On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 06:06:46PM +0100, Jan Kurik wrote:
> = Proposed Self Contained Change: Django 2.0 =
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Django20
For curious folks, there is a copr[1] with django 2.0 builds to try out.
I'm going to strip current Django-1.11 builds down to remove the p
Today we are starting the Nomination & Campaign period during which
we accept nominations to the "steering bodies" of the following teams:
* FESCo (Engineering) (5 seats) [1]
* Fedora Council (2 seats) [2]
* Mindshare (2 seats) [3]
This period is open until 2018-Jan-10 at 23:59:59 UTC.
The nomin
On 02/01/18 12:45 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
On Mon, Jan 01, 2018 at 10:13:15PM +, Fedora Rawhide Report wrote:
[python-lmiwbem]
python2-lmiwbem-0.7.2-16.fc28.aarch64 requires boost-python >= 0:1.50.0
Hmm, boost-python was renamed to python2-boost, and then to boost-p
On Wed, Jan 03, 2018 at 11:43:34AM +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 02/01/18 12:45 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> >On Mon, Jan 01, 2018 at 10:13:15PM +, Fedora Rawhide Report wrote:
> >>[python-lmiwbem]
> >>python2-lmiwbem-0.7.2-16.fc28.aarch64 requires boost-python >= 0:1.50
On 03/01/18 12:55 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
On Wed, Jan 03, 2018 at 11:43:34AM +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 02/01/18 12:45 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
>On Mon, Jan 01, 2018 at 10:13:15PM +, Fedora Rawhide Report wrote:
>>[python-lmiwbem]
>>python2-lm
Hi,
I'm trying to follow procedure described on
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mass_package_changes
Description of the current state
===
At the moment more than many spec files have %post/%postu/%postrans
scriptles in which is done updating hicolor theme cache by calling:
gt
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On Wed, 2018-01-03 at 16:53 +0100, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to follow procedure described on
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mass_package_changes
>
> Description of the current state
> ===
>
> At the moment m
- Original Message -
> From: "Tomasz Kłoczko"
> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 3, 2018 4:53:24 PM
> Subject: [Proposal] Mass change: remove executing gtk-update-icon-cache in
> %post/%postu/%postrans to update hicolor
> theme cache
>
> Hi,
Can we remove the gtk-update-icon-cache entries from our packages now,
manually, in advance of the mass update?
On Wednesday, January 3, 2018 11:10 AM, Charalampos Stratakis
wrote:
- Original Message -
> From: "Tomasz Kłoczko"
> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora
On 3 January 2018 at 17:09, Igor Gnatenko
wrote:
[..]
> First thing you should do is to open a ticket for FPC[0] in order to fix
> guidelines.
>
> Once it is approved by FPC, I can help you dealing with this as a proven
> packager since it is trivial enough.
Done https://pagure.io/packaging-commi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On Wed, 2018-01-03 at 16:30 +, Philip Kovacs wrote:
> Can we remove the gtk-update-icon-cache entries from our packages now,
> manually, in advance of the mass update?
Before FPC approves that it's really not needed, strictly speaking is viol
On 3 January 2018 at 17:09, Charalampos Stratakis wrote:
[..]
> You might want to take a look at https://pagure.io/python-fixrequires which
> is from a python-SIG member, and modify it for your usecase.
>
> It basically forks a repo, makes the changes to the SPEC, pushes it to your
> fork and cr
On 3 January 2018 at 17:41, Igor Gnatenko
wrote:
[..]
>> Can we remove the gtk-update-icon-cache entries from our packages now,
>> manually, in advance of the mass update?
>
> Before FPC approves that it's really not needed, strictly speaking is
> violation
> of packaging guidelines...
Just adde
On Wed, Jan 3, 2018 at 11:42 AM, Tomasz Kłoczko
wrote:
> On 3 January 2018 at 17:09, Charalampos Stratakis wrote:
> [..]
>> You might want to take a look at https://pagure.io/python-fixrequires which
>> is from a python-SIG member, and modify it for your usecase.
>>
>> It basically forks a repo,
Tomasz Kłoczko | Tel: 0774 1209067 | LinkedIn: http://lnkd.in/FXPWxH
On 3 January 2018 at 18:08, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote:
[..]
> So IMO Fedora documentation should be modified more in this direction
> and those +1300 spec files about hicolor theme icons cache update it
> is only ATM biggest part of
On Wed, Jan 03, 2018 at 05:33:38PM +0100, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote:
> On 3 January 2018 at 17:09, Igor Gnatenko
> wrote:
> [..]
> > First thing you should do is to open a ticket for FPC[0] in order to fix
> > guidelines.
> >
> > Once it is approved by FPC, I can help you dealing with this as a proven
On 3 January 2018 at 18:08, Neal Gompa wrote:
[..]
>> Many years ago when I've been working on PLD we wrote such spec
>> indentation tool using few KB awk script. using this script was
>> possible to keep the same style across all spec files with:
>> - put in exact order spec fields in spec preamb
On 3 January 2018 at 18:16, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
[..]
>> Done https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/736
>
> Once the guidelines are removed, I think the optimum way is to
> a) generate patches for all 1300 packages
> b) post them publicly
> c) allow the public-at-large and a fe
Hi
eigen2 has long since been EOL, was actually already retired once in
Fedora, but brought back alive to keep avogadro building (which didn't
build against eigen3 >= 3.3). Avogadro has since received proper
upstream eigen3 support, and the Fedora package has switched to using
eigen3. There a
On 03.01.2018 18:59, Sandro Mani wrote:
Hi
eigen2 has long since been EOL, was actually already retired once in
Fedora, but brought back alive to keep avogadro building (which didn't
build against eigen3 >= 3.3). Avogadro has since received proper
upstream eigen3 support, and the Fedora pac
Hi folks,
I'm a Red Hat employee since 2014 and have been a long-time user of Fedora.
