On Jan 9, 2018 08:40, "Panu Matilainen" wrote:
Started getting these bogus broken deps emails after merging a request to
depend on gcc conditionally. Is the broken dependencies check done with yum
era repoclosure still, or...?
I am getting 200+ emails everyday with such "broken" deps for all R
Hi Richard,
On Sat, 2018-01-06 at 11:27 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> I noticed as a side effect of compiling GCC for riscv64 that RISC-V's
> GCC doesn't support -fstack-clash-protection. Do you know what is
> involved to add it? From a naive point of view I don't understand
> why this feat
On 2018-01-05, Florian Weimer wrote:
> perl-PDL-2.18.0-4.fc27.src.rpm
[...]
> This is based on relatively current Fedora rawhide/x86_64 and reflects
> which currently uses svc_/clnt_/xdr_ symbols from glibc. It does not
> indicate whether these packages can use libtirpc or have bundled
> rep
Dear all,
The Fedora Infrastructure team has had a jenkins instance running at
jenkins.fedorainfracloud.org for a little while now. This instance was
maintained on a best-effort basis though and we often had outage and issues when
upgrading it.
Originally the jenkins master was running on RHEL usi
On 2018-01-08 17:21, Steve Dickson wrote:
Hello,
Is it a problem for a package to pull from two different
upstream tar balls? Basically have
Source0: http://server.com/package1/package1.tar
Source1: http://server.com/package2/package2.tar
Then I would, by hand, untar Source1 into Source0 direc
- Original Message -
> From: "Florian Weimer"
> To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Sent: Friday, January 5, 2018 10:12:50 PM
> Subject: Re: F28 System Wide Change: Removal of Sun RPC Interfaces From glibc
>
> On 01/05/2018 09:42 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > On Fri, 2018-01-05 at 21:09 +01
Jonny Heggheim wrote:
> We just pused a urgent security update for Electrum for Fedora 27 and
> rawhide, Fedora 26 is still affected.
>
> All versions of Electrum is affected by this bug, Fedora 26 still runs
> an older version because of big changes in Electrum 3.0 and an updated
> version of a d
Dne 8.1.2018 v 18:21 Steve Dickson napsal(a):
> Hello,
>
> Is it a problem for a package to pull from two different
> upstream tar balls? Basically have
>
> Source0: http://server.com/package1/package1.tar
> Source1: http://server.com/package2/package2.tar
>
> Then I would, by hand, untar Sour
https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Changes/SunRPCRemoval&oldid=508864
says:
"Packages which need rpcgen will have to add BuildRequires: libtirpc-devel to
their spec files."
but libtirpc-devel (1.0.2-4.fc28.x86_64) doesn't contain rpcgen.
Rich.
--
Richard Jones, Virtualization Grou
= System Wide Change: Binutils version 2.29.1 =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/BINUTILS2291
Change owner(s):
* Nick Clifton
Rebase the binutils package from version 2.29 to version 2.29.1. This
will bring in the bug-fixes from the 2.29.1 point release, but not add
any new features.
==
= System Wide Change: The GNU C Library version 2.27 =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/GLIBC227
Change owner(s):
* Carlos O'Donell
Switch glibc in Fedora 28 to glibc version 2.27.
== Detailed Description ==
The GNU C Library version 2.27 will be released at the beginning of
February 201
= System Wide Change: GCC8 =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/GCC8
Change owner(s):
* Jakub Jelínek
Switch GCC in Fedora 28 to 8.x.y, rebuild all packages with it, or
optionally rebuild just some packages with it and rebuild all packages
only in Fedora 29.
== Detailed Description ==
GCC
= System Wide Change: Add-On Modularity =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/F28AddonModularity
Change owner(s):
* Stephen Gallagher
* Langdon White
== Detailed Description ==
Beginning in Fedora 28, Fedora will provide a new set of repositories
for software and updates with alternative v
On Mon, Jan 08, 2018 at 12:59:20PM -0500, Martin Langhoff wrote:
> I have two VMs, or OS states I can `rpm -qa` on. Is there a script to
> diff the output of the two listings, and then query the package
> changelogs to generate an overall OS-wide changelog?
>
> Use case: I generated an F26 OVA ima
On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 12:11:36PM +0100, Jan Kurik wrote:
> = System Wide Change: The GNU C Library version 2.27 =
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/GLIBC227
>
> Change owner(s):
> * Carlos O'Donell
>
> Switch glibc in Fedora 28 to glibc version 2.27.
