Re: F42 Change Proposal: Switch to EROFS for Live Media (self-contained)

On Wed, Jan 29, 2025 at 03:11:43PM -0500, Dusty Mabe wrote: > On 1/22/25 7:17 AM, mkol...@redhat.com wrote: > > On Wed, 2025-01-22 at 11:19 +0100, Simon de Vlieger wrote: > >> Hi Neal (and Dusty), > >> > >> On 1/15/25 11:53 PM, Aoife Moloney via devel-announce wrote: > >>> EROFS is considerably mor

Re: [rfc] mass package change to introduce sysusers.d configs

On Wed, Jan 29, 2025 at 03:43:56PM +, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > On Wed, Jan 29, 2025 at 03:37:07PM +0000, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 29, 2025 at 03:12:32PM +, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > > On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 08:51:16PM +, Zbigniew

Re: [rfc] mass package change to introduce sysusers.d configs

On Wed, Jan 29, 2025 at 03:12:32PM +, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 08:51:16PM +0000, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > Hi! > > > > In accordance with > > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Mass_package_changes/, > > I plan

Re: [rfc] mass package change to introduce sysusers.d configs

On Wed, Jan 29, 2025 at 02:59:04PM +, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > On Wed, Jan 29, 2025 at 02:16:06PM +0000, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 11:04:54AM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > > On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 10:16:01AM +, Zbi

Re: [rfc] mass package change to introduce sysusers.d configs

On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 11:04:54AM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 10:16:01AM +0000, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > But I see that I didn't add packages that just call > > %{sysusers_create_compat} to my list. > > Updated

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Deprecate Zezere Provisioning Server (IoT) (self-contained)

On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 10:41:15PM +, Aoife Moloney via devel-announce wrote: > == Detailed Description == > Currently, Fedora IoT users can add an SSH key to the root user > account using the Zezere provisioning tool. While convenient for most > use cases, users have given feedback that this

Re: [rfc] mass package change to introduce sysusers.d configs

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 the config snippet in-line is only compatible with F42+? > Naively, I would think that the more-or-less-backw

Re: [rfc] mass package change to introduce sysusers.d configs

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 seeing packages follow > the current packaging guidel

Re: Inadvertent mass-rebuild triggered soname bump in libnfs

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 > > commits a bump to git but doesn't build it in a side tag or rawhide, > > for whatever reason. S

Re: [rfc] mass package change to introduce sysusers.d configs

On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 10:16:01AM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > But I see that I didn't add packages that just call > %{sysusers_create_compat} to my list. Updated diff: https://in.waw.pl/~zbyszek/fedora/sysusers_mass_spec_change_v2.diff.html That brings up the t

Re: [rfc] mass package change to introduce sysusers.d configs

On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 09:27:10AM +, Peter Robinson wrote: > On Fri, 24 Jan 2025 at 14:08, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek > wrote: > > trousers > > Trousers needs to be the same as the the tpm2-tss as they both deal with > the TPM (the former v1 variants the later TPMv2)

Re: [rfc] mass package change to introduce sysusers.d configs

On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 11:29:58AM +0200, Alexander Bokovoy wrote: > On Суб, 25 сту 2025, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 11:06:43AM +0200, Alexander Bokovoy wrote: > > > On Суб, 25 сту 2025, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > > >

Re: [rfc] mass package change to introduce sysusers.d configs

On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 11:06:43AM +0200, Alexander Bokovoy wrote: > On Суб, 25 сту 2025, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > - if the user shall be shared, let on of the packages define the user > > and have the other package add Requires:user(…). > OpenDNSSEC and S

Re: [rfc] mass package change to introduce sysusers.d configs

On Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 07:44:31PM +0100, Tomasz Torcz wrote: > On Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 02:07:07PM +0000, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 08:55:12AM +, Peter Robinson wrote: > > > On Thu, 23 Jan 2025 at 20:52, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek

Re: [rfc] mass package change to introduce sysusers.d configs

On Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 01:25:18PM -0300, Rafael Jeffman wrote: > Some of these packages might have the same issue as > softhsm/opendnssec as they use the same user, but, > currently user GECOS is different on both packages, > causing systemd-sysuers to fail (or warn). This is a preexisting bug in

Re: [rfc] mass package change to introduce sysusers.d configs

On Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 08:55:12AM +, Peter Robinson wrote: > On Thu, 23 Jan 2025 at 20:52, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek > wrote: > Is there a list of those packages? > > The first batch: > > https://in.waw.pl/~zbyszek/fedora/sysusers_mass_spec_change_v1.diff.html ^ Thos

[rfc] mass package change to introduce sysusers.d configs

Hi! In accordance with https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Mass_package_changes/, I plan to do a "mass package change" to add sysusers.d config files for all packages which currently call 'useradd' and 'groupadd' and drop the calls to getent/id/useradd/groupadd/usermod/gpasswd. This is p

Re: Proposal for vendoring/bundling golang packages by default

On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 01:32:55PM +, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 01:27:09PM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > 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 th

Re: Proposal for vendoring/bundling golang packages by default

On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 09:51:28AM +, 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/Silver

Re: Proposal for vendoring/bundling golang packages by default

On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 06:24:26PM -, Jan Drögehoff wrote: > Fabio Valentini wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 5:13 PM Jan Drögehoff sentrycraft...@gmail.com > > 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.

Re: Proposal for vendoring/bundling golang packages by default

On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 09:22:37AM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 9:14 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek > wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 02:09:51PM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > > Workflow with non-vendored dependencies: > > &

Re: Proposal for vendoring/bundling golang packages by default

On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 03:42:22PM +0100, Miroslav Suchý wrote: > Dne 21. 01. 25 v 3:13 odp. Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek napsal(a): > > At the fundamental level, such automation would effectively do two > > steps: > > 1. create a no-change commit like we do now, > > 2. p

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Deprecate python-pytest-runner (self-contained)

On Mon, Jan 06, 2025 at 07:13:02PM +, Aoife Moloney via devel-announce wrote: > == Summary == > The {{package|python-pytest-runner}} > ({{package|python3-pytest-runner}}) package will be > [https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/deprecating-packages/ > deprecated] in [https:

Re: Proposal for vendoring/bundling golang packages by default

On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 02:09:51PM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote: > Workflow with non-vendored dependencies: > - update library or backport fix > - submit rebuilds of dependent applications (with rpmautospec, those > are no-change commits) > > Workflow with vendored dependencies: > - check out appl

Re: Proposal for vendoring/bundling golang packages by default

On Mon, Jan 20, 2025 at 11:20:50AM +, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > I understand that these are challenges, and they are increasing because > > there are so many upcoming ecosystems which build their own distribution > > channels and tools, be it Go, Rust, Julia, even Python to some degree > >

Re: Proposal for vendoring/bundling golang packages by default

On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 02:30:48PM +0100, Miroslav Suchý wrote: > Dne 21. 01. 25 v 1:49 odp. Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek napsal(a): > > Let's not try to revive this. The ring idea is very very dead. Nobody > > ever provided any coherent specification of how it could work. >

Re: Proposal for vendoring/bundling golang packages by default

On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 05:13:07AM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 4:58 AM Florian Weimer wrote: > > * Gerd Hoffmann: > > > Note that in the go/rust world the unbundling does *not* make security > > > updates much easier. Due to the static linkling it is not enough to > > > upd

Re: Proposal for vendoring/bundling golang packages by default

On Mon, Jan 20, 2025 at 04:24:28PM +0100, Miroslav Suchý wrote: > Dne 20. 01. 25 v 11:29 dop. Michael J Gruber napsal(a): > > There is a second point to that, and that is Fedora as a development > > platform (not just as an "app" platform). If we expect developers to > > install dependencies of the

