Re: How do you use sidetags?

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 the following. I cannot > > recall who it was. > > > > My use

Re: How do you use sidetags?

On Sat, May 17, 2025 at 06:32:47PM +1000, Frank Crawford wrote: > Bjorn, > > On Sat, 2025-05-17 at 09:03 +0200, Björn Persson wrote: > > Adam Williamson wrote: > > > `add-pkg` is not the right > > > thing to use here, I'm not sure where you came across it. > > > > "koji help" describes add-pkg as

Orphaned packages (was Re: about this https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2346041 what is your opinion ?)

Per their request, I've removed them from all their packages. Here's the list of packages needing a new main admin: (Note that some may have active co-maintainers) rpms/adns rpms/anyremote rpms/apt rpms/clamav rpms/containerd rpms/ddnet rpms/debconf rpms/debhelper rpms/debmirror rpms/debootstrap

Inactive packagers removed from the packager group

Hi all, Today, 2025-05-06, we have removed inactive packagers from the packager group. This is in accordance with the FESCo policy on inactive packagers: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Policy_for_inactive_packagers/ If the removed user is 'main admin' for a package, this package will

Re: Bugs that maintainers don't respond to

On Sat, May 03, 2025 at 09:20:02PM +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > Note that the bugzilla assignee for the "kernel" package seems to be a > deactivated bugzilla account, since a few months ago, so it's unclear > whether anybody is even getting notifications for bugs filed against > the package.

Re: Bugs that maintainers don't respond to

On Sat, May 03, 2025 at 09:33:01AM -0500, Chris Adams wrote: > 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 maintainer response (not even > bothering to CLOSE WONT

Re: RFC: Lightweight stalled request process

On Fri, Apr 25, 2025 at 03:55:40PM +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote: > 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

Re: Fedora survey data

On Fri, Apr 25, 2025 at 09:34:52AM -0400, Stephen Smoogen wrote: > > The data here was supposed to be end-of-lifed before F40 as it was to be > replaced with a different tool. The scripts are a POC which became > production years and years ago. Most of the work is done by a basic awk > script whic

Re: F43 Change Proposal: Wayland-only GNOME (self-contained)

On Thu, Apr 24, 2025 at 05:53:17PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Tue, Apr 22, 2025 at 07:55:53PM +0100, Aoife Moloney via devel-announce > wrote: > > == Benefit to Fedora == > > This aligns us with the effort going on upstream to retire the GNOME > > X11 session. It also aligns us

Re: RFC: Lightweight stalled request process

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 be some of their packages with no one doing anything, and some w

Re: Discussion about dropping qemu builds on i686

On Thu, Apr 17, 2025 at 12:27:26AM +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote: > 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 fr

Re: Discussion about dropping qemu builds on i686

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 x86_64. > > With work progressing in Wine upstream to make it possible to run 32-bit > Wi

Re: cleaning up our nomenclature

On Fri, Apr 11, 2025 at 11:53:50AM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > Hi folks, > > A few years ago we had the initalitive to get rid of problematic terms > like "master"/"slave". Git changed its default branch name to 'main', > we changed our default dist-git name to 'rawhide' (*). We al

Re: GDM dropped support for running X11 sessions in F42 without a Change?

On Fri, Apr 11, 2025 at 08:01:02AM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: ...snip... > > Two options have been floated: > - a separate gdm-x11 package: certainly an option, but a bit of work, > and upstream might drop the X11 code anyway. I think thats a 's/might/will' ie, they are definitel

Re: GDM dropped support for running X11 sessions in F42 without a Change?

On Wed, Apr 09, 2025 at 03:35:06PM -0400, Eduard Lucena wrote: > Can we go ahead in time and let kevin to create the gdm-x11 package? We Sure, if he wants to? But I'll note that as far as I know, upstream plans to remove this in the upcoming gnome cycle, so you would need to re-add it back and m

Re: Non-responsive maintainer check for dledford

On Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 11:00:25PM +0100, Dan Horák wrote: > On Wed, 19 Mar 2025 17:48:49 -0400 > Peter Martuccelli wrote: > > > Hi Davide, > > > > Please work with Dan, Cc'd, on any issues for Doug. > > ack, I believe most of Doug's packages are Infiniband related and > should have a backup ma