>
>
> == Detailed Description ==
>
On 01/09/2018 11:00 AM, Petr Pisar wrote:
On 2018-01-05, Florian Weimer wrote:
perl-PDL-2.18.0-4.fc27.src.rpm
[...]
This is based on relatively current Fedora rawhide/x86_64 and reflects
which currently uses svc_/clnt_/xdr_ symbols from glibc. It does not
indicate whether these packages c
On 01/09/2018 12:10 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Changes/SunRPCRemoval&oldid=508864
says:
"Packages which need rpcgen will have to add BuildRequires: libtirpc-devel to
their spec files."
but libtirpc-devel (1.0.2-4.fc28.x86_64) doesn't contain r
On 01/09/2018 11:32 AM, Charalampos Stratakis wrote:
Python is currently being addressed upstream [0] and the fix will be backported
soon to fedora's packages.
[0]https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/5137
Has this been tested on OpenSUSE or Gentoo (I think either has already
fully made the
On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 12:28:35PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> On 01/09/2018 12:10 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> >
> >https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Changes/SunRPCRemoval&oldid=508864
> >says:
> >
> > "Packages which need rpcgen will have to add BuildRequires:
> > libtirpc-deve
On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 12:28:35PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> On 01/09/2018 12:10 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> >
> >https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Changes/SunRPCRemoval&oldid=508864
> >says:
> >
> > "Packages which need rpcgen will have to add BuildRequires:
> > libtirpc-deve
On 01/09/2018 12:15 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
This is more of an upstream question, but will this bring along
RISC-V support?
I'm not sure if it will make the cut. There's still some doubt about
the correct system call interface for clone.
We can perhaps make a case for retroactively ad
Changes in the Fedora releng dropped glibc-headers.i686 from the x86_64
compose after the Fedora 26 release. This is not in itself a problem
(glibc-devel.i686 is fine if its dependency is matched by
glibc-headers.x86_64). However, I have received a report that an
installed glibc-headers.i686
Am Dienstag, den 09.01.2018, 13:06 +0100 schrieb Florian Weimer:
> Changes in the Fedora releng dropped glibc-headers.i686 from the
> x86_64
> compose after the Fedora 26 release. This is not in itself a
> problem
> (glibc-devel.i686 is fine if its dependency is matched by
> glibc-headers.x86_6
On Tue, 9 Jan 2018 11:03:28 +0100
Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> The Fedora Infrastructure team has had a jenkins instance running at
> jenkins.fedorainfracloud.org for a little while now. This instance was
> maintained on a best-effort basis though and we often had outage and
> issue
On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 02:29:38PM +0100, Dan Horák wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Jan 2018 11:03:28 +0100
> Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
>
> > Dear all,
> >
> > The Fedora Infrastructure team has had a jenkins instance running at
> > jenkins.fedorainfracloud.org for a little while now. This instance was
> > m
On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 02:17:43AM +, Peter Robinson wrote:
> I thought for some reason that all updates marked as security were
> automatically urgent, maybe I'm misremembering, but if not it might be
> good to do that as a RFE that way all security updates go out non
> batched.
There was som
On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 11:03:28AM +0100, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> On the other side of the fence, with our dear friends from CentOS, is
> a brand new, shiny and well supported Jenkins instance. So we thought
> it may be good to leverage the CentOS infrastructure to alleviate our
> infrastructur
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On Tue, 2018-01-09 at 14:12 +0100, Björn 'besser82' Esser wrote:
> Am Dienstag, den 09.01.2018, 13:06 +0100 schrieb Florian Weimer:
> > Changes in the Fedora releng dropped glibc-headers.i686 from the
> > x86_64
> > compose after the Fedora 26 relea
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On Tue, 2018-01-09 at 13:06 +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> Changes in the Fedora releng dropped glibc-headers.i686 from the x86_64
> compose after the Fedora 26 release. This is not in itself a problem
> (glibc-devel.i686 is fine if its dependency
= System Wide Change: Fedora 28 Boost 1.66 upgrade =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/F28Boost166
Change owner(s):
* Jonathan Wakely
This change brings Boost 1.66.0 to Fedora 28. This will mean F28 ships
with a recent upstream Boost release.
