Re: Heads up: rdma-core dropped support for 32-bit arm

On Sunday, 08 December 2019 at 04:36, Doug Ledford wrote: > > On Dec 7, 2019, at 1:04 AM, Orion Poplawski wrote: > > > > FYI: > > > > rdma-core 26.1-1.fc32 dropped support for %arm: > > > > # 32-bit arm is missing required arch-specific memory barriers, > > ExcludeArch: %{arm} > > > > This bro

[Test-Announce] Fedora 32 Rawhide 20191209.n.0 nightly compose nominated for testing

Announcing the creation of a new nightly release validation test event for Fedora 32 Rawhide 20191209.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

Re: Heads up: rdma-core dropped support for 32-bit arm

On Mon, Dec 09, 2019 at 12:17:43PM +0100, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: > On Sunday, 08 December 2019 at 04:36, Doug Ledford wrote: > > > On Dec 7, 2019, at 1:04 AM, Orion Poplawski wrote: > > > > > > FYI: > > > > > > rdma-core 26.1-1.fc32 dropped support for %arm: > > > > > > # 32-bit

However

(I know that this question might be more reasonable on a kernel list, but a while back I posted the question twice and got no answers.) The acct struct is defined in /usr/include/sys/acct.h includes both ac_io and ac_rw for bytes transferred and blocks read or written, respectively. Fair and go

Fedora-Rawhide-20191209.n.0 compose check report

No missing expected images. Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check! 1 of 43 required tests failed openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING** below Failed openQA tests: 7/165 (x86_64), 1/2 (arm) New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20191208.n

Re: Orphaned packages looking for new maintainers

You should probably scroll to the bottom of [1] to find answer to your question. Vít [1] https://churchyard.fedorapeople.org/orphans-2019-12-02.txt Dne 06. 12. 19 v 1:46 Sérgio Basto napsal(a): > Hi, > > How I produce the results of orphans-2019-12-02.txt ? or please could > you update and

moving bugzilla overrides to dist-git

Hi, We are currently working on getting rid of the git repo at fedora-scm-requests [1] which is nowadays only used to store the overrides of the default assignee in bugzilla (for example to allow different default assignee for Fedora and EPEL). I am working on porting this mechanism to dist-

Re: Heads up: rdma-core dropped support for 32-bit arm

On Monday, 09 December 2019 at 14:15, Honggang LI wrote: > On Mon, Dec 09, 2019 at 12:17:43PM +0100, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski > wrote: [...] > > The change to rdma-core.spec in commit > > b631ce466538bdee6e19be3286fb8cbeb5c73de6: > > ... > > +# 32-bit arm is missing required arch-specific m

Re: moving bugzilla overrides to dist-git

On Mon, Dec 9, 2019 at 8:39 AM Karsten Hopp wrote: > > Hi, > > We are currently working on getting rid of the git repo at > fedora-scm-requests [1] which is nowadays only used to store the overrides of > the default assignee in bugzilla (for example to allow different default > assignee for Fed

Re: Heads up: rdma-core dropped support for 32-bit arm

On Fri, Dec 06, 2019 at 11:04:53PM -0700, Orion Poplawski wrote: > FYI: > > rdma-core 26.1-1.fc32 dropped support for %arm: > > # 32-bit arm is missing required arch-specific memory barriers, > ExcludeArch: %{arm} > > This broke dependecies for the arm package of openmpi > (https://bugzilla.redh

Re: moving bugzilla overrides to dist-git

On Mon, Dec 09, 2019 at 08:46:28AM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Mon, Dec 9, 2019 at 8:39 AM Karsten Hopp wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > We are currently working on getting rid of the git repo at > > fedora-scm-requests [1] which is nowadays only used to store the overrides > > of the default assign

Re: Fedora 31: dnf upgrade suddenly enables modular streams for protobuf

> 1. I didn't ask for/want a module. > 2. They aren't actually needed. After disabling them and reinstalling the > programs I care about (or could have used distro-sync) they weren't > actually needed. This is where I'll drop a plug for the Stewardship SIG. Thanks in large part to Fabio's great wo

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20191209.n.0 changes

OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20191208.n.0 NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20191209.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:1 Dropped images: 0 Added packages: 9 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 16 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 1.70 MiB Size of dropped packages:0 B

Schedule for Mondays's FESCo Meeting (2019-12-09)

Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FESCo meeting Monday at 15:00UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on irc.freenode.net. To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto or run: date -d '2019-12-09 15:00 UTC' Links to all issues to be

NeuroFedora Weekly team meeting: 1600 UTC on Tuesday, 10th December

Hello everyone, You are invited to the next Open/Public NeuroFedora team meeting at 1600UTC on Tuesday, 10th December in #fedora-neuro on irc.freenode.net. You can see the time in your local time zone by running this command in a terminal: $ date --date='TZ="UTC" 1600 next Tue' or using the lin

Re: NeuroFedora Weekly team meeting: 1600 UTC on Tuesday, 10th December

@major will chair tomorrow's meeting Please let me know if there's anything else that you would like to add to the agenda. We hope to see you at the meeting. :D On Mon, Dec 9, 2019 at 7:58 PM Aniket Pradhan wrote: > > Hello everyone, > > You are invited to the next Open/Public NeuroFedora team m

Re: No kernel package on Fedora Rawhide ppc64le?

On Sat, 7 Dec 2019 16:37:09 + Peter Robinson wrote: > On Sat, 7 Dec 2019, 14:46 Justin Forbes, wrote: > > > On Sat, Dec 7, 2019 at 5:01 AM Richard W.M. Jones > > wrote: > > > >> > >> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=39456403 > >> > >> DEBUG util.py:596: No matching

Re: However

I would use git blame to find out the reason. Barry > On 9 Dec 2019, at 13:18, Martha Simons wrote: > > (I know that this question might be more reasonable on a kernel list, > but a while back I posted the question twice and got no answers.) > > The acct struct is defined in /usr/include/sys/

Re: moving bugzilla overrides to dist-git

> We are thinking on providing a simple text field to submit FAS username or > email to override the default assignee, the big question is then, who should > be allowed to update this field ? I like it's the same policy with editing the Setting page of https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/foo .

Re: Announcing new anitya integration and de-orphaning process

> Existing status will be migrated from the fedora-scm-requests repo on pagure > to use this drop-down. > Using the fedora-scm-requests repo for the anitya integration will no longer > be supported. Thank you for the anitya integration feature. I have 2 questions. After the migration will be fi

Re: moving bugzilla overrides to dist-git

It would be nice if we would implement "approval" system while doing this. Like if you set somebody as override, that person must click "accept". Same way to change it, the old person must click "accept". Of course, pagure admin should be able to override this, based on FESCo tickets and such. On

Re: moving bugzilla overrides to dist-git

On Mon, Dec 09, 2019 at 05:18:32PM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > It would be nice if we would implement "approval" system while doing > this. Like if you set somebody as override, that person must click > "accept". Same way to change it, the old person must click "accept". I'm trying to think how

Re: Announcing new anitya integration and de-orphaning process

On Mon, Dec 09, 2019 at 05:15:36PM +0100, Jun Aruga wrote: > > Existing status will be migrated from the fedora-scm-requests repo on > > pagure to > use this drop-down. > > Using the fedora-scm-requests repo for the anitya integration will no > > longer be > supported. > > Thank you for the anit

Re: However

> I would use git blame to find out the reason. That was actually a spam repost of the following list message, probably to boost search engine ranking of the included URL: That

Re: Orphaned packages looking for new maintainers

On 06. 12. 19 1:46, Sérgio Basto wrote: Hi, How I produce the results of orphans-2019-12-02.txt ? or please could you update and upload orphans-2019-12-06.txt to see what we still need for js-jquery , etc. https://churchyard.fedorapeople.org/orphans.txt is generated and uploaded in an endless

