Dne 20. 02. 19 v 10:02 Till Maas napsal(a):
> On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 04:28:17PM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>> Dne 15. 02. 19 v 14:22 Emmanuel Seyman napsal(a):
>>> * Hans de Goede [15/02/2019 12:09] :
And automatic scripts really just should hand it over to the first
co-maintainer
Hi all.
I abandoned qblade packaging because upstream is unresponsive (as always).
Currently, qblade does not compile with gcc9.
Upstream project: https://sourceforge.net/projects/qblade/
--
---
Antonio Trande
Fedora Project
mailto 'sagitter at fedoraproject dot org'
GPG key: 0x6e0331dd1699e4d7
Hi all.
I am plan to retire package kchildlock from Fedora.
It is KDE4 application long time unsupported and FTBFS on rawhide and F30.
If no one need it I will retire package in one week.
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/kchildlock
https://store.kde.org/p/1127875/
https://sourceforge.net/proje
On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 2:37 AM Mosaab Alzoubi wrote:
>
> Due to like-dead upstream and security issue, I orphan these packages:
>
> apt
I'll take this. Then it can be updated to latest apt-dpkg instead and
used for other things.
--
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
__
On 2/26/19 9:37 AM, Mosaab Alzoubi wrote:
Due to like-dead upstream and security issue, I orphan these packages:
apt
synaptic
fedora-package-config-apt
Thank you!
- Panu -
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscrib
On Mon, 2019-02-25 at 21:49 +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> Note: If you received this mail directly you (co)maintain one of the affected
> packages or a package that depends on one. Please adopt the affected package
> or
> retire your depending package to avoid broken dependencies, otherwise your
>
* Sérgio Basto:
> The key was "can't represent -1 with an unsigned number" , I add some sign
> char to the code [1] and it fix the FTBFS
>
> Thanks ,
>
> [1]
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/fork/sergiomb/rpms/gdcm/blob/master/f/gdcm-2.8.8-fix-narrow.patch
Please note that this patch changes th
From:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1680320#c2
When you try to run:
mock -r fedora-rawhide-x86_64 shell
You will get:
Problem 1: conflicting requests
- nothing provides module(platform:f30) needed by module
stratis:1:20181215204600:a5b0195c-0.x86_64
Problem 2: conflicting r
On Tue, Feb 26, 2019, 14:24 Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> From:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1680320#c2
>
> When you try to run:
> mock -r fedora-rawhide-x86_64 shell
>
> You will get:
> Problem 1: conflicting requests
> - nothing provides module(platform:f30) needed by module
>
On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 02:23:35PM +0100, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> From:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1680320#c2
>
> When you try to run:
> mock -r fedora-rawhide-x86_64 shell
>
> You will get:
> Problem 1: conflicting requests
> - nothing provides module(platform:f30) need
On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 02:41:56PM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2019, 14:24 Miroslav Suchý wrote:
>
> > From:
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1680320#c2
> >
> > When you try to run:
> > mock -r fedora-rawhide-x86_64 shell
> >
> > You will get:
> > Problem 1
On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 10:19 PM John Reiser wrote:
> > That test 'testvoidarg' succeeds for me (normal termination, no
> SIGSEGV) on Fedora 28 and Fedora 29.
> >
> >
> > Yes, it only seems to affect f30/Rawhide with GCC 9 (though I'm not sure
> it's the culprit).
> >
> >
> > The tracebac
On 26/02/2019 14:08, Petr Šabata wrote:
I always wonder why people disable the repo -- it's part of
Fedora. What's your motivation?
I'm not using it and it's extra metadata to fetch, parse
and store that slows down updating?
That and on work machines we're not currently mirroring
modules to
On 26. 02. 19 15:07, Petr Šabata wrote:
On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 02:23:35PM +0100, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
From:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1680320#c2
When you try to run:
mock -r fedora-rawhide-x86_64 shell
You will get:
Problem 1: conflicting requests
- nothing provi
'addedFunc' itself is 0 (NULL).
Substituting testvoidarg.cpp.o as compiled by gcc-8.2.1-6.fc28.x86_64 (from
the same source)
gives the same SIGSEGV. So compiling testvoidarg.cpp with gcc-9 is no
longer a suspect.
