On 13/01/2025 10:11, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
First, this would require setting up the infrastructure to build and
store and distribute multiple builds of a single version of a
package. This is something that Fedora currently doesn't do, so it'd
require changes to operations in mock, ko
On 13/01/2025 09:25, David Bold wrote:
No, 0.1 to 1 ms or 0.0001 to 0.001 seconds
Yeah, there's a font problem. I thought it was milli, not micro. After
changing the default font it now looks better. Thanks.
--
Sincerely,
Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.org)
--
__
Got it to build (see dist-git/PR), but please make sure the result works ;)
Cheers
Michael
Luya Tshimbalanga venit, vidit, dixit 2025-01-13 18:19:07:
> Whoops,
>
>
> here is, https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=127824831
>
> On 2025-01-13 00:17, Michael J Gruber wrote:
> > Luya
Björn Persson wrote:
> There seems to be a regression on S390x:
>
> gprconfig --batch -o /dev/null --validate
> raised SYSTEM.OBJECT_READER.FORMAT_ERROR :
> System.Object_Reader.ELF64_Ops.Initialize: unrecognized architecture
> Load address: 0x2aa1b38
This fresh commit is supposed to fix the
On Tue, Jan 14, 2025 at 12:43:51PM +0100, Björn Persson wrote:
> Björn Persson wrote:
> > There seems to be a regression on S390x:
> >
> > gprconfig --batch -o /dev/null --validate
> > raised SYSTEM.OBJECT_READER.FORMAT_ERROR :
> > System.Object_Reader.ELF64_Ops.Initialize: unrecognized architect
On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 6:06 AM Petr Pisar wrote:
>
> V Sun, Jan 12, 2025 at 07:08:05PM -0500, Neal Gompa napsal(a):
> > On Sun, Jan 12, 2025 at 4:36 PM Chris Adams wrote:
> > >
> > > Once upon a time, Neal Gompa said:
> > > > For stuff installed into /usr, we
> > > > should just allow packages
On Mon, 2025-01-13 at 11:45 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> With the Fedora 42 mass rebuild approaching, I've built gcc 15
> snapshot
> (and annobin/libtool) in the
>
> f42-build-side-103300
>
> side-tag.
>
> Feel free to do scratch builds against this side-tag
https://koji.fedoraproje
Hi,
Is there any convention for naming patches? I mildly remember that there
used to be some guideline suggesting form such as
`pagkage-name-version-description-of-patch.patch`. But I was not able to
find this codified in guidelines.
Vít
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital
On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 02:02:33PM +0100, Iker Pedrosa wrote:
> Which shadow-utils upstream ticket?
https://github.com/shadow-maint/shadow/issues/940
> I've long wanted to get rid of the patch we have in Fedora for shadow
> audit, either by including it upstream or removing it altogether, but I'm
I removed Petr as a maintainer of rpms/ipa-hcc.
Thanks,
Fraser
--
___
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/p
Hello!
As part of updating SDL2_sound to 2.0.4, I reviewed the licensing of the
code and the full license is now:
Zlib AND LGPL-2.1-or-later AND ( MIT OR Unlicense ) AND
LicenseRef-Fedora-Public-Domain
Before, it was:
Zlib AND LicenseRef-Callaway-LGPLv2+
Regards,
Dominik
--
Fedora https://fed
On Fri, Jan 10, 2025 at 04:21:56PM -0500, Steve Grubb wrote:
> On Friday, January 10, 2025 10:20:07 AM EST Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> wrote:
> > https://github.com/systemd/systemd/pull/35957
> Thanks. It just occurred to me that upstream shadow-utils has kinda broken
> auditing. The way that
On 1/13/25 11:07 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 12:10:44PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 09:11:35AM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
First, this would require setting up the infrastructure to build and
store and distribute multiple
On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 02:19:25PM +0200, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
> On Пан, 13 сту 2025, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 11:41:07AM +0200, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
> > > On Пан, 13 сту 2025, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> > > > Good Morning Everyone,
> > > >
> > > > We have been
If anyone knows how to contact sham1, please let me know. I've sent an email
to his/her personal email but haven't got a response. The pull request has been
unreviewed for more than 3
weeks:https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/maildir-utils/pull-request/9
I don't know sham1, but I presume you
On Tue, Jan 14, 2025 at 11:36:59AM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Is there any convention for naming patches? I mildly remember that there
> used to be some guideline suggesting form such as
> `pagkage-name-version-description-of-patch.patch`. But I was not able to
> find this codified in gui
On Tue, Jan 14, 2025 at 12:33:55PM +, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> On Mon, 2025-01-13 at 11:45 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > With the Fedora 42 mass rebuild approaching, I've built gcc 15
> > snapshot
> > (and annobin/libtool) in the
> >
> > f42-build-side-103300
> >
> > side-tag.
> >
On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 at 16:08, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 12:10:44PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 09:11:35AM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> wrote:
> > > First, this would require setting up the infrastructure to build and
> > > sto
Hi,
I adopt bc and SFML [3] to avoid one mass removing of packages some
time ago , these two packages have some dependencies , but I'm not very
familiar with them
Recently an user , ask me to consider "Consider switching gnub-bc to
howard-bc"[1] and [2] and change from gcc to clang .
Anyon
On Tue, Jan 14, 2025 at 11:36:59AM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Is there any convention for naming patches? I mildly remember that there
> used to be some guideline suggesting form such as
> `pagkage-name-version-description-of-patch.patch`. But I was not able to
> find this codified in gui
On 12. 01. 25 4:59, Fedora ELN Report wrote:
Added packages: 267
Hi. What happened here? I cannot find the newly added packages in the content
resolver.
Are those packages from ELN Extras?
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora Matrix: mhroncok
--
_
Quick summary:
We discussed the mass-update of packages to use `git-core` instead of
`git` for dependencies. We agreed that merge requests may be
mass-submitted and that a provenpackager (zbyszek) will merge them
after four weeks of inactivity. MRs can be merged by the maintainer
before then or re
Dne 14. 01. 25 v 16:21 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek napsal(a):
On Tue, Jan 14, 2025 at 11:36:59AM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Hi,
Is there any convention for naming patches? I mildly remember that there
used to be some guideline suggesting form such as
`pagkage-name-version-description-of-patch.p
Emacs is uninstallable in Rawhide due to a tree-sitter soname bump.
Are the tree-sitter maintainers planning to rebuild (quickly!) the
broken dependencies soon? The mass rebuild is about to start...
--
Jerry James
http://www.jamezone.org/
--
___
devel
On 1/14/25 08:41, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 12. 01. 25 4:59, Fedora ELN Report wrote:
Added packages: 267
Hi. What happened here? I cannot find the newly added packages in the
content resolver.
Are those packages from ELN Extras?
Yes, ELN and ELN Extras are composed together. In this c
Greetings.
Last year, as part of
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ChangeComposeSettings
we were going to change rawhide (and then f41) repo metadata to use the
new upstream createrepo_c default (zstd).
We unfortunately had to partially back this change out because at the
time there were s
On Tue, 14 Jan 2025 at 09:38, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I adopt bc and SFML [3] to avoid one mass removing of packages some
> time ago , these two packages have some dependencies , but I'm not very
> familiar with them
>
> Recently an user , ask me to consider "Consider switching gnub-bc to
>
I took the golang cgroup ones, since I'm familiarized with it, as well
as with golang. Also trying to start getting into golang packages.
On 1/14/25 5:00 PM, maxwell--- via devel-announce wrote:
olang(github.com/containerd/containerd/cio) = 1.6.23-1.fc41,
golang(github.com/containerd/container
Hello,
Zbigniew, thanks for updating the audit events.
On Tuesday, January 14, 2025 5:56:01 AM EST Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 02:02:33PM +0100, Iker Pedrosa wrote:
>
> > Which shadow-utils upstream ticket?
>
> https://github.com/shadow-maint/shadow/issues/940
So... I've been lurking for a bit and haven't even introduced myself to the dev
mailing list, but I'm certainly interested in SFML. I just looked at the spec
file for the library and looks understandable enough, so if you don't mind a
little hand holding I'd love to look into that!
I'm also awa
On Tue, Jan 14, 2025 at 1:29 PM Vít Ondruch wrote:
>
>
> Dne 14. 01. 25 v 16:21 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek napsal(a):
> > On Tue, Jan 14, 2025 at 11:36:59AM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Is there any convention for naming patches? I mildly remember that there
> >> used to be some g
On Tue, Jan 14, 2025 at 11:36:59AM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Is there any convention for naming patches? I mildly remember that there
> used to be some guideline suggesting form such as
> `pagkage-name-version-description-of-patch.patch`. But I was not able to
> find this codified in gui
On Tue, Jan 14, 2025 at 8:38 AM Jednorozec wrote:
>
> Yes, that is the list. Sometimes, maintainers or change owners required
> packages to be omitted from the current mass rebuild.
> The noautobuild file is used for packages that should never be mass rebuilt.
Great, thank you for the informatio
33 matches
Mail list logo