Planned Outage - updates / reboots - 2025-03-26 21:00UTC

Planned Outage - updates / reboots - 2025-03-26 21:00UTC There will be an outage starting at 2025-03-26 21:00UTC which will last approximately 5 hours. To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto or run: date -d '2025-03-26 21:00UTC' R

Re: Please untag libcbor-0.12.0-2.fc43 in rawhide

On Fri, Mar 21, 2025 at 02:58:46AM +, Gary Buhrmaster wrote: > On Thu, Mar 20, 2025 at 6:15 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > > As a side note: if this sort of thing happens and you need something > > untagged for some reason, please file a releng ticket. > > ( https://pagu

Re: Please untag libcbor-0.12.0-2.fc43 in rawhide

On Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 11:37:40PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Thu, 2025-03-20 at 03:43 +, Gary Buhrmaster wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 20, 2025 at 3:26 AM Gary Buhrmaster > > wrote: > > > > > > I accidentally did not specify a side-tag target, > > > so this build will break rawhide. Sorry

Re: Problems pushing OpenSSH to f42

On Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 10:26:33AM +0100, Dmitry Belyavskiy wrote: > Dear Petr, > Thank you for the investigation! > I think it happened because the build happened during the freeze. It happened right at the time updates-testing was enabled for f42/branched. So, when the build/update was automati

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2025-03-18)

On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 09:13:44PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 02:59:09PM -0600, Jerry James wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 12:05 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek > > wrote: > > > * TOPIC: #3377 cmake 4.0 breaks compatibility, was updated without a > > >

Re: Rawhide: openh264: Public key is not installed.

On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 11:30:07AM +0100, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote: > On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 9:49 AM Marián Konček wrote: > > > > When running a container with current Fedora Rawhide and installing > > `maven`, which transitiely causes the installation of `openh264`, I am > > getting an error: > >

Re: Installing Forgejo from the Fedora repository doesn't end with a working instance – at least for me

On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 08:06:45AM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Sun, Mar 09, 2025 at 07:41:31PM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: > > > We should probably try and get this into Fedora proper, right? Ideally > > > everything needed by Fedora infrastructure is in Fedora itself, it took > >

Re: What is Konflux? What is Fedora Build System was Re: Konflux: What is the right time?

Yeah, I broadly agree with what smooge noted here. The idea isn't to just swap konflux in for koji and call it a day, but rather to use konflux as a build pipeline. The promise of konflux I could see it taking on things that are currently done by: pkgs / src.fedoraproject.org - it could download

Re: Donate 1 minute of your time to test upgrades from F41 to F42

On Wed, Mar 05, 2025 at 08:58:09AM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Wed, Mar 05, 2025 at 09:56:43AM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 05. 03. 25 9:22, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > > Hmm, this seems to be an unfinished retirement. We have > > > https://src.fedoraproject.org/r

Re: Gating Fedora updates on Fedora CoreOS CI

On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 11:53:06AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Fri, 2025-02-28 at 12:04 -0500, Dusty Mabe wrote: > > > @Dusty Mabe  , how about doing this for the > > > F43 development cycle? This give us a good way to "protect" to CoreOS > > > builds as well as

Re: Strange s390x failures in scratch builds

On Thu, Feb 27, 2025 at 09:19:15AM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Thu, Feb 27, 2025 at 09:49:35AM +0100, Dan Horák wrote: > > On Thu, 27 Feb 2025 08:44:25 + > > "Richard W.M. Jones" wrote: > > > > > When doing scratch builds (only from Pagure pull requests?) we get > > > this strange

Re: Non-responsive maintainer check for ret2libc

(adding maintainer to cc) On Tue, Feb 18, 2025 at 03:03:10PM +0100, Andreas Schneider wrote: > Hi, > > we are trying to get a rebuild of rizin [1] but the maintainer doesn't react. > Same applies to the co-maintainer. I've created a non-responsive maintainer > bugzilla ticket at [2]. > > > Be

Re: [Need help] Issue Authorizing fedpkg push in a Container.

