On Sun, May 3, 2020 at 4:40 AM Jerry James wrote:
>
> On Sat, May 2, 2020 at 4:33 AM Christopher wrote:
> > Those are bugs filed against RPM. Is the RPM package responsible for
> > executing lsetfilecon, or is it the grub2 package? If the grub2
> > package, it seems to me that they should know th
Dne po 4. kvě 2020 8:44 uživatel Clement Verna
napsal:
>
>
> On Sun, 3 May 2020 at 21:42, clime wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 3 May 2020 at 19:42, Aoife Moloney wrote:
>> >
>> > # CPE Weekly: 2020-05-02
>> > ---
>> > title: CPE Weekly status email
>> > tags: CPE Weekly, email
>> > ---
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
Hello,
Although I'm new here, I've had a few packages go through review
already and I'm very grateful for the help and education provided by
the reviewers.
But there is one package that I put up for review about a month ago
and I haven't had any luck in attracting a reviewer. It's here -
https://
> as part of https://hackmd.io/kIje9yXTRdWITwP7cFK2pA (annotated tags
> pushed by package maintainers) effort, I revisited the sorting
> algorithm that is used to determine the "latest" tag for a given
> package which is needed to determine correct package version.
> Basically, if the current commi
On 5/3/20 5:05 PM, Guido Aulisi wrote:
Hello,
I'm going to retire the jamin package [0], because it's unmaintained
upstream and it uses an old audio plugin standard (LADSPA).
According to this thread [1], it introduces a lot of distortion too.
It's also been terminally broken (segfault on sta
I will do it.
пн, 4 мая 2020 г., 11:03 Bob Hepple :
> Hello,
>
> Although I'm new here, I've had a few packages go through review
> already and I'm very grateful for the help and education provided by
> the reviewers.
>
> But there is one package that I put up for review about a month ago
> and I
On 5/4/20 10:17 AM, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
On Sun, May 3, 2020 at 4:40 AM Jerry James wrote:
On Sat, May 2, 2020 at 4:33 AM Christopher wrote:
Those are bugs filed against RPM. Is the RPM package responsible for
executing lsetfilecon, or is it the grub2 package? If the grub2
package
On 5/3/20 10:56 PM, Iñaki Ucar wrote:
> Hi,
>
Hi Iñaki!
I have CCed devel@lists.fedoraproject.org as this issue may be shared. I have
not yet written it to
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Java11#common_issues_packagers_can_face_and_gathered_solutions
as
I hope it will be rare.
Generally
On Sat, May 02, 2020 at 02:01:43AM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 01. 05. 20 22:21, Ben Cotton wrote:
> > == Detailed Description ==
> > Fedora 33 will ship with the latest LTS version of Node.js by default.
> > This will either be the `nodejs:14` module stream or else replicated
> > to the non-mo
Hi, thanks for your assistance, comments inline:
On Mon, 4 May 2020 at 10:48, Jiri Vanek wrote:
>
> Generally, no program can say, that do not support jdk11, because any
> javac/java application can be
> *hacked* to work with java11 - see
> https://jvanek.fedorapeople.org/devconf/2017/portingjav
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 10:20 AM Panu Matilainen wrote:
[snip]
> > I've been closing as duplicates of #1722766 but we are just getting
> > too many bugs filed for this issue.
>
> It's an entirely cosmetical issue in rpm SELinux plugin but as innocent
> maintainers are apparently getting bombarded
On 5/4/20 11:15 AM, Iñaki Ucar wrote:
> Hi, thanks for your assistance, comments inline:
>
> On Mon, 4 May 2020 at 10:48, Jiri Vanek wrote:
>>
>> Generally, no program can say, that do not support jdk11, because any
>> javac/java application can be
>> *hacked* to work with java11 - see
>> https:
On 04. 05. 20 7:59, Milan Crha wrote:
Hi,
out of the interest (no offense meant), would this not be caught by the
rawhide gating? I'd expect that this is something what the rawhide
gating would avoid. Of course, it expects reasonably good gating tests
for the package(s), there's no doubt,
On 04. 05. 20 10:51, Petr Pisar wrote:
On Sat, May 02, 2020 at 02:01:43AM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 01. 05. 20 22:21, Ben Cotton wrote:
== Detailed Description ==
Fedora 33 will ship with the latest LTS version of Node.js by default.
This will either be the `nodejs:14` module stream or else
* Milan Crha:
> out of the interest (no offense meant), would this not be caught by the
> rawhide gating? I'd expect that this is something what the rawhide
> gating would avoid.
There is no simple way to run buildroot readiness tests in Fedora. One
has to use weird scripts for that, and the env
On Mon, May 04, 2020 at 11:35:42AM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 04. 05. 20 7:59, Milan Crha wrote:
> > Hi,
> > out of the interest (no offense meant), would this not be caught by the
> > rawhide gating? I'd expect that this is something what the rawhide
> > gating would avoid. Of course, it
On Mon, 4 May 2020 at 11:22, Jiri Vanek wrote:
>
> > Thanks, but as I said above, the RStudio rpms don't pull the JVM,
> > because it's not required at runtime. So I suppose that, beyond fixing
> > the java-devel version in BuildRequires, I don't need to do anything
> > more, right?
>
> Hopefully:
On Mon, May 4, 2020, at 5:39 AM, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 04. 05. 20 10:51, Petr Pisar wrote:
> > On Sat, May 02, 2020 at 02:01:43AM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> >> On 01. 05. 20 22:21, Ben Cotton wrote:
> >>> == Detailed Description ==
> >>> Fedora 33 will ship with the latest LTS version of Node
Just wanted to follow up and say thanks for this! Much appreciated;
I've given it karma. :)
- Alex
- Original Message -
> From: "Florian Müllner"
> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
>
> Cc: "Florian Muellner"
> Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2020 11:54:21 AM
> Subject: Re: Ba
On 5/4/20 12:59 PM, Iñaki Ucar wrote:
> On Mon, 4 May 2020 at 11:22, Jiri Vanek wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks, but as I said above, the RStudio rpms don't pull the JVM,
>>> because it's not required at runtime. So I suppose that, beyond fixing
>>> the java-devel version in BuildRequires, I don't need to do
Hi,
I just orphaned maven-release package, I took this package last week as
my package depended on maven-release, but then I was able to build it
without the maven-release dependency (thanks Fabian!).
Best regards,
Markku Korkeala
___
devel mailing lis
Hello,
Your pastebin has expired. Can you reshare it again? Also, make sure to set
at least 30 days as expiry time when using pastebin ;-)
Regards,
--Dinesh
On Sat, May 2, 2020 at 11:59 PM Globe Trotter via devel <
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have been trying to package
On Sun, May 3, 2020 at 1:47 AM Igor Gnatenko
wrote:
> Is anybody planning to fix bunch of FTI (Fails To Install) ocaml
> packages in rawhide?
Richard tried an update to an OCaml 4.11 prerelease last week to
address some RISC-V problems. Unfortunately, the ocaml-camlp5 package
needed some changes
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 4:46 PM Jerry James wrote:
>
> On Sun, May 3, 2020 at 1:47 AM Igor Gnatenko
> wrote:
> > Is anybody planning to fix bunch of FTI (Fails To Install) ocaml
> > packages in rawhide?
>
> Richard tried an update to an OCaml 4.11 prerelease last week to
> address some RISC-V prob
Let’s talk about dist-git, as a place where we work. For us,
packagers, it’s a well-known place. Yet for newcomers, it may take a
while to learn all the details. Even though we operate with projects
in a dist-git repository, the layout doesn’t resemble the respective
upstream project.
There is a m
Good Morning Everyone,
You may remember the email below from a little while ago.
Well, we just wanted to let you know that this is now running in production and
the data present in the fedora-scm-requests repo has been migrated and that git
repo has been cleared of a large number of files.
Let u
This may not be related enough to discuss here so I'll take it to another
thread if needed, but...
One thing that really bugs me is there's still a catch-22. When you're
working on a new package there is no "git" to work with. I used to just
install all the -devel packages and work with rpmbuild d
* Tomas Tomecek:
> In the packit project, we work in source-git repositories. These are
> pretty much upstream repositories combined with Fedora downstream
> packaging files. An example: I recently added a project called nyancat
> [n] to Fedora. I have worked [w] on packaging the project in the
>
On 04. 05. 20 17:05, Tomas Tomecek wrote:
Dist-git would still be the
authoritative source and a place where official builds are done - the
source-git repo would work as a way to collaborate. We also don’t have
plans right now to integrate packit into fedpkg.
So if packager A decides to use thi
=
#fedora-meeting-1: FESCO (2020-05-04)
=
Meeting started by decathorpe at 15:02:52 UTC. The full logs are
available at
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2020-05-04/fesco.2020-05-04-15.02.log.html
.
Meetin
On Sat, Apr 4, 2020 at 3:49 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> On 04. 11. 19 15:58, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > Dear all,
> >
> > the semiannual exercise is upon us. FESCo candidates must submit an
> > "interview" in which they answer a set of questions (but can also add
> > whatever they want
On Monday, 4 May 2020 16.41.26 WEST Richard Shaw wrote:
> One thing that really bugs me is there's still a catch-22. When you're
> working on a new package there is no "git" to work with. I used to just
> install all the -devel packages and work with rpmbuild directly but you
> have to override the
Hi,
sorry for thread necromancy...
On Wed, Apr 08, 2020 at 10:42:09AM +0200, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
> What I meant, if someone for example had at home a stratum 1 server
> (e.g. synchronized to GPS) and they trusted everything and everyone in
> their local network, it would make sense to still u
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
Le lundi 04 mai 2020 à 17:31 +0100, José Abílio Matos a écrit :
> On Monday, 4 May 2020 16.41.26 WEST Richard Shaw wrote:
>
> > For the longest time I at least overrode it so it wouldn't mix
> everything
> > together by putting the package name in the mix: rpmbuild//...
>
> So did I, for the las
It seems that only the main admin can edit the owners (they have
displayed the "edit" button), is that expected? E.g. checking
rubygem-puma [1], where I have admin bit, I cannot edit the BZ assignee,
while for rubygem-tilt [2] as a main admin, I can.
Vít
[1] https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/
And since I am asking questions like this, how does it work for group
owned packages (if there are any, can't find any example ATM, but there
used to be, right?)?
Vít
Dne 04. 05. 20 v 19:02 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
> It seems that only the main admin can edit the owners (they have
> displayed the
So what is the workflow, how you update to the latest upstream? Or how
you apply custom patch?
Vít
Dne 04. 05. 20 v 17:05 Tomas Tomecek napsal(a):
> Let’s talk about dist-git, as a place where we work. For us,
> packagers, it’s a well-known place. Yet for newcomers, it may take a
> while to lea
On 04. 05. 20 19:08, Vít Ondruch wrote:
And since I am asking questions like this, how does it work for group
owned packages (if there are any, can't find any example ATM, but there
used to be, right?)?
There aren't any.
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
FESCo agreed[1] today that I am tasked with starting an open
discussion on the questions and collecting feedback for them to
approve. Please discuss the questions on this thread.
For reference, the questions used in previous election cycles are:
* Describe some of the important technical issues yo
On Mon, May 04, 2020 at 07:02:35PM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> It seems that only the main admin can edit the owners (they have
> displayed the "edit" button), is that expected? E.g. checking
> rubygem-puma [1], where I have admin bit, I cannot edit the BZ assignee,
> while for rubygem-tilt [2] as
No missing expected images.
Soft failed openQA tests: 1/1 (x86_64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)
ID: 592300 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/592300
--
Mail generated by check-compose:
https://pagure.i
No missing expected images.
Soft failed openQA tests: 1/1 (x86_64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)
ID: 592301 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/592301
--
Mail generated by check-compose:
https://pagure.i
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
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
Hi Fedora users, developers and friends!
It's time to start thinking about Test Days for Fedora 33.
For anyone who isn't aware, a Test Day is an event usually focused
around IRC for interaction and a Wiki page for instructions and results,
with the aim being to get a bunch of interested users and
Missing expected images:
Iot dvd x86_64
Iot dvd aarch64
Failed openQA tests: 1/8 (x86_64)
Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-IoT-33-20200501.0):
ID: 592540 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso release_identification
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/592540
Passed openQA tests:
https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/package/cobbler?collection=f33
Fails building the SRPM:
DEBUG util.py:600: error:
/chroot_tmpdir/srpm_unpacked/SPECS/cobbler.spec: line 119: %S: argument
expected
Line is:
DATE=$(date "+%Y%m%d-%H%M%S")
Do we really have a new rpm macro called %S? Fro
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 3/37 (x86_64)
ID: 592485 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso desktop_notifications_live
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/592485
ID: 592506 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso release_identification
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tes
Thanks!
On Mon, 4 May 2020 at 18:12, Vascom wrote:
>
> I will do it.
>
> пн, 4 мая 2020 г., 11:03 Bob Hepple :
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Although I'm new here, I've had a few packages go through review
>> already and I'm very grateful for the help and education provided by
>> the reviewers.
>>
>> But th
> This incident turns into a growingly unpleasant experience for me.
> I've asked you to clean up the mess in bugzilla and reassign the EPEL
> packages properly, because I am not responsible for those packages.
> You've not done that. I've had to do it myself. Team work doesn't mean
> that you assi
On 05. 05. 20 1:14, Orion Poplawski wrote:
https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/package/cobbler?collection=f33
Fails building the SRPM:
DEBUG util.py:600: error: /chroot_tmpdir/srpm_unpacked/SPECS/cobbler.spec: line
119: %S: argument expected
Line is:
DATE=$(date "+%Y%m%d-%H%M%S")
Do we
On Mon, May 4, 2020, at 7:35 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > This incident turns into a growingly unpleasant experience for me.
> > I've asked you to clean up the mess in bugzilla and reassign the EPEL
> > packages properly, because I am not responsible for those packages.
> > You've not done that
On Mon, 04 May 2020 20:12:58 -0400, James Cassell wrote:
> > Can this stop, please?
> >
> > Again somebody has used a script to assign bugzilla EPEL tickets to me
> > again, although I am not responsible for the EPEL packages and have never
> > been responsible for them.
> >
> > I feel offended.
Did I miss a change notification at some point?
I'm used to seeing a significant date range of data from journalctl but
upon checking today, well I only see today...
Digging further it said I don't have a persistent storage or something
setup.
So journalctl.conf is setup for "auto" which means t
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 7:06 PM Richard Shaw wrote:
>
> Did I miss a change notification at some point?
>
> I'm used to seeing a significant date range of data from journalctl but upon
> checking today, well I only see today...
>
> Digging further it said I don't have a persistent storage or somet
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 8:15 PM Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 7:06 PM Richard Shaw wrote:
> >
> > Did I miss a change notification at some point?
> >
> > I'm used to seeing a significant date range of data from journalctl but
> upon checking today, well I only see today...
> >
> >
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 7:31 PM Richard Shaw wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 8:15 PM Chris Murphy wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 7:06 PM Richard Shaw wrote:
>> >
>> > Did I miss a change notification at some point?
>> >
>> > I'm used to seeing a significant date range of data from journalc
On Sat, 2020-05-02 at 13:46 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Sat, 2 May 2020 12:36:29 +0200, Sandro Mani wrote:
>
> > Hi
> >
> > I'm stuck on the following build failure of the aarch64 build here
> > [1]
> >
> > /usr/bin/ld: .libs/geod: hidden symbol `__aarch64_ldadd4_acq_rel'
> > in
> > /us
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20200502.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20200504.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 3
Added packages: 6
Dropped packages:4
Upgraded packages: 112
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 95.87 MiB
Size of dropped packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1830464
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #5 from Fedo
I have opened bugs for affected packages. Unfortunately did not
exclude ocaml-bin-prot, but feel free to just change status to
ASSIGNED and fix it as soon as you can.
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 4:54 PM Jerry James wrote:
>
> On Sun, May 3, 2020 at 1:47 AM Igor Gnatenko
> wrote:
> > Is anybody planni
On 5/5/20 2:44 AM, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 05. 05. 20 1:14, Orion Poplawski wrote:
https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/package/cobbler?collection=f33
Fails building the SRPM:
DEBUG util.py:600: error:
/chroot_tmpdir/srpm_unpacked/SPECS/cobbler.spec: line 119: %S:
argument expected
Line is:
I also wonder what happened to rubygem-slop [1], because it says it is
retired, while it should be only orphaned [2].
Vít
[1] https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rubygem-slop
[2]
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/AI57XN2SQVXMT7QQBGSZECYVJP4H3LOK
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
On Mon, May 04, 2020 at 05:05:02PM +0200, Tomas Tomecek wrote:
> Over the years there have been multiple tools created to improve the
> development experience:
> rdopkg [r], rpkg-util [ru], tito [t] and probably much much more (e.g.
> the way Fedora kernel developers work on kernel [k]).
>
> In th
66 matches
Mail list logo
