Hi all,
we have updated the script which provides the cached review trackers
pages at https://fedoraproject.org/PackageReviewStatus/ (thanks to
cverna for the assistance).
Nothing too impressive, the main changes in frontend are:
- A search field in list pages to filter tickets. Since these pa
Dne 06. 04. 20 v 23:53 Stephen Gallagher napsal(a):
> I've just published a fourth version[1] of the ELN proposal. With a
> lot of input from Miro Hrončok, I think I've finally been able to
> clarify some of the points that we were getting hung up on.
>
> Changes in this version of the proposal[2]
On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 9:49 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 06, 2020 at 04:59:14PM +0300, Gilboa Davara wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Due to the extreme time constraints that I'm forced to orphan most of my
> > remaining packages.
> > Namely icewm (which has an active co-maintainer), spring and
> Hello. Gilboa, i would like to continue maintaining IceWM. And i interesting
> in 'springlobby' package. Please add me as co-maintainer. FAS: atim.
Hello,
Done. Please verify.
- Gilboa
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsub
On 06/04/2020 22:53, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
Changes in this version of the proposal[2]:
* Improve our explanation of why we are doing ELN in the first place
I agree that the proposal is now a lot clearer and I certainly see
how it furthers the first goral of seeing how Fedora trunk comes
to
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
LGTM. Thank you!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fe
On Mon, Apr 06, 2020 09:37:01 +0200, Pavel Raiskup wrote:
> On Sunday, April 5, 2020 12:44:38 PM CEST Ankur Sinha wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 04, 2020 21:37:05 -, Artem Tim wrote:
> > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1754807
> >
> > That does look like it. I'll go through the comments
On 07. 04. 20 10:09, Tom Hughes via devel wrote:
That will mean that most %fedora conditions will need to be
extended with a %rhel condition and that in many cases new
features may silently not be enabled in ELN builds until that
is manually discovered and the condition is amended which seems
to
Description of problem:
the Info URL of the package "clamsmtp" seems to be offline ...
$ dnf info clamsmtp | grep -i url
URL : http://memberwebs.com/stef/software/clamsmtp/
$ host memberwebs.com
Host memberwebs.com not found: 2(SERVFAIL)
it does not look like a temporary error. Is t
Hi,
On Mon, 2020-04-06 at 09:49 -0400, Ben Rosser wrote:
> > Not everyone is inclined to loudly argue their positions on the
> > mailing
> > list. There have only been 12 unique participants to this thread and 57
> > to the other thread.
> >
> > That isn't indicative of the entire Fedora packager
On Tue, 7 Apr 2020 at 05:58, Christopher wrote:
>
> If I get the motivation, I'll file a bug against the RPMFusion package.
Here's the bug tracker: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/
> As for the original issue regarding packaging: there is a ticket being
> tracked to get it upstream into the kerne
On Tue, 7 Apr 2020 at 03:08, Randy Barlow wrote:
>
> On 4/6/20 6:37 AM, Leigh Griffin wrote:
> > I'm sorry if you took my mail up as implying a lack of value from how
> > the team historically worked. As a team we are being tasked more and
> > more with adding what I call real value which is at a
On Tue, Apr 07, 2020 at 11:38:55AM +0200, Marius Schwarz wrote:
> Description of problem:
>
> the Info URL of the package "clamsmtp" seems to be offline ...
>
>
> $ dnf info clamsmtp | grep -i url
> URL : http://memberwebs.com/stef/software/clamsmtp/
>
> $ host memberwebs.com
> Host
Hi, Neal,
On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 12:49 AM Neal Gompa wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 6:22 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 6:09 PM Neal Gompa wrote:
> >>
> >> * The DistTag should be versioned. Either .eln.elX (e.g. .eln.el9),
> >> .elnX (e.g. .eln9), or just
Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> I'll take it and try to fix it. It's required for the proprietary
> Acrobat Reader for Linux. And yes, I know the last version is from 2013
> and full of security holes, but it's the only software that can read
> PDFs with forms on Linux. Co-maintainers welco
Adam Williamson wrote:
> Well. Uh. Clearly it's being provided to *Google*.
