V Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 05:54:36PM +0200, Dimitris Soumis napsal(a):
> After a recent change in the build system (which I am not aware of), I
> noticed that the generated RPM for the Tomcat package now has an unexpected
> dependency:
>
> $ rpm -qp --requires tomcat-9.0.98-1.fc43.noarch.rpm
> ...
>
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the
FESCo meeting Tuesday at 17:00 UTC in #meeting:fedoraproject.org
on Matrix.
To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto
or run:
date -d '2025-02-11 17:00 UTC'
Links to all issues to be
Hi python folks,
I have a package [1] (you can toggle the with_python var at the top) that
now builds the python bindings in an isolated venv+pip environment, and
hence fails, [2].
It seems, at least in the way upstream currently configures it, you can't
seem to use the distro provided python dep
> On 11 Feb 2025, at 14:30, Peter Robinson wrote:
>
>
> Hi python folks,
>
> I have a package [1] (you can toggle the with_python var at the top) that now
> builds the python bindings in an isolated venv+pip environment, and hence
> fails, [2].
>
> It seems, at least in the way upstream c
Am Di., 11. Feb. 2025 um 17:29 Uhr schrieb Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
:
>
> On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 05:08:36PM +0100, Petr Pisar wrote:
> > V Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 05:54:36PM +0200, Dimitris Soumis napsal(a):
> > > After a recent change in the build system (which I am not aware of), I
> > > noticed
On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 05:08:36PM +0100, Petr Pisar wrote:
> V Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 05:54:36PM +0200, Dimitris Soumis napsal(a):
> > After a recent change in the build system (which I am not aware of), I
> > noticed that the generated RPM for the Tomcat package now has an unexpected
> > dependency
It’s time for another flatbuffers update,
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/flatbuffers/pull-request/15. As
always, this is ABI-incompatible and bumps the SONAME version.
I am impact-checking the dependent package hyperhdr, onnxruntime, and
qdigidoc in COPR,
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org
On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 9:29 AM Peter Robinson wrote:
>
> Hi python folks,
>
> I have a package [1] (you can toggle the with_python var at the top) that now
> builds the python bindings in an isolated venv+pip environment, and hence
> fails, [2].
>
> It seems, at least in the way upstream curren
On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 9:30 AM Peter Robinson wrote:
> Hi python folks,
>
> I have a package [1] (you can toggle the with_python var at the top) that
> now builds the python bindings in an isolated venv+pip environment, and
> hence fails, [2].
>
> It seems, at least in the way upstream currently
Am Di., 11. Feb. 2025 um 15:29 Uhr schrieb Peter Robinson
:
>
> Hi python folks,
>
> I have a package [1] (you can toggle the with_python var at the top) that now
> builds the python bindings in an isolated venv+pip environment, and hence
> fails, [2].
>
> It seems, at least in the way upstream c
We've now got over 100k weekly Fedora CoreOS nodes. Check out the full post
over on the forum:
https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/fedora-coreos-numbers-02-2025-edition/144475
Dusty
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsu
Hi,
> On 10. Feb 2025, at 18:38, Ben Williams wrote:
>
> yes livecd-creator has been not working for some time
I’ve recently tried using livicd-creator, and it seems the reason why it breaks
is because it uses Python’s urllib to access a local file, and there is a bug
in urllib around string
=
# #meeting:fedoraproject.org: fesco
=
Meeting started by @humaton:fedora.im at 2025-02-11 17:00:25
Meeting summary
---
* TOPIC: Init Process (@humaton:fedora.im, 17:00:40)
* TOPIC: #3360 provenpackager nomina
Hi all,
After a recent change in the build system (which I am not aware of), I
noticed that the generated RPM for the Tomcat package now has an unexpected
dependency:
$ rpm -qp --requires tomcat-9.0.98-1.fc43.noarch.rpm
...
*filesystem(unmerged-sbin-symlinks)*
...
As a result, attempting to inst
Later this week I will be updating hdf5 to 1.14.6 from 1.14.5 and netcdf
to 4.6.3 in a side tag in rawhide. Some notes:
For a long time, hdf5 would emit a warning if a program linked to a
version of hdf5 that did not *exactly* match the full version of the
library it was compiled with. For t
OLD: Fedora-eln-20250211.n.0
NEW: Fedora-eln-20250212.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 0
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 29
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 0 B
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Size of
https://www.x.org/releases/X11R7.7/doc/libXt/intrinsics.html
Describes:
typedef struct _XtActionsRec {
String string;
XtActionProc proc;
} XtActionsRec, *XtActionList;
being initialized with:
XtActionsRec actionTable[] = {
{"Set", Set},
{"Unset", Unset},
{"Highlight", Highlight},
{"Unhighligh
Le 03/02/2025 à 15:12, Björn 'besser82' Esser a écrit :
Why there was no communication with us about the thing?
I never intended to build them; I just added the explicit BR so there
will be no fallout, when some time in the future libxcrypt-devel may not
be an implicit part of the buildroots
On Tue, 28 Jan 2025 at 09:07, 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 other package
On Tue, 2025-02-11 at 21:45 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Jan 2025 at 09:07, 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 packag
20 matches
Mail list logo