== Detailed Description ==
The aim is to synch
= System Wide Change: IBus Unicode Typing =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/IBus_Unicode_Typing
Change owner(s):
* Takao Fujiwara
IBus core provides an Emoji dialog which users can type emoji
annotations and output the emoji character using IBus (E.g. Typing
"football" shows U+26BD). The
= System Wide Change: OpenLDAP without Non-threaded Libraries =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/OpenLDAPwithoutNonthreadedLibraries
Change owner(s):
* Matus Honek
OpenLDAP will not ship non-threaded versions of its libraries.
Instead, it will link these to their threaded counterparts.
=
= System Wide Change: OpenLDAP defaults to use only Shared System Certificates =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/OpenLDAPdefaultSharedSystemCertificates
Change owner(s):
* Matus Honek
In order to go forward with adoption of SharedSystemCertificates [1]
after this change OpenLDAP clients a
On 01/09/2018 03:01 PM, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
Well, from my user perspective I think they are supported "as long as it
works". The multilib generation is very hacky/tricky.
I would open a ticket for releng to fix such issues.
I don't think there is anything wrong with the composes. It is not
- Original Message -
> From: "Florian Weimer"
> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
> , "Charalampos Stratakis"
>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 9, 2018 12:30:39 PM
> Subject: Re: F28 System Wide Change: Removal of Sun RPC Interfaces From glibc
>
> On 01/09/2018 11:32 AM, Charalam
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On Tue, 2018-01-09 at 15:05 +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> On 01/09/2018 03:01 PM, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
> > Well, from my user perspective I think they are supported "as long as it
> > works". The multilib generation is very hacky/tricky.
> >
> > I
On 01/09/2018 06:10 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Changes/SunRPCRemoval&oldid=508864
> says:
>
> "Packages which need rpcgen will have to add BuildRequires: libtirpc-devel
> to their spec files."
>
> but libtirpc-devel (1.0.2-4.fc28.x86_64) do
On Mon, Jan 8, 2018 at 7:27 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 08, 2018 at 04:49:44PM -0600, Justin Forbes wrote:
>> combination of the 2. Unfortunately both have external requirements.
>> Retpoline requires GCC patches, and microcode updates for some CPUs.
>> IBRS requires microcode updates
On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 12:11:31PM +0100, Jan Kurik wrote:
> = System Wide Change: Binutils version 2.29.1 =
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/BINUTILS2291
>
> Change owner(s):
> * Nick Clifton
>
> Rebase the binutils package from version 2.29 to version 2.29.1. This
> will bring in the b
Hi all,
Based on the feedback we modified the change:
* There is a more formal contingency plan in place.
* Contingency deadline is moved one week earlier.
* Detailed description contains explanation of what we want to achieve
for F28. We don't aim to have everything in F28.
* It is System Wide C
On 01/05/2018 05:21 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
On Fri, Jan 05, 2018 at 02:50:45PM +0100, Jan Kurik wrote:
= System Wide Change: Make authselect default tool instead of authconfig =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/AuthselectAsDefault
Does this change do anything to reduce the
On 01/09/2018 03:32 PM, Steve Dickson wrote:
On 01/09/2018 06:10 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Changes/SunRPCRemoval&oldid=508864
says:
"Packages which need rpcgen will have to add BuildRequires: libtirpc-devel to
their spec files."
but libtir
On 01/09/2018 03:16 PM, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
So after all I would file bug against DNF to automatically mark all packages
from non-primary arch (given they are non-noarch) as allowuinstall.
I don't really understand what you wrote.
I doubt there is an automated solution without packaging chan
On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 08:44:50AM -0600, Justin Forbes wrote:
> > Does this mean we should do a mass rebuild once those patches have
> > landed? We have a mass rebuild scheduled for Jan 31st (basically three
> > weeks from now). Is that too soon?
> I do not have an answer to this just yet. I mean
Hi,
Based on the claiming guideline[1], I am writing to claim the package
gcin. The package gcin was retired because previous maintainer cicku was
not responsive at that time[2]. Since I hear this package is still
useful for some users, I updated the spec file and filed a review
request here[3].
On Mon, 2018-01-08 at 09:01 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 08, 2018 at 07:04:31AM -0500, Martin Kolman wrote:
> > Yep - basically, there will be no "old" and "new, DBUS/modular"
> > Anaconda, the plan is to turn the current Anaconda to the new one one
> > step at a time.
> >
> > This s
On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 05:17:40PM +0100, Martin Kolman wrote:
> As mentioned by jkonecny, we have updated the change page, including
> the contingency plan.