On Tue, Feb 18, 2025 at 08:32:10AM +, Hangbin Liu wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > Apologies if I’m sending this to the wrong list. > > I’m facing an issue authorizing fedpkg push inside a container. When I run > the command, it provides a link for authorization. However, after logging in, > the

Re: Gating Fedora updates on Fedora CoreOS CI

On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 12:15:16PM -0500, Dusty Mabe wrote: > > > On 2/13/25 11:42 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > I agree with downthread folks that that seems like way too high a > > failure rate to enable gating on. However, a few questions if I can: > > > > I

Re: Gating Fedora updates on Fedora CoreOS CI

I agree with downthread folks that that seems like way too high a failure rate to enable gating on. However, a few questions if I can: Is this reporting to bodhi for all these components? Off hand checking a few I don't see any results from this? Wouldn't a good first step be to enable (non gating

Re: Something wrong with kerberos login

On Mon, Feb 10, 2025 at 09:13:57AM +0100, Dan Horák wrote: > > I suppose it's related to the status of the "http-ipsilon" service > reported as critical on the sysadmin list, so the admins should know > about it. Yes, there was a outage of auth and koji. ;( Sorry for the trouble. kevin -- ___

Re: Where to fill bugs for fedora-kickstarts?

On Mon, Feb 10, 2025 at 06:27:12PM +0100, Milan Crha wrote: > On Mon, 2025-02-10 at 18:10 +0100, David Duncan wrote: > > We would be happy to assist you with building using the kiwi > > descriptions for them we are using now. > > Hi, > should the Wiki page [3] be updated then? It looks recen

Re: RFC: Additional checkpoint for major toolchain updates before mass rebuild

On Tue, Feb 04, 2025 at 06:41:07PM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote: I started replying to everything, but then I realized it's probibly not worth me doing so. :) ...snip... > To sum this up, I can see 3 benefits of mass rebuild: > > 1) change of dist tag > > 2) ensuring all packages builds > > 3) en

Re: retiring basesystem package

On Thu, Feb 06, 2025 at 01:49:57PM +0100, Ondrej Vasik wrote: > Hi Zbigniew, > yes, basesystem is there just to ensure installation order and it could > probably be achieved by that PR. > There is one more benefit from the retirement - as there are > occasionally bug reports (that should be filed a

Re: nodejs22 rawhide update unpushed (among others)

On Wed, Feb 05, 2025 at 01:42:17PM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote: > 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 an

Re: removing self as co-maintainer on several packages

On Wed, Feb 05, 2025 at 02:50:18PM +, Ken Dreyer wrote: > Hi folks, I've changed jobs recently and I need to drop > co-maintainership on some packages. > > I have (co-)maintainership on 27 packages here: > https://src.fedoraproject.org/user/ktdreyer/projects > > If I have admin permissions on

Logs from Tuesday's FESCo Meeting (2025-02-04)

Full logs at: https://meetbot-raw.fedoraproject.org//meeting_matrix_fedoraproject-org/2025-02-04/fesco.2025-02-04-17.00.log.txt = # #meeting:fedoraproject.org: fesco = Meeting started by @nirik:matrix.scrye.com at 2025-02-04

Schedule for Tuesday's FESCo Meeting (2025-02-04)

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 '2025-02-04 17:00 UTC' Links to all issues to be

Re: Package review - submitter not responding

On Mon, Feb 03, 2025 at 09:18:56PM +0100, 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 t

Re: WRT "Add explicit BR: libxcrypt-devel"

I'd like to plug https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Mass_package_changes/ for next time. kevin signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lis

Re: RFC: Additional checkpoint for major toolchain updates before mass rebuild

On Fri, Jan 31, 2025 at 02:27:28PM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote: > > I am advocating for mass-rebuild as we do (i.e. to try to build everything) > to be done after stable branch is branched off. For this cycle, the F42 is > going to be branched on Tue 2025-02-04, so some time after that (week, > month

Re: Proposal for vendoring/bundling golang packages by default

On Thu, Jan 30, 2025 at 11:13:24PM +0100, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Thu, Jan 30, 2025 at 11:05 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jan 29, 2025 at 07:18:23AM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote: > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 08:21:26AM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: > > > >

Re: RFC: Additional checkpoint for major toolchain updates before mass rebuild

On Wed, Jan 29, 2025 at 10:01:09AM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote: > > Thanks for clarifying. Of course one reason for mass rebuild can be that we > are not able to properly identify the package set for more targeted mini > mass rebuild. > > But IMHO, having just the Copr build to identify the problema

Re: RFC: Additional checkpoint for major toolchain updates before mass rebuild

On Tue, Jan 28, 2025 at 07:32:49PM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote: > > Dne 28. 01. 25 v 19:18 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a): ...snip... > > Mass rebuilding which? Rawhide or the new branched? Or both? > > > I am talking about Rawhide > > > > rawhide would be fine, but a

Re: Proposal for vendoring/bundling golang packages by default

On Wed, Jan 29, 2025 at 07:18:23AM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 08:21:26AM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: > > If Koschei could trigger non-scratch rebuilds, that would go a long > > way toward this. Note that koschei just rebuilds existing src.rpms in scratch builds. Getting it

Re: RFC: Additional checkpoint for major toolchain updates before mass rebuild

On Tue, Jan 28, 2025 at 11:19:02AM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote: > I think we should stop and think again why we do mass rebuilds and why we do > them prior release. "The goal is to rebuild every single Fedora package, > regardless of content, before the Fedora 41 Change Deadline." [1] is not > very el

Re: Fedora Linux f42 Mass Rebuild is finished

On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 11:06:03AM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote: > 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.

Re: Inadvertent mass-rebuild triggered soname bump in libnfs

On Sun, Jan 26, 2025 at 10:40:09AM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > It's possible that I'm in the minority here, but I honestly don't think > anything should be pushed to dist-git unless it's intended to be built more > or less immediately. Yes, even changes without an immediate functional > imp

Re: Inadvertent mass-rebuild triggered soname bump in libnfs

On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 12:13:02PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 12:32:52PM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 10:13 PM Adam Williamson > > wrote: > > > > > > Note that side tags aren't the only issue. Sometimes a maintainer > > > commit

Re: Inadvertent mass-rebuild triggered soname bump in libnfs

On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 06:57:57PM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 6:02 PM Simo Sorce wrote: ...snip... > > Sorry, thanks. I forgot to note that ELN has a different %{dist} tag > structure than Fedora. We include a "buildroot number" in the %{dist} which > we bump before

Datacenter move later this year

For those of you who don't read the community blog, (and you really should!) I thought I would raise awareness of a post from today: https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/fedora-datacenter-move-later-this-year-2025-version/ kevin -- ___ devel-announ

Planned Outage - updates / reboots - 2025-01-29 21:00UTC

Planned Outage - updates / reboots - 2025-01-29 21:00UTC There will be an outage starting at 2025-01-29 21:00UTC which will last approximately 5 hours. To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto or run: date -d '2025-01-29 21:00UTC' R

Schedule for Tuesday's FESCo Meeting (2025-01-21)

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 '2025-01-21 17:00 UTC' Links to all issues to be

Re: Idea proposal for next mass rebuilds

On Sun, Jan 19, 2025 at 07:47:31PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > Oh, I was under the impression that the mass rebuild retries the failed > builds in a loop. I had a different mental model of what happens. But since > the builds are independent, then this does make sense to just try

Re: Idea proposal for next mass rebuilds

On Sun, Jan 19, 2025 at 03:36:32PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Sat, Jan 18, 2025 at 10:04:28AM -0800, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > > The only way that works, is what mockchain does: build the packages in > > > random order. if any fails, repeat while at least on

Re: Idea proposal for next mass rebuilds

On Sat, Jan 18, 2025 at 04:33:17PM +0100, 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 this thread, that it is (should not be) the case. Also a

Re: forwarding aliases (was: Non-responsive maintainer sham1)

Note: we are talking about @fedoraproject.org aliases here. mailing lists already mitigate this as you note. On Thu, Jan 16, 2025 at 10:11:22PM +, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > NB, the "From" rewriting with "via devel" is generally only needed > if someone's domain has configured SPF and DMAR

Re: forwarding aliases (was: Non-responsive maintainer sham1)

On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 07:03:23PM +0100, Björn Persson wrote: > > If it's only SPF, then it should be enough to use the forwarding > server's own domain in the SMTP session, like list servers always do. > SPF asks the receiving server to validate the hostname given in > HELO/EHLO and the return a

f42 mass rebuild waiting

The f42 mass rebuild is waiting on golang 1.24 landing in the buildroot. See: https://pagure.io/releng/issue/12527 Once thats sorted out we will start the mass rebuild. kevin signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- ___ devel mailing list -- deve

Re: Non-responsive maintainer sham1

On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 04:15:11PM +0100, Cristian Le via devel wrote: > On 1/15/25 2:33 PM, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > > No, AFAIK the @fedoraproject.org email alias should work for > > all users who are in CLA+1 or something (so it should work for all > > members of the "packager" group, for exa

rawhide metadata change

Greetings. Last year, as part of https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ChangeComposeSettings we were going to change rawhide (and then f41) repo metadata to use the new upstream createrepo_c default (zstd). We unfortunately had to partially back this change out because at the time there were s

