On 2019-08-12, Dan Book wrote:
> --===7543779861429650079==
> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="def674058ff0509d"
>
> --def674058ff0509d
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
> On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 3:11 PM Dan Book wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Au
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1738293
How did it pass review?
> Obsoletes: compton
Silently doing Obsoletes of an active package and doing so even
without version which is prohibited by the Packaging Guidelines.
Really?
> cp -a yshui-%{appname}-%{test_shortcommit}/subprojects
On 05. 08. 19 14:12, Fedora Rawhide Report wrote:
= DOWNGRADED PACKAGES =
Package: dtc-1.4.7-3.fc30
Old package: dtc-1.5.0-2.fc31
Summary: Device Tree Compiler
RPMs: dtc libfdt libfdt-devel libfdt-static python2-libfdt
Added RPMs: python2-libfdt
Dropped RPMs: python3-
On 8/13/19 11:17 AM, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1738293
How did it pass review?
Obsoletes: compton
Silently doing Obsoletes of an active package and doing so even
without version which is prohibited by the Packaging Guidelines.
Really?
cp -a yshui
For someone who wants to see current registered external bug trackers,
click "Add link" drop down list from below link to see the list. :)
It's interesting to see many bug trackers are already in it.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Fedora
--
Jun Aruga | He - His - Him
__
Hi,
I packaged xe-guest-utilities with a systemd service for Fedora.
But there is an upstream rpm package that include the same service as
a sysv one. And the
service is enabled with the 'Default-Start' info in the init script
after '/sbin/chkconfig --del xe-linux-distribution'.
And when people
On Tuesday, August 13, 2019 11:26:12 AM CEST Panu Matilainen wrote:
> On 8/13/19 11:17 AM, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
>
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1738293
> >
> > How did it pass review?
> >
> >
> >> Obsoletes: compton
> >
> >
> > Silently doing Obsoletes of an active pack
On 8/13/19 1:19 PM, Kamil Dudka wrote:
On Tuesday, August 13, 2019 11:26:12 AM CEST Panu Matilainen wrote:
On 8/13/19 11:17 AM, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1738293
How did it pass review?
Obsoletes: compton
Silently doing Obsoletes of an active
On Tuesday, August 13, 2019 12:22:17 PM CEST Panu Matilainen wrote:
> On 8/13/19 1:19 PM, Kamil Dudka wrote:
>
> > On Tuesday, August 13, 2019 11:26:12 AM CEST Panu Matilainen wrote:
> >
> >> On 8/13/19 11:17 AM, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?i
On Sat, Aug 10, 2019 at 10:21 AM Igor Gnatenko <
ignatenkobr...@fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> You meant more like "rebuilding" modules rather than branching, right?
>
> On Sat, Aug 10, 2019 at 3:09 PM Mohan Boddu wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > There is a Mass Branching scheduled for next Tuesday, t
On 13.08.2019 12:38, Kamil Dudka wrote:
> So you want to use -flto=auto
Supported only by GCC 10+.
--
Sincerely,
Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.org)
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le..
I have tried to join the Amateur Radio SIG twice, once in January, and
again recently in August. The owner, Bob Jensen [0], does not seem to be
around any longer in the Fedora community or the amateur radio community as
his FCC license has expired and is no longer valid [1]. I would like to
know ho
> On 10 Aug 2019, at 17:56, Georg Sauthoff wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 09, 2019 at 03:50:43PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> [..]
>> Problem and thesis statement:
>> Certain workloads, such as building webkitGTK from source, results in
>> heavy swap usage eventually leading to the system becoming totall
Greetings. Where can I remove myself from bug emails for packages I am
not a maintainer anymore?
I am not maintaining eclipse-subclipse from a long time ago, I am not
listed as a member at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/eclipse-subclipse but I still get
FTBFS bugzilla emails.
Any help i
Please approve review of linuxconsoletools package
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1740634
It was retired due to FTBFS but needed for gpm, fpc, lazarus to build
pascal programs.
Situation same as with gettext.
--
Best regards,
Vasiliy Glazov
___
On 8/13/19 1:38 PM, Kamil Dudka wrote:
On Tuesday, August 13, 2019 12:22:17 PM CEST Panu Matilainen wrote:
On 8/13/19 1:19 PM, Kamil Dudka wrote:
On Tuesday, August 13, 2019 11:26:12 AM CEST Panu Matilainen wrote:
On 8/13/19 11:17 AM, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show
Igor Gnatenko wrote:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1738293
>
> How did it pass review?
>
>> Obsoletes: compton
>
> Silently doing Obsoletes of an active package and doing so even
> without version which is prohibited by the Packaging Guidelines.
> Really?
This was submitted
I've just added support for weak dependencies.
On Mon, Aug 5, 2019 at 3:38 PM Adam Samalik wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Aug 4, 2019 at 8:16 PM Igor Gnatenko <
> ignatenkobr...@fedoraproject.org> wrote:
>
>> How does it deal with rich dependencies? Does it take conflicts into the
>> account? What about m
On 12. 08. 19 22:36, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 12. 08. 19 20:37, Petr Stodulka wrote:
Can you explain better what do you mean by that? I am little lost
here.
Sure. The idea was:
1) When Fedora 31 is branched (scheduled for tomorrow [1]), push the switch to
rawhide (Fedora 32)
2) See what hap
Fixed
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/compton-ng/blob/master/f/compton-ng.spec
> How did it pass review?
Because no one reviewing packages in Fedora. Only one person reviewing and help
witch packaging - eclipseo. Many thanks to him.
Also no one want to wait for month+ and pinging non existe
On 8/10/19 9:06 PM, Garrett Holmstrom wrote:
> Hi,
>
> My time to work on Fedora cloud-related things has diminished in
> recent months, so I have not been able to give the cloud-init and
> python-boto packages the care they deserve. They are free to a good
> home.
>
Can you give cloud-init t
On 8/13/19 8:54 AM, Dusty Mabe wrote:
On 8/10/19 9:06 PM, Garrett Holmstrom wrote:
Hi,
My time to work on Fedora cloud-related things has diminished in
recent months, so I have not been able to give the cloud-init and
python-boto packages the care they deserve. They are free to a good
home.
Dne 12. 08. 19 v 13:34 Hans de Goede napsal(a):
>
> gcompris has been replaced upstream by gcompris-qt, which is also in
> Fedora and which we will keep around.
Imho gcompris should have been remove long time ago from Fedora. And
Gcompris-qt should obsolete-provides gcompris.
It just confuse peo
On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 06:02:42PM +0800, Robin Lee wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I packaged xe-guest-utilities with a systemd service for Fedora.
>
> But there is an upstream rpm package that include the same service as
> a sysv one. And the
> service is enabled with the 'Default-Start' info in the init scri
On Tuesday, 13 August 2019 15:51:41 CEST Artem Tim wrote:
> Fixed
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/compton-ng/blob/master/f/compton-ng.spec
>
>
> > How did it pass review?
>
>
> Because no one reviewing packages in Fedora. Only one person reviewing and
> help witch packaging - eclipseo. M
On Tue, 2019-08-13 at 13:51 +, Artem Tim wrote:
> Because no one reviewing packages in Fedora. Only one person
> reviewing and help witch packaging - eclipseo. Many thanks to him.
I see plenty of names in Bugzilla doing package reviews. If you’ve
waited a long time, this list is one place to a
Hi all,
Due to an issue with mbs authentication and then travel for FLOCK, we
couldn't run mass rebuilds of modules last week (mass rebuilds of modules
is run after mass rebuild of rpms are done). We are planning to try it
today. Please look out for module builds that we will be submitting as part
Hello All,
Fedora 31 will be branched from rawhide today as per the Fedora 31
schedule[1]. The process takes about a day and everything should be ready
by tomorrow. You can still be able to build packages normally until then,
but after the mass branching rawhide and F31 will be separated.
We will
Dear all,
You are kindly invited to the meeting:
Minimization Team Meeting on 2019-08-14 from 15:00:00 to 16:00:00 GMT
At fedora-meetin...@irc.freenode.net
The meeting will be about:
Meeting of the Fedora Minimization Team
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/minimization/team/
Source: h
On 12. 08. 19 10:56, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 12. 08. 19 8:21, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
You need to explicitly set --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:F31
I thought itvwas fixed, but probably it does not work for repoquery.
It was fixed for a long time. This just started again now.
I've reopened
Hi,
We're considering removing support for Wireless Extensions from
NetworkManager in Fedora 32 time frame.