Thanks -- that's much more clear. And I see the deadline has been moved
back to a week before Final Freeze. Sounds good to me assuming QA fe
Packages remaining to rebuild:
digikam
fawkes
kf5-libkface
nomacs
player
simon
Provenpackager request for:
Merge and fedpkg build [1] and [2] in master branch.
Do fedpkg build in fawkes master [3]
[1]
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/nomacs/pull-request/1
[2]
https://src.fedoraproject.org/r
On Tue, 2018-01-09 at 11:03 +0100, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> The Fedora Infrastructure team has had a jenkins instance running at
> jenkins.fedorainfracloud.org for a little while now. This instance was
> maintained on a best-effort basis though and we often had outage and issues
On 01/09/2018 05:53 PM, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> Packages remaining to rebuild:
> digikam
> fawkes
> kf5-libkface
> nomacs
> player
> simon
>
> Provenpackager request for:
> Do fedpkg build in fawkes master [3]
> [3]
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/fawkes/commits/master
>
That won't help
On Mon, 2018-01-08 at 12:21 -0500, Steve Dickson wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Is it a problem for a package to pull from two different
> upstream tar balls? Basically have
>
> Source0: http://server.com/package1/package1.tar
> Source1: http://server.com/package2/package2.tar
>
> Then I would, by hand,
On Tue, 2018-01-09 at 12:11 +0100, Jan Kurik wrote:
> = System Wide Change: GCC8 =
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/GCC8
>
> Change owner(s):
> * Jakub Jelínek
>
> Switch GCC in Fedora 28 to 8.x.y, rebuild all packages with it, or
> optionally rebuild just some packages with it and rebui
On Tue, 2018-01-09 at 11:13 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 08, 2018 at 12:59:20PM -0500, Martin Langhoff wrote:
> > I have two VMs, or OS states I can `rpm -qa` on. Is there a script to
> > diff the output of the two listings, and then query the package
> > changelogs to generate an
On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 09:39:41AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> The timing on this looks a bit awkward when compared with the current
> schedule, which has the Beta going out in March and Final early in May:
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/28/Schedule
>
> That would appear to mean
= System Wide Change: Replace glibc's libcrypt with libxcrypt =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Replace_glibc_libcrypt_with_libxcrypt
Change owner(s):
* Björn Esser
* Florian Weimer
There are plans to remove libcrypt from glibc, so we should have a replacement.
== Detailed Description
On Tue, 2018-01-09 at 11:28 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 05:17:40PM +0100, Martin Kolman wrote:
> > As mentioned by jkonecny, we have updated the change page, including
> > the contingency plan.
>
> Thanks -- that's much more clear. And I see the deadline has been moved
>
On Tue, 2018-01-09 at 18:45 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 09:39:41AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > The timing on this looks a bit awkward when compared with the current
> > schedule, which has the Beta going out in March and Final early in May:
> >
> > https://fedorapro
= System Wide Change: NIS switching to new libnsl to support IPv6 =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/NISIPv6
Change owner(s):
* Matej Muzila
* Honza Horak
This system-wide change covers the switch of NIS components to the new
client side implementation in order to support IPv6, while deta
On 01/08/2018 10:53 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>> Well, if this firefox update was urgent, shouldn't it have been marked
>> urgent?
>
> Urgency is always in the eye of the beholder. I as a user consider all
> security updates "urgent", and in addition, I want ALL updates as soon
Greetings!
Today, on 2018-Jan-09, we have reached Fedora 28 Change Checkpoint:
Proposal submission deadline (Changes requiring mass rebuild & system
wide changes) [1].
At this point, only Self Contained Changes will be accepted for Fedora
28. Any Change Proposal requiring mass rebuild or a System
On 09/01/18 16:16 +0100, Tomasz Torcz 👁️ wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 12:11:31PM +0100, Jan Kurik wrote:
>> = System Wide Change: Binutils version 2.29.1 =
>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/BINUTILS2291
>>
>> Change owner(s):
>> * Nick Clifton
>>
>> Rebase the binutils package from v
This is just a reminder that tomorrow on 2018-Jan-10 at 23:59:59 UTC
we will close the Nomination window of January 2018 Elections.
Please check the nomination pages [1][2][3] and apply, if you are
interested to work in FESCo, Council or Mindshare teams.
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Developm
Hi all. Apologies for cross-posting, but I am running out of ideas.
