Hi,
I'm getting:
Error: Package systemd-udev-229-5.fc24.x86_64.rpm is not signed
When doing a "dnf update", I'm following the f24 branch / repo.
This used to work with previous pushes, and AFAIK F24 pushes
are supposed to be signed ?
Regards,
Hans
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproje
On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 10:11 AM, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm getting:
>
> Error: Package systemd-udev-229-5.fc24.x86_64.rpm is not signed
>
> When doing a "dnf update", I'm following the f24 branch / repo.
> This used to work with previous pushes, and AFAIK F24 pushes
> are supposed to be s
Since it is my first package which includes python stuff, I would ask if
someone more experienced in python packaging could have a look to this
review request:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1299139
Am I doing things right with python scriptlets? I can also do a review
swap, if nee
Il 06/03/2016 11:11, Hans de Goede ha scritto:
Hi,
I'm getting:
Error: Package systemd-udev-229-5.fc24.x86_64.rpm is not signed
This is also breaking builds on Copr:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/mattia/Astronomy/build/166081/
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
htt
Missing expected images:
Cloud raw-xz i386
Atomic raw-xz x86_64
Cloud raw-xz x86_64
No images in this compose but not 24-20160305.n.0
No images in 24-20160305.n.0 but not this.
Failed openQA tests: 64 of 78
ID: 7744Test: i386 Everything-boot-iso default_install
URL: https://openqa.fedo
[so it seems somewhere yesterday the relval fedmsg consumer managed to
create a new validation event, but didn't send out the announcement
mail; I'm sending it by hand.]
Announcing the creation of a new nightly release validation test event
for Fedora 24 Branched 20160305. Please help run some tes
On Sun, 2016-03-06 at 10:16 +, Peter Robinson wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 10:11 AM, Hans de Goede wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm getting:
> >
> > Error: Package systemd-udev-229-5.fc24.x86_64.rpm is not signed
> >
> > When doing a "dnf update", I'm following the f24 branch / repo.
> >
On 05/03/16 13:37, notificati...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
> upgradepath FAILED for audacity-2.1.2-3.fc23
>
> https://taskotron.fedoraproject.org/artifacts/all/119e1b68-e27b-11e5-a932-525400120b80/task_output/audacity-2.1.2-3.fc23.log
Hi, I've received the above notification from the QA proc
Missing expected images:
Cloud raw-xz i386
Atomic raw-xz x86_64
Cloud raw-xz x86_64
Kde raw-xz armhfp
Images in this compose but not Rawhide-20160305.n.0:
Soas raw-xz armhfp
Xfce live x86_64
Lxde live x86_64
Scientific_kde live x86_64
Xfce live i386
Xfce raw-xz armhfp
Lxde raw-xz armhfp
Scientif
On Mon, 2016-03-07 at 08:14 +1100, David Timms wrote:
> Can I ignore that an push the build anyway for F23 (I can't see the
> push
> button) ?
Unfortunately no, as that would break upgrades to F24. You might be
stuck until that gets fixed.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http:/
On Mon, 7 Mar 2016 08:14:47 +1100
David Timms wrote:
> On 05/03/16 13:37, notificati...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
> > upgradepath FAILED for audacity-2.1.2-3.fc23
> >
> > https://taskotron.fedoraproject.org/artifacts/all/119e1b68-e27b-11e5-a932-525400120b80/task_output/audacity-2.1.2-3.fc23.l
Hi,
On Seg, 2016-03-07 at 08:14 +1100, David Timms wrote:
> On 05/03/16 13:37, notificati...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
> >
> > upgradepath FAILED for audacity-2.1.2-3.fc23
> > https://taskotron.fedoraproject.org/artifacts/all/119e1b68-e27b
> > -11e5-a932-525400120b80/task_output/audacity-2.1.2
On Dom, 2016-03-06 at 15:52 -0600, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> On Mon, 2016-03-07 at 08:14 +1100, David Timms wrote:
> >
> > Can I ignore that an push the build anyway for F23 (I can't see the
> > push
> > button) ?
> Unfortunately no, as that would break upgrades to F24. You might be
> stuck until
Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> or I suppose you could add an Epoch.
Epoch would not help here. The Epoch would have to be bumped in Rawhide,
where the package does not build at all, not even the old version.
Kevin Kofler
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraprojec
On Mon, 2016-03-07 at 02:23 +, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> I hope that will never be true, specially when we are comparing with
> rawhide or a not final release, because if can't build in rawhide or
> pre-alfa versions, it shouldn't make us stop to update a previous
> version ...
I was wrong, Kevin
# Fedora Quality Assurance Meeting
# Date: 2016-03-07
# Time: 16:00 UTC
(https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto)
# Location: #fedora-meeting on irc.freenode.net
Greetings testers!
It's meeting time again tomorrow! We met last week, but we didn't make
it to Test Days, and it's been
# F24 Blocker Review meeting
# Date: 2016-03-07
# Time: 17:00 UTC
# Location: #fedora-blocker-review on irc.freenode.net
Hi folks! We have a few proposed blockers to review, so let's take a
look at them. There are 4 proposed Alpha blockers, 2 proposed Beta
blockers, and 1 proposed Final blocker. W
Dne 4.3.2016 v 23:36 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek napsal(a):
> I finally pushed the split of the systemd package to Rawhide and F24 today
> [https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Changes/systemd_package_split].
> If you upgrade with dnf you should see something like this:
> Installing:
> syst
18 matches
Mail list logo