Re: A fix for the FTBFS issue with the jed text editor

On Sun, Jan 19, 2025 at 02:49:36AM -0800, Loren M. Lang wrote: > > > Steps to join the packager group: > > > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Joining_the_Package_Maintainers/ > > I have gone through most of those steps now, though I think I still need > to send an introduct

Re: Idea proposal for next mass rebuilds

On Sun, Jan 19, 2025 at 09:10:52AM -0800, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Sun, Jan 19, 2025 at 03:36:32PM +0000, 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 packa

Re: Idea proposal for next mass rebuilds

On Sun, Jan 19, 2025 at 03:37:09PM +, 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 > > versions etc.) between t

Re: Idea proposal for next mass rebuilds

On Sun, Jan 19, 2025 at 03:18:10PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > Some were indeed caused by dependency problems, but it is a special > case of the case you describe above: because of the sbin merge and > the sysusers change, some packages are not installable. But such an &

Re: Idea proposal for next mass rebuilds

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 one package in the loop > > succeed. > > So, this is an interesting idea. Perhaps we should start doing this

Re: Idea proposal for next mass rebuilds

On Sat, Jan 18, 2025 at 11:43:39AM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote: > So if you see packages that *change* (either their dependencies, or > their contents - but ignoring codegen differences with new compiler > versions etc.) between the last build before the mass rebuild and the > build performed duri

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Deprecate Zezere Provisioning Server (IoT) (self-contained)

On Thu, Jan 16, 2025 at 10:49:41AM +, Peter Robinson wrote: > On Thu, 16 Jan 2025 at 10:44, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek > wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 10:41:15PM +, Aoife Moloney via devel-announce > > wrote: > > > Wiki - https://fedoraproject.org

Re: Fedora Mass Rebuild 42 has started

On Thu, Jan 16, 2025 at 02:26:12PM +0530, Samyak Jain wrote: > Failures can be seen > On the failed builds, I see "BuildError: error building package (arch i686), mock exited with status 1; see build.log or root.log for more info

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Promote KDE Plasma Desktop variant to Edition (self-contained)

> == User Experience == > The main change will be the Fedora website showing the KDE Plasma > Desktop Edition alongside Workstation and others. Sounds reasonable. BTW, looking at that page, shouldn't "container optimized OS" be "container-optimized OS"? On the page it's show an "containeroptimize

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Deprecate Zezere Provisioning Server (IoT) (self-contained)

On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 10:41:15PM +, Aoife Moloney via devel-announce wrote: > Wiki - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Deprecate_Zezere > Discussion thread - > > This is a proposed Change for Fedora Linux. > This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes > process,

Re: List of long term FTBFS packages to be retired in 2 weeks

On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 01:47:56PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote: > jaero vascom I fixed this one which just needed an updated library name. Zbyszek -- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send a

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Optimized Binaries for the AMD64 / x86_64 Architecture (v2) (self-contained)

On Tue, Jan 14, 2025 at 08:16:15AM -0500, Stephen Smoogen wrote: > On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 at 16:08, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek > wrote: > > > On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 12:10:44PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > > On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 09:11:35AM +0000, Zbigniew Jędr

Re: GCC 15 for Fedora 42 in a side-tag

On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 05:06:47PM +0100, Karolina Surma wrote: > Hi, > > My Python 3.14 builds have started pulling gcc 15 in Fedora Rawhide (no > side-tag). Is this intentional? It seems so. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-920722dc45 is the update based on the side tag, and

Re: rpmlint+readelf corrupted interpreter on generated binaries

On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 10:18:28AM +0100, Robin Jarry wrote: > Hi folks, > > I found out that rpmlint errors out without producing any meaningful result > when the analyzed RPMs contain binaries: rpmlint should not blindly assume that output is valid text, but should probably print a meaningful