On the job I work on mostly subscription-manager (
https://github.com/candlepin/subscription-manager ) and also candlepin (
https://github.com/candlepin/candlepin ). I dabble in various other tiny
side-projects (
Hi all-
I know this has come up before, though I apologize that I couldn't find
the info, but what is preventing Fedora from including
"libblocksruntime" as an available RPM? Debian provides it:
https://packages.debian.org/source/jessie/libblocksruntime
and it's a requirement for compiling A
Announcing the creation of a new nightly release validation test event
for Fedora 28 Rawhide 20180103.n.0. Please help run some tests for this
nightly compose if you have time. For more information on nightly
release validation testing, see:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki
Missing expected images:
Server dvd i386
Workstation live i386
Server boot i386
Kde live i386
Failed openQA tests: 97/128 (x86_64), 1/2 (arm)
New failures (same test did not fail in Rawhide-20180102.n.0):
ID: 183659 Test: x86_64 Server-boot-iso install_default@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedo
On Wed, 2018-01-03 at 17:42 +0100, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote:
> On 3 January 2018 at 17:09, Charalampos Stratakis wrote:
> [..]
> > You might want to take a look at https://pagure.io/python-fixrequires which
> > is from a python-SIG member, and modify it for your usecase.
> >
> > It basically forks a
Hi folks!
So you might have read some stories today about an issue that's being
described as a design flaw in some CPUs which makes it possible for
unprivileged users on an affected system to read from privileged memory
locations.
It seems like there are some complex questions still being figured
On Wed, 2018-01-03 at 15:02 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> Hi folks!
>
> So you might have read some stories today about an issue that's being
> described as a design flaw in some CPUs which makes it possible for
> unprivileged users on an affected system to read from privileged memory
> location
On Wed, 2018-01-03 at 20:43 +, Fedora compose checker wrote:
> Missing expected images:
>
> Server dvd i386
> Workstation live i386
> Server boot i386
> Kde live i386
These are due to:
https://github.com/rhinstaller/lorax/pull/299
Once a lorax package build with that fix shows up in Rawhide
On Wed, 2018-01-03 at 15:02 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> Hi folks!
>
> So you might have read some stories today about an issue that's being
> described as a design flaw in some CPUs which makes it possible for
> unprivileged users on an affected system to read from privileged memory
> location
On Wed, 03 Jan 2018 16:39:34 -0800
Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2018-01-03 at 15:02 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > Hi folks!
> >
> > So you might have read some stories today about an issue that's
> > being described as a design flaw in some CPUs which makes it
> > possible for unprivileg
On Wed, 03 Jan 2018 15:02:11 -0800
Adam Williamson wrote:
> * We know that the fix can lead to reduced performance in some cases
> (this affects synthetic benchmarks rather more than real-world
> performance). The kernel team thinks the fix is sufficiently important
> that it should go out despit
Any word on the performance hit before you push to stable? Is it discernible?
On Wednesday, January 3, 2018 8:15 PM, stan
wrote:
On Wed, 03 Jan 2018 15:02:11 -0800
Adam Williamson wrote:
> * We know that the fix can lead to reduced performance in some cases
> (this affects synthetic
On Wed, 2018-01-03 at 18:13 -0700, stan wrote:
> On Wed, 03 Jan 2018 15:02:11 -0800
> Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> > * We know that the fix can lead to reduced performance in some cases
> > (this affects synthetic benchmarks rather more than real-world
> > performance). The kernel team thinks the f
On Thu, 2018-01-04 at 01:35 +, Philip Kovacs wrote:
> Any word on the performance hit before you push to stable? Is it
> discernible?
So far as I've read, the general consensus is that you're probably not
going to notice it in most usage. Some specific synthetic benchmarks
are showing impac
On Wed, 2018-01-03 at 17:48 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> This is certainly not correct. Both the Google researchers and Red
> Hat's security team have stated that many other CPUs and CPU families
> are affected. ARM has already released a statement acknowledging that
> several of their CPUs,
On Wed, Jan 03, 2018 at 06:06:11PM -0700, stan wrote:
> It turns out that AMD processors are not affected by this problem.
This is not completely clear. AMD processors seem to be not affected by
at least some forms of the "Meltdown" variant of the problem; I don't
think we can confidently state an
On 01/03/2018 08:24 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Wed, Jan 03, 2018 at 06:06:11PM -0700, stan wrote:
It turns out that AMD processors are not affected by this problem.
This is not completely clear. AMD processors seem to be not affected by
at least some forms of the "Meltdown" variant of the pr
On Wed, 2018-01-03 at 21:49 -0700, Brendan Conoboy wrote:
> This is probably where the "AMD is safe" rumor started, but that is
> only 1/3, maybe 2/3. Now that the context is public let's be clear:
> even AMD processors are vulnerable without the patched kernel Adam has
> asked for help testing
On Wed, 2018-01-03 at 22:14 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2018-01-03 at 21:49 -0700, Brendan Conoboy wrote:
> > This is probably where the "AMD is safe" rumor started, but that is
> > only 1/3, maybe 2/3. Now that the context is public let's be clear:
> > even AMD processors are vulner
Missing expected images:
Server dvd i386
Workstation live i386
Server boot i386
Kde live i386
Failed openQA tests: 15/128 (x86_64), 1/2 (arm)
Old failures (same test failed in Rawhide-20180102.n.0):
ID: 183999 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_role_deploy_domain_controller
URL: https://op
40 matches
Mail list logo
