Re: Unannounced soname bump: libjasper.so.4 -> libjasper.so.6

On 2/11/22 21:45, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote: > Miro Hrončok wrote: >> It was actually announced: >> >> > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/FV53ADNJB5STFN3YAEEXEVHMIA6DMXCN/ >> >> But for reasons I don't understand, it was pushed to rawhide without

Re: Do we have any policy for disabling inactive users

On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 11:24:24AM -0800, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 11:33:13AM +, Mattia Verga via devel wrote: > > Il 11/02/22 12:20, Florian Weimer ha scritto: > > > * Mattia Verga via devel: > > > > > >> Il 11/02/22 10:41, Miro Hrončok ha scritto: > > >>> On 11. 02. 22 10:

Re: Unannounced soname bump: libjasper.so.4 -> libjasper.so.6

On Sun, Feb 13, 2022 at 04:27:36PM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: > I used to be motivated to write such a bot, but after the rpmautospec > thing, I'm not going to bother. I wanted rpmautospec to handle > rebuilds without commits/changelog bumps, because then we could > trigger rebuilds more simply (depe

Re: Do we have any policy for disabling inactive users

On Sat, Feb 12, 2022 at 10:29:54AM +, Mattia Verga via devel wrote: > Il 11/02/22 20:24, Kevin Fenzi ha scritto: > > On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 11:33:13AM +, Mattia Verga via devel wrote: > >> Il 11/02/22 12:20, Florian Weimer ha scritto: > >>> * Mattia Verga via devel: > >>> > Il 11/02/2

Re: Unannounced soname bump: libjasper.so.4 -> libjasper.so.6

Miro Hrončok wrote on 2022/02/13 22:26: On 13. 02. 22 13:32, Josef Řídký wrote: Hi, first of all, I would like to apologize for the mess I've caused by the jasper .so name bump in Rawhide. I entirely forgot the side-tag option and had the old mindset of having rawhide as a "sandbox for new fe

Re: What should we do about the "Install only newly recommended packages on upgrades" F36 change?

On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 7:42 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 11. 02. 22 13:50, Jaroslav Mracek wrote: > > > No we didn't and it will make the feature less usable - see > reported issues > > > during testing in original request ( > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1699672

Re: Unannounced soname bump: libjasper.so.4 -> libjasper.so.6

Thanks, I wasn't aware that fbrnch is so smart. On Sun, Feb 13, 2022 at 08:09:12PM -, E.N. virgo wrote: > Here is a proof-of-concept one-liner (split up a bit for readability > purposes): > > ```fish > #!/usr/bin/fish > > function get_dependent_pkgs > dnf -q repoquery --repo=koji --qf='

Fedora-Cloud-35-20220214.0 compose check report

No missing expected images. Soft failed openQA tests: 1/8 (x86_64), 1/8 (aarch64) (Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug) Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-35-20220213.0): ID: 1128165 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud URL: https://op

Re: Preventing .build-id file conflicts between pypy3.7-libs-7.3.7-1.fc34.x86_64 and pypy3.8-libs-7.3.7-1.fc34.x86_64

The time had to come, when two packages would generate the same hash. I was hit by: --- Error: Transaction test error: file /usr/lib/.build-id/34/feaa549462e8818baa0629ce11da344465882b conflicts between attempted installs of discord-0.0.16-1.fc35.x86_64 and skypeforlinux-8.79.0.95-1.x86_64 --- s

Fedora-Cloud-34-20220214.0 compose check report

No missing expected images. Soft failed openQA tests: 1/8 (x86_64), 1/8 (aarch64) (Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug) Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-34-20220213.0): ID: 1128181 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud URL: https://op

Re: Fedora rawhide compose report: 20220211.n.3 changes: order of changelogs

On Sun, Feb 13, 2022 at 12:17:23PM -0800, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Sat, Feb 12, 2022 at 11:41:22AM +0100, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > Are the changelogs for packages supposed to be ordered newest-to-latest > > or the reverse? Some packages have the changelog one way, some the other… > >

Next Open NeuroFedora Meeting: 1300 UTC on Monday, 14 February (Today)

Hello everyone, Please join us at the next Open NeuroFedora team meeting on Monday 14th February (today!) at 1300UTC in #fedora-neuro on IRC (Libera.chat) or Matrix. The meeting is a public meeting, and open for everyone to attend. You can join us over: Matrix: https://matrix.to/#/#neuro:fedorapr

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20220214.n.0 changes

OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20220213.n.0 NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20220214.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:0 Dropped images: 0 Added packages: 10 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 84 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 6.78 MiB Size of dropped packages:0 B

Dist-git auto builders fails to unknown error

Hi, I've ran into this problem twice today... The automated scratch-build in PR fails with 'error'. When looking into the error message, it gives me no clear reason why it failed. These are the PRs with failed scratch-builds (Note: when using "fedpkg scratch-build --srpm" the same builds are buil

Re: Unannounced soname bump: libjasper.so.4 -> libjasper.so.6

Mamoru TASAKA wrote on 2022/02/14 17:47: Miro Hrončok wrote on 2022/02/13 22:26: On 13. 02. 22 13:32, Josef Řídký wrote: Hi, first of all, I would like to apologize for the mess I've caused by the jasper .so name bump in Rawhide. I entirely forgot the side-tag option and had the old mindset o

Re: Dist-git auto builders fails to unknown error

The problem looks to be in GPG keys "Error: GPG check FAILED". On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 11:48 AM Lukas Javorsky wrote: > Hi, > > I've ran into this problem twice today... The automated scratch-build in > PR fails with 'error'. > When looking into the error message, it gives me no clear reason wh

Re: Preventing .build-id file conflicts between pypy3.7-libs-7.3.7-1.fc34.x86_64 and pypy3.8-libs-7.3.7-1.fc34.x86_64

On Mon, 2022-02-14 at 10:34 +0100, Michal Schorm wrote: > The time had to come, when two packages would generate the same hash. > > I was hit by: > --- > Error: Transaction test error: >   file /usr/lib/.build-id/34/feaa549462e8818baa0629ce11da344465882b > conflicts between attempted installs of d

Re: Dist-git auto builders fails to unknown error

Hi, > The problem looks to be in GPG keys "Error: GPG check FAILED". I had the same problem with my local mock build for rawhide. Rawhide is no longer f36, but it is now f37, and IMHO the GPG keys do not match. For me locally helped to clean the rawhide builtroot with "--scrub -all" and then rer

Self-Introduction: Steve Cossette

Good morning, Fedora Developers. My name is Steve Cossette, I am a Developer/IT Manager at a small HVAC company in Virginia who also happens to be a real computer nerd. I started using Linux as my main OS in November, starting with Manjaro and migrated over to Fedora 35 in December, craving better

Self introduction: glaring gibbon

*About me;* That's not my real name but it's close enough and most people get it wrong anyway. I have no previous experience of FOSS (other than using it). I thought that this might help me get a better understanding of how linux systems operate under the hood. I don't work in IT, this is a hobb

Re: Non-responsive maintainer check: kushal

Thank you for your response, and for accepting help from co-maintainers. I hope you’ll understand why I started the unresponsive maintainer process, and don’t feel that I have called you out inappropriately. I certainly understand that almost all of us are volunteers who are here by choice, and

Re: ppc64le build failure on F34 and EPEL8, EPEL8-next only

Il 10/01/22 00:30, Germano Massullo ha scritto: Thank you, and what about EPEL8 build failure? Such branch is not affected by that bug https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=81021476 Thank you new darktable release build failure on EL8 ppc64le https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/

Re: Self-Introduction: Steve Cossette

Hi Steve Have you read this bit? Hope it helps. Regards GG ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsub

Re: Self-Introduction: Steve Cossette

Hi Steve Have you read this bit? Just ask the existing maintainers if they want help. kind regards GG ___ devel mailing list

Re: Self-Introduction: Steve Cossette

Hi Steve https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/How_to_Get_Sponsored_into_the_Packager_Group/#become_a_co_maintainer According to this ^^^, just ask the existing maintainers of a package you'd like to be involved with if they want help. Hope it helps. regards GG _

Fedora-Rawhide-20220214.n.0 compose check report

Missing expected images: Minimal raw-xz armhfp 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: 21/231 (x86_64), 18/161 (aarch64) New failures (sa

Re: Self-Introduction: Steve Cossette

Oh I did see those links, I do understand I do have to ask existing maintainers if they need help. But I'm not really aiming to help maintain a specific package (I don't really mind which), is there a place where maintainers look for co-maintainers? I don't really wanna go through the 30 000 packag

Re: How to clone by fedpkg ?

On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 at 09:20, Miao, Jun wrote: > > Hi developer, > > I want to clone the rpms through fedpkg, but failed log like this: > > > > jmiao@fedora36:temp$ fedpkg clone tboot > > Cloning into 'tboot'... > > miaojun0...@pkgs.fedoraproject.org: Permission denied (publickey). > > fatal: Coul

F37 Change: MinGW toolchain update (System-Wide Change proposal)

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/F37MingwEnvToolchainUpdate == Summary == Update the MinGW toolchain to the latest upstream stable releases. == Owner == * Name: [[User:smani|Sandro Mani]] * Email: manisan...@gmail.com == Detailed Description == The following packages will be updated * mi

Re: Self introduction: glaring gibbon

Hello and welcome! You have a lot of interests. Very nice. https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/How_to_Get_Sponsored_into_the_Packager_Group/#become_a_co_maintainer I saw that you have referred to this ^^ URL on other places, but I think you might find more interesting the

Re: Self-Introduction: Steve Cossette

Hi Steve, welcome to Fedora :-) Am 14.02.22 um 14:46 schrieb Steve Cossette: But I'm not really aiming to help maintain a specific package (I don't really mind which), is there a place where maintainers look for co-maintainers? I don't think so. The main reason is that data on any list gets

Re: Unannounced soname bump: libjasper.so.4 -> libjasper.so.6

Jos de Kloe wrote on 2022/02/14 15:56: Hi, eccodes will need to be adapted upstream. I filed an issue there and they will try to fix this a.s.a.p. Untill then, if needed, I could remove use of libjasper since it is an optional feature. For now, I've pushed: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms

Re: Fedora 36 Mass Branching

On Wed, 9 Feb 2022 at 18:15, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 09, 2022 at 06:26:44PM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 9, 2022 at 6:12 PM Jonathan Wakely wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, 8 Feb 2022 at 20:40, Tomas Hrcka wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > > > Fedora 36 has now bee

Re: Unannounced soname bump: libjasper.so.4 -> libjasper.so.6

On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 3:31 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 13, 2022 at 04:27:36PM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: > > I used to be motivated to write such a bot, but after the rpmautospec > > thing, I'm not going to bother. I wanted rpmautospec to handle > > rebuilds without commi

Re: Unannounced soname bump: libjasper.so.4 -> libjasper.so.6

Your points about why touching dist-git for rebuilds can be problematic are correct, I think. However, I don’t see an easy way around the fact that a release bump is required to produce a new build that obsoletes the previous build, and that interaction with dist-git is required to make this hap

Re: Preventing .build-id file conflicts between pypy3.7-libs-7.3.7-1.fc34.x86_64 and pypy3.8-libs-7.3.7-1.fc34.x86_64

Michal Schorm wrote: > The time had to come, when two packages would generate the same hash. Well, yes, depending on hash codes being globally unique is broken by design. Hash collisions exist. They can happen both by accident (because hash functions cannot possibly be injective because the rang

Re: Unannounced soname bump: libjasper.so.4 -> libjasper.so.6

Mamoru TASAKA wrote: > kdelibs3 also seems to be okay with above, but ppc64le build only failed: > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=82799185 > Looking at build.log , it looks like parallel make issue. Yes, try just resubmitting the build, hopefully it will not hit the race cond

IMA signing notes and code

Hi folks, I've been researching IMA signing with RPM. This is a new feature in CentOS 9 that has not been enabled in Fedora I'm not an IMA expert, and I don't work on this for Red Hat, I'm just an interested user. (In particular, I'm interested in how our build systems track signatures, and how t

Re: Unannounced soname bump: libjasper.so.4 -> libjasper.so.6

Miro Hrončok wrote on 2022/02/13 22:26: On 13. 02. 22 13:32, Josef Řídký wrote: Hi, first of all, I would like to apologize for the mess I've caused by the jasper .so name bump in Rawhide. I entirely forgot the side-tag option and had the old mindset of having rawhide as a "sandbox for new fe

Re: Do we have any policy for disabling inactive users

As I reported in the Fesco ticket, I've published the script to check packagers activity at https://pagure.io/find-inactive-packagers The latest run showed 274 totally inactive packagers [1]. However, I've just realized that the activity check made by datagrepper is wrong: the current query doesn'

Re: Fedora 36 Mass Branching

On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 03:30:52PM +, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > > I can't see how "rawhide/f36 has been completely isolated from > previous releases" can be interpreted to mean that :-) Well, long ago when we branched, there was a inheritence chain in koji, so if you built something in F(n-1)

Re: Do we have any policy for disabling inactive users

On Mon, 2022-02-14 at 17:48 +, Mattia Verga via devel wrote: > As I reported in the Fesco ticket, I've published the script to check > packagers activity at https://pagure.io/find-inactive-packagers > > The latest run showed 274 totally inactive packagers [1]. However, I've > just realized tha

Re: Fedora 36 Mass Branching

On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 at 18:14, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 03:30:52PM +, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > > > > I can't see how "rawhide/f36 has been completely isolated from > > previous releases" can be interpreted to mean that :-) > > Well, long ago when we branched, there was a i

Re: PSA: GTK-RS 0.15 update coming to F36+

On Sun, Feb 13, 2022 at 3:30 AM Fabio Valentini wrote: > > Hello Rust packagers, > > I have prepared an update of the entire GTK-RS stack to the latest version: > https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/decathorpe/gtk-rs-0.15/monitor/ > > I am planning to update these packages in Fedora Rawhide an

Fedora 36 compose report: 20220214.n.1 changes

OLD: Fedora-36-20220213.n.0 NEW: Fedora-36-20220214.n.1 = SUMMARY = Added images:5 Dropped images: 0 Added packages: 12 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 94 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 6.27 MiB Size of dropped packages:0 B Size of

Re: report on the "ELF package notes" status

On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 08:01:39PM +0100, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > Hi! > > I did some quick'n'dirty statistics of how many ELF files successfully gained > a .package.note section. > > packages: 28742, see [1] for the list (*) If you still have the packages checked out, would it be po

Fedora-IoT-36-20220214.0 compose check report

No missing expected images. Failed openQA tests: 4/15 (aarch64), 1/16 (x86_64) New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-IoT-36-20220209.0): ID: 1129439 Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_zezere_server@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1129439 ID: 1129441 Test: aarch6

Re: Unannounced soname bump: libjasper.so.4 -> libjasper.so.6

On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 10:32:40AM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 3:31 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek > wrote: > > > > On Sun, Feb 13, 2022 at 04:27:36PM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: > > > I used to be motivated to write such a bot, but after the rpmautospec > > > thing, I'm not go

Re: report on the "ELF package notes" status

On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 09:50:55PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 08:01:39PM +0100, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > Hi! > > > > I did some quick'n'dirty statistics of how many ELF files successfully > > gained > > a .package.note section. > > > > packages: 2874

Fedora-36-20220214.n.1 compose check report

No missing expected images. Failed openQA tests: 18/229 (x86_64), 12/161 (aarch64) New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-36-20220213.n.0): ID: 1129046 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_repository_nfsiso_variation URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1129046 ID: 1129053 Te

ZFS

After having dealt for the n-th time with libvirt dependencies messing up [1] with zfs packages installed from ZFS On Linux repository, I wondered if we could just include them in Fedora repository. They are not in the Fedora Forbidden Items [2] list. Fedora Wiki ZFS page [3] says: "Fedora relea

Re: ZFS

On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 6:57 PM Germano Massullo wrote: > > After having dealt for the n-th time with libvirt dependencies messing > up [1] with zfs packages installed from ZFS On Linux repository, I > wondered if we could just include them in Fedora repository. > They are not in the Fedora Forbid

Re: [Rust] Re: PSA: GTK-RS 0.15 update coming to F36+

Hi Fabio. I have build rust-msgbox in the sidetag and made a pr to update msgbox upstream. https://github.com/bekker/msgbox-rs/pull/21 I will need msgbox for a future package so please do not orphan it. For image-roll, i cannot update it since it will need some code change to support rust-gtk 0.