Re: Convention for naming patches

On Tue, Jan 14, 2025 at 11:36:59AM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote: > Hi, > > Is there any convention for naming patches? I mildly remember that there > used to be some guideline suggesting form such as > `pagkage-name-version-description-of-patch.patch`. But I was not able to > find this codified in gui

Re: F42 Change Proposal: RPM Support For Systemd Sysusers.d (system-wide)

On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 02:02:33PM +0100, Iker Pedrosa wrote: > Which shadow-utils upstream ticket? https://github.com/shadow-maint/shadow/issues/940 > I've long wanted to get rid of the patch we have in Fedora for shadow > audit, either by including it upstream or removing it altogether, but I'm

Re: F42 Change Proposal: RPM Support For Systemd Sysusers.d (system-wide)

On Fri, Jan 10, 2025 at 04:21:56PM -0500, Steve Grubb wrote: > On Friday, January 10, 2025 10:20:07 AM EST Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek > wrote: > > https://github.com/systemd/systemd/pull/35957 > Thanks. It just occurred to me that upstream shadow-utils has kinda broken > audi

Re: AVX but not AVX2: F42 Change Proposal: Optimized Binaries for the AMD64 / x86_64

On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 10:48:42AM +, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > On Fri, Jan 10, 2025 at 01:45:44PM -0800, John Reiser wrote: > > > A vendor-independent x86-64 psABI > > > supplement defines four "microachitecture levels": `x86-64-v1` (the > > > baseline, our code targets this), `x86-64-v2` (+

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Optimized Binaries for the AMD64 / x86_64 Architecture (v2) (self-contained)

On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 12:10:44PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 09:11:35AM +0000, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > First, this would require setting up the infrastructure to build and > > store and distribute multiple builds of a single version of a &g

Re: bin-sbin merge rebuild

On Fri, Jan 10, 2025 at 10:13:31AM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Fri, Jan 10, 2025 at 08:58:32AM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > > * Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek: > > > > > glibc > > > > If we rebuild glibc, should we do a second rebuild in

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Optimized Binaries for the AMD64 / x86_64 Architecture (v2) (self-contained)

On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 09:18:46AM +0100, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote: > On 12/01/2025 20:36, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > I think any massive use of this scheme is unlikely. Note that we'd > > want to this only for packages where the optimized code yields >

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Optimized Binaries for the AMD64 / x86_64 Architecture (v2) (self-contained)

On Sun, Jan 12, 2025 at 03:16:39PM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Sun, Jan 12, 2025 at 2:36 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek > wrote: > > > > On Sun, Jan 12, 2025 at 05:21:18PM +0100, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote: > > > On 12/01/2025 13:02, Christoph Erhardt wrote: >

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Unification of boot loader updates, phase 1 (system-wide)

On Fri, Jan 10, 2025 at 07:44:29PM +, Aoife Moloney via devel-announce wrote: > Wiki - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/BootLoaderUpdatesPhase1 > Discussion thread - > https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/f42-change-proposal-unification-of-boot-loader-updates-phase-1-system-wide/142035

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Optimized Binaries for the AMD64 / x86_64 Architecture (v2) (self-contained)

On Sun, Jan 12, 2025 at 05:21:18PM +0100, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote: > On 12/01/2025 13:02, Christoph Erhardt wrote: > > 1. Not all packages but only those whose maintainers explicitly opt in. > > Yes, at the first stage. But over time the number of packages can increase > significantly. I t

Re: F42 Change Proposal: RPM Support For Systemd Sysusers.d (system-wide)

On Thu, Jan 02, 2025 at 01:08:38PM -0500, Steve Grubb wrote: > * Verify that audit events exist for user and group creation: >ausearch --start recent -i -m > 'ADD_USER,USER_MGMT,USER_CHAUTHTOK,ROLE_ASSIGN,ROLE_REMOVE,DEL_USER,ADD_GROUP,GRP_MGMT,GRP_CHAUTHTOK,DEL_GROUP' > * Remove the packa

