On Sun, 20 Sep 2020 at 03:27, Luya Tshimbalanga
wrote:
> On 2020-09-19 1:32 p.m., Andy Mender wrote:
>
> On Sat, 19 Sep 2020 at 22:27, Richard Shaw wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Sep 19, 2020 at 3:16 PM Luya Tshimbalanga
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello team,
>>>
>>> openvdb is updated to 7.1.0 in Rawhide and luxco
If anybody wants to try their kernel with a different page size, for
example, using ppc64el with the 4k page size instead of 64k
- are there any packages in a standard installation that should be
recompiled?
- before recompiling anything, should we recompile any build tools, such
as gcc, on the
No missing expected images.
Soft failed openQA tests: 1/7 (x86_64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)
Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-32-20200918.0):
ID: 671734 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproj
> If anybody wants to try their kernel with a different page size, for
> example, using ppc64el with the 4k page size instead of 64k
>
> - are there any packages in a standard installation that should be
> recompiled?
No, there's no recompile needed, in the early aarch64 days there was
but we fixe
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20200919.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20200920.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 1
Added packages: 1
Dropped packages:2
Upgraded packages: 124
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 130.53 KiB
Size of dropped packages
No missing expected images.
Passed openQA tests: 7/7 (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.
Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check!
3 of 43 required tests failed, 4 results missing
openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING**
below
Failed openQA tests: 10/181 (x86_64)
New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-Rawhide-2
On Sat, Sep 19, 2020 at 8:27 PM Luya Tshimbalanga
wrote:
> Thanks for quick response. The suggestion seems to work. Unfortunately,
> the build failed on openvdb (either using the bundled and 7.1.0 version)
> while working fine on Fedora 32.
>
> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 2/16 (x86_64)
Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-IoT-34-20200919.0):
ID: 672059 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_zezere_server
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/672059
ID: 672062 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_zez
OLD: Fedora-33-20200919.n.0
NEW: Fedora-33-20200920.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:1
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 0
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 0
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 0 B
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Size of upgraded
Hi all,
As some of you may have noticed, I have been away from Fedora
packaging for quite a while. I've been hoping to find the time for
packaging work, but it hasn't happened. In hindsight, I should have
let the project know earlier.
I have now orphaned vdr-skinsoppalusikka, because I don't have
On 20. 09. 20 15:07, Ville-Pekka Vainio wrote:
I have now orphaned vdr-skinsoppalusikka, because I don't have a
working VDR installation anymore. If someone has the ability, my user
(vpv) can be dropped from the packages vdr, vdr-epgsearch, vdr-femon
and vdr-osdteletext.
Done.
--
Miro Hrončok
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 1/181 (x86_64)
Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-33-20200919.n.0):
ID: 672194 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_notifications_postinstall
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/672194
Soft failed openQA tests: 9/181 (x86_64)
(Tes
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 2/16 (x86_64)
New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-IoT-33-20200919.0):
ID: 672309 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_zezere_server
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/672309
ID: 672312 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot
Does Btrfs have any mechanism to help manage ERC settings in the drives
or is there any desire for Fedora to help users do this?
I've typically used rc.local to check the settings on drives used in md
or btrfs arrays, e.g.
DISKS="/dev/sda /dev/sdb"
echo -n "smartctl: Trying to enable SCTERC /
After upgrade of one of my servers to F33, I noticed that I can not ssh to
one of my other servers running Debian 9 system (relatively freshly EOLed,
I need to do something about it). On F33 I always need to:
$ ssh -oPubkeyAcceptedKeyTypes=+ssh-rsa user@debian-9-host
The changes in Fedora p
On Sun, 20 Sep 2020 at 13:12, Pavel Raiskup wrote:
> After upgrade of one of my servers to F33, I noticed that I can not ssh to
> one of my other servers running Debian 9 system (relatively freshly EOLed,
> I need to do something about it). On F33 I always need to:
>
> $ ssh -oPubkeyAccepte
On 9/20/20 10:11 AM, Pavel Raiskup wrote:
I'm curious about the effects of the change. It claims that RSA 2048 >= should
stay accepted by DEFAULT, and from what I can tell the host server key seems to
be RSA 2048 (at least that's what is generated by default on Debian 9):
$ ssh-keygen -l -
On 2020-09-20 4:49 a.m., Richard Shaw wrote:
On Sat, Sep 19, 2020 at 8:27 PM Luya Tshimbalanga
mailto:l...@fedoraproject.org>> wrote:
Thanks for quick response. The suggestion seems to work.
