On 09/12/2016 08:55 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 07:48:31PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 09:06:59AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
I had a brief look at the glibc patches. Apparently, off_t and
time_t are 32-bit. For a new architecture, that'
I'm going to do mass bug filling for those packages which are still
not fixed. Are there some scripts to do that or I have to write my
own?
Unfixed packages:
https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/broken-obsoletes/latest/broken-obsoletes.txt
On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 1:14 PM, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
FWIW, this was done in:
commit 07106ddaa4f45aa188019d497a6a042bd7b58750
Author: Peter Robinson
Date: Sat Apr 2 10:24:17 2016 +0100
add alsa-ucm
For F24 and F25.
Thanks!
- Original Message -
> > alsa-ucm contains routing information to setup sound codecs
> > on some machines, usua
- Original Message -
>
>
> Dne 9.9.2016 v 21:53 Roger Wells napsal(a):
> > Just a couple of smallish things after upgrading (via dnf) from F23 to
> > F24 a couple of months ago:
> >
> >
> > 2. fingerprint identification:
> >
> > The laptop has a fingerprint reader and it works f
On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 07:05:32AM -0400, Bastien Nocera wrote:
>
>
> - Original Message -
> >
> >
> > Dne 9.9.2016 v 21:53 Roger Wells napsal(a):
> > > Just a couple of smallish things after upgrading (via dnf) from F23 to
> > > F24 a couple of months ago:
> > >
> > >
> > > 2. fingerpr
- Original Message -
> I'm seeing 24 bugs at:
> https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/fprintd/bugs/all
> including a potential security one: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/1333882
Fedora's bugzilla is a garbage fire as far as I'm concerned. I already made
that abundantly clear I think.
>
On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 11:32:26AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> On 09/12/2016 08:55 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> >On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 07:48:31PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> >>On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 09:06:59AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> >>>I had a brief look at the glibc patches
On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 07:30:07AM -0400, Bastien Nocera wrote:
>
>
> - Original Message -
> > I'm seeing 24 bugs at:
> > https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/fprintd/bugs/all
> > including a potential security one: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/1333882
>
> Fedora's bugzilla is a garbag
Hi,
To be clear, the problem is that a small handful of package maintainers
(including Bastien) are collectively "responsible" for all of the GNOME
and freedesktop components in Fedora (including fprintd), and it's
simply not reasonable to expect them to read all the bugs that are
assigned to them
On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 10:00:32AM -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> Hi,
>
> To be clear, the problem is that a small handful of package maintainers
> (including Bastien) are collectively "responsible" for all of the GNOME
> and freedesktop components in Fedora (including fprintd), and it's
> simp
On 09/13/2016 11:09 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 10:00:32AM -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> To be clear, the problem is that a small handful of package maintainers
>> (including Bastien) are collectively "responsible" for all of the GNOME
>> and freedesktop c
On 09/13/2016 05:09 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
This is a truly awful experiance from POV of a Fedora user filing bugs :-(
We've set a silent trap for them with no warning of the fact that their
bug reports are going to be ignored until Fedora EOL procedure closes
them :-(
One lesson I have
On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Daniel P. Berrange
wrote:
>
> eg, update the component description to tell user to file in GNOME
> bugzilla instead, and have a bot that adds a comment to any new bugs
> that are still filed, closing them WONTFIX and asking the user to
> re-open against upstream G
On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 11:43 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 09/13/2016 05:09 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>
>> This is a truly awful experiance from POV of a Fedora user filing bugs :-(
>> We've set a silent trap for them with no warning of the fact that their
>> bug reports are going to be igno
- Original Message -
> On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 07:30:07AM -0400, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> >
> >
> > - Original Message -
> > > I'm seeing 24 bugs at:
> > > https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/fprintd/bugs/all
> > > including a potential security one: https://bugzilla.redhat.c
- Original Message -
> This is a truly awful experiance from POV of a Fedora user filing bugs :-(
> We've set a silent trap for them with no warning of the fact that their
> bug reports are going to be ignored until Fedora EOL procedure closes
> them :-(
>
> Even if we can't enhance Red
On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 12:24:33PM -0400, Bastien Nocera wrote:
>
>
> - Original Message -
> > On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 07:30:07AM -0400, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > - Original Message -
> > > > I'm seeing 24 bugs at:
> > > > https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/fp
- Original Message -
> Hi,
>
> To be clear, the problem is that a small handful of package maintainers
> (including Bastien) are collectively "responsible" for all of the GNOME
> and freedesktop components in Fedora (including fprintd), and it's
> simply not reasonable to expect them to
For which one of the problems you listed? It would certainly have been
interesting to list those in your original mail.
