On 9 August 2017 at 03:39, Ralph Bean wrote:
> ## Solution: "Input" Modulemd Syntax Changes
>
> We’re going to extend the modulemd syntax to allow specifying multiple
> dependencies in an "input" modulemd (the one that packagers modify). When
> submitted to the build system, the module-build-serv
Due to the sheer number of packages I have commit rights for (the whole
inherited "gnome-sig" package list, https://src.fedoraproject.org/ shows 280
packages), I'll be marking all mails from the Fedora section of the Bugzilla as
read.
The infrastructure needs to be fixed instead of me doing bus
Dne 24.8.2017 v 16:46 Dridi Boukelmoune napsal(a):
Hello,
For some reason I fail to understand, a non-devel package is
conflicting with a devel package :-/
According to dnf it's the only explicit conflict for the package:
$ dnf repoquery --conflicts firefox-55.0.2-2.fc26.x86_64
pkgco
On 08/24/2017 04:46 PM, Dridi Boukelmoune wrote:
Hello,
For some reason I fail to understand, a non-devel package is
conflicting with a devel package :-/
According to dnf it's the only explicit conflict for the package:
$ dnf repoquery --conflicts firefox-55.0.2-2.fc26.x86_64
pkgconf
On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 07:43:21PM +1000, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> As a concrete example, the upstream Python 3.7 alpha & beta cycle will
> be running in parallel with the F28 development cycle. It would be
> beneficial to be able to create the corresponding module stream once
> the first alpha releas
On 30/08/17 00:50, mcatanz...@gnome.org wrote:
Something changed yesterday and now the entire GNOME packager group is
being automatically CCed to all GNOME-related bugs in Red Hat Bugzilla.
There's no way to opt-out in Bugzilla preferences, at least not that I
have found.
What seems to have
Hello,
On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 12:33 PM, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> Because there are several ways how to resolve the dependency and DNF chose
> from them one which is confusing for humans:
> See
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1485881
> Already
Non-optimal resolution is one proble
Sorry for any extra emails people are getting... many of us are at flock
right now, but this wasn't intended, so something must have broken down.
We will investigate as soon as we can.
kevin
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
de
Hello Petr,
On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 1:35 PM, Petr Stodulka wrote:
>
>
> On 24.8.2017 08:04, Pavel Raiskup wrote:
> > On Wednesday, August 23, 2017 1:46:46 PM CEST Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> >> Do you use Copr for building packages for nightlies? For building
> packages
> >> before pull request is m
Hello Martin,
On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 2:02 PM, Martin Sehnoutka
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm using Copr for build on commit for dnssec-trigger project:
> https://github.com/InfrastructureServices/dnssec-trigger-fedora
> It's using tito.
>
> But I'm looking for a different way of doing this. Especially w
On 08/30/2017 09:47 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> Sorry for any extra emails people are getting... many of us are at flock
> right now, but this wasn't intended, so something must have broken down.
> We will investigate as soon as we can.
I have filed:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/631
Found it. The fix needs to land in pagure itself. See the infra ticket for
more details.
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/6315
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedor
Thanks for the speedy response!
Michael
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Hi,
it seems the upgrade path to Fedora 27 via dnf system-upgrade is
currently broken. Everytime I try to upgrade I get the following
errors:
> Problem 1: package grub2-1:2.02-0.40.fc26.x86_64 requires grub2-
> tools = 1:2.02-0.40.fc26, but none of the providers can be installed
> - grub2-tools
:)
Pierre was able to hotfix pagure prod with the watchers fix.
I confirmed that the sync script worked correctly on the nodejs-accepts package
- it set the default cc list to the nodejs sig mailing list stored in FAS.
I started a full run to reset all projects, but it takes quite a while to
c
2017-08-30 19:01 GMT+02:00 Heiko Adams :
> Hi,
> it seems the upgrade path to Fedora 27 via dnf system-upgrade is
> currently broken. Everytime I try to upgrade I get the following
> errors:
There are lot of different errors, but for what rpmfusion is
concerned, you should probably manually upgrade
On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 07:01:18PM +0200, Heiko Adams wrote:
> it seems the upgrade path to Fedora 27 via dnf system-upgrade is
> currently broken. Everytime I try to upgrade I get the following
> errors:
> > Problem 1: package grub2-1:2.02-0.40.fc26.x86_64 requires grub2-
> > tools = 1:2.02-0.40.
I had played hardly for about 48 hours until I run from another terminal
(Tilix) the following command, as root, of course: 'dnf upgrade
repository-packages --releasever=27' - just this. The difference between GNOME
Terminal 3.24.3 and Tilix is that Tilix doesn't stop on every
install/upgrade/e
On Tue, 29 Aug 2017 14:51:49 +0100
"Richard W.M. Jones" wrote:
> OCaml 4.05 was added to Fedora 27+ recently. Unfortunately, on
> aarch64 only, it interacts badly with a change made in binutils 2.29
> which tightens up the rules on relocations for PC-relative addresses.
> More details:
>
> ht
On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 2:57 PM, Dan Horák wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Aug 2017 14:51:49 +0100
> "Richard W.M. Jones" wrote:
>
>> (1) Continue having broken dependencies for the affected packages on
>> aarch64 for a bit and see if upstream come up with anything.
>
> I would lean to that "solution"
Me, t
Quack,
I'm a duck from DuckLand, and during my stay on shadow Earth I found fun
do do some packaging. I've been a Debian developer since 2005 but I also
use CentOS and Fedora so why not contribute here too.
I've been working for a long time around Free softwares and I'm now
working at Red Hat in
On Wednesday, August 30, 2017 5:18:39 PM CEST Michal Novotny wrote:
> We are considering the options here and so far the most convenient method (at
> least from the implementation point of view) seems to be to automatically call
> `make srpm` command in the source git repo if user selects `make srp
22 matches
Mail list logo