Re: Self-reintroduction, reflections, and so forth

On Thu, Jan 09, 2025 at 06:51:18PM -0800, Brendan Conoboy wrote: > On Thu, Jan 9, 2025 at 3:53 PM Michel Lind wrote: > > Ahh, the perfect person to deal with our s390x capacity crunch ;) > > > > Yes! Actually, I think Kevin and IT just applied a bandaid that has made a > significant improvement

Re: Help with flexiblas crash on aarch64 in kojij only

On Mon, Jan 06, 2025 at 12:17:09PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > valgrind works by interpreting each instruction, so yes the overhead > is rather large. On the other hand I really appreciate its ability to > find bugs. > > >From the errors below it seems to be a problem with Neoverse code

Re: compose reports make search in mailing list ineffective

On Sun, Dec 29, 2024 at 04:09:28PM +0100, Simon de Vlieger wrote: > On 12/28/24 6:05 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > On Sat, 2024-12-28 at 14:28 +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > > On Fri, Dec 27, 2024 at 2:31 PM Mattia Verga via devel > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > I'd like to ask if it would be po

Re: upload to src.fpo fails

On Sat, Dec 21, 2024 at 04:06:25PM -0600, Mukundan Ragavan wrote: > I am unable to upload to src.fpo. > > $ fedpkg new-sources xfce4-dev-tools-4.20.0.tar.bz2 > Uploading: xfce4-dev-tools-4.20.0.tar.bz2 to > https://src.fedoraproject.org/repo/pkgs/upload.cgi > Uploading: xfce4-dev-tools-4.20.0.tar.

Re: Revocation of provenpackager access from pbrobinson

Oh, one additional item I wanted to mention... I wonder if we could encourage maintainers/community members to do something like this: https://cassidoo.co/post/remote-intros/ TLDR: a small page listing your contact prefs, timezones, etc. kevin signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- _

Re: libntlm soname bump

On Mon, Dec 09, 2024 at 10:09:44AM -0800, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > Hey folks. > > In 1 week, I'd like to bump libntlm from 1.6 to 1.8. > This involves a soname bump. > > Affected are I think (gkrellm and libgsasl). > Maintainers bcced here. > > I ran a mpb o

Re: Revocation of provenpackager access from pbrobinson

Since I have not chimed in on this yet, let me just say that I am deeply sorry how the communication/timing/process went here. At the least I should have realized that many fesco members would be already away this week, so with lack of quorum, it's hard for fesco as a whole to respond or take actio

Re: Orphaned packages looking for new maintainers

On Wed, Dec 18, 2024 at 10:55:13AM -0600, Jason Tibbitts wrote: > > maxwell--- via devel-announce > > writes: > > > fedscm-admin cqi, ignatenkobrain, limb, 3 weeks > > ago > > mohanboddu, orphan, tibbs > >

Re: src.fedoraproject.org fork stuck in limbo

Turns out there was something deeper going on here. There was a rebase that was somehow stuck and causing problems. See: https://pagure.io/releng/issue/12497 I think I have it all fixed up now. kevin signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- ___

Re: src.fedoraproject.org fork stuck in limbo

On Sun, Dec 15, 2024 at 07:16:50AM -0800, Andrea Bolognani wrote: > Hi, > > I created [1] yesterday using the Web UI button but the result seems > stuck in some weird in-between state. > > A banner is displayed prominently on top of the page: > > The permissions on this repository are being up

Re: Looking for a packager sponsor for libecoli

On Wed, Dec 04, 2024 at 11:20:23PM +0100, Robin Jarry wrote: > Hi folks, > > I would like to package the grout project into Fedora. It has a dependency > to libecoli which isn't packaged yet, neither. > > https://github.com/DPDK/grout > https://github.com/rjarry/libecoli > > I have followed the

s390x builders update

Hey folks. I know many people have run into slowdowns on s390x builds of late. There's 2 changes that hopefully will help that out: 1. I setup a 'ci' koji channel and restricted the number of s390x builders in that channel. That should keep more builders open for regular builds. Of course on the o

libntlm soname bump

Hey folks. In 1 week, I'd like to bump libntlm from 1.6 to 1.8. This involves a soname bump. Affected are I think (gkrellm and libgsasl). Maintainers bcced here. I ran a mpb on the 1.8 version and both those packages built fine. https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/kevin/libntlm/packages/ I