- Original Message -
> On 09/13/2016 11:09 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 10:00:32AM -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> To be
- Original Message -
>
>
> - Original Message -
> > I'm seeing 24 bugs at:
> > https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/fprintd/bugs/all
> > including a potential security one: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/1333882
>
> Fedora's bugzilla is a garbage fire as far as I'm concerned. I
- Original Message -
> Could you elaborate a little on your reasoning/thoughts please?
>
> I am quite interesting to understand your point of view.
> From where I stand, we are offering a way for someone to unlock someone's
> else
> computer without a password.
> I understand the proced
On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 12:32:20PM -0400, Bastien Nocera wrote:
>
>
> - Original Message -
>
> > This is a truly awful experiance from POV of a Fedora user filing bugs :-(
> > We've set a silent trap for them with no warning of the fact that their
> > bug reports are going to be ignored
On Tue, 13 Sep 2016, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
This is a truly awful experiance from POV of a Fedora user filing bugs :-(
We've set a silent trap for them with no warning of the fact that their
bug reports are going to be ignored until Fedora EOL procedure closes
them :-(
One lesson I have lea
On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Michael Catanzaro
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> To be clear, the problem is that a small handful of package maintainers
> (including Bastien) are collectively "responsible" for all of the GNOME
> and freedesktop components in Fedora (including fprintd), and it's
> simply not r
On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 01:19:04PM -0400, Paul Wouters wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Sep 2016, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>
> > > This is a truly awful experiance from POV of a Fedora user filing bugs
> > > :-(
> > > We've set a silent trap for them with no warning of the fact that their
> > > bug reports ar
On Tue, 2016-09-13 at 18:49 +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> If ABRT is a firehose of bugs flying to RH's bugzilla, would the
> situation be
> really better if the reports were sent to gnome's BZ?
Yes, it would. Keep in mind that upstream maintainers are responsible
for far fewer packages than F
On 09/13/2016 12:31 PM, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> For which one of the problems you listed? It would certainly have been
> interesting to list those in your original mail.
It was the first problem, the one with deja-dup
>
> - Original Message -
>> On 09/13/2016 11:09 AM, Daniel P. Berrange
On 09/10/2016 07:19 AM, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> We are in the process of importing aarch64 to the primary koji instance as
> part of https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/
> RedefiningSecondaryArchitectures The import and enablement of aarch64 is for
> rawhide only, we expec
>> We are in the process of importing aarch64 to the primary koji instance as
>> part of https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/
>> RedefiningSecondaryArchitectures The import and enablement of aarch64 is for
>> rawhide only, we expect to add power big and little endiian sometime before
>>
Hi there,
On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 11:07:06AM +, opensou...@till.name wrote:
> The following packages require above mentioned packages:
> Depending on: freeradius-client (11), status change: 2016-04-29 (18 weeks ago)
> asterisk (maintained by: jsmith, gtjoseph, itamarjp, lbazan,
> leifm
On Tue, 2016-09-13 at 12:52 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 11:32:26AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> >
> > On 09/12/2016 08:55 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 07:48:31PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, S
Hi all,
On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 8:45 PM, Till Maas wrote:
>> Depending on: freeradius-client (11), status change: 2016-04-29 (18 weeks
>> ago)
>> asterisk (maintained by: jsmith, gtjoseph, itamarjp, lbazan,
>> leifmadsen, russellb)
>> asterisk-13.9.1-1.fc25.1.src requires fr
On Tue, 2016-09-13 at 14:33 -0400, Roger Wells wrote:
> It was the first problem, the one with deja-dup
Where did you report the bug? The upstream bug tracker is [1]. If you
reported it somewhere else, of course you'd be told it's the wrong
place
Unfortunately, I think deja-dup is unmaintaine
Missing expected images:
Cloud_base raw-xz i386
Atomic raw-xz x86_64
Failed openQA tests: 8/92 (x86_64), 3/17 (i386), 1/2 (arm)
New failures (same test did not fail in Rawhide-20160912.n.0):
ID: 34125 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso install_default_upload
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproje
On 13 September 2016 at 16:03, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-09-13 at 14:33 -0400, Roger Wells wrote:
>> It was the first problem, the one with deja-dup
>
> Where did you report the bug? The upstream bug tracker is [1]. If you
> reported it somewhere else, of course you'd be told it's th
On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 2:24 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> On 13 September 2016 at 16:03, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
>> On Tue, 2016-09-13 at 14:33 -0400, Roger Wells wrote:
>>> It was the first problem, the one with deja-dup
>>
>> Where did you report the bug? The upstream bug tracker is [1].
