 January 2025 01:06:19 CET Jerry James wrote:
> > > > Emacs is uninstallable in Rawhide due to
On Sun, Jan 19, 2025 at 6:19 PM Mattia Verga via devel
wrote:
>
> I see several of my packages are FTB in the running mass rebuild due to
> something like:
>
> error: too many arguments to function ‘DoInterlace’; expected 0, have 1
>
> Is that due to GCC 15, or is due to some "hardening" setting a
On Sun, Jan 19, 2025 at 4:37 PM Gary Buhrmaster
wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jan 18, 2025 at 10:44 AM Fabio Valentini wrote:
>
> > So if you see packages that *change* (either their dependencies, or
> > their contents - but ignoring codegen differences with new compiler
> > vers
On Sat, Jan 18, 2025 at 5:07 PM Michal Schorm wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jan 18, 2025 at 4:33 PM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> > Dne 18. 01. 25 v 11:01 dop. Mattia Verga via devel napsal(a):
> > > I think some of the build failures are due to building things out of
> > > sequence.
> >
> > I agree with Fabio in
On Sat, Jan 18, 2025 at 2:40 PM Kyle Bloom wrote:
>
> Hello Fabio (or whom it may concern),
>
> I am interested in maintaining the python-magic-wormhole package,
> and it is along with its dependencies. I continue to use and love
> the project. There has been an uptick in activity in the project a
On Sat, Jan 18, 2025 at 3:11 PM Neal Gompa wrote:
>
> The code gathers the necessary information to do sequenced builds,
> though. Since it can report the graph to you, that means it can
> theoretically use that information to sort build sequencing.
Ok, it *has* dependency graph data, but it does
1 - 100 of 1250 matches
Mail list logo
