On 06/13/2017 12:49 AM, Tom Stellard wrote:
> No plans to do this for gcc, because gcc is only compiler not a library,
> like LLVM, though I would like to do this for the clang libraries as well.
GCC potentially has similar issues. However, libstdc++ aims at
backwards compatibility, and the other
Dne 12.6.2017 v 21:01 Ralph Bean napsal(a):
> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 01:09:28PM +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote:
>> Hello , pkgdb also have Monitoring settings, Koschei integration,
>> timeline and Anitya , where do we have this on Pagure over Dist-Git ?
> The Koschei integration is going to move in
Il giorno lun, 12/06/2017 alle 22.38 +, t...@fedoraproject.org ha
scritto:
> In preparation for the Final Freeze on 2017-06-27 Release
> Engineering will retire all packages in Branched with broken
> dependencies and
> all packages depending on these. If you get this e-mail directly this
> affe
On 06/13/2017 12:38 AM, t...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
> thunderbird-enigmail lupinix75 weeks ago
>
Should be fixed now, new build submitted for updates-testing.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
T
2017-06-13 0:38 GMT+02:00 :
> In preparation for the Final Freeze on 2017-06-27 Release
> Engineering will retire all packages in Branched with broken dependencies and
> all packages depending on these. If you get this e-mail directly this affects
> at least one of your packages. Please fix the br
I'm not sure how all those people can be co-maintainers of efl. I'm
not sure how that's meant to be interpreted but given some of the
other responses I think this script as bit rotted some what.
Peter
> Affected (co)maintainers
> alexl: efl
> ankursinha: lldb, efl
> atkac: efl
> bpepple: efl
> b
Il giorno mar, 13/06/2017 alle 11.11 +0100, Peter Robinson ha scritto:
> I'm not sure how all those people can be co-maintainers of efl. I'm
> not sure how that's meant to be interpreted but given some of the
> other responses I think this script as bit rotted some what.
>
> Peter
I think these a
Hi everyone!
The submission deadline for Changes of Fedora 27 [1], requiring mass
rebuild, takes effect in one week on June 20th. All the Changes
requiring mass rebuild sent for review after this deadline are going
to be moved to Fedora 28 release.
The mass rebuild it self is planned on July 12th.
IMHO it is exactly as Björn replied to you. Between 2010 and 2014 I was working
in aerospace where the exact time of an event is of the highest importance. In
this field there is deep understanding (based on several
hundreds-millions-dollars screwups) how much compliance to standards is
importa
Thanks, Stephen, I will update the "Benefit to Fedora" section.
> It does not inspire confidence that the person(s) proposing this Change
> understand the potential fallout.
...
> what packages in Fedora parse the rsyslog output and make sure that they are
> capable of handling the change.
Ev
On 06/13/2017 12:47 AM, Josh Stone wrote:
> On 06/12/2017 03:38 PM, t...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
>> lldb airlied, daveisfera, 71 weeks ago
>>jankratochvil, jvcelak,
>>siddhar
On 2017-06-13, Pavel Raiskup wrote:
>> vim-syntastic praiskup 38
>> weeks ago
>
> Please don't remove this set of vim-syntastic* packages, there's
> nothing to do about this. Once we have fixed release engineering
> processes [1] that allow me to ExcludeAr
On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 2:18 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>> When some package will break because someone adjusted format of
>> timestamps, the bug is in that package and not in the rsyslog's format
>
> there is a world outside packages called user scripts
That is true. But here there is simple way t
On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 09:22:57PM -0600, Jerry James wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 7:58 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> wrote:
> > Till, it'd be great if this kind of scary e-mail, affecting quite a
> > lot of packagers, would contain more details, hints, etc. It seems
> > people are confuse
On 06/13/2017 12:38 AM, t...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
In preparation for the Final Freeze on 2017-06-27 Release
Engineering will retire all packages in Branched with broken dependencies and
all packages depending on these. If you get this e-mail directly this affects
at least one of your packag
On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
> i call your infrastructure scattered around the globe the minority of setups
This can be the case for Fedora but it would be not for CentOS and RHEL,
where this change should head in too.
> "there is a simple way to change the format if you
Greetings.
Some folks may have noticed that there have been no completed rawhide
composes in a while (13 days as of today).
This has been due to a variety of bugs and issues, along with pungi now
failing composes that don't have all required release blocking items.
Here's a partial list:
2017-0
The Fedora Project is pleased to announce the immediate availability
of Fedora 26 Beta, the next big step on our journey to the exciting
Fedora 26 release in July.
Download the prerelease from our Get Fedora site:
* Get Fedora 26 Beta Workstation
https://getfedora.org/workstation/prerelease/
*
On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 2:11 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> Greetings.
>
> Some folks may have noticed that there have been no completed rawhide
> composes in a while (13 days as of today).
>
> This has been due to a variety of bugs and issues, along with pungi now
> failing composes that don't have all
Tom Stellard wrote:
> I'm working on moving the llvm-devel sub-package from the llvm package to
> a new llvm4.0 package, however, when I upgrade from the llvm sub-package
> to the llvm4.0 sub-package, I am getting file conflicts.
...
> Error: Transaction check error:
> file /usr/include/llvm fro
Rex Dieter wrote:
> Tom Stellard wrote:
>
>> I'm working on moving the llvm-devel sub-package from the llvm package to
>> a new llvm4.0 package, however, when I upgrade from the llvm sub-package
>> to the llvm4.0 sub-package, I am getting file conflicts.
> ...
>> Error: Transaction check error:
>
On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 03:10:58PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
> > This has been due to a variety of bugs and issues, along with pungi now
> > failing composes that don't have all required release blocking items.
>
> Is there a way we can loosen that up for rawhide and have it tightened
> down fo
On Tue, Jun 13, 2017, at 10:43 AM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> I know we're already at new-deliverable explosion, but this seems like
> a place where it'd be nice to have Rawhide and Bikeshed (or whatever we
> want to call "tested and believed-to-be basically functional Rawhide").
> That doesn't see
You keep using that word — where for [sic] — I do not think it means
what you think it means. (As inconceivable as it may seem.)
--
Kaleb
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedor
On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 10:25 AM, Rex Dieter wrote:
> Rex Dieter wrote:
>
>> Tom Stellard wrote:
>>
>>> I'm working on moving the llvm-devel sub-package from the llvm package to
>>> a new llvm4.0 package, however, when I upgrade from the llvm sub-package
>>> to the llvm4.0 sub-package, I am gettin
On 06/12/2017 06:38 PM, t...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
> In preparation for the Final Freeze on 2017-06-27 Release
> Engineering will retire all packages in Branched with broken dependencies and
> all packages depending on these. If you get this e-mail directly this affects
> at least one of your pa
Neal Gompa wrote:
> Implicit replacements are dangerous, and lead to weird special cases.
rpm handles it (rpm --upgrade ...), dnf should do the same. This is not
just a special case, but a very simple one that's always worked. IMHO
-- Rex
___
devel
On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 11:14:37AM +0200, Guido Aulisi wrote:
> This is going to break all audio applications in Fedora, because jack-
> audio-connection-kit is affected, but I cannot see a dependency on efl,
> I've got jack installed with no efl and only libffado, if I try to
> install ffado I ge
On Sat, May 20, 2017 at 11:11:38AM -0400, Randy Barlow wrote:
> On Fri, 2017-05-19 at 11:48 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > Yeah, I just tested and this works:
> >
> > $ sudo dnf upgrade --advisory FEDORA-2017-f590422f5b
>
> Fantastic! I'm bummed that I now need a new idea, but I'm glad this
> e
On Tue, 2017-06-13 at 01:50 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 12:20:36AM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 04:12:04PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2017-06-12 at 16:06 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 2
On 06/13/2017 10:25 AM, Rex Dieter wrote:
> Rex Dieter wrote:
>
>> Tom Stellard wrote:
>>
>>> I'm working on moving the llvm-devel sub-package from the llvm package to
>>> a new llvm4.0 package, however, when I upgrade from the llvm sub-package
>>> to the llvm4.0 sub-package, I am getting file con
On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 02:40:27PM -0400, Tom Stellard wrote:
> >>> Error: Transaction check error:
> >>> file /usr/include/llvm from install of llvm-devel-4.0.0-13.fc27.x86_64
> >>> conflicts with file from package llvm-devel-4.0.0-4.fc27.x86_64 file
> >>> /usr/include/llvm-c from install of
Il giorno mar, 13/06/2017 alle 19.12 +0200, Till Maas ha scritto:
> On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 11:14:37AM +0200, Guido Aulisi wrote:
>
> > This is going to break all audio applications in Fedora, because
> > jack-
> > audio-connection-kit is affected, but I cannot see a dependency on
> > efl,
> > I'v
On 06/13/2017 02:51 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 02:40:27PM -0400, Tom Stellard wrote:
> Error: Transaction check error:
> file /usr/include/llvm from install of llvm-devel-4.0.0-13.fc27.x86_64
> conflicts with file from package llvm-devel-4.0.0-4.fc27.x86_64
Guido Aulisi wrote:
> So a dependency on a subpackage is affecting the entire package,
> is this true?
Yes
-- Rex
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
On 06/13/2017 02:51 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 02:40:27PM -0400, Tom Stellard wrote:
> Error: Transaction check error:
> file /usr/include/llvm from install of llvm-devel-4.0.0-13.fc27.x86_64
> conflicts with file from package llvm-devel-4.0.0-4.fc27.x86_64
On 06/13/2017 08:10 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 2:11 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>> Greetings.
>>
>> Some folks may have noticed that there have been no completed rawhide
>> composes in a while (13 days as of today).
>>
>> This has been due to a variety of bugs and issues, along
On 06/13/2017 08:43 AM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 03:10:58PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
>>> This has been due to a variety of bugs and issues, along with pungi now
>>> failing composes that don't have all required release blocking items.
>>
>> Is there a way we can loosen th
On 13 June 2017 at 17:28, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On 06/13/2017 08:10 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 2:11 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>>> Greetings.
>>>
>>> Some folks may have noticed that there have been no completed rawhide
>>> composes in a while (13 days as of today).
>>>
>>> T
On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 03:47:48PM -0700, Josh Stone wrote:
> On 06/12/2017 03:38 PM, t...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
> > lldb airlied, daveisfera, 71 weeks ago
> >jankratochvil, jvcelak,
> >
On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 11:52:05AM +1000, Peter Hutterer wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 03:47:48PM -0700, Josh Stone wrote:
> > On 06/12/2017 03:38 PM, t...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
> > > lldb airlied, daveisfera, 71 weeks
> > > ago
> > >
Greetings.
Some folks may have noticed that there have been no completed rawhide
composes in a while (13 days as of today).
This has been due to a variety of bugs and issues, along with pungi now
failing composes that don't have all required release blocking items
On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 04:12:04PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> Oh, I see the problem now, though it doesn't explain the '73 weeks
> ago':
The 73 weeks relates to the state in pkgdb and I should have removed it
from the report. It is not useful here. :-/
>
> [os-autoinst]
> os-autoin
On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 03:31:37PM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > I know we're already at new-deliverable explosion, but this seems like
> > a place where it'd be nice to have Rawhide and Bikeshed (or whatever we
> > want to call "tested and believed-to-be basically functional Rawhide").
> (Side not
Hello,
Is there a reason for delaying the update for mesa-17.1.2 to F26?
We're getting buildroot failures for some F26 packages that depend on mesa (llvm was
updated).
Thanks,
Michael
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubs
On 06/13/2017 06:32 PM, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
Hello,
Is there a reason for delaying the update for mesa-17.1.2 to F26?
We're getting buildroot failures for some F26 packages that depend on
mesa (llvm was updated).
Thanks,
Michael
something seems to be messed up. llvm 4.0 should be in
On Fri, 2017-05-19 at 16:04 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 11:48:37AM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 11:44:57AM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > > See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1234930
> > >
> > > It's my understandin
47 matches
Mail list logo
