On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 12:23:04PM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 12:19 PM, Petr Šabata wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 02:19:43PM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
> >> On Mon, 2017-01-16 at 13:13 +0100, Petr Šabata wrote:
> >> > Let it be known that due to certain packaging c
On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 12:19 PM, Petr Šabata wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 02:19:43PM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
>> On Mon, 2017-01-16 at 13:13 +0100, Petr Šabata wrote:
>> > Let it be known that due to certain packaging changes implemented
>> > in December, neither python nor python3 are aut
On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 02:19:43PM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
> On Mon, 2017-01-16 at 13:13 +0100, Petr Šabata wrote:
> > Let it be known that due to certain packaging changes implemented
> > in December, neither python nor python3 are automatically pulled
> > into the default, minimal buildroot a
On Mon, 2017-01-16 at 13:13 +0100, Petr Šabata wrote:
> Let it be known that due to certain packaging changes implemented
> in December, neither python nor python3 are automatically pulled
> into the default, minimal buildroot anymore.
I have to note that for python3 it's not really true, since rpm
Let it be known that due to certain packaging changes implemented
in December, neither python nor python3 are automatically pulled
into the default, minimal buildroot anymore.
This negatively affects packages the require python/python3 at
build time but do not explicitly say so, causing FTBFS issu