Unfortunately, the build failed on openvdb (either using the
bundled and 7.1.0 version) whil
On Sat, Sep 19, 2020 at 3:48 AM Daniel Pocock wrote:
>
>
> I noticed another thread about subvolumes already exists, I'm starting
> this one for the very specific topic of installing multiple root
> filesystems as subvolumes
>
> Examples: Fedora 33 in one subvolume, Fedora rawhide in another
> sub
The build was successfully as tested:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=51905588
Patch submitted to upstream:
https://github.com/LuxCoreRender/LuxCore/issues/449
--
Luya Tshimbalanga
Fedora Design Team
Fedora Design Suite maintainer
___
On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 11:02:26PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> Hello,
>
> As many of you know, Fedora has an EOL policy that roughly tl;drs to:
>
> "Fedora N goes to End of Life 4 weeks after Fedora N+2 Final Release (GA)."
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Release_Life_Cycle
>
> The d
On Sat, Sep 19, 2020 at 03:11:39PM -0500, Richard Shaw wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 5:03 PM Ben Cotton wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Sep 18, 2020, 17:03 Miro Hrončok wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> So, my question is: Should we fix the document to describe the long
> >> standing
> >> practice more understandabl
On Sun, Sep 20, 2020 at 07:11:29PM +0200, Pavel Raiskup wrote:
> After upgrade of one of my servers to F33, I noticed that I can not ssh to
> one of my other servers running Debian 9 system (relatively freshly EOLed,
> I need to do something about it). On F33 I always need to:
>
> $ ssh -oPu
On Sat, Sep 19, 2020 at 5:39 AM Neal Gompa wrote:
>
> On Sat, Sep 19, 2020 at 5:48 AM Daniel Pocock wrote:
> >
> >
> > I noticed another thread about subvolumes already exists, I'm starting
> > this one for the very specific topic of installing multiple root
> > filesystems as subvolumes
> >
> >
On 20. 09. 20 20:45, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
But also because it doesn't really make sense to me. I can imagine a case
when a bug in Fedora N can be fixed by adding a new package (for example
when we accidentally introduce a new dependency) and I don't understand why
Wouldn't that be caught in testin
On Sun, Sep 20, 2020 at 11:07 AM Daniel Pocock wrote:
>
>
>
> Does Btrfs have any mechanism to help manage ERC settings in the drives
> or is there any desire for Fedora to help users do this?
File systems have nothing do with SCT ERC or the SCSI command timer.
There's no mechanism at all.
> I'v
On Sunday, September 20, 2020 8:52:21 PM CEST Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 20, 2020 at 07:11:29PM +0200, Pavel Raiskup wrote:
> > After upgrade of one of my servers to F33, I noticed that I can not ssh to
> > one of my other servers running Debian 9 system (relatively freshly EOLed,
> > I need
Hi Everyone,
Below is this week's CPE weekly for week ending 2020-09-20.
I found that if you want to skip to the hackmd, you can use the view
link https://hackmd.io/8iV7PilARSG68Tqv8CzKOQ?view and then use the
header bar on your left to skip to either the Fedora or CentOS
updates, whichever inter
On 20/09/2020 21:16, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 20, 2020 at 11:07 AM Daniel Pocock wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Does Btrfs have any mechanism to help manage ERC settings in the drives
>> or is there any desire for Fedora to help users do this?
>
> File systems have nothing do with SCT ERC or the S
Hi. There is an ongoing problem with conflicting build-ids in chromium
and chromium-freeworld [1][2]:
> Error: Transaction test error:
> file /usr/lib/.build-id/61/91aba223f60784c4a2fb95cdedcedc97217e5b from
> install of chromium-freeworld-85.0.4183.102-1.fc32.x86_64 conflicts with file
> from
On 9/21/20 12:25 AM, Marcin Zajączkowski wrote:
Hi. There is an ongoing problem with conflicting build-ids in chromium
and chromium-freeworld [1][2]:
Error: Transaction test error:
file /usr/lib/.build-id/61/91aba223f60784c4a2fb95cdedcedc97217e5b from
install of chromium-freeworld-85.0.4183.
any other suggestions here ? I will be glad, if maintainers of dependent
packages will share their opinions. If we fix this issue and it breaks
dependent packages, simple workaround via symlink is available until the
problems will be solved, so I see no reason for ignoring this problem.
On Fri, S
33 matches
Mail list logo