Suppose one updates libmpfr in a copr repository, which bumps the
soname. Both GCC and libmpc depend on libmpfr, and so must be rebuilt,
but neither GCC nor libmpc can be rebuilt without an existing libmpc,
which, in turn, depends
I'm getting kernel panics in a VM that functions as a hypervisor, the
moment I spin up the nested guest (on AMD ThreadRipper / Fedora 27). That
is annoying, of course, so I try to be a good citizen and file a bug.
For some reason though, I cannot get the core dumped. I get a core fine
with sysrq,
Hi,
Regardless of the build infra, you will need to create a compat package with
the old lib version to make it available during bootstraping
Regards,
--
Nicolas Mailhot
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an em
= Proposed Self Contained Change: Avoid /usr/bin/python in RPM build =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Avoid_usr_bin_python_in_RPM_Build
Change owner(s):
* Petr Viktorin
* Miro Hrončok
Deprecate, and later disable, running /usr/bin/python (as opposed to
/usr/bin/python3 or /usr/bin/pytho
Hi Kevin, thanks for your feedback.
On 01/09/2018 11:36 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> … if you can't do the backport in a reasonable time frame (This
> vulnerability is very critical, since it allows remote money stealing!), the
> recommendation is to just upgrade to the latest upstream immediately
Thanks Nicolas. That makes sense.
Would you advise that the compatibility package remains in rawhide
after the mass rebuild?
Best,
James.
On Tue, 2018-01-09 at 20:06 +0100, nicolas.mail...@laposte.net wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Regardless of the build infra, you will need to create a compat
> package wit
Dear Fedora Devops,
qrencode (critpath) package has been updated in rawhide branch.
Major change:
from: libqrencode.so.3.4.4
to: libqrencode.so.4.0.0
If you need to report any issue:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1510097
Koji build:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo
On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 12:58 PM Adam Williamson
wrote:
> On Tue, 2018-01-09 at 18:45 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 09:39:41AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > The timing on this looks a bit awkward when compared with the current
> > > schedule, which has the Beta goin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On Tue, 2018-01-09 at 20:37 +0100, Casper wrote:
> Dear Fedora Devops,
>
> qrencode (critpath) package has been updated in rawhide branch.
>
> Major change:
> from: libqrencode.so.3.4.4
> to: libqrencode.so.4.0.0
>
> If you need to report any issu
On Tue, 2018-01-09 at 18:28 +0100, Till Hofmann wrote:
>
> On 01/09/2018 05:53 PM, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> > Packages remaining to rebuild:
> > digikam
> > fawkes
> > kf5-libkface
> > nomacs
> > player
> > simon
> >
> > Provenpackager request for:
> > Do fedpkg build in fawkes master [3]
> > [3]
On Tue, 2018-01-09 at 21:12 +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
> On Tue, 2018-01-09 at 20:37 +0100, Casper wrote:
> > Dear Fedora Devops,
> >
> > qrencode (critpath) package has been updated in rawhide branch.
> >
> > Major change:
> > from: libqrencode.so.3.4.4
> > to: libqrencode.so.4.0.0
> >
> > If
On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 07:50:10PM +, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > Well, true, but then just like every year, we'll wind up doing a lot of
> > the spadework of fixing things to build with the new GCC. And probably
> > at first some critical things will fail to build and that'll mess up
> > the
Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> You also don't want updates-testing to even exist right?
That is not true. I want to leave the decision whether and for how long an
update needs to be tested to the package maintainer instead of enforcing
minimum testing requirements in the software, because the software can
Matthew Miller wrote:
> Also, I think everyone in this discussion on _this_ list who would like
> updates faster should probably be using updates-testing. Or at least
> _looking_ at updates-testing. You can always pull individual updates
> from there on a per-package basis, and doing this helps eve
Apologies on not announcing this farther ahead of time.
There will be an outage starting at 2018-01-09 22:00:00 UTC, which will
last 4-6 hours.
To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto or run:
date -d '2018-01-09 22:00:00 UTC'
Reaso
Jonny Heggheim wrote:
> I think the best solution, based on my knowledge and available time, is
> to upgrade Fedora 26 to the latest upstream.
So please do that then. The sooner, the better.
> The fixes from upstream are spread on several commits and releases.
That is also the case with, e.g., F
On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 04:30:56PM +0100, Pavel Březina wrote:
> On 01/05/2018 05:21 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> >On Fri, Jan 05, 2018 at 02:50:45PM +0100, Jan Kurik wrote:
> >>= System Wide Change: Make authselect default tool instead of authconfig =
> >>https://fedoraproject.org/wiki
first, thanks for your remarks.
the build has been untagged (thanks for releng reactivity), so it
won't be a melodramatic movie about rawhide which is broken... oh
wait! look the mass-rebuild showing the point of its nose...
seriously.
