On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 3:30 AM Neal Gompa wrote:
>
> On Sun, Feb 10, 2019 at 9:22 PM Dridi Boukelmoune
> wrote:
> >
> > > I don't read repodata manually, libsolv does it for me. Using libdnf
> > > and/or libmodulemd is not something what (for example) OBS would do. They
> > > rely on libsolv f
On Sun, Feb 10, 2019 at 9:22 PM Dridi Boukelmoune
wrote:
>
> > I don't read repodata manually, libsolv does it for me. Using libdnf and/or
> > libmodulemd is not something what (for example) OBS would do. They rely on
> > libsolv for all dependency solving operations. And unless it will support
On to, 07 helmi 2019, Jerry James wrote:
On Thu, Feb 7, 2019 at 2:13 AM Adam Samalik wrote:
2) Fedora infra builds of standalone packages — modular content is currently invisible to
standalone package builds. That said, the Modularity Team is actively working on making
that possible. You migh
On Thu, Feb 7, 2019 at 2:13 AM Adam Samalik wrote:
> 2) Fedora infra builds of standalone packages — modular content is currently
> invisible to standalone package builds. That said, the Modularity Team is
> actively working on making that possible. You might have heard about "Ursa
> Major" whi
> I don't read repodata manually, libsolv does it for me. Using libdnf and/or
> libmodulemd is not something what (for example) OBS would do. They rely on
> libsolv for all dependency solving operations. And unless it will support
> modularity (which depends heavily on DNF people's ability to sp
I can't speak on behalf of Neal, but I think I will try to answer.
On Thu, Feb 7, 2019, 10:21 Adam Samalik
>
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 6:19 PM Neal Gompa wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 6:07 AM Matthew Miller
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 11:06:25PM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
>>
On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 6:19 PM Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 6:07 AM Matthew Miller
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 11:06:25PM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > > Please don't do that. You'll basically break the distribution for all
> > > third-party packagers. Modules are not
On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 6:07 AM Matthew Miller
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 11:06:25PM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > Please don't do that. You'll basically break the distribution for all
> > third-party packagers. Modules are not supported by anyone at all, and
> > it's too difficult to integ
On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 4:23 AM Matthew Miller wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 03:01:55PM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
> > > But wait also: can't the module just refer to the release-branch (base)
> > > dist-git? Why maintain two copies?
> > Well, they can. But someone needs to build it twice: o
On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 11:06:25PM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> Please don't do that. You'll basically break the distribution for all
> third-party packagers. Modules are not supported by anyone at all, and
> it's too difficult to integrate as it currently stands (and I'm
> actually trying because of
On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 03:01:55PM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
> > But wait also: can't the module just refer to the release-branch (base)
> > dist-git? Why maintain two copies?
> Well, they can. But someone needs to build it twice: once using fedpkg
> build and once using fedpkg module-build from
On Wed, 2019-01-30 at 10:32 +0100, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> and the results show up in Bodhi (albeit under the heading
> 'undefined', which is a bug we should fix):
> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-9d006f6254 (see
> Automated Tests tab)
https://github.com/fedora-infra/bodh
- Original Message -
> From: "Adam Williamson"
> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
> , "Neal Gompa"
> Cc: "Stef Walter" , svashi...@redhat.com
> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2019 10:32:32 AM
> Subject: Re: F3
On Mon, 2019-01-28 at 08:56 +0100, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> > Have you run these tests on bash 5.0 rebase yet? Also, would it be
> > possible to get this into Fedora Dist-Git so that the checks could be
> > run as part of any build/update/PR to the package?
>
> Great point, Neal - that would in
On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 11:05 PM Matthew Miller
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 02:43:39AM -0500, Siteshwar Vashisht wrote:
> > I agree that it would be much safer to target it for Fedora 31. I have no
> > objection if we change target release.
>
> What about building it as a module, with Bash
On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 2:59 PM Matthew Miller wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 01:28:06PM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
> > That doesn't help until there is Ursa Major or some alternative deployed.
> >
> > The reason for that is that we would need to maintain 2 copies of
> > bash, one for users a
On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 01:28:06PM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
> That doesn't help until there is Ursa Major or some alternative deployed.
>
> The reason for that is that we would need to maintain 2 copies of
> bash, one for users and one for buildroot. I do that for libgit2 and
> it is painful.
That doesn't help until there is Ursa Major or some alternative deployed.
The reason for that is that we would need to maintain 2 copies of
bash, one for users and one for buildroot. I do that for libgit2 and
it is painful.
On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 11:53 AM Matthew Miller
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 2
On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 02:43:39AM -0500, Siteshwar Vashisht wrote:
> I agree that it would be much safer to target it for Fedora 31. I have no
> objection if we change target release.
What about building it as a module, with Bash 4 as the default stream for
F30 and a plan to switch that to 5 for
- Original Message -
> From: "Adam Williamson"
> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
>
> Sent: Monday, January 28, 2019 11:38:58 PM
> Subject: Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Bash 5.0
>
> It's not the "only"
On Mon, 2019-01-28 at 22:24 +0100, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski
wrote:
> On Monday, 28 January 2019 at 03:57, Neal Gompa wrote:
> [...]
> > My understanding is that generally script breakage is considered a bug
> > and would have priority for fixing in bash anyway, so I *really* don't
> > think t
On Monday, 28 January 2019 at 03:57, Neal Gompa wrote:
[...]
> My understanding is that generally script breakage is considered a bug
> and would have priority for fixing in bash anyway, so I *really* don't
> think there's any harm in doing this. GCC is an order of magnitude
> worse than bash, and
t; >
> > > Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2019 11:06:39 PM
> > > Subject: Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Bash 5.0
> > >
> > > It's also only been released for barely 2 weeks, it's marked as a
> > > major revision number, and it seems a
> >
> > > Cc: "Mikolaj Izdebski" , "Michael Simacek"
> > >
> > > Sent: Monday, January 28, 2019 3:52:32 AM
> > > Subject: Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Bash 5.0
> > >
> > > Is there some way we can (ab)use Koschei to
- Original Message -
> From: "Neal Gompa"
> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
>
> Cc: "Stef Walter"
> Sent: Monday, January 28, 2019 4:28:15 AM
> Subject: Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Bash 5.0
>
> Have y
gt; >
> > Sent: Monday, January 28, 2019 3:52:32 AM
> > Subject: Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Bash 5.0
> >
> > Is there some way we can (ab)use Koschei to see how things would look
> > for bash 5.0 in Rawhide? Personally, I really don't think we
- Original Message -
> From: "Neal Gompa"
> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
>
> Cc: "Mikolaj Izdebski" , "Michael Simacek"
>
> Sent: Monday, January 28, 2019 3:52:32 AM
> Subject: Re: F30 Self-Contained Ch
On Sun, Jan 27, 2019 at 9:55 PM Siteshwar Vashisht wrote:
>
> - Original Message -
> > From: "Frantisek Zatloukal"
> > To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
> >
> > Sent: Friday, January 25, 2019 4:16:45 PM
> > S
- Original Message -
> From: "Frantisek Zatloukal"
> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
>
> Sent: Friday, January 25, 2019 4:16:45 PM
> Subject: Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Bash 5.0
>
> Why is this Self-Contained Cha
On Sun, Jan 27, 2019 at 9:49 PM Siteshwar Vashisht wrote:
>
> - Original Message -
> > From: "Nico Kadel-Garcia"
> > To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
> >
> > Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2019 11:06:39 PM
> > S
- Original Message -
> From: "Nico Kadel-Garcia"
> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
>
> Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2019 11:06:39 PM
> Subject: Re: F30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Bash 5.0
>
> It's also only been
On Sat, Jan 26, 2019 at 12:05 PM Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski
wrote:
>
> On Saturday, 26 January 2019 at 17:15, John Reiser wrote:
> [...]
> > Already bash-5.0 has two official patches in three weeks. The first one
> > fixes a bug in glob filename expansion. Use of globbing is almost
> > univ
On Saturday, 26 January 2019 at 17:15, John Reiser wrote:
[...]
> Already bash-5.0 has two official patches in three weeks. The first one
> fixes a bug in glob filename expansion. Use of globbing is almost universal,
> but the test cases did not catch the bug before release of bash-5.0.
> Often t
On 1/25/19 15:27 UTC, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 10:17 AM Frantisek Zatloukal
wrote:
Why is this Self-Contained Change and not a System Wide Change?
It seems, at least to me, that it should be System Wide Change, according to
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Policy#Compl
On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 10:17 AM Frantisek Zatloukal
wrote:
>
> Why is this Self-Contained Change and not a System Wide Change?
>
> It seems, at least to me, that it should be System Wide Change, according to
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Policy#Complex_system_wide_changes .
>
Is it r
Why is this Self-Contained Change and not a System Wide Change?
It seems, at least to me, that it should be System Wide Change, according
to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Policy#Complex_system_wide_changes
.
On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 3:45 PM Ben Cotton wrote:
> https://fedoraproject.org/
36 matches
Mail list logo