Indeed. Once again, Fedora is depending on third-party, proprietary,
privacy-invading SaaS.
Kevin Kofler
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsu
|Le 20-04-06 à 21 h 01, Paul Dufresne a écrit :> BTW, thanks I was
searching for an example of package using a git||version rather than a
released archive!||
|
|Just for the record, *I think* the current package is a bad example of
a package using a forge like git.|||
||
|Current
https://s
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
Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> The majority here is telling you to hold off execution of that
> "decision" and revisit it, but you're ignoring those voices entirely and
> offering useless "apologies" instead. You cannot pretend to be part of a
> community if you just ignore its other membe
On 07. 04. 20 12:18, Aleksandra Fedorova wrote:
What I'm confused about is the hangup with versioning the ELN tree.
Why is this a problem?
I explained it in one of the previous threads:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/OQ7BW5RFQDJYLPTB6G5XBZSIY
On Mon, Apr 06, 2020 at 06:48:17PM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 6:22 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 6:09 PM Neal Gompa wrote:
> >> I've personally been burned enough times by not having versioned
> >> DistTags for personal rebuilds that I would strongl
On Tue, Apr 07, 2020 09:53:18 +0100, Ankur Sinha wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 06, 2020 09:37:01 +0200, Pavel Raiskup wrote:
> > On Sunday, April 5, 2020 12:44:38 PM CEST Ankur Sinha wrote:
> > > On Sat, Apr 04, 2020 21:37:05 -, Artem Tim wrote:
> > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=175
On 06/04/20 16:19, David Schwörer wrote:
> On 4/5/20 6:06 PM, Antonio Trande wrote:
>> On 04/04/20 19:23, David S wrote:
>>> On 4/4/20 4:38 PM, Antonio Trande wrote:
Hi all.
`MUMPS-5.3.0` [1] `PETSc-3.13.0` [2] and `Sundials-5.2.0` [3] are coming
on Rawhide; these updates will
Le mardi 07 avril 2020 à 06:31 -0400, Paul Dufresne via devel a écrit :
> Le 20-04-06 à 21 h 01, Paul Dufresne a écrit :
> > BTW, thanks I was searching for an example of package using a git
> version rather than a released archive!
> Just for the record, *I think* the current package is a bad exam
On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 11:13 PM Rex Dieter wrote:
> Rex Dieter wrote:
>
> > FYI, Started work on importing Qt 5.14.2 into rawhide today, with
> work-in-
> > progress being done in side tag f33-build-side-21031
> >
> > I figure it'll take at least a few days to get the core bits and all
> > depend
On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 3:46 AM Vít Ondruch wrote:
...
> > * Added a section explaining how we will deal with side-tags
>
>
> Thank you for addressing this.
>
> However, could you please elaborate what will be the actual trigger to
> do rebuild of some package in ELN? It can't be `git push` if you
On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 2:22 AM Mattia Verga via devel <
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> we have updated the script which provides the cached review trackers
> pages at https://fedoraproject.org/PackageReviewStatus/ (thanks to
> cverna for the assistance).
>
Can we assume the o
On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 7:33 AM Petr Pisar wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 06, 2020 at 06:48:17PM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 6:22 PM Stephen Gallagher
> > wrote:
> > > On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 6:09 PM Neal Gompa wrote:
> > >> I've personally been burned enough times by not having v
On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 8:56 AM Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>
>
> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-d120de33c5
>
> This one is a Rawhide update from a side tag, submitted on Sunday
> morning which has been in pending for 2 days. (As it's Rawhide it's
> supposed to spend 0 days in t
There is a problem right now with the part of koji that tags builds and
adds them to the various repos koji uses for new builds. So you can
build new packages, but can not rely on further builds seeing your
just-built packages.
--
Nicolas Mailhot
___
de
Richard Shaw wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 11:13 PM Rex Dieter wrote:
>
>> Rex Dieter wrote:
>>
>> > FYI, Started work on importing Qt 5.14.2 into rawhide today, with
>> work-in-
>> > progress being done in side tag f33-build-side-21031
>> >
>> > I figure it'll take at least a few days to get
On 4/4/20 09:21, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
On Fri, Apr 03, 2020 at 02:25:36PM +0200, Kalev Lember wrote:
I added the libsecret -> gnome-keyring recommends due to
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1725412 but perhaps it's best
to revert this change
Yes, please.
OK, I went a
For each of these stuck builds could you open up tickets in
https://pagure.io/releng/new_issue so we can track them down and fix them.
Currently there are 1.5 sysadmins and 1.5 release engineer and we are not
going to be able to track what and where we are doing things from mailing
list posts.
On
Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>
> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-d120de33c5
>
> This one is a Rawhide update from a side tag, submitted on Sunday
> morning which has been in pending for 2 days. (As it's Rawhide it's
> supposed to spend 0 days in testing.) Is there any problem
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 1/8 (x86_64)
Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-IoT-32-20200406.0):
ID: 569478 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso base_services_start
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/569478
Passed openQA tests: 7/8 (x86_64)
--
Mail generated
On Tue, Apr 07, 2020 07:21:14 +, Mattia Verga via devel wrote:
> Hi all,
Hi Mattia,
Thanks very much for this!
>
>
> BTW, since we have a 'trivial' ticket list for new reviewers, it would
> be nice to have this populated: just add the 'trivial' tag in the ticket
> whiteboard field on bugz
Hello there
We would be starting the meeting in about 2 hours. Would love to see
you all there. ;D
On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 2:45 PM Aniket Pradhan
wrote:
>
> Hello world
>
> You are invited to attend the next Open NeuroFedora team meeting this
> week on Tuesday at 1600UTC in #fedora-neuro on IRC (
On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 3:10 AM Tom Hughes via devel
wrote:
>
> On 06/04/2020 22:53, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
> > Changes in this version of the proposal[2]:
> >
> > * Improve our explanation of why we are doing ELN in the first place
>
> I agree that the proposal is now a lot clearer and I certa
The Audacity package is currently getting desktop lint errors on x86_64 and
armv7hl saying:
"diag" : "Exec file /usr/bin/env not found, even in noarch",
when it uses the exec line:
"Exec=env UBUNTU_MENUPROXY=0 audacity %F"
inside its .desktop file.
To me, I don't see anything wrong with this
Il 07/04/20 16:01, Ankur Sinha ha scritto:
>
> The list says that there aren't any trivial tickets, but easyfix does
> show one (only one):
> https://fedoraproject.org/PackageReviewStatus/trivial.html
> vs
> https://fedoraproject.org/easyfix/
>
> Could you check this please?
>
Yeah, that's because
On Tue, 2020-04-07 at 14:01 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot via devel wrote:
> Le mardi 07 avril 2020 à 06:31 -0400, Paul Dufresne via devel a écrit :
> > Le 20-04-06 à 21 h 01, Paul Dufresne a écrit :
> > > BTW, thanks I was searching for an example of package using a git
> > version rather than a released
On Sat, 2020-04-04 at 06:55 +0200, Jan Pazdziora wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 03, 2020 at 03:12:35PM +0200, Petr Pisar wrote:
> > Maybe libsecret spec could provide an empty libsecret-never-fail subpackage
> > that would hard-require a libsecret server and the applications like geary
> > would
> > require
On 4/7/20 9:21 AM, Mattia Verga via devel wrote:
> we have updated the script which provides the cached review trackers
> pages at https://fedoraproject.org/PackageReviewStatus/ (thanks to
> cverna for the assistance).
It looks like 1821497 [1] is displayed incorrectly (currently at the
bottom
Is there a recommended way for detecting when a package is being built
under mock? I have a package where some tests fail due to various things
not being present in a mock container, e.g, /dev/log doesn't exist. I can
just disable these tests downstream, but upstream might take a change if I
On Tuesday, April 7, 2020 11:24:28 AM EDT Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Sat, 2020-04-04 at 06:55 +0200, Jan Pazdziora wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 03, 2020 at 03:12:35PM +0200, Petr Pisar wrote:
> > > Maybe libsecret spec could provide an empty libsecret-never-fail
> > > subpackage that would hard-require
Announcing the creation of a new nightly release validation test event
for Fedora 32 Branched 20200407.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
On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 09:27:56AM +0200, Adrian Reber wrote:
> I will update libcdio to 2.1.0 next week in rawhide. As always, libcdio
> comes with a new SO version.
>
> The following packages have to be rebuilt and I will do the necessary
> rebuilds:
>
> cantata
> cdw
> clementine
> gstreamer1-
Le 07/04/2020 à 12:29, Kevin Kofler a écrit :
Adam Williamson wrote:
Well. Uh. Clearly it's being provided to *Google*.
Indeed. Once again, Fedora is depending on third-party, proprietary,
privacy-invading SaaS.
Meets exactly my thoughts...
This is yet again another disappointing choice of
- Original Message -
> From: "Xavier Bachelot"
> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
> , "Kevin Kofler"
>
> Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 12:15:37 PM
> Subject: Re: Modularity Survey
>
> Le 07/04/2020 à 12:29, Kevin Kofler a écrit :
> > Adam Williamson wrote:
> >> Well. Uh. C
On Tue, 2020-04-07 at 13:12 -0400, Alex Scheel wrote:
> I'm sure we can trust that Red Hat did its
>
> due diligence and Google isn't using responses to a customer's form to
>
> track those taking the survey.
I don't really know why you'd think anyone can trust that. Google
tracks everyone every
Hello people
Thanks for attending the meeting. We shall meet in two weeks' time. I
will share a whenisgood to the NeuroFedora ML to schedule a suitable
time for the next meeting.
Links to the logs from today's meeting:
-
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-neuro/2020-04-07/neurofedora.2020-
OLD: Fedora-32-20200406.n.0
NEW: Fedora-32-20200407.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 1
Added packages: 2
Dropped packages:1
Upgraded packages: 46
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 1.72 MiB
Size of dropped packages:17.30 MiB
Size
Hi,
On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 1:13 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> On 07. 04. 20 12:18, Aleksandra Fedorova wrote:
> >> What I'm confused about is the hangup with versioning the ELN tree.
> >> Why is this a problem?
> > I explained it in one of the previous threads:
> >
> > https://lists.fedoraproject.or
On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 1:50 PM Aleksandra Fedorova wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 1:13 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
> >
> > On 07. 04. 20 12:18, Aleksandra Fedorova wrote:
> > >> What I'm confused about is the hangup with versioning the ELN tree.
> > >> Why is this a problem?
> > > I explain
On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 1:56 PM Neal Gompa wrote:
> This definitely solves the issue I've been thinking of. I'm not sure I
> understand why we want to disconnect the ELN version from the upcoming
> RHEL version, even in the DistTag? It seems to be a weird hoop to
> separate when we all know this is
On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 2:02 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 1:56 PM Neal Gompa wrote:
> > This definitely solves the issue I've been thinking of. I'm not sure I
> > understand why we want to disconnect the ELN version from the upcoming
> > RHEL version, even in the DistTag?
On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 7:55 PM Neal Gompa wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 1:50 PM Aleksandra Fedorova wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 1:13 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > >
> > > On 07. 04. 20 12:18, Aleksandra Fedorova wrote:
> > > >> What I'm confused about is the hangup with ve
On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 2:11 PM Aleksandra Fedorova wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 7:55 PM Neal Gompa wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 1:50 PM Aleksandra Fedorova
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 1:13 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On 07. 04. 20 12:1
On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 2:16 PM Neal Gompa wrote:
> > > This definitely solves the issue I've been thinking of. I'm not sure I
> > > understand why we want to disconnect the ELN version from the upcoming
> > > RHEL version, even in the DistTag? It seems to be a weird hoop to
> > > separate when we
On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 2:27 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 2:16 PM Neal Gompa wrote:
> > > > This definitely solves the issue I've been thinking of. I'm not sure I
> > > > understand why we want to disconnect the ELN version from the upcoming
> > > > RHEL version, even in
On Tue, Apr 07, 2020 at 11:46:20AM -0400, Steve Grubb wrote:
> I think out of this whole experience, there might need to be a rule that any
> weak depency added to a package in @Core should not result in pulling is a
> nearly working desktop. Maybe that should also be extended to @Base?
That's p
On 4/6/20 4:08 PM, Ben Cotton wrote:
[snip]
It doesn't make much sense to me for this to default to on if we still
"trust" the DNS servers provided over DHCP. Additionally, it's not clear
to me from the proposal what it would take for an NTP server provided
over DHCP to be "trusted", or wh
On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 2:27 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 2:16 PM Neal Gompa wrote:
> > > > This definitely solves the issue I've been thinking of. I'm not sure I
> > > > understand why we want to disconnect the ELN version from the upcoming
> > > > RHEL version, even in
On Tue, 7 Apr 2020 11:43:26 -0400 (EDT)
Scott Talbert wrote:
> Is there a recommended way for detecting when a package is being
> built under mock? I have a package where some tests fail due to
> various things not being present in a mock container, e.g, /dev/log
> doesn't exist. I can just dis
On Tue, Apr 7, 2020, at 2:42 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 2:27 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 2:16 PM Neal Gompa wrote:
> > > > > This definitely solves the issue I've been thinking of. I'm not sure I
> > > > > understand why we want to disconnect th
On Tue, 7 Apr 2020, Paul Howarth wrote:
Is there a recommended way for detecting when a package is being
built under mock? I have a package where some tests fail due to
various things not being present in a mock container, e.g, /dev/log
doesn't exist. I can just disable these tests downstream,
On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 2:49 PM James Cassell
wrote:
> eln9.100.0 makes the relation to RHEL cycle obvious without looking like a
> RHEL tag. Is dot allowed here? Do we need eln9_100_1?
The dots would be permissible here.
That said, can you describe what value you see in having the RHEL
cycle re
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 5:53 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> I've just published a fourth version[1] of the ELN proposal. With a
> lot of input from Miro Hrončok, I think I've finally been able to
> clarify some of the points that we were getting hung
- Original Message -
> From: "Stephen Gallagher"
> To: devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Sent: Monday, April 6, 2020 11:53:47 PM
> Subject: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change Proposal: ELN Buildroot and Compose V4
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> I've just pub
On Tue, Apr 07, 2020 at 01:41:48PM -0500, Brandon Nielsen wrote:
> On 4/6/20 4:08 PM, Ben Cotton wrote:
> > [snip]
> >
> >
>
> It doesn't make much sense to me for this to default to on if we still
> "trust" the DNS servers provided over DHCP. Additionally, it's not clear to
> me from the propos
Things should be getting better now
https://pagure.io/koji/issue/2119#comment-640757
On Sat, Apr 4, 2020 at 5:13 AM Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>
> On Sat, Apr 04, 2020 at 12:42:29AM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > On 03. 04. 20 13:03, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > >
> > >I've been waiting on:
> >
This is a great idea, but I wouldn't recommend removing buildroot
overrides totally for one more reason than the others that are already
mentioned here. Side tags are resource intensive compared to buildroot
override as each side tag needs its own buildroot.
On Sat, Apr 4, 2020 at 5:02 PM Richard
On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 8:57 AM Rex Dieter wrote:
>
> Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>
> >
> > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-d120de33c5
> >
> > This one is a Rawhide update from a side tag, submitted on Sunday
> > morning which has been in pending for 2 days. (As it's Rawhide it's
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/OpenSSL3.0
== Summary ==
The OpenSSL package is rebased to version 3.0 and the dependent
packages are rebuilt.
== Owner ==
* Name: [[User:Tmraz| Tomáš Mráz]]
* Email:
== Detailed Description ==
The OpenSSL 3.0 release is going to be a significantly new re
On 4/6/20 5:19 AM, Alex Scheel wrote:
It'd be interesting to see if the FESCo election system could be
repurposed to get a sense of all packagers' opinions, rather than
make assumptions on how the community as a whole feels based on a few
vocal members and their participation in the mailing lists
I guess it should be a fixed in bodhi. But for now you can remove the
builds that it's complaining about in the update.
https://github.com/fedora-infra/bodhi/issues/3991
On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 2:56 AM Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>
>
> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-d120de33c5
On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 8:34 AM Fabio Valentini wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 8:56 AM Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> >
> >
> > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-d120de33c5
> >
> > This one is a Rawhide update from a side tag, submitted on Sunday
> > morning which has been in pen
On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 1:00 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> On 29. 03. 20 13:13, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > According to the Fedora's Fails To Build From Source policy:
> >
> > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Fails_to_build_from_source_Fails_to_install/
> >
> >
> > The following packages will b
I saw that Nvidia published version 440.82 of their drivers today.
Last one was 440.62 released on February 28.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Co
On Tue, 2020-04-07 at 20:55 -0400, Paul Dufresne via devel wrote:
> I saw that Nvidia published version 440.82 of their drivers today.
>
> Last one was 440.62 released on February 28.
That is offtopic here, as Fedora does not ship or support proprietary
software. There are third-party repositorie
Hi all,
I just updated python-hypothesis to the latest 5.8.0 version. It should
be fine for Rawhide, but for Fedora 32 it's probably worth testing
(since the previous version we have in the repo is a bit behind -- 4.23.8).
I'm putting it as a buildroot override in case maintainers for the
de
On Sun, Apr 5, 2020 at 6:58 AM Rex Dieter wrote:
>
> FYI, Started work on importing Qt 5.14.2 into rawhide today, with work-in-
> progress being done in side tag f33-build-side-21031
>
> I figure it'll take at least a few days to get the core bits and all
> dependencies rebuilt. Will provide stat
On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 6:06 AM Iñaki Ucar wrote:
>
> On Tue, 7 Apr 2020 at 05:58, Christopher wrote:
> >
> > If I get the motivation, I'll file a bug against the RPMFusion package.
>
> Here's the bug tracker: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/
Thanks.
>
> > As for the original issue regarding pack
On Wed, Apr 08, 2020 at 10:45:40AM +0800, Robin Lee wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 5, 2020 at 6:58 AM Rex Dieter wrote:
> >
> > FYI, Started work on importing Qt 5.14.2 into rawhide today, with work-in-
> > progress being done in side tag f33-build-side-21031
> >
> > I figure it'll take at least a few days
On Tue, 7 Apr 2020 at 14:57, Rex Dieter wrote:
> Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>
> >
> > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-d120de33c5
> >
> > This one is a Rawhide update from a side tag, submitted on Sunday
> > morning which has been in pending for 2 days. (As it's Rawhide it's
>
On Tue, 7 Apr 2020 at 23:38, Mohan Boddu wrote:
> I guess it should be a fixed in bodhi. But for now you can remove the
> builds that it's complaining about in the update.
>
> https://github.com/fedora-infra/bodhi/issues/3991
Answered in the ticket, but I think Bodhi is behaving correctly there
I agree, if this would not happen then everything would just blow up.
On Wed, Apr 8, 2020 at 8:33 AM Clement Verna wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, 7 Apr 2020 at 23:38, Mohan Boddu wrote:
>>
>> I guess it should be a fixed in bodhi. But for now you can remove the
>> builds that it's complaining about in t
On Wed, Apr 8, 2020 at 12:24 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 08, 2020 at 10:45:40AM +0800, Robin Lee wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 5, 2020 at 6:58 AM Rex Dieter wrote:
> > >
> > > FYI, Started work on importing Qt 5.14.2 into rawhide today, with work-in-
> > > progress being done in side tag f33-b
89 matches
Mail list logo