Re: New bodhi struggling with composes

On Fri, Dec 06, 2024 at 08:30:15PM -0800, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Sat, Dec 07, 2024 at 03:03:04AM +, Bojan Smojver via devel wrote: > > Looks like bodhi upgrade may have caused composes to go haywire today: > > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/composes/ > > > > It

Re: New bodhi struggling with composes

On Sat, Dec 07, 2024 at 03:03:04AM +, Bojan Smojver via devel wrote: > Looks like bodhi upgrade may have caused composes to go haywire today: > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/composes/ > > It could be just a coincidence, of course. Anyhow, just FYI if anyone > managing that is around. Yeah

Re: 400 - Bad Request when login with FAS from bugzilla redirection

On Tue, Dec 03, 2024 at 11:11:42AM +, Christopher Klooz wrote: > Kevin and I have already worked on this in a pagure ticket (I experienced it > as well frequently in the past): > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/11962 > > I already posted this mailing list thread in the ticket t

Re: subscription-manager orphaned

On Sun, Dec 01, 2024 at 03:42:51PM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote: > On Sat, Nov 30, 2024 at 5:49 PM Neal Gompa wrote: > > > > On Sat, Nov 30, 2024 at 11:08 AM Maxwell G wrote: > > > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > > > It seems https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/subscription-manager (and > > > related

Re: xorg-x11-drv-amdgpu, Orphaned by releng, why ?

On Sun, Nov 24, 2024 at 03:46:31PM +, Sérgio Basto wrote: > Hi, > > I can't find the reason of xorg-x11-drv-amdgpu being orphaned . > can some one point me the ticket ? The maintainer was unresponsive and removed from the packager group: https://pagure.io/find-inactive-packagers/issue/2055 S

Re: find-debuginfo failing with objcopy Permission denied error

On Mon, Nov 18, 2024 at 03:35:38PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Mon, Nov 18, 2024 at 03:16:13PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > This is a weird one: > > > > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=125988419 > > > > + /usr/bin/find-debuginfo -j48 --strict-build-id -m -i -

Re: Random failures building on Koji

On Sat, Nov 16, 2024 at 02:43:32PM -0600, Ron Olson wrote: > Hey all, > > I’ve been having difficulty building Swift on Koji’s x86_64 builders, as > well as the aarch64 ones too, occasionally. The build.log doesn’t seem to > show the cause of the failure, just that a particular command failed and

Re: Findings by static analyzers in Fedora 42 Critical Path Packages

On Fri, Nov 15, 2024 at 06:36:14AM +0100, Siteshwar Vashisht wrote: > On Thu, Nov 14, 2024 at 10:47 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > > > What does it mean when the table lists the package version as 'el8'? > > I was trying to reuse some scripts that are used to generate

Re: What is "FAILED: ActionNotAllowed: policy violation (tag)"

On Fri, Nov 15, 2024 at 02:32:09PM +0200, David Abdurachmanov wrote: > On Fri, Nov 15, 2024 at 12:04 AM Andrea Bolognani wrote: > > > > On Thu, Nov 14, 2024 at 01:51:07PM -0800, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > > On Thu, Nov 14, 2024 at 03:37:49PM +, Andrea Bolognani wrote: >

Re: Findings by static analyzers in Fedora 42 Critical Path Packages

What does it mean when the table lists the package version as 'el8'? kevin signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora C

Re: What is "FAILED: ActionNotAllowed: policy violation (tag)"

On Thu, Nov 14, 2024 at 03:37:49PM +, Andrea Bolognani wrote: > On Tue, Nov 12, 2024 at 02:20:32PM -0800, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 11, 2024 at 04:23:16AM -0600, Andrea Bolognani wrote: > > > Can we please look into getting pesign rebuilt? Ideally in f41, but >

Re: builders running out of disk space?