Re: libnova: announcing soname bump

On Mon, Jan 06, 2025 at 01:18:35PM -0500, Stephen Smoogen wrote: > On Mon, 6 Jan 2025 at 12:50, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > > On Mon, Jan 6, 2025 at 6:03 PM Stephen Smoogen > > wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, 6 Jan 2025 at 11:49, Fabio Valentini > > wrote: > > >> > > >> On Mon, Jan 6, 2025 at 10:05 A

Re: libnova: announcing soname bump

On Mon, Jan 06, 2025 at 06:27:41PM +, Mattia Verga via devel wrote: > Il 06/01/25 18:50, Fabio Valentini ha scritto: > > On Mon, Jan 6, 2025 at 6:03 PM Stephen Smoogen wrote: > >> On Mon, 6 Jan 2025 at 11:49, Fabio Valentini wrote: > >>> On Mon, Jan 6, 2025 at 10:05 AM Mattia Verga via devel

Re: bin-sbin merge rebuild

On Fri, Jan 10, 2025 at 08:58:32AM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek: > > > glibc > > If we rebuild glibc, should we do a second rebuild into your side tag? Probably… But let's coordinate (here or on Matrix). I hope we can avoid dupli

Re: bin-sbin merge rebuild

On Fri, Jan 10, 2025 at 08:31:18AM +0900, Mamoru TASAKA wrote: > Jerry James wrote on 2025/01/10 8:10: > > For a little more fun the hivex package, which libguestfs depends on, > > is already in a side tag for a ruby update. I need to rebuild hivex > > and then libguestfs in the OCaml side tag, bu

bin-sbin merge rebuild

Hi folks, I want to make another attempt at the bin-sbin merge tomorrow. See [0, 1, 2] for the general description and history. I tried to do the merge last year, but there were various failures and the attempt was reverted. Those issues have been fixed, so I'll try again, following the same plan

Re: Self-reintroduction, reflections, and so forth

On Wed, Jan 08, 2025 at 08:43:55PM -0800, Brendan Conoboy wrote: > Having come full circle, starting a project in the Fedora community, > maturing it in RHEL, learning deeply how RHEL works and shaping it, and now > back in a community space, I believe I have one valuable thing to offer: > insider

Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2025-01-07)

Text Log: https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/meeting_matrix_fedoraproject-org/2025-01-07/fesco.2025-01-07-17.01.log.txt HTML Log: https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/meeting_matrix_fedoraproject-org/2025-01-07/fesco.2025-01-07-17.01.log.html Text Minutes: https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/meeting_m

Schedule for Tuesday's FESCo Meeting (2025-01-07)

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 '2025-01-07 17:00 UTC' Links to all issues to be

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Tcl/Tk 9.0 (system-wide)

> Wiki - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/TclTk9.0 > Discussion Thread - > https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/f42-change-proposal-tcl-tk-9-0-system-wide/139549 > pypy > pypy3.10 > pypy3.9 > python3.10 > python3.11 > python3.12 > python3.13 > python3.14 > python3.6 > python3.8 > python3.9

Re: About cleaning Up Go SIG Membership

On Mon, Dec 30, 2024 at 08:39:39PM +0100, Alejandro Saez Morollon wrote: > Hi everyone, > > At the last Go SIG meeting, we discussed the current membership of the SIG. > There are 34 members, but some have been inactive for a while. Since being > a member of the Go SIG grants commit access to many

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Install Using GPT on all architectures by Default (system-wide)

On Sat, Dec 21, 2024 at 05:44:02AM -0700, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Sat, Dec 21, 2024 at 2:13 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek > wrote: > > > > On Thu, Dec 12, 2024 at 07:59:28PM +0100, Simon de Vlieger wrote: > > > On 12/12/24 5:04 PM, Vojtech Trefny wrote: > >

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Install Using GPT on all architectures by Default (system-wide)

