Dne 28. 01. 25 v 18:53 Siddhesh Poyarekar napsal(a):
On 2025-01-28 05:19, Vít Ondruch wrote:
4) Having everything rebuild by GCC 15? That on itself is not a goal
IMHO. Making sure everything works with GCC 15 is good goal, but that
is problem for developers, not for users (we can argue if ther
Dne 28. 01. 25 v 19:18 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a):
On Tue, Jan 28, 2025 at 11:19:02AM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
I think we should stop and think again why we do mass rebuilds and why we do
them prior release. "The goal is to rebuild every single Fedora package,
regardless of content, before the Fedo
Dne 28. 01. 25 v 19:32 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
Dne 28. 01. 25 v 19:18 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a):
On Tue, Jan 28, 2025 at 11:19:02AM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
I think we should stop and think again why we do mass rebuilds and
why we do
them prior release. "The goal is to rebuild every single Fedora
Dne 28. 01. 25 v 19:18 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a):
On Tue, Jan 28, 2025 at 11:19:02AM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
I think we should stop and think again why we do mass rebuilds and why we do
them prior release. "The goal is to rebuild every single Fedora package,
regardless of content, before the Fedo
On Tue, Jan 28, 2025 at 11:19:02AM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> I think we should stop and think again why we do mass rebuilds and why we do
> them prior release. "The goal is to rebuild every single Fedora package,
> regardless of content, before the Fedora 41 Change Deadline." [1] is not
> very el
On Tue, Jan 28, 2025 at 11:19:02AM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> I think we should stop and think again why we do mass rebuilds and why we do
> them prior release. "The goal is to rebuild every single Fedora package,
> regardless of content, before the Fedora 41 Change Deadline." [1] is not
> very el
I have orphaned the following:
- apache-commons-configuration
- apache-commons-jexl
- apache-commons-vfs
They were used by maven-doxia, but with the
maven-doxia*/maven-reporting* updates I just submitted to Rawhide,
they no longer are. If my repoquery usage is correct, then the first
two have no
On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 10:41:15PM +, Aoife Moloney via devel-announce
wrote:
> == Detailed Description ==
> Currently, Fedora IoT users can add an SSH key to the root user
> account using the Zezere provisioning tool. While convenient for most
> use cases, users have given feedback that this
On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 07:31:35PM +, Sérgio Basto via devel wrote:
> I just want check, if I'm thinking correctly before submitting a fix in
> gtest package
>
> The problem is on Rawhide I have this warning that make other packages
> fail to build [1]
>
> gtest source [2] source get __cplu
Hi,
On 1/27/25 23:16, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
Like Fabio mentioned, we already do this and tend to have that
information but don't communicate until we have determined that it is
relevant and as it happened this time around, it was too late. The main
reason why we hold on to the informati
Dne 28. 01. 25 v 11:33 Daniel P. Berrangé napsal(a):
On Tue, Jan 28, 2025 at 11:19:02AM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
I think we should stop and think again why we do mass rebuilds and why we do
them prior release. "The goal is to rebuild every single Fedora package,
regardless of content, before t
I think we should stop and think again why we do mass rebuilds and why
we do them prior release. "The goal is to rebuild every single Fedora
package, regardless of content, before the Fedora 41 Change Deadline."
[1] is not very elaborated and I was not able to find anything better.
These are m
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20250127.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20250128.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 2
Added packages: 5
Dropped packages:2
Upgraded packages: 119
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 35.06 MiB
Size of dropped packages
On 2025-01-28 13:53, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 28. 01. 25 v 18:53 Siddhesh Poyarekar napsal(a):
On 2025-01-28 05:19, Vít Ondruch wrote:
4) Having everything rebuild by GCC 15? That on itself is not a goal
IMHO. Making sure everything works with GCC 15 is good goal, but that
is problem for develop
On Tue, 2025-01-28 at 10:06 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 07:31:35PM +, Sérgio Basto via devel
> wrote:
> > I just want check, if I'm thinking correctly before submitting a
> > fix in
> > gtest package
> >
> > The problem is on Rawhide I have this warning that make oth
I'm a little confused about this new type of preemption.
"The long road to lazy preemption" [1] article says:
"The lazy mode will occupy a place between PREEMPT_NONE and PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY,
replacing both of them."
Whereas Linux 6.13 change log [2] says:
"lazy preemption" mode that aims to be a
I think that -Werror makes sense for upstream development CI with
controlled dependencies and toolchains, but it is too strict and brittle
for downstream packaging, because insignificant warnings from new
toolchain or dependency versions tend to cause frequent unnecessary
breakage. The more com
Hi
I've merged the side tag. Only Paraview is currently FTBFS
(pre-existing, since the mass rebuild), vtk and gmsh otoh have been
successfully rebuilt.
Thanks
Sandro
On 24.01.25 10:30, Sandro Mani wrote:
Hi
I'll be updating to cgnslib-4.5.0 in rawhide, building to the
f42-build-side-1042
On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 5:22 PM Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
> I built the whole set of packages myself in the right order, in 5 phases
> as described here
> https://mizdebsk.fedorapeople.org/review/l10n-maven-plugin/plan.html
> All packages built fine in rawhide.
> Then I proceed to review the new pac
FYI At least one of those FTBS packages is failing in C code because of
a change to compile with -std=c23, not a golang issue.
Dave
On Mon, Jan 20, 2025 at 07:24:11AM +0100, Mikel Olasagasti via golang wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This is a heads-up regarding the impact of Go 1.24, now available in
> Fedora
On 2025-01-28 05:19, Vít Ondruch wrote:
4) Having everything rebuild by GCC 15? That on itself is not a goal
IMHO. Making sure everything works with GCC 15 is good goal, but that is
problem for developers, not for users (we can argue if there are CVEs,
this might become problem, but this is not
On 2025-01-28 06:00, Vít Ondruch wrote:
This is debatable. Realistically, failure due to GCC does not need to be
fixed everywhere until really needed. It is good to have it fixed in
Rawhide to be ready for backport when needed.
Build failures don't *have* to be fixed right away, but in practic
On 2025-01-28 04:08, Karolina Surma wrote:
Regarding the gcc prebuild: I'd personally prefer to deal with a report
that may end up redirected to the gcc team or closed as not a bug weeks
in advance than being surprised by the build failure when an update
lands in Rawhide.
Thank you, that's us
Before the meeting we had one more voted change in the ticket:
#3338 Change: Deprecation of STI Tests
https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3338
APPROVED (+5, 0, 0)
During the meeting we also voted on:
#3293 Change: Dropping of cert.pem file
https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3293
APPROVED for F43 (+6, 0, -0
OLD: Fedora-eln-20250128.n.0
NEW: Fedora-eln-20250129.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 0
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 61
Downgraded packages: 1
Size of added packages: 0 B
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Size of
25 matches
Mail list logo
