Font rendering and blurry fonts

Hi, something changed between F24 and F26 (even F25) regarding font rendering and I can't figure out what it is. On F24, fonts were crispy clear with full hinting and antialiasing. On F25+, fonts are quite blurry even with the same hinting and antialiasing settings. I'm using XFCE and didn't chang

Re: Font rendering and blurry fonts

Hi Jan, Jan Synacek wrote: something changed between F24 and F26 (even F25) regarding font rendering and I can't figure out what it is. On F24, fonts were crispy clear with full hinting and antialiasing. On F25+, fonts are quite blurry even with the same hinting and antialiasing settings. I'm

Re: Font rendering and blurry fonts

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 09:25:41AM +0200, Jan Synacek wrote: > Hi, > > something changed between F24 and F26 (even F25) regarding font > rendering and I can't figure out what it is. On F24, fonts were crispy > clear with full hinting and antialiasing. On F25+, fonts are quite > blurry even with th

Re: Mass package change (python2- binary package renaming)

2017-08-10 4:52 GMT+02:00 Scott Talbert : > Where did your list of 'all python packages' come from? I fear that there > are some missing because wxPython should be in there. I also miss pytorctl in the list. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedorap

openjpeg-2.2.0

Hi openjpeg-2.2.0 was just release, carrying a large number of security fixes. I'd also like to update it for F25 and F26, since it is ABI and API compatible with 2.1.x, there is however the problem that openjpeg2 installs its headers under /usr/include/openjpeg-$major.$minor, so this would m

Re: Blocker bug process proposal: waiving late-discovered blockers to next release (round 2)

Thanks Adam for putting this together. I am definitely+1 to extend the Blocker bug process with your proposal. And there is one more topic related to this: how we should deal with 0day bugs found at the last moment before release ? Should not we have a statement for Accepted0Day and AcceptedPrevio

Re: Mass package change (python2- binary package renaming)

On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 10:17:34PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 04:08:35PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 04:48:42PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > > On Tue, Aug 08, 2017 at 10:14:26PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-S

Re: Is it possible atlas is linked wrongly by new binutils?

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 11:21:30AM +0200, Jakub Martisko wrote: > > > On 9.8.2017 11:37, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > > > ocaml-gsl (OCaml bindings for GNU Scientific Library) currently > > fails to link to atlas: > > > > + /usr/bin/ocamlfind ocamlopt -g -I lib -linkpkg -package bigarray -I li

Re: Font rendering and blurry fonts

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 10:20 AM, Tomasz Torcz wrote: > On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 09:25:41AM +0200, Jan Synacek wrote: >> Hi, >> >> something changed between F24 and F26 (even F25) regarding font >> rendering and I can't figure out what it is. On F24, fonts were crispy >> clear with full hinting and

Re: Is it possible atlas is linked wrongly by new binutils?

Never mind. Something in the atlas build segfaults when building on ppc64le: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=21145734 This is a mess :-( Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones Read my programming and virtualization blog: http

Re: Is it possible atlas is linked wrongly by new binutils?

Well, yes, the current version is a bit messy, I am currently working on rebase to 3.10.3, where the builds seem to be more stable but I wanted to test it a bit more before publishing it tbh. :-/ On 10.8.2017 12:29, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > Never mind. Something in the atlas build segfaults wh

git push fails for new packages

$ fedpkg clone nuvola-app-mixcloud; cd nuvola-app-mixcloud $ fedpkg import ~/rpmbuild/SRPMS/nuvola-app-mixcloud-3.2-3.fc26.src.rpm $ git commit -m "Initial import (#1478067)." $[martin@f26 nuvola-app-mixcloud]$ git push -v Pushing to ssh://marti...@pkgs.fedoraproject.org/rpms/nuvola-app-mixcloud F

Re: Mass package change (python2- binary package renaming)

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 10:50:22AM +0200, Juan Orti Alcaine wrote: > 2017-08-10 4:52 GMT+02:00 Scott Talbert : > > Where did your list of 'all python packages' come from? I fear that there > > are some missing because wxPython should be in there. > > I also miss pytorctl in the list. I added it

Re: git push fails for new packages

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 12:42:26PM -, Martin Gansser wrote: > $ fedpkg clone nuvola-app-mixcloud; cd nuvola-app-mixcloud > $ fedpkg import ~/rpmbuild/SRPMS/nuvola-app-mixcloud-3.2-3.fc26.src.rpm > $ git commit -m "Initial import (#1478067)." > > $[martin@f26 nuvola-app-mixcloud]$ git push -v >

Re: git push fails for new packages

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 03:35:13PM +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 12:42:26PM -, Martin Gansser wrote: > > $ fedpkg clone nuvola-app-mixcloud; cd nuvola-app-mixcloud > > $ fedpkg import ~/rpmbuild/SRPMS/nuvola-app-mixcloud-3.2-3.fc26.src.rpm > > $ git commit -m "Initi

Re: openjpeg-2.2.0

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 10:55:07AM +0200, Sandro Mani wrote: > openjpeg-2.2.0 was just release, carrying a large number of security > fixes. I'd also like to update it for F25 and F26, since it is ABI > and API compatible with 2.1.x, there is however the problem that > openjpeg2 installs its header

Re: Font rendering and blurry fonts

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 11:39:30AM +0200, Jan Synacek wrote: > > Bug 1469712 - font antialiasing/hinting is not working on Fedora 26 > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1469712 > Cheers, the solution from #1470509 did the trick. I'm quite puzzled as > to why people prefer looking at

Re: Mass package change (python2- binary package renaming)

On 08/10/2017 04:52 AM, Scott Talbert wrote: On Tue, 8 Aug 2017, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: Hello Fedora Python package maintainers! This is an announcement of a mass package renaming: Python 2 binary packages will be renamed to python2-*. This will happen soon after the F27 branching

Re: openjpeg-2.2.0

Sandro Mani wrote: > Hi > > openjpeg-2.2.0 was just release, carrying a large number of security > fixes. I'd also like to update it for F25 and F26, since it is ABI and > API compatible with 2.1.x, there is however the problem that openjpeg2 > installs its headers under /usr/include/openjpeg-$ma

Re: Font rendering and blurry fonts

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 4:04 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 11:39:30AM +0200, Jan Synacek wrote: >> > Bug 1469712 - font antialiasing/hinting is not working on Fedora 26 >> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1469712 >> Cheers, the solution from #1470509 did the

Re: openjpeg-2.2.0

On 10 August 2017 at 16:24, Rex Dieter wrote: > No objection, it should be fine for any app correctly using pkg-config > and/or cmake Agreed; if an app breaks because it hardcoded the include path then it should just have been using pkg-config. Richard. __

Re: openjpeg-2.2.0

You can check the api compliance with abi-compliance-checker first to be sure... $ abi-compliance-checker -L openjpeg -dump -vnum -dump $ abi-compliance-checker -L openjpeg -dump -vnum -dump $ abi-compliance-checker -L openjpeg -old -new I wrote that mostly from memory so definitely double

Re: openjpeg-2.2.0

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 10:41 AM, Richard Shaw wrote: > You can check the api compliance with abi-compliance-checker first to be > sure... > > $ abi-compliance-checker -L openjpeg -vnum -dump > $ abi-compliance-checker -L openjpeg -vnum -dump > $ abi-compliance-checker -L openjpeg -old -new

Re: git push fails for new packages

ok git push works now, but ... unknown branches. [martin@f26 nuvola-app-mixcloud]$ git push Everything up-to-date [martin@f26 nuvola-app-mixcloud]$ fedpkg build --nowait /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/fedora/client/bodhi.py:48: DeprecationWarning: fedora.client.bodhi has been deprecated. Please

Re: openjpeg-2.2.0

On 10.08.2017 17:42, Richard Shaw wrote: On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 10:41 AM, Richard Shaw > wrote: You can check the api compliance with abi-compliance-checker first to be sure... $ abi-compliance-checker -L openjpeg -vnum -dump $ abi-compli

Re: Mass package change (python2- binary package renaming)