On Thu, Dec 12, 2024 at 07:59:28PM +0100, Simon de Vlieger wrote: > On 12/12/24 5:04 PM, Vojtech Trefny wrote: > > The default we have in blivet actually applies only to systems > > installed with Anaconda so this would not be true for many ARM > > systems. The images used with arm-image-installer

Re: Enabling RPM based sysuser handling

On Fri, Dec 20, 2024 at 04:11:10PM -0600, Michel Lind wrote: > On Fri, Dec 20, 2024 at 03:31:36PM +0100, Michal Sekletar wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 19, 2024 at 5:28 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek > > wrote: > > > +1 for a Change proposal. (Deadline is the 24th.) > > >

Re: Enabling RPM based sysuser handling

On Thu, Dec 19, 2024 at 04:28:02PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Thu, Dec 19, 2024 at 02:06:01PM +0100, Michal Sekletar wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 3:17 PM Panu Matilainen wrote: > > > > > Excellent :) With the duplicates gone from systemd basic.co

Re: Enabling RPM based sysuser handling

On Thu, Dec 19, 2024 at 02:06:01PM +0100, Michal Sekletar wrote: > On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 3:17 PM Panu Matilainen wrote: > > > Excellent :) With the duplicates gone from systemd basic.conf gone, a > > logical next step would be turning on hard dependencies for users and > > groups before the F41

Re: Applying code layout optimization to postgresql16 RPMs in Fedora 41 gave a 3%-6% improvement in IPC

On Thu, Dec 05, 2024 at 03:45:59PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote: > What is the blocker to run this in Koji/mock? > > You do `make_sediment_rpmmacros > ~/.rpmmacros`. > > What's the issue with %defining such macros at spec level? I don't think the approach with 'make_sediment_rpmmacros' can work. It

Re: F42 Change Proposal: DNF5 Expired Keys (System-Wide)

On Thu, Dec 05, 2024 at 11:51:55AM +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote: > On 12/5/24 10:42 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 05, 2024 at 08:53:05AM +0100, Jan Kolarik wrote: > > > Hi Zbyszek, > > > > > > Thank you for your interest in this pr

Re: F42 Change Proposal: DNF5 Expired Keys (System-Wide)

On Thu, Dec 05, 2024 at 11:39:30AM -, Peter Oliver wrote: > Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > > As to the implementation: the distro has a historical list of all keys > > used to sign its packages. For any given release we know which keys > > are "old".

Re: F42 Change Proposal: DNF5 Expired Keys (System-Wide)

On Thu, Dec 05, 2024 at 08:53:05AM +0100, Jan Kolarik wrote: > Hi Zbyszek, > > Thank you for your interest in this proposal! > > I'd like to see behaviour where keys for EOL releases are removed as > > soon as possible. I.e. if I have upgraded to F42, but still have a > > package from F39, then k

Re: F42 Change Proposal: DNF5 Expired Keys (System-Wide)

On Tue, Dec 03, 2024 at 05:18:12PM +, Aoife Moloney via devel-announce wrote: > Wiki - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Dnf5ExpiredPGPKeys > The proposed solution is a new LIBDNF5 plugin. This plugin will act as > a hook, checking for invalid repository PGP keys on the system before > e

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Switch to git-core (self-contained)

On Wed, Dec 04, 2024 at 12:50:12PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > === Require on git === > > > > > > grep -E '^Requires:\s*git$' *.spec |cut -d ":" -f1 |sed 's:.spec::' > > Maybe: > rg -l '^Requires\s*:.

