Hello, Nicolas Mailhot via devel.
Mon, 15 Jul 2019 07:35:09 + you wrote:
> It would be much clearer and user-friendly to move I*86 packages out of the
> 64 bit repos and make the i*86 an optional add-on
It will break multilib.
--
Sincerely,
Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.org)
_
On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 7:58 AM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
wrote:
>
> Hello, Dridi Boukelmoune.
>
> Mon, 15 Jul 2019 06:59:33 + you wrote:
>
> > game that cannot move to 64bit support because it's dragging binaries
> > for which it doesn't have source code.
>
> Wine64 can still emulate 32-bit Wi
Hello, Dridi Boukelmoune.
Mon, 15 Jul 2019 08:26:59 + you wrote:
> Emulate as in not run natively even though the hardware might be able to?
Sorry for misinformation. Wine64 is still require 32-bit libraries in
order to run legacy 32-bit Windows PE executables.
https://wiki.winehq.org/FAQ#I
Hi Kevin,
On Sun, 2019-07-14 at 15:50 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On 7/14/19 2:35 PM, John Reiser wrote:
> > Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > > Neal Gompa wrote:
> >
> > [[snip]]
> >
> > > > This will also make it impossible for people to locally do multilib
> > > > build/installs. It will remove COPR’s a
On 7/15/19 11:34 AM, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> Hello, Dridi Boukelmoune.
>
> Mon, 15 Jul 2019 08:26:59 + you wrote:
>
>> Emulate as in not run natively even though the hardware might be able to?
>
> Sorry for misinformation. Wine64 is still require 32-bit libraries in
> order to run
Hi,
The latest nettle (3.5.1) update will break ABI on rawhide. The API
remains the same hence recompilation will be sufficient to address any
issues.
regards,
Nikos
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email t
On 15. 07. 19 12:41, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote:
Hi,
The latest nettle (3.5.1) update will break ABI on rawhide. The API
remains the same hence recompilation will be sufficient to address any
issues.
I've recently seen an Arch Linux user ranting about this particular update on
Twitter.
On 15. 07. 19 12:41, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote:
Hi,
The latest nettle (3.5.1) update will break ABI on rawhide. The API
remains the same hence recompilation will be sufficient to address any
issues.
Nearly all of my packages now fail to resolve because of:
nothing provides libnettle.so.
On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 11:58 AM Jiri Vanek wrote:
> On 7/15/19 11:34 AM, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> > Hello, Dridi Boukelmoune.
> >
> > Mon, 15 Jul 2019 08:26:59 + you wrote:
> >
> >> Emulate as in not run natively even though the hardware might be able
> to?
> >
> > Sorry for misinfo
On 15. 07. 19 13:24, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 15. 07. 19 12:41, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote:
Hi,
The latest nettle (3.5.1) update will break ABI on rawhide. The API
remains the same hence recompilation will be sufficient to address any
issues.
Nearly all of my packages now fail to resolve b
On 15. 07. 19 13:54, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 15. 07. 19 13:24, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 15. 07. 19 12:41, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote:
Hi,
The latest nettle (3.5.1) update will break ABI on rawhide. The API
remains the same hence recompilation will be sufficient to address any
issues.
Nearl
On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 12:45 PM Jiri Vanek wrote:
>
> On 7/15/19 11:34 AM, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> > Hello, Dridi Boukelmoune.
> >
> > Mon, 15 Jul 2019 08:26:59 + you wrote:
> >
> >> Emulate as in not run natively even though the hardware might be able to?
> >
> > Sorry for misinfor
On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 2:48 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> On 15. 07. 19 13:54, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > On 15. 07. 19 13:24, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> >> On 15. 07. 19 12:41, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>> The latest nettle (3.5.1) update will break ABI on rawhide. The API
> >>> remains
Dne 10. 07. 19 v 9:19 James Antill napsal(a):
> 2. adduser/group/etc. => sysusers files
For anyone willing to do this in advance on his/her package - this is how you
can do that:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/mock/commit/cf4c8f076637755acc3cf4eb091d8ebb36020237
Here is relevant FPC
On Sun, 14 Jul 2019 at 18:16, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 14, 2019 at 5:21 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> >
> > On 7/14/19 1:15 PM, Neal Gompa wrote:
> >
> > > This will also make it impossible for people to locally do multilib
> > > build/installs. It will remove COPR’s ability to do the same. For
On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 9:45 AM Fabio Valentini wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 2:48 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
> >
> > On 15. 07. 19 13:54, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > > On 15. 07. 19 13:24, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > >> On 15. 07. 19 12:41, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote:
> > >>> Hi,
> > >>> The lates
On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 10:04 AM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
>
> Dne 10. 07. 19 v 9:19 James Antill napsal(a):
> > 2. adduser/group/etc. => sysusers files
>
> For anyone willing to do this in advance on his/her package - this is how you
> can do that:
>
> https://github.com/rpm-software-management/mock
Thank you for your answers.
I adopted "moby-engine" and did two new releases:
- moby-engine-18.09.7-4 depends on packages "containerd" and "runc"
instead of conflicting and bundling the binaries. It is packaged for
Rawhide and Fedora 30 (in updates-testing: [1]). I did not see any
regression due
On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 11:52:50AM +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> Could you explain a bit more how this (keeps) working? I think my
> mental model of how Fedora repositories work in the case of multilib
> devel packages is a bit flawed. At first I assumed that this suggestion
> would kill that. Beca
On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 10:13:21AM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 10:04 AM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> >
> > Dne 10. 07. 19 v 9:19 James Antill napsal(a):
> > > 2. adduser/group/etc. => sysusers files
> >
> > For anyone willing to do this in advance on his/her package - this is how
On 15/07/2019 15:56, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 11:52:50AM +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote:
Could you explain a bit more how this (keeps) working? I think my
mental model of how Fedora repositories work in the case of multilib
devel packages is a bit flawed. At first I
Dne 15. 07. 19 v 17:03 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek napsal(a):
> On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 10:13:21AM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 10:04 AM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
>>> Dne 10. 07. 19 v 9:19 James Antill napsal(a):
2. adduser/group/etc. => sysusers files
>>> For anyone willi
On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 11:52 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 10:13:21AM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 10:04 AM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> > >
> > > Dne 10. 07. 19 v 9:19 James Antill napsal(a):
> > > > 2. adduser/group/etc. => sysusers files
Just a reminder that builds are currently running for python2 and python3 that
change the meaning of /usr/bin/python from Python 2 to Python 3 in rawhide.
For details, see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Python_means_Python3
I'll be sending e-mails later to package owners who still depen
On 7/13/19 4:25 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
Greetings.
(I am posting this to the devel list and also Bccing the maintainers of
the involved packages below).
A bit back I updated python-requests-oauthlib to 1.2.0.
I didn't realize at the time that this version needs python-oauthlib
3.0.0 or newer.
3
On 7/14/19 11:46 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Miro Hrončok:
>
>> The only other use/need for the repostories is to allow maintainers to
>> debug and test fixes for multilib shipped packages, but the koji
>> buildroot repo can be used for this use case.
>
>> ** modify mock to use the koji buildro
On 7/15/19 5:43 AM, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> (I for one am still semi-regularly building stuff in the mock
> fedora-rawhide-i686 chroots, especially for testing if things still
> work on 32bit systems (be it armv7hl or i686) - I know that this will
> probably continue to work somehow, but making i
On 7/15/19 8:08 AM, Tom Hughes wrote:
> On 15/07/2019 15:56, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 11:52:50AM +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote:
>>> Could you explain a bit more how this (keeps) working? I think my
>>> mental model of how Fedora repositories work in the case of mul
Hello Vitaly,
Update the Mono stack in Fedora from 5.18 to 5.20.
Also please update NuGet package. It was not updated for ages and cannot
install modern dotnet dependencies.
I have now written a reply to that bug 1722217 for nuget.
Timotheus
___
d
On Mon, Jul 15, 2019, 19:33 Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On 7/15/19 5:43 AM, Fabio Valentini wrote:
>
> > (I for one am still semi-regularly building stuff in the mock
> > fedora-rawhide-i686 chroots, especially for testing if things still
> > work on 32bit systems (be it armv7hl or i686) - I know that t
> "VO" == Vít Ondruch writes:
VO> I just wonder what is the point of:
VO>
https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/b0ca726/src/core/macros.systemd.in#L122
I guess it just saves packagers from having to call systemd-sysusers
properly. You include the configuration file in the source package
On Mon, 15 Jul 2019 at 14:53, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 15, 2019, 19:33 Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
>> On 7/15/19 5:43 AM, Fabio Valentini wrote:
>>
>> > (I for one am still semi-regularly building stuff in the mock
>> > fedora-rawhide-i686 chroots, especially for testing if things still
>>
On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 2:53 PM Fabio Valentini wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jul 15, 2019, 19:33 Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>>
>> On 7/15/19 5:43 AM, Fabio Valentini wrote:
>>
>> > (I for one am still semi-regularly building stuff in the mock
>> > fedora-rawhide-i686 chroots, especially for testing if things still
On Mon, 15 Jul 2019 at 16:07, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 2:53 PM Fabio Valentini
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 15, 2019, 19:33 Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> >>
> >> On 7/15/19 5:43 AM, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> >>
> >> > (I for one am still semi-regularly building stuff in the mock
> >> >
On 15/07/2019 18:05, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
So, this is how it works (as far as I recall off the top of my head):
You build a archfull package in koji. It's built for x86_64 and i686
(and the other arches).
pungi runs to compose things. It has a config (in pungi-fedora or bodhi
config) that tells
Miro Hrončok wrote:
> Just a reminder that builds are currently running for python2 and python3
> that change the meaning of /usr/bin/python from Python 2 to Python 3 in
> rawhide.
Changing the meaning of such a widely used command that way is just wrong.
> For details, see
> https://fedoraprojec
Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> I just don't think the number of people who do local i686 builds is all
> that large, so it having some issues and corner cases to help out the
> vast majority of folks seems like a good trade off to me.