On 09/13/2016 04:03 PM, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-09-13 at 14:33 -0400, Roger Wells wrote:
>> It was the first problem, the one with deja-dup
>
> Where did you report the bug? The upstream bug tracker is [1]. If you
> reported it somewhere else, of course you'd be told it's the wrong
On Tue, 2016-09-13 at 20:13 +, Fedora compose checker wrote:
> Missing expected images:
>
>
> Cloud_base raw-xz i386
> Atomic raw-xz x86_64
>
>
> Failed openQA tests: 8/92 (x86_64), 3/17 (i386), 1/2 (arm)
>
>
> New failures (same test did not fail in Rawhide-20160912.n.0):
>
>
> ID: 341
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 15:01:29 +0200
Milan Crha wrote:
> On Mon, 2016-09-12 at 14:26 +0200, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
> > > Javier Peña : 1
> > Please fix unicode issues ;)
>
> Hi,
> it's because the related part claims:
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> while using UTF-8 in
On Tue, 13 Sep 2016 11:38:24 +0200
Igor Gnatenko wrote:
> I'm going to do mass bug filling for those packages which are still
> not fixed. Are there some scripts to do that or I have to write my
> own?
>
> Unfixed packages:
> https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/broken-obsoletes/latest/broken
Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> Everyone having `watchbugzilla` on a package is automatically cc'ed
> to the bug reports.
> In the early days of pkgdb2, I had it be: everyone with
> `watchbugzilla` or `commit` but I was asked to remove that last
> condition [1].
Would it be possible to show that infor
On Tue, 13 Sep 2016 15:03:28 -0500
Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-09-13 at 14:33 -0400, Roger Wells wrote:
> > It was the first problem, the one with deja-dup
>
> Where did you report the bug? The upstream bug tracker is [1]. If you
> reported it somewhere else, of course you'd be tol
On Tue, 2016-09-13 at 17:17 -0400, Roger Wells wrote:
>
> if it is unmaintained why does its GUI operation change between Fedora
> versions?
I'm not sure it really is unmaintained. There was 34.2 release this
April, by the looks of things.
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID
On Tue, 2016-09-13 at 14:46 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> I'm not sure it really is unmaintained. There was 34.2 release this
> April, by the looks of things.
>
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=10035
Aaaand I do see it in Software now. At long last!