A more modern Wi-Fi configuration API, cfg802111/nl80211, has been
available since 2007 and maybe there's no point in carrying the
maintenance burden anymore. It seems reasonable to assume
> We're considering removing support for Wireless Extensions from
> NetworkManager in Fedora 32 time frame.
>
> A more modern Wi-Fi configuration API, cfg802111/nl80211, has been
> available since 2007 and maybe there's no point in carrying the
> maintenance burden anymore. It seems reasonable to a
Hi,
On 13-08-19 17:39, Peter Robinson wrote:
We're considering removing support for Wireless Extensions from
NetworkManager in Fedora 32 time frame.
A more modern Wi-Fi configuration API, cfg802111/nl80211, has been
available since 2007 and maybe there's no point in carrying the
maintenance bur
Hi,
On 13-08-19 16:31, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Dne 12. 08. 19 v 13:34 Hans de Goede napsal(a):
gcompris has been replaced upstream by gcompris-qt, which is also in
Fedora and which we will keep around.
Imho gcompris should have been remove long time ago from Fedora. And
Gcompris-qt should obs
This will be our very first meeting!
I'll prepare some agenda before the meeting, but I mostly expect quick
introductions, our long-term goals or things we're interested in, ideas,
and ideally a plan for everyone for the upcoming week.
See you there!
Adam
On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 5:02 PM wrote:
On 13.08.2019 16:52, Ernestas Kulik wrote:
> No need to get defensive about this. Provide feedback ahead of time
> and, preferably, help out. Replacing tooling is not just flipping a
> switch.
But he was right. Review process in openSUSE is much more easier, than
in Fedora. Currently no one want t
On Tue, 2019-08-13 at 18:31 +0200, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> On 13.08.2019 16:52, Ernestas Kulik wrote:
> > No need to get defensive about this. Provide feedback ahead of time
> > and, preferably, help out. Replacing tooling is not just flipping a
> > switch.
>
> But he was right. Review p
I can suggest following:
1. Do review process much more easier by running Fedora Review Tool on
Koji using fedpkg. Output can be sent to email for additional manual checks.
2. Do package revocation procedure from non-responsive maintainers much
more simple and easier. Currently we need to wait 3
On 13.08.2019 18:34, Adam Williamson wrote:
> And yet this thread demonstrates that without good review, we will get
> garbage packages. Review processes exist for a reason.
Every package can become a garbage, because after package review no one
reviews it again. I see lots of legacy packages, whi
> I see plenty of names in Bugzilla doing package reviews. If you’ve
> waited a long time, this list is one place to ask for them (review
> swaps for extra points).
This guy probably didn't know about that since he still trying to push it since
2014
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=116
> Review processes exist for a reason.
Review processes is one of the best thing in Fedora and i believe this helps
with packaging quality overall. The problem is no one literally wanted to do
this in Fedora since 99% of packages reviewing one person which i mentioned
already before there.
efivar and mokutil fail to build from source. They have been retired, then
unretired and they still fail to build from source.
Following the policy:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Fails_to_build_from_source_Fails_to_install/
I kindly ask the maintainers to rebuild them or orphan the
Should we rename "Bodhi activation point" in the schedule?
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/31/Schedule
Bodhi is now active for rawhide and branched as well.
What about "Bodhi updates-testing activation point"?
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
__
On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 07:50:17AM -0400, Mohan Boddu wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Due to an issue with mbs authentication and then travel for FLOCK, we
> couldn't run mass rebuilds of modules last week (mass rebuilds of modules
> is run after mass rebuild of rpms are done). We are planning to try it
> to
Firstly they're just FTBFS in F-30 This isn't exactly long
standing, if it was F-26 like some that were retired I could
completely understand that statement but F-30 is pushing the rhetoric
a bit here.
> efivar and mokutil fail to build from source. They have been retired, then
> unretired and
On 8/7/19 12:13 PM, Mattias Ellert wrote:
> fre 2019-07-19 klockan 18:16 -0700 skrev Kevin Fenzi:
>> hey folks, here is a list of currently failing images in rawhide.
>> Please fix if you can.
>>
>> 4. Fedora scientific KDE:
>> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=36353230
>>
>> Prob
On 13. 08. 19 19:43, Peter Robinson wrote:
Firstly they're just FTBFS in F-30 This isn't exactly long
standing, if it was F-26 like some that were retired I could
completely understand that statement but F-30 is pushing the rhetoric
a bit here.
It has been half a year without any response.
On Tue, 2019-08-13 at 18:42 +0200, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> On 13.08.2019 18:34, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > And yet this thread demonstrates that without good review, we will get
> > garbage packages. Review processes exist for a reason.
>
> Every package can become a garbage, because aft
On Tue, 2019-08-13 at 19:02 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> Should we rename "Bodhi activation point" in the schedule?
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/31/Schedule
>
> Bodhi is now active for rawhide and branched as well.
>
> What about "Bodhi updates-testing activation point"?
Agreed,
On 8/11/19 3:55 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>> I'm not sure what else you would like me to do here...
>
> How about changing the Bodhi rules to allow stable pushes 7 days after
> update submission rather than 7 days after the push to testing actually
> happens? That would make t
On 8/11/19 7:17 AM, Mukundan Ragavan wrote:
> Can someone from releng re-tag these packages and push them to stable?
>
> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1344119
> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1344089
> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?bui
On Sun, 2019-08-11 at 12:55 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > I'm not sure what else you would like me to do here...
>
> How about changing the Bodhi rules to allow stable pushes 7 days after
> update submission rather than 7 days after the push to testing actually
> happens? T
Hey guys, I just saw this so sorry for the late reply.
I'm still around. I haven't been contacted but I see no problems with
moving away from compton in an orderly fashion.
Feel free to take over if you want. :)
Regards,
Abhiram K
On Tue, 13 Aug, 2019, 11:32 PM Adam Williamson,
wrote:
> On Tue
Now that we are branching Fedora 31,
I wonder what are the plans for F31 gating before the "Bodhi activation point".
Will we only gate rawhide and let f31 builds go directly to the f31-pending ->
f31 tag?
Or the procedure on rawhide and branched will be +- identical?
(I've been told on IRC th
On 13.08.2019 20:01, Adam Williamson wrote:
> This is true, but that's not a reason to stop doing package reviews.
> "Things aren't perfect" is never a good excuse for "...so we can make
> them worse!"
I never asked to stop doing package reviews. Package review is a good
thing. I just asked to sim
On Mon, Aug 5, 2019 at 6:17 PM Kevin Kofler wrote:
> >
> > Please feel free though to add your thoughts to the issue.
> >
> > [1] https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/issues/702
>
> The upstream issue actually says they want to keep building 32-bit in
> their
> CI, so it should compile just fine,
Kaleb Keithley wrote:
> Building it on 32-bit in the CI is only to ensure correctness of sprintf
> format strings. It's a compile-only test.
And that is sufficient. As long as it compiles, you can package it. Whether
upstream "supports" it or not is irrelevant.
Kevin Kofler
_
Adam Williamson wrote:
> It's not really about "accountability", it's simply: we can only really
> assume the package is being tested once it makes it to the repo. Yes
> you can pull it out sooner manually or using bodhi CLI, but very few
> people do that. The intent of the rule is "we want people
On Tue, 2019-08-13 at 23:36 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Adam Williamson wrote:
> > It's not really about "accountability", it's simply: we can only really
> > assume the package is being tested once it makes it to the repo. Yes
> > you can pull it out sooner manually or using bodhi CLI, but very f
Adam Williamson wrote:
> But the key principle here isn't 'fairness', it's 'is the package
> broken'. That's the actual thing we're trying to achieve. From that
> perspective it doesn't make any sense to start the timer on submission
> rather than push.
What I want to achieve is predictability for
On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 10:36 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 06:02:42PM +0800, Robin Lee wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I packaged xe-guest-utilities with a systemd service for Fedora.
> >
> > But there is an upstream rpm package that include the same service as
> > a sy
Hi All,
Fedora 31 has now been branched, please be sure to do a git pull
--rebase to pick up the new branch, as an additional reminder
rawhide/f32 has been completely isolated from previous releases, so
this means that anything you do for f31 you also have to do in the
master branch and do a build
Hello,
I found out that nothing in Fedora depends on lz4-static (neither
runtime nor buildtime). Is anybody using it or I'm free to drop it?
Any thoughts?
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le..
>
>
> And that is sufficient. As long as it compiles, you can package it.
> Whether
> upstream "supports" it or not is irrelevant.
It depends on package maintainer. If upstream dropped 32-bit support, I'd
stop building it for that arch in Fedora.
Why would package maintainer have to bear the bur
64 matches
Mail list logo