On Thu, Nov 14, 2024 at 08:20:27AM -0500, Kaleb Keithley wrote: > I've had two ceph builds fail — one ppc64le and one x86_64 — apparently > when the disk filled up. > > first was https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=125823380 > second was https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo

Re: What is "FAILED: ActionNotAllowed: policy violation (tag)"

On Mon, Nov 11, 2024 at 04:23:16AM -0600, Andrea Bolognani wrote: > On Fri, Sep 27, 2024 at 09:35:20AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 27, 2024 at 8:30 AM Richard W.M. Jones > > wrote: > > > We wanted to build pesign so we can automatically trigger RISC-V > > > builds, since for s

Re: Thunderbird FTBFS on ppc64le

On Mon, Nov 11, 2024 at 05:49:59PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > > The cause is reported as: (signal: 9, SIGKILL: kill) > So probably OOM. It could be a genuine toolchain bug, or > the builders have to little memory assigned relative to core count. Yeah, as noted it's a balancing act. :( > (I

riscv sig meeting - 2024-11-12 16UTC

Hey everyone. We are working on getting the riscv sig meeting regularly, and we settled on 16UTC on tuesdays in #meeting:fedoraproject.org on matrix. Sorry for the short notice. I whipped up a agenda doc: https://hackmd.io/SPrxvhU0Sv2l5Ox7zqg01A Interested parties are encouraged to attend and pa

Re: rawhide and f41 build errors.

On Sat, Nov 09, 2024 at 12:07:09PM -0600, Steve Dickson wrote: > Hello, > > Out of the blue rawhide scratch builds [1] > are now failing and f41 builds [2] are failing > but f40 builds [3] are succeeding and they > are all the same code! > > Late Oct I made a release so their repo > heads are all

orphaning mxml

Hey folks. Long ago I took on mxml because libnftnl needed it. It no longer does, so I'm hoping someone more interested in it can take it on. To consider: * We have mxml 3.x and 4.x is out upstream. This of course has a soname bump, which is fine, but also, they renamed the library/pc from mxml

Re: Bodhi 8.2 in production: changes to karma requirements

On Thu, Nov 07, 2024 at 11:55:20AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: ...snip... > If folks believe allowing early push at +1 for non-critpath updates was > appropriate, then the appropriate thing to do would be to lobby FPC to > change the policy. I think Bodhi should always attempt to implement the >

Re: FYI Koji 1.35 changed how side tag newRepo works

On Mon, Oct 28, 2024 at 06:42:28PM +0100, Björn Persson wrote: > Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > fedpkg build --target=... --wait-build= > > Neither "man fedpkg" nor "fedpkg build --help" mention a "--wait-build" > option. Yeah, it doesn't have one (yet). https://pagure.io/fedpkg/issue/575 > M

Re: Slower builds on non-x86_64 arches - number of cores?

On Mon, Oct 28, 2024 at 05:49:56PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Kevin Fenzi: > > > On Mon, Oct 28, 2024 at 09:07:59AM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > >> * Kevin Fenzi: > >> > >> > As a side note, I removed s309x from the noarch_arches when that wa

Re: Slower builds on non-x86_64 arches - number of cores?

On Mon, Oct 28, 2024 at 09:07:59AM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Kevin Fenzi: > > > As a side note, I removed s309x from the noarch_arches when that was > > going on, but I have readded it a while back. (So noarch builds could > > also happen on s390x). Also, changes

Re: Slower builds on non-x86_64 arches - number of cores?

On Sat, Oct 26, 2024 at 09:00:26PM -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote: > I've noticed that for quite a while vtk and paraview take significantly > longer to build on non-x86_64 arches. The majority of the time appears to > be in the compilation itself. > > My current guess is that it is particularly he

Re: FYI Koji 1.35 changed how side tag newRepo works

On Wed, Oct 23, 2024 at 11:11:22AM +0300, Alexander Ploumistos wrote: > In addition to Petr's question, would someone be so kind as to give a > detailed example of what the workflow should be in the case of three > package maintainers wanting to build three interdependent packages in > a side tag?

Re: FYI Koji 1.35 changed how side tag newRepo works

On Tue, Oct 22, 2024 at 10:24:58AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Tue, 2024-10-22 at 16:11 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > [So no one else ends up waiting around like an idiot] > > > > Koji 1.35 changed how repositories and side tags and such get rebuilt, > > so they no longer get rebuilt

Re: Fedora 41 compose report: 20241021.n.0 changes

On Mon, Oct 21, 2024 at 10:04:03PM +0900, Mamoru TASAKA wrote: > > What happened with these dropped live isos? > > Quick take a look at these seems to indicate that at least some of these are > due to disk space shortage, so > > * some upgraded packages increased install size significantly? > *

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >