On Wednesday, 10 October 2018 21.34.47 WEST David Timms wrote:
> Given Fedora runs on community power, have you tried rebuilding the
> packages that interest you under f29 to see/fix any problems that arise ?
Yes. As long as the time that I available allows.
> You can also use the web tools to se
On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 06:40:38PM -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> KP> That policy has been cancelled. Since the upgrade tools started
> KP> doing basically "dnf distrosync (--allowerasing)" for upgrades, the
> KP> upgrade path between distros stopped being a major issue and the
> KP> policy h
On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 10:57:20PM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
> We still have tons of references to Fedora Extras in our infra too
> (just look at most of our tracker bug labels!).
> I wonder if we now have more people in Fedora that came after the
> Core/Extras merge than before it...?
Yes, I think
On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 7:41 PM Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
>
> > "KP" == Kamil Paral writes:
>
> KP> That policy has been cancelled. Since the upgrade tools started
> KP> doing basically "dnf distrosync (--allowerasing)" for upgrades, the
> KP> upgrade path between distros stopped being a ma
> "KP" == Kamil Paral writes:
KP> That policy has been cancelled. Since the upgrade tools started
KP> doing basically "dnf distrosync (--allowerasing)" for upgrades, the
KP> upgrade path between distros stopped being a major issue and the
KP> policy has been dropped.
If this is true then it'
On 11/10/18 01:50, José Abílio Matos wrote:
Even so the problem described seems to be related with packages that were not
build for F29 by mistake (probably around the time that F29 was branched from
rawhide August 14). If the same nvr exists in F28 and rawhide it is difficult
to come with a reas
On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 4:33 PM Germano Massullo
wrote:
> Il giorno mer 10 ott 2018 alle ore 15:46 Kamil Paral
> ha scritto:
> > That policy has been cancelled. Since the upgrade tools started doing
> basically "dnf distrosync (--allowerasing)" for upgrades, the upgrade path
> between distros st
On Wednesday, 10 October 2018 14.45.22 WEST Kamil Paral wrote:
> That policy has been cancelled. Since the upgrade tools started doing
> basically "dnf distrosync (--allowerasing)" for upgrades, the upgrade path
> between distros stopped being a major issue and the policy has been
> dropped.
Even
Il giorno mer 10 ott 2018 alle ore 15:46 Kamil Paral
ha scritto:
> That policy has been cancelled. Since the upgrade tools started doing
> basically "dnf distrosync (--allowerasing)" for upgrades, the upgrade path
> between distros stopped being a major issue and the policy has been dropped.
Do
On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 1:59 PM Fabio Valentini
wrote:
> I haven't been able to find the documentation for this, but I seem to
> remember that package versions should always be higher in newer fedora
> releases (so there are no downgrades when upgrading from N to N+1). Is
> this what is referred
On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 03:10:23PM +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 2:57 PM Michal Konečný wrote:
> >
> > Shouldn't this be caused by F29 final freeze?
>
> Not necessarily. The freeze went into effect only yesterday, so it's
> not that (yet).
>
> The specific packages I li
On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 2:57 PM Michal Konečný wrote:
>
> Shouldn't this be caused by F29 final freeze?
Not necessarily. The freeze went into effect only yesterday, so it's
not that (yet).
The specific packages I listed don't have newer versions available,
even in f29-updates-testing.
As I said,
Shouldn't this be caused by F29 final freeze?
On 10.10.2018 13:57, Fabio Valentini wrote:
Hi all,
I tried upgrading my system to f29, and I noticed some packages that
would have been downgraded. Upon further investigation, their
maintainers seem to have forgotten (or missed) to build and/or sub
Il giorno mer 10 ott 2018 alle ore 13:58 Fabio Valentini
ha scritto:
> I seem to
> remember that package versions should always be higher in newer fedora
> releases (so there are no downgrades when upgrading from N to N+1). Is
> this what is referred to as a "broken upgrade path"?
Exactly
___
Hi all,
I tried upgrading my system to f29, and I noticed some packages that
would have been downgraded. Upon further investigation, their
maintainers seem to have forgotten (or missed) to build and/or submit
updates for these packages to fedora 29 - so, for example, the newer
version is only avai
15 matches
Mail list logo