--
devel mailing
On 09/12/2016 01:21 PM, Zdenek Kabelac wrote:
> Dne 12.9.2016 v 17:48 Basil Mohamed Gohar napsal(a):
>> On 09/11/2016 02:19 PM, stan wrote:
>>> On Sat, 10 Sep 2016 22:04:22 -0400
>>> Basil Mohamed Gohar wrote:
>>>
>>>
> On 09/08/2016 03:44 AM, Basil Mohamed Gohar wrote:
>> Even since I ins
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20160913.n.1
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20160913.n.2
= SUMMARY =
Added images:4
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 0
Dropped packages:32
Upgraded packages: 40
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 0.00 B
Size of dropped packages:66.00
Missing expected images:
Cloud_base raw-xz i386
Atomic raw-xz x86_64
Failed openQA tests: 10/92 (x86_64), 4/17 (i386), 1/2 (arm)
New failures (same test did not fail in Rawhide-20160913.n.1):
ID: 34248 Test: x86_64 Workstation-boot-iso install_default
URL: https
On Wed, 2016-09-14 at 03:37 +, Fedora compose checker wrote:
> Missing expected images:
>
>
> Cloud_base raw-xz i386
> Atomic raw-xz x86_64
>
>
> Failed openQA tests: 10/92 (x86_64), 4/17 (i386), 1/2 (arm)
>
>
> New failures (same test did not fail in
Missing expected images:
Cloud_base raw-xz i386
Atomic raw-xz x86_64
Failed openQA tests: 10/92 (x86_64), 4/17 (i386), 1/2 (arm)
New failures (same test did not fail in Rawhide-20160913.n.1):
ID: 34248 Test: x86_64 Workstation-boot-iso install_default
URL: https
Missing expected images:
Cloud_base raw-xz i386
Atomic raw-xz x86_64
Failed openQA tests: 10/92 (x86_64), 4/17 (i386), 1/2 (arm)
New failures (same test did not fail in Rawhide-20160913.n.1):
ID: 34248 Test: x86_64 Workstation-boot-iso install_default
URL: https
Missing expected images:
Cloud_base raw-xz i386
Atomic raw-xz x86_64
Failed openQA tests: 10/92 (x86_64), 4/17 (i386), 1/2 (arm)
New failures (same test did not fail in Rawhide-20160913.n.1):
ID: 34248 Test: x86_64 Workstation-boot-iso install_default
URL: https
On Mon, 2016-09-05 at 08:36 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> > I propose to carry out a mass bug filing with the bug title:
> "Remove
> > webkitgtk/webkitgtk3 dependency" (depending on which package is
> > dependend on) and following text:
I've started filing bugs and will continue throughout the
On Mon, 2016-09-12 at 10:08 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Mon, 2016-09-12 at 00:39 +, Fedora compose checker wrote:
> Missing expected images:
>
>
> Cloud_base raw-xz i386
> Atomic raw-xz x86_64
>
>
> Failed openQA tests: 12/92 (x86_64), 2/17 (i386), 1/2 (arm)
>
>
>
>
> Sorry, I'm
On Fri, Sep 09, 2016 at 03:53:06PM -0400, Roger Wells wrote:
> Just a couple of smallish things after upgrading (via dnf) from F23 to
> F24 a couple of months ago:
>
> 1. deja-dup gui:
>
> one has to deselect then reselect the Overview option in order
> to be offered the "Backup Now" opti
Missing expected images:
Cloud_base raw-xz i386
Atomic raw-xz x86_64
Failed openQA tests: 10/92 (x86_64), 4/17 (i386), 1/2 (arm)
New failures (same test did not fail in Rawhide-20160913.n.1):
ID: 34248 Test: x86_64 Workstation-boot-iso install_default
URL: https
On Tue, 2016-09-13 at 23:26 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> I've started filing bugs and will continue throughout the week.
>
> Michael
Well nevermind that, I'm (mostly) finished:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1375784
The one thing I did not do was file individual bugs for all o
On Tue, 2016-09-13 at 21:37 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> I'll talk to upstream and see if we can identify the bug and get it
> fixed. I could teach the compose check report sender to keep a record
> of what composes it's sent mails for and refuse to duplicate reports
> without a manual overri
On 09/13/2016 06:32 PM, Bastien Nocera wrote:
>
>
> - Original Message -
>
>
> A couple of things could be done to help with that:
> - Bring back the x-bugzilla .desktop metadata, and have ABRT file upstream
> bugs
Does GNOME Bugzilla support XMLRPC? Is there any testing instance AB
58 matches
Mail list logo
