Fedora-Cloud-30-20200302.0 compose check report

No missing expected images. Passed openQA tests: 1/1 (x86_64) -- Mail generated by check-compose: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedorap

Re: Fwd: How to update ? Was:[Red Hat Bugzilla] Your Outstanding Requests

Am 02.03.20 um 04:43 schrieb J. Scheurich: > What is wrong ? Bugzilla + the build system are not magically linked. You need to close the bug manually after building the package in rawhide and F32. Just from a quick glance I think your rebuilds were successful so you can close the bug report. :-)

Re: Build into < Rawhide side tag fails with "Package ... has already been built"

On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 08:50:08AM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 11:43:16AM -0800, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 07:50:05PM +0100, Clement Verna wrote: > > > On Thu, 27 Feb 2020 at 14:14, Richard W.M. Jones > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Despite earlier

Re: Ideas and proposal for removing changelog and release fields from spec file

On Fri, 2020-02-28 at 15:45 +0100, clime wrote: > I thought the main reason not to combine update in the changelog file > with > code commits is to avoid conflicts when cherry picking as you > described. > > I.e. i do minor update specifically in f32 and generate changelog > file > in the same com

Re: Fwd: How to update ? Was:[Red Hat Bugzilla] Your Outstanding Requests

Hi, >> What is wrong ? > Bugzilla + the build system are not magically linked. You need to close the > bug manually after building the package in rawhide and F32. > > Just from a quick glance I think your rebuilds were successful so you can > close the bug report. :-) Thanks. But how do i close the

Creation of pkgconfig file for libraries that do not ship one

Hi, can we create a pkgconfig file for libraries that do not ship one? I did not find anything about that in our packaging policy. A bug was filed [0] about a missing pkgconfig file for zita-convolver library and I'm thinking og creating the missing pkgconfig file myself. Thank you Guido FAS: ta

Re: Ideas and proposal for removing changelog and release fields from spec file

Le 2020-03-01 02:31, clime a écrit : On Sat, 29 Feb 2020 at 21:50, Nicolas Mailhot via devel wrote: Le samedi 29 février 2020 à 20:30 +0100, clime a écrit : Putting %{dynrel} reconciliation in the rpmbuild -bs stage using detached file state means that fedpkg local (or checking out git stat

Re: Creation of pkgconfig file for libraries that do not ship one

On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 6:03 AM Guido Aulisi wrote: > > Hi, > can we create a pkgconfig file for libraries that do not ship one? > I did not find anything about that in our packaging policy. > > A bug was filed [0] about a missing pkgconfig file for zita-convolver > library and I'm thinking og crea

Re: Creation of pkgconfig file for libraries that do not ship one

On Mon, Mar 02, 2020 at 12:03:01PM +0100, Guido Aulisi wrote: > Hi, > can we create a pkgconfig file for libraries that do not ship one? > I did not find anything about that in our packaging policy. > > A bug was filed [0] about a missing pkgconfig file for zita-convolver > library and I'm thinkin

Re: Ideas and proposal for removing changelog and release fields from spec file

On Mon, 2 Mar 2020 at 11:44, Nils Philippsen wrote: > > On Fri, 2020-02-28 at 15:45 +0100, clime wrote: > > I thought the main reason not to combine update in the changelog file > > with > > code commits is to avoid conflicts when cherry picking as you > > described. > > > > I.e. i do minor update

Strange covert module builds [sbergmann ?]

Hello, I'm the maintainer of 'mariadb' & 'mariadb-connector-c' packages (rpms) and also 'modules/mariadb'. Recently, I discovered a 'modules/mariadb-connector-c' exists. Created by my colleague years ago, discontinued in 2017. This is correct - as we don't want it to build (anymore, most likely ev

Today's FESCo Meeting (2020-03-02) is cancelled

Due to an empty agenda today's FESCo Meeting (2020-03-02) is cancelled. The next meeting will be on next Monday (2020-03-09), I'll chair it (I was supposed to chair this one). I ask FESCo members to respond asynchronously to: F32 incomplete Changes: https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2349 -- Miro

Re: Strange covert module builds [sbergmann ?]

On 02/03/2020 12:48, Michal Schorm wrote: I'm the maintainer of 'mariadb' & 'mariadb-connector-c' packages (rpms) and also 'modules/mariadb'. Recently, I discovered a 'modules/mariadb-connector-c' exists. Created by my colleague years ago, discontinued in 2017. This is correct - as we don't want

Fedora-Cloud-31-20200302.0 compose check report

No missing expected images. Passed openQA tests: 1/1 (x86_64) -- Mail generated by check-compose: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedorap

Re: Strange covert module builds [sbergmann ?]

Can you please brief me really quick on how does the flatpack work from maintainer POV? (what does it need for build / creation; what does it need for runtime ) If the flatpack uses the packages from base Fedora; 'rpms/mariadb-connector-c', which I'm the maintainer of probably sent me the email to

Re: Strange covert module builds [sbergmann ?]

On 02/03/2020 13:30, Michal Schorm wrote: Can you please brief me really quick on how does the flatpack work from maintainer POV? (what does it need for build / creation; what does it need for runtime ) If the flatpack uses the packages from base Fedora; 'rpms/mariadb-connector-c', which I'm the

Re: Fwd: How to update ? Was:[Red Hat Bugzilla] Your Outstanding Requests

On Mon, 2020-03-02 at 11:55 +0100, J. Scheurich wrote: > Thanks. But how do i close the bugreport ? > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1800246 > > do not offer a "close bug" Change the status to CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE (and set the “Fixed In Version” field preferrably) if it is fixed

Re: Fwd: How to update ? Was:[Red Hat Bugzilla] Your Outstanding Requests

On Mon, Mar 02, 2020 at 11:55:52AM +0100, J. Scheurich wrote: > Hi, > >> What is wrong ? > > Bugzilla + the build system are not magically linked. You need to close the > > bug manually after building the package in rawhide and F32. > > > > Just from a quick glance I think your rebuilds were succes

Orphaned packages looking for new maintainers

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://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_remove_a_package_at_end_of_life Note: If

Re: Strange covert module builds [sbergmann ?]

On Mon, 2 Mar 2020 at 07:32, Michal Schorm wrote: > Can you please brief me really quick on how does the flatpack work > from maintainer POV? (what does it need for build / creation; what > does it need for runtime ) > > If the flatpack uses the packages from base Fedora; > 'rpms/mariadb-connecto

Re: Strange covert module builds [sbergmann ?]

> That new thing then gets leveraged into the next new thing with multiple > layers that would make MC Escher and Rube Goldberg proud. Awesome :D ... TL;DR: I don't need to investigate it further. I was afraid of rouge Fedora Module builds, which actually didn't happen. If flatpack needs to rebu

Re: Ideas and proposal for removing changelog and release fields from spec file

On Mon, 2 Mar 2020 at 12:05, Nicolas Mailhot via devel wrote: > > Le 2020-03-01 02:31, clime a écrit : > > On Sat, 29 Feb 2020 at 21:50, Nicolas Mailhot via devel > > wrote: > >> > >> Le samedi 29 février 2020 à 20:30 +0100, clime a écrit : > > >> Putting %{dynrel} reconciliation in the rpmbuild

Re: Ideas and proposal for removing changelog and release fields from spec file

On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 8:46 AM clime wrote: > > On Mon, 2 Mar 2020 at 12:05, Nicolas Mailhot via devel > wrote: > > > > If you don’t keep things decentralized you’ll be in a word of pain when > > the scm or buildsys needs to be changed for another implementation (not > > to mention, that’s not a

GNOME 3.35.92 megaupdate

Hi all, I am putting together a megaupdate for GNOME 3.35.92. If you are helping with builds, please wait until we have the f32-gnome side tag (requested in https://pagure.io/releng/issue/9292) and then do the F32 builds with 'fedpkg build --target f32-gnome'. I'll collect all the builds tagg

GCC help needed for chromium

Wait, I know that $TOPIC is scary, come back. Chromium has this chunk of code (in third_party/angle/src/common/PackedEnums.h): // This horrible const_cast pattern is necessary to work around a constexpr limitation. // See https://stackoverflow.com/q/34199774/ . Note that

Re: GNOME 3.35.92 megaupdate

On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 7:57 AM Kalev Lember wrote: > > Hi all, > > I am putting together a megaupdate for GNOME 3.35.92. If you are helping > with builds, please wait until we have the f32-gnome side tag (requested > in https://pagure.io/releng/issue/9292) and then do the F32 builds with > 'fedpk

Plan to retire mapserver

Hi all, I intend to retire the mapserver package (https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/mapserver). I don't use it any more and it fails to build for F32. If you want to maintain it, please step up! Regards, -- Julien Enselme http://www.jujens.eu/ ___ d

Re: GNOME 3.35.92 megaupdate

On 3/2/20 15:04, Richard Shaw wrote: On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 7:57 AM Kalev Lember > wrote: Hi all, I am putting together a megaupdate for GNOME 3.35.92. If you are helping with builds, please wait until we have the f32-gnome side tag (requested

Re: Strange covert module builds [sbergmann ?]

On 3/2/20 14:15, Michal Schorm wrote: That new thing then gets leveraged into the next new thing with multiple layers that would make MC Escher and Rube Goldberg proud. Awesome :D ... TL;DR: I don't need to investigate it further. I was afraid of rouge Fedora Module builds, which actually did

Re: GCC help needed for chromium

On Mon, Mar 02, 2020 at 08:57:46AM -0500, Tom Callaway wrote: > Wait, I know that $TOPIC is scary, come back. > > Chromium has this chunk of code (in > third_party/angle/src/common/PackedEnums.h): > > // This horrible const_cast pattern is necessary to work > around a constexpr limit

kernel install - very slow weak modules / depmod step

I've been installing kernel-core-5.6.0-0.rc3.git2.2.fc33.x86_64 on a very fast AMD server and it's taking many minutes (at least 5 minutes and I'm still waiting). The slow step seems t be running some new thing called "weak-modules", and many depmod invocations underneath. 2212 pts/0S+

Re: kernel install - very slow weak modules / depmod step

On Mon, Mar 02, 2020 at 02:17:35PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > I've been installing kernel-core-5.6.0-0.rc3.git2.2.fc33.x86_64 on a > very fast AMD server and it's taking many minutes (at least 5 minutes > and I'm still waiting). The slow step seems t be running some new > thing called "wea

Re: kernel install - very slow weak modules / depmod step

On Mon, Mar 02, 2020 at 02:22:54PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Mon, Mar 02, 2020 at 02:17:35PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > I've been installing kernel-core-5.6.0-0.rc3.git2.2.fc33.x86_64 on a > > very fast AMD server and it's taking many minutes (at least 5 minutes > > and I'm st

Re: Fwd: How to update ? Was:[Red Hat Bugzilla] Your Outstanding Requests

On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 1:55 pm, Petr Pisar wrote: Then tick on "I am providing the requested information for this bug" item under the large comment text area. That was probably the key point. Bugzilla was reminding you that you had an unresolved needinfo in that bug. ___

Re: GCC help needed for chromium

On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 8:57 am, Tom Callaway wrote: // This horrible const_cast pattern is necessary to work around a constexpr limitation. // See https://stackoverflow.com/q/34199774/ . Note that it should be fixed with C++17. const_cast(const_cast(

Fedora 32 compose report: 20200302.n.0 changes

OLD: Fedora-32-20200301.n.0 NEW: Fedora-32-20200302.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:0 Dropped images: 0 Added packages: 0 Dropped packages:1 Upgraded packages: 0 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 0 B Size of dropped packages:359.47 KiB Size of

Re: GNOME 3.35.92 megaupdate

On 3/2/20 14:55, Kalev Lember wrote: Hi all, I am putting together a megaupdate for GNOME 3.35.92. If you are helping with builds, please wait until we have the f32-gnome side tag (requested in https://pagure.io/releng/issue/9292) and then do the F32 builds with 'fedpkg build --target f32-gn

Reminder: Summer time changes in the next few weeks

As a reminder to the community, we've reached the point in the year where jurisdictions around the world begin or end summer time. Be sure to check your recurring meetings on Fedocal[1] to make sure you know when you're meeting. Some meetings are set to a fixed time UTC and others are set to a part

Fedora-32-20200302.n.0 compose check report

No missing expected images. Failed openQA tests: 23/171 (x86_64), 1/2 (arm) New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-32-20200301.n.0): ID: 530704 Test: x86_64 universal install_blivet_lvmthin@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/530704 Old failures (same test failed in Fedo

Fedora-IoT-32-20200302.0 compose check report

Missing expected images: Iot dvd x86_64 Iot dvd aarch64 Soft failed openQA tests: 2/8 (x86_64) (Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug) Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-IoT-32-20200228.0): ID: 530758 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso install_default_upload

Spend 5 minutes on reviewing a quick-doc!

Hello! There are still a lot of quick-docs that were automatically converted from wiki pages that have not yet been reviewed for correctness. If you have a few minutes, please pick one and check it to see if the information is correct and up to date. https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/quick-doc

Non-Responsive Maintainer: bsjones

Hello all, I have had zero success in contacting Brendan Jones per the non-responsive maintainer checks I filed in Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1806161 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1806162 Additionally, I attempted a pull request on fedora-jam-backgrounds

Re: Strange covert module builds [sbergmann ?]

On Mon, Mar 2, 2020, at 9:14 AM, Kalev Lember wrote: > For extra libraries that app flatpaks need that are not part of the > runtime, those we rebuild for the /app prefix for each app, using the MBS. I think whenever discussing this, it needs to be stated clearly that the *reason* for using th

Re: Ideas and proposal for removing changelog and release fields from spec file

Ad. Zbyszek: > What about doing --.? > This means that upgrade path not affected by the number of commits or > builds in the older release. I was thinking how to properly implement this into rpkg-util and then finally, it clicked for me. First, I added the prefix parameter for git_release macro

Re: Non-responsive maintainer: pocock

On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 1:23 PM Julian Sikorski wrote: > > Hi Daniel, > > I would like to add to Ankur's point: while I understand that many of us are > doing Fedora work voluntarily and the expectations should be set accordingly, > I believe we should be open to accept help when we realise that

Re: Ideas and proposal for removing changelog and release fields from spec file

On Tue, 3 Mar 2020 at 00:28, clime wrote: > > Ad. Zbyszek: > > > What about doing --.? > > This means that upgrade path not affected by the number of commits or > > builds in the older release. > > I was thinking how to properly implement this into rpkg-util and then > finally, it clicked for me.

Fedora-Cloud-30-20200303.0 compose check report

No missing expected images. Passed openQA tests: 1/1 (x86_64) -- Mail generated by check-compose: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedorap