* Jonathan Wakely:
>> Missing an include directory isn't necessarily the problem though, it
>> is the missing headers that aren't present when they are included
>> that would be - and that should trigger a build error for the missing
>> file. What advantage does failing on this warning provide tha
In one week (2023-12-19) or a little later I will update biosig4c++ to
version 2.5.2 in rawhide. This will bring an soname bump. However, there
are no consuming packages, making this a self contained change.
Cheers,
--
Sandro
FAS: gui1ty
IRC: Penguinpee
Elsewhere: [Pp]enguinpee
--
I opened an releng issue about this. [1] At the time of writing, I noticed that
there is probably an similar issue of failure of package creation appeared. [2]
Hope anyone can help me solve the problem, which maybe the cause of my personal
issue, or other factors. Thanks in advance.
[1] https:/
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20231211.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20231212.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:2
Dropped images: 7
Added packages: 6
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 91
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 2.40 GiB
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Hello Rafel
I'm also a mathematician and I'm happy to see other people from mathematics
get involved with Fedora
Until you not become a Fedora maintainer (I hope you find a sponsor soon!)
we can work together
As a Fedora maintainer I think I can check and merge your PRs.
Priscila.
On Sun, Dec 10
Hello,
I am writing this email to get feedback from the members of the Fedora
development community about OpenScanHub for Fedora.
# tl;dr
OpenScanHub does static and dynamic analysis of rpm packages and it may be
helpful in the Fedora community. Please take a look at our staging proof of
concept
Hello,
OpenSSL 3.0.0 deprecated the support for using engines and introduced the
concept of providers.
If your package requires openssl-pkcs11 (libp11, engine_pkcs11), we
recommend that you stop using it, and migrate to using the pkcs11-provider
instead. We plan to deprecate and remove openssl-pk
On Tue, Dec 12, 2023 at 11:14:03AM -, Felix Wang wrote:
> I opened an releng issue about this. [1] At the time of writing, I noticed
> that there is probably an similar issue of failure of package creation
> appeared. [2] Hope anyone can help me solve the problem, which maybe the
> cause of
Wiki https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Podman5
This is a proposed Change for Fedora Linux.
This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes
process, proposals are publicly announced in order to receive
community feedback. This proposal will only be implemented if approved
by
Wiki https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/F40Boost183
This is a proposed Change for Fedora Linux.
This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes
process, proposals are publicly announced in order to receive
community feedback. This proposal will only be implemented if approve
On Mo, 11.12.23 11:10, DJ Delorie (d...@redhat.com) wrote:
> Lennart Poettering writes:
> > Well, as you might be aware many distributions these days do more than
> > "files dns" for "hosts", and similar for the other databases, and
> > hence a built-in default in glibc is great, but most distrib
11 matches
Mail list logo