Dear maintainers.
Based on the current fail to build from source policy, the following packages
should be retired from Fedora 43 approximately one week before branching,
i.e. tomorrow.
Due to delay in process, the retirement will happen on Monday, 2025-08-11.
5 weekly reminders are required, th
build as draft build and when
the PR is merged, promote the draft build to a real one (in a side tag if needed).
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora Matrix: mhroncok
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproje
On 29. 07. 25 6:36, Maxwell G wrote:
Hi,
On 7/28/25 2:52 AM, Miro Hrončok wrote:
golang-* packages excluded via https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3447
Looking at the list of packages from last week's notification, I see the
following packages are considered fesco_3447_not_exempt in
t end up witch bunch of broken
runtime deps after all the rebuilds.
Builds in mass rebuild don't "see each other" so each rebuild is somewhat
isolated and should be able to pass individual bodhi/gating.
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fed
On 28. 07. 25 20:46, Adam Williamson wrote:
Mass rebuild changes bypass automated testing and gating
This begs the question: Should we stop doing it that way?
What if we let all the builds from mass rebuild go trough bodhi? One by one.
Would Bodhi + OpenQA handle the load?
--
Miro Hrončok
://bugzilla.redhat.com/2384168
Mattias,
I hope you are doing fine.
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora Matrix: mhroncok
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le
Dear maintainers.
Based on the current fail to build from source policy, the following packages
should be retired from Fedora 43 approximately one week before branching,
i.e. 2025-08-05.
5 weekly reminders are required, this is the fourth one.
Policy:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco
On 23. 07. 25 13:48, Jan Stanek wrote:
On Wed, Jul 23, 2025 at 1:45 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
I'd go with alternative-for(nodejs-bin). There's even code in dnf that will
tell you the options if you try to install nodejs-bin (unless the metapackage
is called that).
You can try it out
, python36, python38, python39
[1]
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/dnf5/blob/5.2.15.0/libdnf5/base/transaction.cpp#L294
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora Matrix: mhroncok
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraprojec
ivers-0:25.0.7-3.fc41.x86_64
mesa-libEGL-0:25.0.7-3.fc41.x86_64
qt5-qtwayland-0:5.15.17-1.fc41.x86_64
qt6-qtwayland-0:6.8.3-1.fc41.x86_64
spice-gtk3-0:0.42-5.fc41.x86_64
webkit2gtk4.1-0:2.48.3-1.fc41.x86_64
weston-0:14.0.1-2.fc41.x86_64
weston-libs-0:14.0.1-2.fc41.x86_64
--
Miro Hrončok
--
On 21. 07. 25 0:03, Miro Hrončok wrote:
Depending on: mingw-wine-gecko (9)
wine (maintained by: besser82, mooninite)
wine-10.12-3.fc43.i686 requires mingw32-wine-gecko, wine-mono
wine-10.12-3.fc43.x86_64 requires mingw32-wine-gecko, mingw64-wine-
gecko, wine-mono
Dear maintainers.
Based on the current fail to build from source policy, the following packages
should be retired from Fedora 43 approximately one week before branching,
i.e. 2025-08-05.
5 weekly reminders are required, this is the third one.
Policy:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/
On 15. 07. 25 12:00, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
On Tue, Jul 15, 2025 at 11:48:50AM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
Hello,
There is a bug for qemu which was assigned to "Fedora Virtualization
Maintainers" in Bugzilla by default:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/2375004
But that account i
isabled.
"""
How do we reach the maintainers of qemu in Bugzilla?
And, more generally, should we detect this and treat it similarly to
"maintainer has an invalid Bugzilla email set in FAS" problem?
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora Matrix: mhroncok
--
__
It is necessary to use %pyproject_buildrequires from the folder where the
Python package has its pyproject.toml and/or setup.py file:
%generate_buildrequires
cd flowblade-trunk
%pyproject_buildrequires
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora Matrix: mhroncok
--
__
eant then the guideline should say so.
OK, could you please submit a pull request?
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora Matrix: mhroncok
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an
---
The reason for the rule is that:
1) Not all RPM packages that need BR on python3-devel are "Python packages" to
use %pyproject_* macros.
2) Packages that use the pyproject declarative BuildSystem to reduce
boilerplate use %pyproject_buildrequires implicitly and gain a BR on python3-
On 03. 07. 25 21:03, Miro Hrončok wrote:
flatpak-rpm-macros amigadave, otaylor, tpopela, yselkowitz
This package has a noutobuild file without a documented justification (in the
file or in the commit message that added it).
I see it was now built in Rawhide.
Until now
On 04. 07. 25 13:50, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 04. 07. 25 v 13:16 Miro Hrončok napsal(a):
On 04. 07. 25 13:13, Vít Ondruch wrote:
What my email was about are points 7 and 8 of the policy.
This might be some Google deduplication, but I can't say I would receive
remainder as per: "
nstead, I would noticed.
This was the first reminder. You clearly received it because you are replying
to it.
I don't understand what's confusing here. My email says:
> 5 weekly reminders are required, this is the first one
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +42077797
On 04. 07. 25 11:27, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 03. 07. 25 v 21:03 Miro Hrončok napsal(a):
rubygem-abrt vondruch
I wonder why I see rubygem-abrt listed here, but the relevant ticket, such as
[1] is not updated.
Updated how?
My email is orthogonal to bugzilla
, music)
teem-1.11.0-81.fc43.src requires levmar-devel = 2.6-18.fc42
Took this one. Co-maintainers welcome.
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora Matrix: mhroncok
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To
n at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/plexus-cipher/blob/rawhide/f/plexus-cipher.spec
Oh. I did not know we can have multiple BuildOptions in one spec. That's neat.
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora Matrix: mhroncok
--
___
devel mailin
ge against
its all fine building dependencies.
For cases where everything is actually fine, we'll handle the builds.
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora Matrix: mhroncok
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To
ybody time with opening/closing tickets and
then manually rebuilding all the packages just to see that everything is
fine.
What do you mean by "everything is fine"?
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora Matrix: mhroncok
--
___
de
y makes a difference in
these context.
Adding such pyproject.toml has no benefit. It's more or less the same as not
having it (except the default backend in that case is
setuptools.build_meta:__legacy__, but I don't think it's any different).
--
Miro Hrončok
--
ead of the removed 2 is indeed enough, yes.
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora Matrix: mhroncok
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Condu
l use python setup.py install, they will beak when
setuptools removes that. We will not be removing the deprecated macros before
then, so defining your own macros has no point.
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora Matrix: mhroncok
--
___
On 09. 06. 25 9:17, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
On 08/06/2025 21:10, Miro Hrončok wrote:
For projects with setup.py, the macros fallback to setuptools backend and
pyproject.toml is not required.
What happens when Python removes setup.py support from setuptools?
That is not what is
On 09. 06. 25 9:23, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
On 08/06/2025 22:06, Miro Hrončok wrote:
See https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/qr-code-generator/pull-request/2 instead.
Thank you.
But this is a temporary solution until Python removes setup.py support from
setuptools, right
On 08. 06. 25 21:10, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 08. 06. 25 9:51, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
On 07/06/2025 14:49, Aoife Moloney wrote:
The modern pyproject.toml-based build system and corresponding
`%pyproject` macros should be used instead,
which provide a more flexible and standardized
the
corresponding subpackages.
Why?
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora Matrix: mhroncok
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct
r changes in Python
packages until the rebuild is over.
Thanks!
Karolina
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora Matrix: mhroncok
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to dev
that is too new (e.g. uses new RPM
rawhide-only features) or too old (e.g. uses old RPM EL-only features).
I created https://github.com/fedora-copr/copr/issues/1315 5 years ago
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora Matrix: mhroncok
On 05. 05. 25 10:30, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 25. 04. 25 17:42, Florian Weimer wrote:
With the update to glibc-2.41.9000-11.fc43, is no longer
there, and some historic terminal-related baggage is no longer included
in . These terminal interfaces were alread obsolete when
Linux was first
a7/Modules/termios.c:1137:17:
error: invalid application of ‘sizeof’ to incomplete type ‘struct termio’
1137 | {"TCSETAW", TCSETAW},
| ^~~
make: *** [Makefile:3589: Modules/termios.o] Error 1
=====
/mirrormanager2-flask-xml-rpc.patch
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora Matrix: mhroncok
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https
t one.
You can proceed with the needinfo now.
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora Matrix: mhroncok
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of
:
https://github.com/GNUAspell/aspell
Is there a way to un-deprecate a deprecated package?
You need to make a new Change proposal for it.
I don't think that should be required.
If you maintain the package, drop the deprecated() provides.
If you don't, talk to the maintainer.
--
Mi
fix built but not added to bodhi and the rest are
orphaned for a while and will eventually be gone from the distribution anyway.
Hence, I decided to skip this step.
If you see a package that's better removed immediately, let me know.
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora M
On 13. 03. 25 19:39, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
On Thu, Mar 13, 2025 at 06:55:57PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 13. 03. 25 18:50, Milan Crha wrote:
On Wed, 2025-03-12 at 00:11 +0100, Miro Hrončok via devel-announce
wrote:
This change will land to rawhide first and later to all stable
releases as
On 13. 03. 25 18:50, Milan Crha wrote:
On Wed, 2025-03-12 at 00:11 +0100, Miro Hrončok via devel-announce
wrote:
This change will land to rawhide first and later to all stable
releases as well.
Hi,
are you really going to intentionally break all the stable releases? I
thought there is
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/pyproject-rpm-macros/pull-request/512
On 05. 02. 25 10:47, Miro Hrončok wrote:
Hello Pythonistas.
When we updated tox from version 3 to 4, it no longer fails when here is no
suitable tox configuration found. This was a deliberate upstream choice.
Unfortunately, it means that pac
docs/pull-request/177
Thanks.
There's also my RFE to make this shorter:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/mock/issues/1295
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora Matrix: mhroncok
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel
f43 spot
[BLOCKED]
$ koji list-pkgs --show-blocked --tag f42 --quiet --package torque
torque f42 spot
[BLOCKED]
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora Matrix: mhroncok
--
___
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 recently got an
idea.
One of the common needs for provenpackagers is to simply "bump and rebuild" a
set of dependen
ovenpackager, I would not usually think of that situation when
bump-builidng stuff.
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora Matrix: mhroncok
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le..
On 20. 02. 25 14:08, Dmitry Belyavskiy wrote:
On Thu, Feb 20, 2025 at 1:17 PM Miro Hrončok <mailto:mhron...@redhat.com>> wrote:
What if we allowed all packagers to push empty commit to any package? That
should eliminate *some* need for provenpackager access. We w
On 20. 02. 25 14:02, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Thu, Feb 20, 2025 at 7:59 AM Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 20. 02. 25 13:51, Michael J Gruber wrote:
With the wide adoption of %autorelease, such bump commits are empty,
which should be easy to verify.
Wide, well, ...
Roughly 39% based on a simple grep
On 20. 02. 25 13:51, Michael J Gruber wrote:
With the wide adoption of %autorelease, such bump commits are empty,
which should be easy to verify.
Wide, well, ...
Roughly 39% based on a simple grep for %\{?autorelease
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora Matrix: mhroncok
On 20. 02. 25 13:28, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Thu, Feb 20, 2025 at 01:17:02PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
What if we allowed all packagers to push empty commit to any
package? That should eliminate *some* need for provenpackager
access. We would also communicate in our policies that such
commit to any package? That
should eliminate *some* need for provenpackager access. We would also
communicate in our policies that such bumps do not require prior agreement with
the maintainers to avoid confusion about "what are we allowed to do".
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777
-theme
2) or co-own /usr/share/icons/HighContrast(/scalable(/apps))
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora Matrix: mhroncok
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le
un somehow.
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora Matrix: mhroncok
--
___
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
On 11. 02. 25 18:40, Jednorozec wrote:
=
# #meeting:fedoraproject.org: fesco
=
Meeting started by @humaton:fedora.im at 2025-02-11 17:00:25
Coudl you please share the log links?
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
python3.14 specfile:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python3.14/c/7fc2da03e52a52e09d2ca4aa52f2748f88e55ff7?branch=rawhide
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora Matrix: mhroncok
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To u
On 03. 02. 25 12:13, Miro Hrončok wrote:
Why only for Python < 3.13?
I guess because the crypt module was removed from Python 3.13 and python3-libs
no longer Requires libcrypt.so.2()(64bit) + libcrypt.so.2(XCRYPT_2.0)(64bit).
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora Matrix: mhron
s not explain why.
Why was this necessary?
Why only for Python < 3.13?
Why there was no communication with us about the thing?
Please do not build the packages, I will use this opportunity to pin tk-devel
to < 9.
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedo
On 01. 02. 25 2:10, William Cohen wrote:
On 12/5/24 9:45 AM, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 04. 12. 24 20:32, William Cohen wrote:
On 11/21/24 17:32, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 21. 11. 24 23:11, William Cohen wrote:
Sediment has been designed to work with the RPM build process.
Currently, one needs to
As an example of a big chnage, I think the SPDX commits were pushed but not
built.
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora Matrix: mhroncok
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@
652>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2341839
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora Matrix: mhroncok
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora C
On 24. 01. 25 6:13, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote:
On 1/23/25 03:30, Miro Hrončok wrote:
qm-dsp tartina
qm-vamp-plugins valtri
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/qm-dsp/pull-request/3
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/qm-vamp-plugins/pull-request/2
(Those two should be
Dear maintainers.
Based on the current fail to build from source policy, the following packages
should be retired from Fedora 42 approximately one week before branching,
i.e. 2025-01-28.
5 weekly reminders are required, this is the last one.
Policy:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/F
#x27;t see each other" hence the
order of the builds within is completely irrelevant.
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora Matrix: mhroncok
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an em
On 16. 01. 25 13:29, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 06. 01. 25 12:45, Miro Hrončok wrote:
Hello,
I propose we retire python-nose from Fedora 43+ immediately after branching.
The package has been deprecated for 5 years:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/DeprecateNose
It does not build with
On 06. 01. 25 12:45, Miro Hrončok wrote:
Hello,
I propose we retire python-nose from Fedora 43+ immediately after branching.
The package has been deprecated for 5 years:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/DeprecateNose
It does not build with Python 3.14:
https
On 16. 01. 25 9:47, Petr Pisar wrote:
V Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 09:07:49PM +0100, Miro Hrončok napsal(a):
I just wasn't sure if the user/group Provides aren't "magical" in some sort
-- e.g. dnf on F42+ treating them specially by creating the user/group,
DNF does not create
creating the user/group, but I
guess the respective Provides must actually exist.
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora Matrix: mhroncok
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists
- nothing provides group(uuidd) needed by uuidd-2.40.4-1.fc42.x86_64
- nothing provides user(uuidd) needed by uuidd-2.40.4-1.fc42.x86_64
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora Matrix: mhroncok
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraprojec
it happens, please? I know you
actually do test this in copr, so why do you land it just like that?
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora Matrix: mhroncok
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email
hould do.
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpmlint/issues/1147
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-59cc5ecf54
Pending (lack of) user feedback, I plan to update rpmlint in Fedora 41 as well,
after a while.
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora Matrix: mhroncok
Dear maintainers.
Based on the current fail to build from source policy, the following packages
should be retired from Fedora 42 approximately one week before branching,
i.e. 2025-01-28.
5 weekly reminders are required, this is the fourth one.
Policy:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco
On 12. 01. 25 4:59, Fedora ELN Report wrote:
Added packages: 267
Hi. What happened here? I cannot find the newly added packages in the content
resolver.
Are those packages from ELN Extras?
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora Matrix: mhroncok
retirement directly or indirectly.
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora Matrix: mhroncok
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https
several
weeks, IMHO 2 weeks is not sufficient time to wait before going for the
non-responsive maintainer process. A simple comment on the PR requesting
a response is probably a better first step.
Except it rarely works with Neal unless you ping him via a side channel :(
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone
the main Python in Fedora 42, see
https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/127364
I would not bother with the older ones.
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora Matrix: mhroncok
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To
es enblend, hugin-base
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
--
___
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
. How long do we need to keep it?
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora Matrix: mhroncok
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct
lta
Hey Fabio.
Thanks for maintaining this until now, I use it :)
Do you know nay alternative in case this goes out of the distro? I probably
don't have free cycles to maintain the Rust bindings for libgit2 :/
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fed
On 23. 12. 24 10:21, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 22. 12. 24 v 17:18 Miro Hrončok via devel-announce napsal(a):
colm filiperosset, jtaylor
Chm, can some package be this unlucky?
https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/package/colm
https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/package/colm?
last_seen_ts
On 18. 12. 24 12:53, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Dne 18. 12. 24 v 10:53 dop. Miro Hrončok napsal(a):
When the package is orphaned (e.g. because the buzgilla that said it does not
install was ignored by all 8 maintainers), it would be assigned to one of
them, we are at 7 maintainers. It would take 8
tainers.
If a package is orphaned for FTBFS/FTI reason, co-maiantainers clearly should
not get it automatically.
If the original main admin orphans it, they should communicate with their
co-maintainers. In reallity, they don't always do that, but that is an exception.
--
Miro Hrončok
--
like that.
Sure, I guess we all agree that the line is fuzzy and probably not very well
documented/defined. That does not mean we use that to justify problematic
provenpackager behavior.
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora Matrix: mhroncok
--
___
despite my opinion on the matter.)
[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2284439#c1
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora Matrix: mhroncok
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email
expect that some modules will need time to support NumPy 2.
"""
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/2332408
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora Matrix: mhroncok
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscr
nly usable like this:
%{version_no_tilde %{quote:}}
And that is a bit hard to use.
There's also:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-rpm-macros/pull-request/101
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/1219
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/discussions/2715
On 04. 12. 24 20:32, William Cohen wrote:
On 11/21/24 17:32, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 21. 11. 24 23:11, William Cohen wrote:
Sediment has been designed to work with the RPM build process.
Currently, one needs to use modified RPM macros. These can be created
quickly by writing the output of the
On 05. 12. 24 11:57, Jaroslav Škarvada wrote:
On Tue, Dec 3, 2024 at 10:30 PM Jaroslav Škarvada wrote:
On Mon, Nov 4, 2024 at 6:14 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 04. 11. 24 17:26, Jaroslav Škarvada wrote:
I am going to add compat Tcl/Tk 8.6 packages, because IMHO porting of
the packages to Tcl
On 03. 12. 24 19:43, Aoife Moloney via devel-announce wrote:
If we receive enough candidates to hold an election for FESCo, voting will
start on Friday 6th December, as per the elections schedule[3].
What about the interviews?
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora Matrix: mhroncok
tually takes care of this
package.
Wouldn't it be better to let the co-maintainers take the package instead of
jumping the gun and taking it "for now"?
They had ~6 weeks to do it.
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora Matrix: mhroncok
--
___
On 29. 11. 24 15:47, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
On Fri, Nov 29, 2024 at 03:36:44PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 28. 11. 24 23:49, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Thu, Nov 28, 2024 at 4:30 AM Florian Weimer wrote:
* Richard W. M. Jones:
One question is whether it's better to add this as a sub-pa
ld avoid the
pitfall of someone at a later time defining bundled_rust_deps to 0 and things
not working right in that case? Something like,
%bcond bundled_rust_deps %{defined rhel}
%autosetup %{?with_bundled_rust_deps:-a1}
Yes please.
It's e
h /usr/lib/rpm/macros.d/macros.valgrind-srpm.
Please don't. I don't want it there. It makes things complicated when
redhat-rpm-config gets changed/backported incompatibly in RHEL.
In what way? We have other such macros there. I'd not expect this to be
problematic and your answer
ff as is the case now).
It would be good to have a discussion here followed by a plan to resolve
this issue. If that means doing two protobuf versions, I'm willing to
help with that as well.
Yes, having multiple packages with different versions is usually the way to go.
See e.g. python-pytest7
On 22. 11. 24 13:15, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
This project is dead upstream...
Or is it alive?
(Apologies, I could not resist.)
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora Matrix: mhroncok
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel
posed to
put those to ~/.rpmmacros. Exccept I never build Python loclly, I use Koji or
mock. I can probably amend this to use %global and insert it to
python3.14.spec. But what else I need to do? Do you have a step by step kind of
document I can follow?
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
F
On 11. 11. 24 14:38, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 08. 11. 24 v 21:50 Miro Hrončok napsal(a):
On 08. 11. 24 15:44, David Bold wrote:
The policy is applied:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/
message/RROZC3KFCF6G4RRMKEM4NXJ4PTFFROTT/
The question is, why
-parser gets retired, we can restore usage of the bundled one. It
already bundles llhttp anyway.
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora Matrix: mhroncok
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
11038
After that, it was never built. As such, it makes no harm.
Anyway, Vít, you can follow step 3 at
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Fails_to_build_from_source_Fails_to_install/#_package_removal_for_long_standing_ftbfs_and_fti_bugs
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora M
reviewed.
I proposed https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-durationpy/pull-request/1
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora Matrix: mhroncok
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le
1 - 100 of 2227 matches
Mail list logo
