On Sunday, 10 April 2022 at 22:30, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> On Friday, 08 April 2022 at 13:41, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> > On 08/04/2022 09:54, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> > > I already did. Isn't that what I wrote?
> >
> > Can you post their answer?
>
> Yes:
>
On Sat, Apr 9, 2022 at 1:51 AM Thomas Schmitt wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> > OK so there isn't (yet) an option to embed the GRUB core.img in a GPT
> > BIOS boot partition, I take it? The assumption is MBR? On hard drives,
> > core.img goes in the MBR gap. I'm not sure where it goes on xorriso
> > produced I
On Sun, Apr 10, 2022 at 1:31 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 07, 2022 at 10:43:02AM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > On Mi, 06.04.22 07:33, Neal Gompa (ngomp...@gmail.com) wrote:
> > > Irrespective of this change, I would flat-out oppose moving to
> > > sd-boot. In any ca
Hi,
On 4/11/22 01:07, Gabriel Ramirez wrote:
> On 4/10/22 16:10, Neal Gompa wrote:
>> On Sun, Apr 10, 2022 at 4:37 PM Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski
>> wrote:
>>> On Friday, 08 April 2022 at 16:14, Zamir SUN wrote:
>>> [...]
Probably it isn't a problem for some users, but I'm still having ba
On Mo, 11.04.22 02:34, Chris Murphy (li...@colorremedies.com) wrote:
> > > OK, I'll bite.
> > >
> > > What are you missing in sd-boot, specifically?
> > >
> > > Also, why would a boot menu need a particularly fancy user experience?
> > > It's a boot manager, not a web browser.
> >
> > "barebones c
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-34-20220410.0):
ID: 1219869 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL: https://op
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20220410.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20220411.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 2
Added packages: 0
Dropped packages:2
Upgraded packages: 36
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 0 B
Size of dropped packages:471.17
Hi,
Chris Murphy wrote:
> At least with the BIOS firmware without a bug, the GRUB LBA 0 code
> jumps direct to core.img, no instruction on how to read the GPT and
> find the core.img from BIOS boot partition.
That's probably because the GRUB MBR code for hard disk gets the LBA
of the next stage p
Hello everyone,
Please join us at the next Open NeuroFedora team meeting on Monday 11th
April(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:fedoraprojec
Hi,
apparently some broken packages have landed in rawhide:
DEBUG util.py:444: Error:
DEBUG util.py:444: Problem: conflicting requests
DEBUG util.py:444:- nothing provides mpich-devel(x86-64) = 3.4.1
needed by petsc-mpich-devel-3.16.5-2.fc37.x86_64
DEBUG util.py:446: (try to add '--skip
Missing expected images:
Minimal raw-xz armhfp
Compose PASSES proposed Rawhide gating check!
All required tests passed
Failed openQA tests: 10/231 (x86_64), 20/161 (aarch64)
New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20220410.n.0):
ID: 1219957 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso de
On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 02:36:57PM +0200, Ralf Corsépius wrote:
> Hi,
>
> apparently some broken packages have landed in rawhide:
>
> DEBUG util.py:444: Error:
> DEBUG util.py:444: Problem: conflicting requests
> DEBUG util.py:444:- nothing provides mpich-devel(x86-64) = 3.4.1 needed
> by
OLD: Fedora-36-20220410.n.0
NEW: Fedora-36-20220411.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:6
Dropped images: 4
Added packages: 3
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 25
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 553.34 MiB
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Size of
On 4/11/22 15:29, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 02:36:57PM +0200, Ralf Corsépius wrote:
Hi,
apparently some broken packages have landed in rawhide:
DEBUG util.py:444: Error:
DEBUG util.py:444: Problem: conflicting requests
DEBUG util.py:444:- nothing provide
On 4/10/22 8:28 PM, Zebediah Figura wrote:
The first problem is that the location of runtime DLLs varies wildly between
distributions, and there's no common independent way to detect it. We could
potentially hardcode a few "guesses" at the runtime path into Wine's configure
script, but that bri
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 1/15 (aarch64)
Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-IoT-36-20220407.0):
ID: 1220872 Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_clevis@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1220872
Passed openQA tests: 14/15 (aarch64), 15/15 (x86_64)
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 7/229 (x86_64), 9/161 (aarch64)
New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-36-20220410.n.0):
ID: 1220458 Test: x86_64 Server-boot-iso install_default
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1220458
ID: 1220631 Test: aarch64 Server-dv
The libcerf package was updated to version 2.1 in Rawhide yesterday[1],
which included an unannounced .so version bump from “1” to “2”.
The following packages will need to be rebuilt:
- LabPlot
- gnuplot
- libecpint
[1]
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/libcerf/c/27320a591bcaf
Neal Gompa writes:
> Windows is a niche in the server space, rather than the default
That may be true for many workloads, but I doubt it's true in all cases
- Active Directory has a huge footprint, for instance, and Linux is not
"the default" for identity services.
Be well,
--Robbie
signature
On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 3:02 AM Lennart Poettering wrote:
>
> On Mo, 11.04.22 02:34, Chris Murphy (li...@colorremedies.com) wrote:
>
> > > > OK, I'll bite.
> > > >
> > > > What are you missing in sd-boot, specifically?
> > > >
> > > > Also, why would a boot menu need a particularly fancy user expe
On Wed, Apr 06, 2022 at 01:57:00PM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 6, 2022 at 11:50 AM Jared Dominguez wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 6, 2022 at 8:20 AM Neal Gompa wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, Apr 6, 2022 at 8:04 AM Vít Ondruch wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Dne 05. 04. 22 v 17:08 Neal Gompa
Neal Gompa writes:
> Alright, I'll bite. I am within my rights to propose any Change I want
> for Fedora Cloud, which I help steward with David Duncan.
As, presumably, is anyone else?
> As an aside, I examined the state of all release blocking Fedora
> deliverables, and something I noticed is t
On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 03:37:04PM +0200, David wrote:
> On 4/11/22 15:29, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 02:36:57PM +0200, Ralf Corsépius wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > apparently some broken packages have landed in rawhide:
> > >
> > > DEBUG util.py:444: Error:
>
On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 4:36 AM Thomas Schmitt wrote:
> > A legacy/fallback image (or two) would provide some breathing room to
> > remove more legacy layers. Including possibly even ISO 9660.
>
> Aww. 14 years of xorriso development would be obsoleted. {:|
>
> Giving up ISO 9660 would mean to gi
> Am 10.04.2022 um 04:50 schrieb Gary Buhrmaster :
>
> On Wed, Apr 6, 2022 at 6:01 PM Neal Gompa wrote:
>
>> Moving past the Big Three(tm), the actual
>> cloud providers that matter from a Fedora context are the smaller
>> outfits that principally serve Linux users. These are companies like
>>
Once upon a time, Peter Boy said:
> I want to reiterate, it's not just about cloud platforms! if we remove BIOS
> boot (too early), we also kick Fedora servers, installed on hardware, out of
> these data centers. And the reason is not that this server hardware does not
> support UEFI, but the
On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 02:21:04PM -0500, Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Peter Boy said:
> > I want to reiterate, it's not just about cloud platforms! if we remove BIOS
> > boot (too early), we also kick Fedora servers, installed on hardware, out
> > of these data centers. And the reaso
> Am 11.04.2022 um 21:21 schrieb Chris Adams :
>
> Once upon a time, Peter Boy said:
>> I want to reiterate, it's not just about cloud platforms! if we remove BIOS
>> boot (too early), we also kick Fedora servers, installed on hardware, out of
>> these data centers. And the reason is not tha
On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 1:21 PM Chris Adams wrote:
>
> Once upon a time, Peter Boy said:
> > I want to reiterate, it's not just about cloud platforms! if we remove BIOS
> > boot (too early), we also kick Fedora servers, installed on hardware, out
> > of these data centers. And the reason is no
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the
FESCo meeting Tuesday at 17:00UTC in #fedora-meeting on
irc.libera.chat.
To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto
or run:
date -d '2022-04-12 17:00 UTC'
Links to all issues to be di
On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 02:21:04PM -0500, Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Peter Boy said:
> > I want to reiterate, it's not just about cloud platforms! if we remove BIOS
> > boot (too early), we also kick Fedora servers, installed on hardware, out
> > of these data centers. And the reaso
The latest version of python-networkx requires version 0.8 or later of
python-pydata-sphinx-theme to build its documentation. That version
of python-pydata-sphinx-theme needs 3 new python packages, which I can
handle, but it also comes with a new requirement: using node to build
the theme files (C
Facing a similar situation a while ago, it was suggested to use a script
like [1] to prepare an offline cache of all dependencies, and point yarn
to that folder in the package spec. Other example is pgadmin4 [2].
Sandro
[1] https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/qgis/blob/rawhide/f/prepare_vendor.
On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 3:45 PM Sandro Mani wrote:
> Facing a similar situation a while ago, it was suggested to use a script
> like [1] to prepare an offline cache of all dependencies, and point yarn
> to that folder in the package spec. Other example is pgadmin4 [2].
>
> Sandro
>
> [1] https://s
On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 3:36 PM Brian C. Lane wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 02:21:04PM -0500, Chris Adams wrote:
> > Once upon a time, Peter Boy said:
> > > I want to reiterate, it's not just about cloud platforms! if we remove
> > > BIOS boot (too early), we also kick Fedora servers, insta
Once upon a time, Brian C. Lane said:
> It is likely because UEFI specifies FAT32 on harddrives, and the minimum
> size for FAT32 is 256MB.
mkdosfs will make a FAT32 without warning on a size of 33296KB.
--
Chris Adams
___
devel mailing list -- devel@
> However, the majority of Linux PC users *must* step out of the happy path
> to get their hardware working for two cases:
>
> * NVIDIA graphics
> * Broadcom wireless
In the Firefox Public Data Report, GPU vendor is 69% Intel, 13% Nvidia, 13%
AMD, 5% other. I don’t think Broadcom wireless is tha
On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 9:50 AM Ben Beasley wrote:
>
> The libcerf package was updated to version 2.1 in Rawhide yesterday[1],
> which included an unannounced .so version bump from “1” to “2”.
My mistake, I thought I did a "dnf repoquery --whatrequires
libcerf.so.1", but it only showed libecpint.
Hello,
I'm in the process of updating wxGTK to 3.1.6 in Rawhide. This comes with
an soname bump. I've built wxGTK 3.1.6 in a side tag, f37-build-side-52676.
The dependent packages are:
CubicSDR -> already rebuilding in side tag
audacity -> already rebuilding in side tag
wxmacmolplt -> needs
On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 5:26 PM David Cantrell wrote:
> This was already addressed. Fedora should not be expected to jump through
> hoops to support vendors unwilling to participate in the open source Linux
> ecosystem. Users should stop buying their hardware -or- contribute to
> projects like
On 4/11/22 08:50, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
On 4/10/22 8:28 PM, Zebediah Figura wrote:
The first problem is that the location of runtime DLLs varies wildly
between distributions, and there's no common independent way to detect
it. We could potentially hardcode a few "guesses" at the runtime pa
Am 11.04.22 um 19:33 schrieb Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek:
On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 03:37:04PM +0200, David wrote:
On 4/11/22 15:29, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 02:36:57PM +0200, Ralf Corsépius wrote:
Hi,
apparently some broken packages have landed in rawhide:
On 11/04/2022 23:35, Brian C. Lane wrote:
It is likely because UEFI specifies FAT32 on harddrives, and the minimum
size for FAT32 is 256MB.
This is not true. From my Fedora VM:
Disk /dev/sda1: 200 MiB, 209715200 bytes, 409600 sectors
Units: sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/p
On 11/04/2022 22:29, Chris Murphy wrote:
UEFI Spec 2.8, 13.3.1.1 says "The EFI firmware must support the FAT32,
FAT16, and FAT12 variants of the EFI file system. What variant of EFI
FAT to use is defined by the size of the media. The rules defining the
relationship between media size and FAT vari
44 matches
Mail list logo