Regarding Adam Miller (maxamillion) packager status

I had a short email conversation with Adam and he doesn't have time to maintain any his packages anymore. I don't know how to tell which packages he's main admin on but he on 391 packages overall. https://src.fedoraproject.org/user/maxamillion/projects He did point out a problem and I'm not sure

Re: Regarding Adam Miller (maxamillion) packager status

On 09. 12. 19 18:04, Richard Shaw wrote: I had a short email conversation with Adam and he doesn't have time to maintain any his packages anymore. I don't know how to tell which packages he's main admin on but he on 391 packages overall. https://src.fedoraproject.org/user/maxamillion/projects

Fedora Koji and unreliable IPv6 test

We have some IPv6 tests which basically start a server listening on ::1 and connect to it from a client. These fail semi-regularly in Fedora Koji. Initially I believed it would only fail on ppc64le, but in fact I have just now observed the failure on x86-64: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/t

Re: moving bugzilla overrides to dist-git

On Mon, Dec 09, 2019 at 05:35:58PM +0100, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > On Mon, Dec 09, 2019 at 05:18:32PM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > It would be nice if we would implement "approval" system while doing > > this. Like if you set somebody as override, that person must click > > "accept". Same way

Re: Fedora Koji and unreliable IPv6 test

On Mon, Dec 09, 2019 at 05:17:19PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > We have some IPv6 tests which basically start a server listening on > ::1 and connect to it from a client. These fail semi-regularly in > Fedora Koji. Initially I believed it would only fail on ppc64le, but > in fact I have jus

Re: Fedora Koji and unreliable IPv6 test

On Mon, Dec 09, 2019 at 07:46:08PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Mon, Dec 09, 2019 at 05:17:19PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > We have some IPv6 tests which basically start a server listening on > > ::1 and connect to it from a client. These fail semi-regularly in > > Fedora Koji.

Re: Allow comments and discussion even though an update was pushed to stable

On Sun, 2019-12-08 at 08:51 +, Mattia Verga via devel wrote: > Il 07/12/19 19:32, Adam Williamson ha scritto: > > But we already explained this. Comments on stable updates are not > > primarily for the maintainer, they are for *users*. Users tend to refer > > to Bodhi notes, if anything, more t

Re: Fedora 32 System-Wide Change proposal: Disallow Empty Password By Default

On 12/6/19 7:19 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: Lennart Poettering wrote: If you know where stuff is located you can change individual blocks in files. You are not going to know what you are changing them to, but you can change it and traditional files will not detect that you did that. Then you get un

Re: moving bugzilla overrides to dist-git

On Mon, Dec 09, 2019 at 06:34:15PM +0100, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > On Mon, Dec 09, 2019 at 05:35:58PM +0100, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 09, 2019 at 05:18:32PM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > > It would be nice if we would implement "approval" system while doing > > > this. Like if

Re: Fedora 32 System-Wide Change proposal: Disallow Empty Password By Default

On Mon, Dec 9, 2019 at 1:11 PM Przemek Klosowski via devel wrote: > > On 12/6/19 7:19 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > Lennart Poettering wrote: > >> If you know where stuff is located you can change individual blocks in > >> files. You are not going to know what you are changing them to, but > >> you

Re: Fedora 32 System-Wide Change proposal: Disallow Empty Password By Default

On 12/6/19 10:02 PM, John M. Harris Jr wrote: On Friday, December 6, 2019 5:14:24 PM MST Kevin Kofler wrote: Marius Schwarz wrote: "Figure out intersection with current work to use the TPM to allow booting to GDM without entering the password." Means, if someone steals the device, he can boot

Review request: python-odfdo

Hello I need this package to create odf files. It is the "new" version of lpod. Here is the review request: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1773344 Can someone review it ? Thanks ! Regards ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproje

Re: Fedora-Rawhide-20191209.n.0 compose check report

On Mon, 2019-12-09 at 13:18 +, Fedora compose checker wrote: > No missing expected images. > > Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check! > 1 of 43 required tests failed > openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING** > below > > Failed openQA tests: 7/165 (x8

Re: Suggestion for Fedora change proposal: -Bsymbolic-functions default in LDFLAGS

> Not fool proof checked, but I believe this is what would happen. Usually > one wants to only LD_PRELOAD to replace some glibc symbol, for some kind > of debug, but any library where there valid usages of LD_PRELOAD should > not be linked with -Bdynamic-functions. Having experienced the frustra

Re: Suggestion for Fedora change proposal: -Bsymbolic-functions default in LDFLAGS

If you are running into that kind of problems where plugins/modules/dynamically linked objects may have conflicting requirements then see dlmopen(): https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/LinkerNamespaces ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraprojec

Re: Fedora 32 System-Wide Change proposal: Disallow Empty Password By Default

On Monday, December 9, 2019 1:42:01 PM MST Chris Murphy wrote: > I'm not sure how people are worried about trojans being injected into > an unencrypted root, while also not at all concerned about bootloader > malware, or malware injected into the initramfs or the hibernation > image - which upon re

Re: Fedora 32 System-Wide Change proposal: Disallow Empty Password By Default

On Monday, December 9, 2019 1:42:01 PM MST Chris Murphy wrote: > The alternative, to put a fine point on it, would > mean creating some small subset of the entire GNOME stack to stuff > into the initramfs in order to provide input, keymapping, and UI to > have the minimum a11y function and i18n exp

[Fedocal] Reminder meeting : Modularity Team (weekly)

Dear all, You are kindly invited to the meeting: Modularity Team (weekly) on 2019-12-10 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

Re: Working fedora-active-user script?

On Sat, 2019-12-07 at 07:21 -0600, Richard Shaw wrote: > On Fri, Dec 6, 2019 at 2:05 PM Pierre-Yves Chibon < > pin...@pingoured.fr> wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 06, 2019 at 01:52:52PM -0600, Richard Shaw wrote: > > > > >First, done anyone have a working version of the script? > > Google returns > >

Re: Orphaned packages looking for new maintainers

On Mon, 2019-12-09 at 14:22 +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote: > You should probably scroll to the bottom of [1] to find answer to > your > question. Ah ok , thanks > Vít > > > > [1] https://churchyard.fedorapeople.org/orphans-2019-12-02.txt > > > Dne 06. 12. 19 v 1:46 Sérgio Basto napsal(a): > > Hi

Re: Orphaned packages looking for new maintainers

On Mon, 2019-12-09 at 18:03 +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 06. 12. 19 1:46, Sérgio Basto wrote: > > Hi, > > > > How I produce the results of orphans-2019-12-02.txt ? or please > > could > > you update and upload orphans-2019-12-06.txt to see what we still > > need > > for js-jquery , etc. > > ht

Re: Fedora 32 System-Wide Change proposal: Disallow Empty Password By Default

On Mon, Dec 9, 2019 at 6:33 PM John M. Harris Jr wrote: > > On Monday, December 9, 2019 1:42:01 PM MST Chris Murphy wrote: > > I'm not sure how people are worried about trojans being injected into > > an unencrypted root, while also not at all concerned about bootloader > > malware, or malware inj

Re: Fedora 32 System-Wide Change proposal: Disallow Empty Password By Default

On Mon, Dec 9, 2019 at 6:35 PM John M. Harris Jr wrote: > > On Monday, December 9, 2019 1:42:01 PM MST Chris Murphy wrote: > > The alternative, to put a fine point on it, would > > mean creating some small subset of the entire GNOME stack to stuff > > into the initramfs in order to provide input,

Re: Fedora 32 System-Wide Change proposal: Disallow Empty Password By Default

On Mon, Dec 09, 2019 at 09:25:06PM -0700, Chris Murphy wrote: > The installer doesn't support such a configuration. No portion of the > bootloader nor the boot volume, can be encrypted. I do consider this a bug, but as there is no stable solution for that right now we can't just "fix it". > While