I just performed a mockbuild for Fedora 29 and all tests passed... W
On 26/02/19 13:28 +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
* Sérgio Basto:
The key was "can't represent -1 with an unsigned number" , I add some sign char
to the code [1] and it fix the FTBFS
Thanks ,
[1]
https://src.fedoraproject.org/fork/sergiomb/rpms/gdcm/blob/master/f/gdcm-2.8.8-fix-narrow.patch
P
On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 8:44 AM John Reiser wrote:
> > 'addedFunc' itself is 0 (NULL).
> > Substituting testvoidarg.cpp.o as compiled by
> gcc-8.2.1-6.fc28.x86_64 (from the same source)
> > gives the same SIGSEGV. So compiling testvoidarg.cpp with gcc-9 is
> no longer a suspect.
> >
#fedora-meeting-3: Weekly Meeting of the Modularity Team
Meeting started by nils at 15:00:00 UTC.
Minutes:
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-3/2019-02-26/modularity.2
According to the Fedora 30 schedule[1], the 100% code complete
deadline[2] for Changes is Tuesday, 5 March. The beta freeze[3]
takes effect on this date as well. All Changes should be in "ON_QA"
state by then.
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/30/Schedule
[2]
https://fedoraproject.org/w
On 20. 02. 19 23:24, Tomas Tomecek wrote:
Hello,
at DevConf.cz, we have introduced a new project: packit [1] [2].
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KpF27v6K4Oc
[2] https://github.com/packit-service/packit
From the ticket:
>> FESCo is concerned that the presented idea of how this automation
Is it definitely the linking? Or should I check the compiler arguments as well?
There are 8 libraries (-lQtTest -lQtCore -lQtGui -lxslt -lxml2 -lQtCore
-lQtXmlPatterns -lQtXml)
plus an explicit libapiextractor.so.0.10.1. Did you run nine tests, replacing
the pieces
one-by-one with their Fedor
I'm troubleshooting why apiextractor tests segfault during package
building. I have not been able to attribute it to any change in build flags
so I started looking at qt4 which appears to still be FTBFS for F30 rebuild.
There's a check in the spec file which fails:
+ grep '^#define QT_BUILD_KEY '
On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 9:52 AM John Reiser wrote:
> > Is it definitely the linking? Or should I check the compiler arguments
> as well?
>
> There are 8 libraries (-lQtTest -lQtCore -lQtGui -lxslt -lxml2 -lQtCore
> -lQtXmlPatterns -lQtXml)
> plus an explicit libapiextractor.so.0.10.1. Did you ru
There are 8 libraries (-lQtTest -lQtCore -lQtGui -lxslt -lxml2 -lQtCore
-lQtXmlPatterns -lQtXml)
plus an explicit libapiextractor.so.0.10.1. Did you run nine tests,
replacing the pieces
one-by-one with their Fedora 29 versions?
I'm not sure how to do that in a mock chroot...
Bo
Richard Shaw wrote:
> I'm troubleshooting why apiextractor tests segfault during package
> building. I have not been able to attribute it to any change in build
> flags so I started looking at qt4 which appears to still be FTBFS for F30
> rebuild.
>
> There's a check in the spec file which fails:
John Reiser wrote on 2019/02/26 13:18:
That test 'testvoidarg' succeeds for me (normal termination, no SIGSEGV) on
Fedora 28 and Fedora 29.
Yes, it only seems to affect f30/Rawhide with GCC 9 (though I'm not sure it's
the culprit).
The traceback says:
> 41 QCOMPARE(addedFun
On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 11:17 AM Mamoru TASAKA
wrote:
> So... I guess Qt "foreach" behavior changed with gcc9..
>
Is there any chance this will change or magically get fixed if qt is
rebuilt with gcc 9?
Thanks,
Richard
___
devel mailing list -- devel@
Richard Shaw wrote on 2019/02/27 2:23:
On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 11:17 AM Mamoru TASAKA
wrote:
So... I guess Qt "foreach" behavior changed with gcc9..
Is there any chance this will change or magically get fixed if qt is
rebuilt with gcc 9?
Thanks,
Richard
Well, foreach or Q_FOREACH is jus
On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 02:29:32AM +0900, Mamoru TASAKA wrote:
> Richard Shaw wrote on 2019/02/27 2:23:
> > On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 11:17 AM Mamoru TASAKA
> > wrote:
> >
> > > So... I guess Qt "foreach" behavior changed with gcc9..
> > >
> >
> > Is there any chance this will change or magically
On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 1:10 AM Matthias Runge wrote:
> With that, I'm looking for co-maintainers for python-cherrypy. The
> package is severely outdated and it seems there hasn't been any
> significant contribution to this over the past 4 years. I may have been
> too optimistic with my available
Mamoru TASAKA wrote on 2019/02/27 2:29:
Richard Shaw wrote on 2019/02/27 2:23:
On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 11:17 AM Mamoru TASAKA
wrote:
So... I guess Qt "foreach" behavior changed with gcc9..
Is there any chance this will change or magically get fixed if qt is
rebuilt with gcc 9?
Thanks,
Ric
On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 10:27 AM Rex Dieter wrote:
> Richard Shaw wrote:
>
> > I'm troubleshooting why apiextractor tests segfault during package
> > building. I have not been able to attribute it to any change in build
> > flags so I started looking at qt4 which appears to still be FTBFS for F30
Hello everyone!
My name is Chilly. I am looking to bring back Snort IDS into the Fedora Project
and maintain it for at least several years. I am relatively new to packaging
but have been using Fedora for many years now as my daily driver. Doing my best
to follow to guide according to
https://f
On Tue, 2019-02-26 at 10:38 -0500, Ben Cotton wrote:
> According to the Fedora 30 schedule[1], the 100% code complete
> deadline[2] for Changes is Tuesday, 5 March. The beta freeze[3]
> takes effect on this date as well. All Changes should be in "ON_QA"
> state by then.
I still haven't any compose
On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 11:39 AM Mamoru TASAKA
wrote:
> Mamoru TASAKA wrote on 2019/02/27 2:29:
> > Richard Shaw wrote on 2019/02/27 2:23:
> >> On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 11:17 AM Mamoru TASAKA <
> mtas...@fedoraproject.org>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> So... I guess Qt "foreach" behavior changed with gcc
On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 01:25:54PM -0600, Richard Shaw wrote:
> > What I did is:
> >
> > LANG=C grep -rl 'foreach.*,' . | \
> > xargs sed -i -e '\@foreach.*,@s|foreach\(.*\),|for\1:|'
> >
> > So now I appreciate it if someone would investigate Q_FOREACH macro.
> >
>
> Thanks Mamoru! As far
On Tue, 2019-02-26 at 06:22 +, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> On Fri, 2019-02-01 at 11:23 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > RepoView just needs a patch to switch from rpmUtils and yum.comps
> > to
> > rpm and libcomps Python bindings, which I think I already wrote and
> > put somewhere. I'll have to dig it o
On Tue, 2019-02-26 at 14:46 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 26/02/19 13:28 +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > * Sérgio Basto:
> >
> > > The key was "can't represent -1 with an unsigned number" , I add
> > > some sign char to the code [1] and it fix the FTBFS
> > >
> > > Thanks ,
> > >
> > > [1]
On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 11:38 AM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 02:29:32AM +0900, Mamoru TASAKA wrote:
> > Richard Shaw wrote on 2019/02/27 2:23:
> > > On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 11:17 AM Mamoru TASAKA <
> mtas...@fedoraproject.org>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > So... I guess Qt "foreac
On 26/02/2019 19:42, Sérgio Basto wrote:
Is stdio.h that defines EOF as -1 , so if we what work with files and
use EOF character, we need use signed chars, though .
No, you need to use int. The EOF value is deliberately outside the
range of character values so that EOF is not a valid characte
On 26/02/19 19:42 +, Sérgio Basto wrote:
On Tue, 2019-02-26 at 14:46 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 26/02/19 13:28 +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Sérgio Basto:
>
> > The key was "can't represent -1 with an unsigned number" , I add
> > some sign char to the code [1] and it fix the FTBFS
>
Ok, I updated the patch the COMPILER_VERSION issue (committed) and have a
local patch for the Q_FOREACH problem based on a qt 5 commit:
https://github.com/qt/qtbase/commit/c35a3f519007af44c3b364b9af86f6a336f6411b
With both of those problems fixed the build still fails probably due to gcc
9 being
Richard Shaw wrote:
> Ok, I updated the patch the COMPILER_VERSION issue (committed) and have
> a local patch for the Q_FOREACH problem based on a qt 5 commit:
>
> https://github.com/qt/qtbase/commit/c35a3f519007af44c3b364b9af86f6a336f6411b
>
> With both of those problems fixed the build still fa
On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 1:29 PM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> No, see my other mail on what should be done.
>
Since the scratch build shows that the tests pass I'm tempted to disable
%check for now just to fix the FTBFS issue and re-enable when qt is fixed.
Thanks,
Richard
On Tue, 2019-02-26 at 20:52 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 26/02/19 19:42 +, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> > On Tue, 2019-02-26 at 14:46 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > > On 26/02/19 13:28 +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > > > * Sérgio Basto:
> > > >
> > > > > The key was "can't represent -1 with
* Tom Hughes:
> On 26/02/2019 19:42, Sérgio Basto wrote:
>
>> Is stdio.h that defines EOF as -1 , so if we what work with files and
>> use EOF character, we need use signed chars, though .
>
> No, you need to use int. The EOF value is deliberately outside the
> range of character values so that E
* Sérgio Basto:
> stdio.h defines EOF as -1 , so if we want work with files
> and use EOF character, we need use signed chars, though .
No, this is not how it works.
Most C interfaces (hopefully all of them, but I wouldn't be sure) that
use in-band signaling for EOF return ints. EOF is returne
On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 9:51 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> The following packages are orphaned and will be retired when they
> are orphaned for six weeks, unless someone adopts them. If you know for sure
> that the package should be retired, please do so now with a proper reason:
> https://fedoraproj
On 26. 02. 19 18:37, Ken Dreyer wrote:
On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 1:10 AM Matthias Runge wrote:
With that, I'm looking for co-maintainers for python-cherrypy. The
package is severely outdated and it seems there hasn't been any
significant contribution to this over the past 4 years. I may have been
On 2/26/19 11:11 AM, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> On Tue, 2019-02-26 at 10:38 -0500, Ben Cotton wrote:
>> According to the Fedora 30 schedule[1], the 100% code complete
>> deadline[2] for Changes is Tuesday, 5 March. The beta freeze[3]
>> takes effect on this date as well. All Changes should be in "ON_QA"
On Tue, 2019-02-26 at 16:09 -0800, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On 2/26/19 11:11 AM, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> > On Tue, 2019-02-26 at 10:38 -0500, Ben Cotton wrote:
> > > According to the Fedora 30 schedule[1], the 100% code complete
> > > deadline[2] for Changes is Tuesday, 5 March. The beta freeze[3]
> > >
On Tue, 2019-02-26 at 22:44 +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Sérgio Basto:
>
> > stdio.h defines EOF as -1 , so if we want work with files
> > and use EOF character, we need use signed chars, though .
>
> No, this is not how it works.
>
> Most C interfaces (hopefully all of them, but I wouldn't
On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 2:42 AM absolutezero wrote:
>
> Hello everyone!
>
> My name is Chilly. I am looking to bring back Snort IDS into the Fedora
> Project and maintain it for at least several years. I am relatively new to
> packaging but have been using Fedora for many years now as my daily d
With current koji buildroot I end up with:
+ ls -l /usr/bin/ld /usr/bin/ld.bfd /usr/bin/ld.gold /usr/bin/ldd
--w---. 1 root root 3814880 Feb 27 04:00 /usr/bin/ld
-rwxr-xr-x. 1 root root 1841608 Feb 26 15:02 /usr/bin/ld.bfd
-rwxr-xr-x. 1 root root 3814880 Feb 26 15:02 /usr/bin/ld.gold
-rwxr-
Orion Poplawski wrote:
> With current koji buildroot I end up with:
>
> + ls -l /usr/bin/ld /usr/bin/ld.bfd /usr/bin/ld.gold /usr/bin/ldd
> --w---. 1 root root 3814880 Feb 27 04:00 /usr/bin/ld
> -rwxr-xr-x. 1 root root 1841608 Feb 26 15:02 /usr/bin/ld.bfd
> -rwxr-xr-x. 1 root root 3814880 Feb
55 matches
Mail list logo