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 03:54:06AM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 10:52:19PM -0400, Scott Talbert wrote: > > Where did your list of 'all python packages' come from? I fear that > > there are some missing because wxPython should be in there. > > > > I'll plan o

mercurial CVEs - plan for f25 and f26 updates

CVE-2017-1000115: Mercurial's symlink auditing was incomplete prior to 4.3, and could be abused to write to files outside the repository. CVE-2017-1000116: Mercurial was not sanitizing hostnames passed to ssh, allowing shell injection attacks by specifying a hostname starting with -oProxyComma

Re: Please fix your bugzilla.redhat.com account

Can anybody tell me what this is all about? I'm using my @fedoraproject.org address in Bugzilla, and was previously told that was okay. I don't want to use my forwarding address to authenticate to Bugzilla, because that can change. Yet, I'm getting the following errors now as a result of that. I se

Re: Please fix your bugzilla.redhat.com account

On 08/10/2017 11:34 AM, Christopher wrote: > Can anybody tell me what this is all about? I'm using my @fedoraproject.org > address in Bugzilla, and was previously told that was okay. I don't want to > use my forwarding address to authenticate to Bugzilla, because that can > change. Yet, I'm getting

Re: Please fix your bugzilla.redhat.com account

Am 10.08.2017 um 20:34 schrieb Christopher: Can anybody tell me what this is all about? I'm using my @fedoraproject.org address in Bugzilla, and was previously told that was okay. I don't want to use my forwarding address to authenticate to Bugzilla, because that can

Fwd: Heads-up on rpm 4.14 coming to rawhide, incl. soname bump

Resending to devel@, some mishap in earlier... Forwarded Message Subject: Heads-up on rpm 4.14 coming to rawhide, incl. soname bump Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2017 20:50:30 +0300 From: Panu Matilainen To: devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org, Development discussions related to Fedor

Re: Font rendering and blurry fonts

On 10 August 2017 at 17:36, Jan Synacek wrote: > On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 4:04 PM, Matthew Miller > wrote: >> On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 11:39:30AM +0200, Jan Synacek wrote: >>> > Bug 1469712 - font antialiasing/hinting is not working on Fedora 26 >>> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id

seafile-client fails to build on ARM for f26

Hi, I have a strange build failure my package seafile-client on ARM for f26 (rawhide and f25 are fine). From what I understand, this is a ld issue related to Qt5. However, I am no expert in these sort of things. Can someone help me with this? Build on koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/ta

Re: git push fails for new packages

Hi, "Martin Gansser" writes: > ok git push works now, but ... unknown branches. [...] > Result on koji: > BuildError: package nuvola-app-mixcloud not in list for tag f27-pending I'm seeing a similar error now for uom-se and it's initial build. Cheers, Lukas

librpm.so.7, deltarpm-3.6.{21,22} and building ceph on rawhide

After a successful scratch build[1] on fc27/i686 of ceph-2.1.2-2 to test a fix for a 32-bit issue I immediately fired off a full fedpkg build, which failed thusly [2]: ... DEBUG util.py:439: Error: nothing provides librpm.so.7()(64bit) needed by deltarpm-3.6-22.fc27.x86_64 DEBUG util.py:439

pagure-over-dist-git: traceback in receive-hook when pushing to new repo

I've just pushed an import commit to my first repository that was created with fedrepo_req on pagure, and I got the following traceback from the remote when it obviously failed to run a post-receive hook: remote: Traceback (most recent call last): remote: File "./hooks/post-receive.default", lin

Re: mercurial CVEs - plan for f25 and f26 updates

Neal Becker wrote: CVE-2017-1000116: Mercurial was not sanitizing hostnames passed to ssh, allowing shell injection attacks by specifying a hostname starting with -oProxyCommand. For curious parties, git and subversion are also similarly vulnerable. I have git builds in progress for f25, f2

Re: librpm.so.7, deltarpm-3.6.{21,22} and building ceph on rawhide

On 08/10/2017 02:15 PM, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY wrote: > > After a successful scratch build[1] on fc27/i686 of ceph-2.1.2-2 to test > a fix for a 32-bit issue I immediately fired off a full fedpkg build, > which failed thusly [2]: > > ... > DEBUG util.py:439: Error: nothing provides librpm.so.7()(64bi