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Switch to git-core (self-contained)

On Tue, Dec 03, 2024 at 05:01:38PM +, Aoife Moloney via devel-announce wrote: > Wiki - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ChangeToGitCore > $ grep -E '^BuildRequires:\s*git$' *.spec |cut -d ":" -f1 |sed 's:.spec::' > 4Pane > accountsservice > adobe-mappings-cmap > adobe-mappings-pdf ... >

Re: Extended Nominations Period for FESCo - Closes Thursday December 5th

On Tue, Dec 03, 2024 at 11:15:53PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote: > 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 in

Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2024-12-03)

Text Log: https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/meeting_matrix_fedoraproject-org/2024-12-03/fesco.2024-12-03-17.00.log.txt HTML Log: https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/meeting_matrix_fedoraproject-org/2024-12-03/fesco.2024-12-03-17.00.log.html Text Minutes: https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/meeting_m

Re: Schedule for Tuesday's FESCo Meeting (2024-12-03)

On Mon, Dec 02, 2024 at 12:08:58PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > 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 l

Re: small problem with vendored deps in rust packages

On Sun, Dec 01, 2024 at 04:54:12PM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote: > There's a WIP of a simplified "conditional vendor" handling here: > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rust-vhost-device-sound/pull-request/4 > As soon as this is in good shape it might serve as a template for > other packages too.

Schedule for Tuesday's FESCo Meeting (2024-12-03)

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 '2024-12-03 17:00 UTC' Links to all issues to be

Re: small problem with vendored deps in rust packages

On Thu, Nov 28, 2024 at 12:34:50AM +0100, Kalev Lember wrote: > On Thu, Nov 28, 2024 at 12:23 AM Kalev Lember wrote: > > > On Wed, Nov 27, 2024 at 11:56 PM Fabio Valentini > > wrote: > > > >> On Wed, Nov 27, 2024 at 11:50 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek >

small problem with vendored deps in rust packages

Hi Yaakov, I was looking to update rust-zram-generator and I noticed the following: commit 820c5ec20c000e2f0ef57d19970311901d598cf1 Author: Yaakov Selkowitz Date: Mon May 15 20:13:52 2023 -0400 Use vendored dependency in RHEL builds This introduces and rpm macro logic bug

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

On Fri, Nov 15, 2024 at 06:53:59AM +0100, Siteshwar Vashisht wrote: > - The issue of false positives is one of the most important, but hard > to solve. I started a discussion[2] on GitHub, but we do not have a > good answer to it yet. If you have ideas, please share on GitHub. Hi, This was alread

Re: PSA: tuned breaks boot loader entries for systemd-boot

On Sun, Nov 17, 2024 at 05:45:12PM +0100, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote: > Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > Heh, that's a cool idea. But that's not how standards work. > > You cannot just insert things at random points in low-level config > > files or protols. H

Re: Bodhi 8.2 in production: changes to karma requirements

On Sun, Nov 17, 2024 at 10:12:58AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Sun, 2024-11-17 at 18:35 +0100, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote: > > Kevin Kofler via devel wrote: > > > PS: I suspect the documentation was actually just an attempt to document > > > the previous broken Bodhi policy implementation.

Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2024-11-12)

Text Log: https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/meeting_matrix_fedoraproject-org/2024-11-12/fesco.2024-11-12-17.01.log.txt HTML Log: https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/meeting_matrix_fedoraproject-org/2024-11-12/fesco.2024-11-12-17.01.log.html Text Minutes: https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/meeting_m

Schedule for Tuesday's FESCo Meeting (2024-11-12)

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 '2024-11-12 17:00 UTC' Links to all issues to be

Re: Moving away from the term "karma" in Bodhi

On Tue, Nov 12, 2024 at 09:07:33AM +, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: >"Karma: Is the update generally functional?" > > The word "karma" is adding no value here, it is mere word clutter > and could be trivially removed. You describe the use of the word from the perspective of newcomers. But I t

Re: Moving away from the term "karma" in Bodhi

On Mon, Nov 11, 2024 at 05:51:18PM +, Mattia Verga via devel wrote: > The original request to change the term "karma" in Bodhi was > https://github.com/fedora-infra/bodhi/issues/4321 > > I see some points which are in favor to the renaming: > - we are using the term like a "joke" while it has

Re: Moving away from the term "karma" in Bodhi

On Mon, Nov 11, 2024 at 08:47:57AM +0100, Sandro wrote: > On 11-11-2024 08:27, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > On Sun, Nov 10, 2024 at 03:18:49PM +, Mattia Verga via devel wrote: > > > I have started to move away Bodhi from using the term "karma" to rate >

Re: Moving away from the term "karma" in Bodhi

On Sun, Nov 10, 2024 at 03:18:49PM +, Mattia Verga via devel wrote: > I have started to move away Bodhi from using the term "karma" to rate > updates. I know this word has become familiar to all Fedora users, but > there were several requests in the past to stop the misuse. As I may not > be

Re: SPDX Statistics - 360 packages remaining

On Fri, Nov 08, 2024 at 08:51:47AM +0100, Miroslav Suchý wrote: > Hot news: > * 24311 spec files in Fedora > > * 30967 license tags in all spec files > > * 360 tags are not SPDX complient (number from line bellow minus packages > with LicenseRef-Callaway-*) > > * 2658 tags have not been convert

Re: systemd-257~rc1 in rawhide

On Thu, Nov 07, 2024 at 12:47:00PM -0500, Dusty Mabe wrote: > > > On 11/7/24 11:15 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > Hi, > > > > systemd-257~rc1 is building for rawhide. This is a big update, with > > lots of changes, see [1] for the list. There

systemd-257~rc1 in rawhide

Hi, systemd-257~rc1 is building for rawhide. This is a big update, with lots of changes, see [1] for the list. There are a lot of small changes in various tools, but hopefully nothing that'd disrupt a typical Fedora installation. Systems which have cgroup v1 configured via kernel commandline para

Re: PSA: tuned breaks boot loader entries for systemd-boot

On Wed, Nov 06, 2024 at 01:50:28PM +0100, Jaroslav Škarvada wrote: > On Wed, Nov 6, 2024 at 12:59 PM Kilian Hanich via devel > wrote: > > > > Am 06.11.24 um 11:32 schrieb Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek: > > >> That's not how standards work. It's behavio

Re: PSA: tuned breaks boot loader entries for systemd-boot

On Tue, Nov 05, 2024 at 07:32:58PM +0100, Jaroslav Škarvada wrote: > > > > > > > > On 11/4/24 7:42 AM, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > > > > > > > > Oof ... the fact that tuned mangles bootloader parameters > > > > > > > > > wasn't > > > > > > > > > mentioned at all in the Change Proposal to enable it

Re: PSA: tuned breaks boot loader entries for systemd-boot

On Tue, Nov 05, 2024 at 03:56:57PM +0100, Jaroslav Škarvada wrote: > On Tue, Nov 5, 2024 at 12:04 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek > wrote: > > > > On Mon, Nov 04, 2024 at 05:06:34PM +0100, Jaroslav Škarvada wrote: > > > On Mon, Nov 4, 2024 at 4:31 PM Fa

Re: PSA: tuned breaks boot loader entries for systemd-boot

On Mon, Nov 04, 2024 at 05:06:34PM +0100, Jaroslav Škarvada wrote: > On Mon, Nov 4, 2024 at 4:31 PM Fabio Valentini wrote: > > > > On Mon, Nov 4, 2024 at 4:20 PM Jaroslav Škarvada > > wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 4, 2024 at 3:02 PM Ian Pilcher wrote: > > > > > > > > On 11/4/24 7:42 AM, Fabio

FESCo meeting cancelled this week

Hi folks, We have no tickets tagged for the meeting and no ticket resolutions to announce. The meeting tomorrow is cancelled. Enjoy/suffer the U.S. presidential elections in peace ;) Zbyszek -- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org T

Re: strange reproducibility problem with QImage

On Sun, Nov 03, 2024 at 11:02:16AM -0500, Ben Beasley wrote: > Kevin’s observation about floating-point rounding and runtime dispatch is an > excellent one in general. > > Those two CPU’s should, as far as I can tell, be dispatched to the same SIMD > implementations in this case. > > Skimming

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >