metadata of updateinfo.xml

Is there any guide that explains fields of the updateinfo.xml files which are generated in repositories? I'm trying to figure out https://github.com/fedora-infra/bodhi/issues/2487 and I think we currently have weird data in updates. For example, looking to the 'issued' and 'modified' dates of few

Re: metadata of updateinfo.xml

On Sun, Nov 20, 2022 at 4:32 AM Mattia Verga via devel wrote: > > Is there any guide that explains fields of the updateinfo.xml files > which are generated in repositories? > > I'm trying to figure out > https://github.com/fedora-infra/bodhi/issues/2487 and I think we > currently have weird data i

FF 107.0 scratch builds - just for fun

Now that nss 3.85 has been built, I thought I'd have a go at building FF 107.0, given that's been out for a few days and original builds failed in koji, because nss was too old at the time. No idea how this is going to end up, but the tasks for F3{8,7,6,5} are here, if anyone is interested: https

Re: metadata of updateinfo.xml

Il 20/11/22 11:05, Neal Gompa ha scritto: > On Sun, Nov 20, 2022 at 4:32 AM Mattia Verga via devel > [](mailto:devel@lists.fedoraproject.org) > wrote: > >> Is there any guide that explains fields of the updateinfo.xml files >> which are generated in repositories? >> >> I'm trying to figure out >>

Re: SPDX Statistics

Dne 19. 11. 22 v 12:37 Miro Hrončok napsal(a): On 18. 11. 22 15:09, Miroslav Suchý wrote: |Fun fact: the script with the checks runs on my notebook for 32 hours.| That sounds pretty bad. What is the biggest bottleneck? Do you clone the repositories from dist-git, or use https://pkgs.fedorapr

Re: SPDX Statistics

Am 20.11.22 um 17:38 schrieb Miroslav Suchý: Dne 19. 11. 22 v 12:37 Miro Hrončok napsal(a): On 18. 11. 22 15:09, Miroslav Suchý wrote: |Fun fact: the script with the checks runs on my notebook for 32 hours.| That sounds pretty bad. What is the biggest bottleneck? Do you clone the reposito

Re: FF 107.0 scratch builds - just for fun

Everything except F38 completed fine. -- Bojan ___ 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-cond

Re: FF 107.0 scratch builds - just for fun

On 11/20/22 07:24, Bojan Smojver via devel wrote: > Now that nss 3.85 has been built, I thought I'd have a go at building > FF 107.0, given that's been out for a few days and original builds > failed in koji, because nss was too old at the time. Has switching to bundled NSS been considered? For b

Re: FF 107.0 scratch builds - just for fun

On Sun, Nov 20, 2022 at 5:23 PM Demi Marie Obenour wrote: > > On 11/20/22 07:24, Bojan Smojver via devel wrote: > > Now that nss 3.85 has been built, I thought I'd have a go at building > > FF 107.0, given that's been out for a few days and original builds > > failed in koji, because nss was too o

Re: FF 107.0 scratch builds - just for fun

On Sun, 2022-11-20 at 17:22 -0500, Demi Marie Obenour wrote: > On 11/20/22 07:24, Bojan Smojver via devel wrote: > > Now that nss 3.85 has been built, I thought I'd have a go at building > > FF 107.0, given that's been out for a few days and original builds > > failed in koji, because nss was too o

Re: FF 107.0 scratch builds - just for fun

On 11/20/22 17:40, Simo Sorce wrote: > On Sun, 2022-11-20 at 17:22 -0500, Demi Marie Obenour wrote: >> On 11/20/22 07:24, Bojan Smojver via devel wrote: >>> Now that nss 3.85 has been built, I thought I'd have a go at building >>> FF 107.0, given that's been out for a few days and original builds >

Re: SPDX Statistics

Miroslav Suchý wrote: > abattis-cantarell-fonts warning: not valid as calaway nor as SPDX, please > check The name Callaway has 2 'l's in it. Kevin Kofler ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to de

Re: metadata of updateinfo.xml

> Is there any guide that explains fields of the updateinfo.xml files > which are generated in repositories? I very much wish there was, but alas, no. Pretty much everything to do with rpm metadata is effectively implementation-defined, and the implementations are all different, especially with

Update: Porting to Modern C

I'm still in the process of setting thigs up. I've created a wiki page separately from the change proposal that documents some project procedures: It has some instructions how to test things locally. Thanks to Kevin's help, we should