On 10/24/2017 11:12 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
> Am 24.10.2017 um 02:43 schrieb Xose Vazquez Perez:
>> They are not tagged for fedora 27
> but FTBFS is not true and so this list is worthless when it is that
> long and contains also packages which where built sucessfully but
> some metadata in the
A few I've just tried to build chosen pretty much at random from the
above list:
> boinc-client
builds fine - there was a FTBFS months ago (#1251482) referring to
openssl but it's fine now
> activemq-cpp
Already tracked by #1423204 - upstream have, slightly strangely,
included the fix in a comme
On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 8:43 PM, Xose Vazquez Perez
wrote:
> They are not tagged for fedora 27.
>
> # hostnamectl | egrep "Operating|CPE"
> Operating System: Fedora 27 (Workstation Edition)
>CPE OS Name: cpe:/o:fedoraproject:fedora:27
>
> # dnf install quasselc quassel-irssi
> Last meta
Ben Rosser wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 9:49 AM, Xose Vazquez Perez
> wrote:
>> quasselc-0-3.20170111gita0a1e6b | fc26
>> quassel-irssi-0-4.20170119git7b034e3 | fc26
> Where is this list sourced from?
I did get it directly from koji:
koji latest-pkg --all f27
> I maintain both of these p
On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 9:49 AM, Xose Vazquez Perez
wrote:
> On 10/22/2017 04:08 PM, Xose Vazquez Perez wrote:
>> Mat Booth wrote:
>>
>>> On 7 August 2017 at 15:35, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
>>>
[3] https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/mass-rebuild/f27-failures.html
>>>
>>> This file seems su
I have a PR up for edb - if i get chance I might take a look at a couple
of others on that list.
In in the case of edb it’s looking a lot like the maintainer is
unresponsive - probably like for many of the package on that list.
Thanks,
Michael
On Mon, 23 Oct 2017, at 08:56 PM, Sérgio Basto wrote:
On Mon, 2017-10-23 at 15:49 +0200, Xose Vazquez Perez wrote:
> On 10/22/2017 04:08 PM, Xose Vazquez Perez wrote:
> > Mat Booth wrote:
> >
> > > On 7 August 2017 at 15:35, Dennis Gilmore
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > [3] https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/mass-rebuild/f27-failure
> > > > s.html
> >
On 10/23/2017 04:43 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>> rbldnsd-0.998-3 | fc26
>
> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=3720
>
> 1 through 46 of 46
> NVR Built by Finished descending sort State
> rbldnsd-0.998-4.fc27 releng 2017-07-29 15:10:37 complete
>
On 10/22/2017 04:08 PM, Xose Vazquez Perez wrote:
> Mat Booth wrote:
>
>> On 7 August 2017 at 15:35, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
>>
>>> [3] https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/mass-rebuild/f27-failures.html
>>>
>>
>> This file seems suspiciously small... I somehow don't believe that there
>> were "0 fai
Mat Booth wrote:
> On 7 August 2017 at 15:35, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
>
>> [3] https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/mass-rebuild/f27-failures.html
>>
>
> This file seems suspiciously small... I somehow don't believe that there
> were "0 failed builds" :-)
Current status?
___
On 7 August 2017 at 15:35, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> [3] https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/mass-rebuild/f27-failures.html
>
This file seems suspiciously small... I somehow don't believe that there
were "0 failed builds" :-)
--
Mat Booth
http://fedoraproject.org/get-fedora
__
On Mon, Aug 07, 2017 at 11:46:34AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> El lun, 07-08-2017 a las 16:35 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> escribió:
> > On Mon, Aug 07, 2017 at 09:35:46AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> > > [3] https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/mass-rebuild/f27-failures.ht
> > > ml
> >
El lun, 07-08-2017 a las 16:35 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
escribió:
> On Mon, Aug 07, 2017 at 09:35:46AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> > [3] https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/mass-rebuild/f27-failures.ht
> > ml
> > [4] https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/mass-rebuild/f27-binutils-fa
> > il
On Mon, Aug 07, 2017 at 09:35:46AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> [3] https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/mass-rebuild/f27-failures.html
> [4] https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/mass-rebuild/f27-binutils-failur
> es.html
Will the up-to-date status be tracked somehow?
Zbyszek
__
On 08/07/2017 08:14 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> On 08/07/2017 04:35 PM, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
>> We have now completed two mass rebuilds, The first one was the
>> scheduled mass rebuild for Fedora 27 details are here[1] the second one
>> was all archful packages due to the binutils bug[2] on ppc64l
On Mon, Aug 07, 2017 at 09:35:46AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> We have now completed two mass rebuilds, The first one was the
> scheduled mass rebuild for Fedora 27 details are here[1] the second one
> was all archful packages due to the binutils bug[2] on ppc64le. The
> failures pa
On 08/07/2017 04:35 PM, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> We have now completed two mass rebuilds, The first one was the
> scheduled mass rebuild for Fedora 27 details are here[1] the second one
> was all archful packages due to the binutils bug[2] on ppc64le. The
> failures pages for the two rebuilds can be
El lun, 07-08-2017 a las 10:50 -0400, Matthew Miller escribió:
> On Mon, Aug 07, 2017 at 09:35:46AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> > We have now completed two mass rebuilds, The first one was the
> > scheduled mass rebuild for Fedora 27 details are here[1] the second
> > one
> > was all archful pac
On Mon, Aug 07, 2017 at 09:35:46AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> We have now completed two mass rebuilds, The first one was the
> scheduled mass rebuild for Fedora 27 details are here[1] the second one
> was all archful packages due to the binutils bug[2] on ppc64le. The
> failures pages for the t
Hi All,
We have now completed two mass rebuilds, The first one was the
scheduled mass rebuild for Fedora 27 details are here[1] the second one
was all archful packages due to the binutils bug[2] on ppc64le. The
failures pages for the two rebuilds can be found here[3] and here[4]
Please quickly cl
20 matches
Mail list logo