Re: pagure-over-dist-git: traceback in receive-hook when pushing to new repo

On 08/10/2017 03:01 PM, Fabio Valentini wrote: > I've just pushed an import commit to my first repository that was created > with fedrepo_req on pagure, and I got the following traceback from the > remote when it obviously failed to run a post-receive hook: > > remote: Traceback (most recent call

Unable to push update

Hi, I have a new build for my package - https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=953883. However, when I try 'fedpkg update' for the new build, command fails with following error: https://gist.github.com/ravindravmw/5bbbedff0785980e5b8e3f93ef2417d6 I have tried it multiple tim

Re: Unable to push update

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 10:19:04PM +, Ravindra Kumar wrote: > Hi, > > > I have a new build for my package - > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=953883. > > > However, when I try 'fedpkg update' for the new build, command fails > with following error: > > https://gist.git

Re: Unable to push update

Oh wait, this is actually a bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1445294 You need to ensure you are updated to bodhi >= 2.6.2 python-fedora >= 0.9.0-3.fc25 Try ‘dnf update’ and then run the update command again. Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://

Re: Unable to push update

> Oh wait, this is actually a bug: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1445294 > You need to ensure you are updated to > bodhi >= 2.6.2 > python-fedora >= 0.9.0-3.fc25 Thanks Rich. Looks like there is no bodhi package, but updating python-fedora package fixed it. Thanks, Ravindra

Re: Unable to push update

I forgot to mention that Bodhi web interface did not offer any suggestions when I typed 'open-vm-tools' package name. This was bit surprising and I could not use Bodhi web interface as a workaround. From: Ravindra Kumar Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2017 3:44 PM To:

Re: Blocker bug process proposal: waiving late-discovered blockers to next release (round 2)

On Thu, 2017-08-10 at 10:59 +0200, Jan Kurik wrote: > Thanks Adam for putting this together. I am definitely+1 to extend the > Blocker bug process with your proposal. > > And there is one more topic related to this: how we should deal with > 0day bugs found at the last moment before release ? Shou

Schedule for Friday's FESCo Meeting (2017-08-11)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FESCo meeting Friday at 16:00UTC in #fedora-meeting onirc.freenode.net. To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto or run: date -d '2017

Re: Fwd: Heads-up on rpm 4.14 coming to rawhide, incl. soname bump

Sadly we ran into a problem... as soon as the new rpm was in the rawhide buildroot and builds were made with it, things started piling up in f27-pending (the tag things land in after build so the autosigner can sign them and move them to f27). It seems old rpm cannot read headers of rpms made

Re: Mass package change (python2- binary package renaming)

On 11 August 2017 at 00:08, Petr Viktorin wrote: > On 08/10/2017 04:52 AM, Scott Talbert wrote: >> I'll plan on fixing wxPython myself, but you may want to look into why it >> wasn't on the list as there may be others. > > Thanks for noticing! > > Unfortunately, I don't know of a good way to autom

Re: "sustmi" GNOME Shell packages should be orphaned -- I'd like to take over

How do we proceed from here? I see the wiki talks about how to voluntarily orphan one's own package, and how to take over a package that has *been* orphaned. But I don't see instructions about how to declare a clearly abandoned package as orphaned. ~ Andrew Toskin FAS: terrycloth > /cc yaderv

Re: "sustmi" GNOME Shell packages should be orphaned -- I'd like to take over

On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 04:29:36AM -, Andrew Toskin wrote: > How do we proceed from here? I see the wiki talks about how to voluntarily > orphan one's own package, and how to take over a package that has *been* > orphaned. But I don't see instructions about how to declare a clearly > abandon

Re: "sustmi" GNOME Shell packages should be orphaned -- I'd like to take over

On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 04:29:36AM -, Andrew Toskin wrote: > How do we proceed from here? I see the wiki talks about how to > voluntarily orphan one's own package, and how to take over a package > that has *been* orphaned. But I don't see instructions about how to > declare a clearly abandoned