I will miss the next mass-rebuild because of your shitty min
Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> […]
I really don't understand why we do this "batched" thing to begin with.
>>> To reduce the constant flow of updates that are very minor or affect
>>> very few mixed in with the major updates that affect lots of people and
>>> are urgent.
>> But the users were alrea
Hello guys! :)
Initial NOTE: I have made some bigger changes in Ghostscript package during
the cleanup, which should be self-contained. In my opinion those changes
are not so significant to create "self-contained change" wiki page for it
(for F28), but if the consensus of people here will be the
Providing privacy and security for DNS! (especially after dnscrypt is
discontinued now).
It would be nice to have this in Fedora.
https://dnsprivacy.org/wiki/display/DP/DNS+Privacy+Daemon+-+Stubby
GitHub: https://github.com/getdnsapi/stubby
For distro status see: https://repology.org/metapackage/
On Tue, 2018-01-09 at 23:06 +0100, Casper wrote:
> no kidding, it's a critpath, and one day it will be updated in
> development branch (which is called "Rawhide").
>
> you want a rendez-vous or what ?
There's a process you're meant to follow:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy#Rawhide
Jan Kurik wrote:
> Currently in Fedora (package names, executable names, etc.), python
> means Python 2.
> We would like to change it to mean Python 3, but to do that, we need
> to free it of the current meaning.
> This means explicitly using either "python2" or "python3" throughout
> Fedora.
Are
Casper wrote:
> I will miss the next mass-rebuild because of your shitty mind
The mass rebuild cannot happen with your incompatible package because many
packages indirectly depend on systemd.
At the very least, systemd needs to be rebuilt against the new qrencode. And
systemd itself drags in sy
Hello,
I'm in a hurry for this update to get to the stable repository, however it
contains OpenSSL update, which should be tested by many more users, to be
sure.
All karma - positive or neagitve - will be welcomed!
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-b7b2c36b14
Thanks!
--
Mich
On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 11:06:11PM +0100, Casper wrote:
> I will miss the next mass-rebuild because of your shitty mind
Hey. Please remember the Fedora friends foundation — and our code of
conduct. Directing this kind of comment at another contributor is not
okay.
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Proj
> "JK" == Jan Kurik writes:
JK> Python 2, when called as python or /usr/bin/python at RPM build time
JK> (as identified by the RPM_BUILD_ROOT environment variable), will
JK> print a deprecation warning to stderr. (Any program invoked during
JK> build that invokes /usr/bin/python will cause th
On 10 January 2018 at 11:30, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> In the end I just can't shake the notion that it's bad to have some
> random non-python-related environment variable basically breaking
> python.
Aye, I think you've hit on the main problem: if this is keyed off
RPM_BUILD_ROOT, then it wi
On 09/01/18 23:31, Florian Weimer wrote:
> On 01/09/2018 03:32 PM, Steve Dickson wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 01/09/2018 06:10 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>>>
>>> https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Changes/SunRPCRemoval&oldid=508864
>>> says:
>>>
>>> "Packages which need rpcgen will have to add
On Jan 09 09:25, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 2018-01-09 at 11:03 +0100, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> > Dear all,
> >
> > The Fedora Infrastructure team has had a jenkins instance running at
> > jenkins.fedorainfracloud.org for a little while now. This instance was
> > maintained on a best-effo
On Jan 09 14:41, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 02:29:38PM +0100, Dan Horák wrote:
> > On Tue, 9 Jan 2018 11:03:28 +0100
> > Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> >
> > > Dear all,
> > >
> > > The Fedora Infrastructure team has had a jenkins instance running at
> > > jenkins.fedorainf
Hello,
Internet Systems Consortium, has changed license of DHCP from ISC to
MPL 2.0 [1] since 4.4.0 (which will land rawhide soon).
[1] https://www.isc.org/blogs/isc-dhcp-moves-to-mpl-2-0-license/
--
Pavel Zhukov
Software Engineer
IRC: landgraf
___
deve
On 01/10/2018 04:20 AM, Ian Kent wrote:
Note that the plan is that the new package will provide rpcgen, so you can just
use
BuildRequires: rpcgen
and you'll get the new package once it becomes available.
What can I do in the meantime to build autofs in Rawhide?
You can use rpcgen today, i
95 matches
Mail list logo