Removing something does not "help out" anybody, ever. The people who'd
b
Miro Hrončok wrote:
> With the dropping of the i686 kernel package it's no longer possible to
> directly install Fedora 31 or later on i686 hardware, however, it is still
> possibly to upgrade older releases as long as we continue to provide a
> repository. This will leave those users with an old p
Neal Gompa wrote:
> I know it’s beating a dead horse, but I’d rather have the buildsystem
> *deal* with such a trivial problem than require manual intervention.
> Cycling through and building things properly in order to deal with a
> soname bump is something our tooling should do for us.
And how i
Miro Hrončok wrote:
> gnutls now cannot be rebuilt:
>
> nothing provides libnettle.so.6 needed by gnutls-3.6.8-1.fc31.armv7hl
Don't you love circular dependencies?
This is really the biggest issue that we have: There are more and more
circular dependencies. Each of them is a major PITA when try
Nicolas Mailhot via devel wrote:
> It would be much clearer and user-friendly to move I*86 packages out of
> the 64 bit repos and make the i*86 an optional add-on
+1 to that suggestion.
Vitaly Zaitsev via devel replied:
> It will break multilib.
Not really. It would break the legacy "install
On 16. 07. 19 0:07, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Miro Hrončok wrote:
Just a reminder that builds are currently running for python2 and python3
that change the meaning of /usr/bin/python from Python 2 to Python 3 in
rawhide.
Changing the meaning of such a widely used command that way is just wrong.
On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 7:22 PM Kevin Kofler wrote:
>
> Nicolas Mailhot via devel wrote:
>
> > It would be much clearer and user-friendly to move I*86 packages out of
> > the 64 bit repos and make the i*86 an optional add-on
>
> +1 to that suggestion.
>
>
> Vitaly Zaitsev via devel replied:
>
> >
On 7/15/19 1:51 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
OK could all the people who are so interested in i686 get onto the
x86_32 mailing list and chime up there about what they are wanting to
do? Also start having regular sig meetings and other things which have
been pretty dead for about a year?
My
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20190712.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20190715.n.1
= SUMMARY =
Added images:5
Dropped images: 21
Added packages: 26
Dropped packages:2
Upgraded packages: 365
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 70.65 MiB
Size of dropped packages
Dear all,
You are kindly invited to the meeting:
Modularity Team (weekly) on 2019-07-16 from 15:00:00 to 16:00:00 UTC
At fedora-meetin...@irc.freenode.net
The meeting will be about:
Meeting of the Modularity Team.
More information available at: [Modularity Team
Docs](https://docs.pagure.o
No missing expected images.
Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check!
3 of 47 required tests failed
openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING**
below
Failed openQA tests: 8/147 (x86_64), 18/18 (i386), 1/2 (arm)
New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-Rawh
> I don't think we can drop multilib until at least steam/wine are ready
> for it at least.
Will they ever be though? Thanks to Wine I can run an open source
game that cannot move to 64bit support because it's dragging binaries
for which it doesn't have source code. I reverse-engineered one of the
Hello, Dridi Boukelmoune.
Mon, 15 Jul 2019 06:59:33 + you wrote:
> game that cannot move to 64bit support because it's dragging binaries
> for which it doesn't have source code.
Wine64 can still emulate 32-bit WinPE executables.
--
Sincerely,
Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.org)
Hello, Neal Gompa.
Sun, 14 Jul 2019 17:27:03 -0400 you wrote:
> Building library packages and making your own multilib repo is
> impossible without having both the i686 repo and the x86_64 repo, as
> you need to build for both and then munge them together for a multilib
> repo.
Most of Fedora us
Hello, John Reiser.
Sun, 14 Jul 2019 14:35:46 -0700 you wrote:
> For some apps 2GB of malloc() arena is plenty, and they run faster
> in 32-bit mode because a 64-byte cache line contains 16 pointers
> instead of only 8.
And such applications became extremely vulnerable due to missing ASLR
suppor
On 7/15/19 9:10 AM, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> Hello, Dridi Boukelmoune.
>
> Mon, 15 Jul 2019 06:59:33 + you wrote:
>
>> game that cannot move to 64bit support because it's dragging binaries
>> for which it doesn't have source code.
>
> Wine64 can still emulate 32-bit WinPE executable
Hello, Jiri Vanek.
Mon, 15 Jul 2019 09:22:57 +0200 you wrote:
> That is not enough. See what hapened to Ubuntu once they dropped i686
They decided to remove whole 32-bit support, including multilib support.
We need to drop 32-bit packages, except needed to run Steam and Wine32.
Third-party dev
It would be much clearer and user-friendly to move I*86 packages out of the 64
bit repos and make the i*86 an optional add-on
Le July 14, 2019 9:27:03 PM UTC, Neal Gompa a écrit :
>On Sun, Jul 14, 2019 at 5:21 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>>
>> On 7/14/19 1:15 PM, Neal Gompa wrote:
>>
>> > This will a
54 matches
Mail list logo
