On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 09:40:02PM +0900, Mamoru TASAKA wrote:
> Untagged gcc-15.0.1-0.9.fc42 from gcc-15.0.1-0.9.fc42
>
> (It can be done yourself by
> $ koji untag-build f42-build-side-107435 gcc-15.0.1-0.9.fc42
> but for now I did it)
Oh... Of course! Somehow, this simple solution didn't e
Wiki - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/RPM-6.0
Discussion thread -
https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/f43-change-proposal-rpm-6-0-system-wide/146855
This is a proposed Change for Fedora Linux.
This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes
process, proposals are publ
Hello
On Mon, Mar 10, 2025, 12:12 PM Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 09, 2025 at 01:00:38PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Sat, 2025-03-08 at 11:31 -0800, Michel Lind wrote:
> > > If this is both too heavy to evaluate on recent hardware, and also not
> reproducibly deployable, it s
On Mon, Mar 10 2025 at 11:11:33 AM +00:00:00, Richard W.M. Jones
wrote:
Thanks for this link. The instance is:
https://konflux.apps.kfluxfedorap01.toli.p1.openshiftapps.com/application-pipeline
I played around for about 3 minutes and am very confused. The overview
page looks like an adverti
On Mon, 2025-03-10 at 16:42 +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > * The most noticeable change is that RPM now refuses to install
> > packages whose signature hasn't been positively verified, whether due
> > to being unsigned, missing key or otherwise. This can be worked around
> > by supplying `--nosig
Yeah, I broadly agree with what smooge noted here. The idea isn't to
just swap konflux in for koji and call it a day, but rather to use
konflux as a build pipeline.
The promise of konflux I could see it taking on things that are
currently done by:
pkgs / src.fedoraproject.org - it could download
In one week, 2025-03-18, or slightly later, in collaboration with Scott
Logan (FAS: cottsay), I plan to update spatialindex from 1.9.3 to 2.1.0
in F43/Rawhide[1].
Upstream reports that “There are no significant major enhancements or
refactorings that should change any behaviors. It had been a
On Sun, Mar 09, 2025 at 07:41:31PM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > We should probably try and get this into Fedora proper, right? Ideally
> > everything needed by Fedora infrastructure is in Fedora itself, it took us
> > a few years to get there with mailman so the earlier we start the better
> >
>
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20250309.n.1
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20250310.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 1
Added packages: 3
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 20
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 569.15 KiB
Size of dropped packages:0
This change has been filed with FESCo https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3376
for F42 as per the change owners guidance. Please note that the F42 change
proposal deadline was January 14. Any changes landing after this date are
assumed to be intended for F43. I do have a bad habit of assuming that
change
In the packaging guidelines we call out the problematic upgrades for
replacing a directory with a non-directory, or replacing a symlink
with a directory.
We don't mention replacing a regular file with a directory though.
Empirically that appears to be a broken scenario too.
# ls -al /usr/lib64/gi
Dne 10. 03. 25 v 10:22 dop. Daniel P. Berrangé napsal(a):
Did something change in cpio, or has it always been broken for regular file
to directory replacement too, and our docs were thus always incomplete ?
It was always this way.
The same for replacing a file with symlink. Or vice versa.
--
On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 10:26:12AM +0100, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> Dne 10. 03. 25 v 10:22 dop. Daniel P. Berrangé napsal(a):
> > Did something change in cpio, or has it always been broken for regular file
> > to directory replacement too, and our docs were thus always incomplete ?
>
> It was always
Wiki - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/DeprecateGoldLinker
Discussion thread -
https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/f43-change-proposal-deprecate-the-gold-linker-system-wide/146851
This is a proposed Change for Fedora Linux.
This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Chang
On Mon, Mar 03, 2025 at 10:43:25AM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> Below is the list of PRs to merge. They all pass CI or the CI failed
> for unrelated reasons. I'll look at each PR before merging, so if
> there is an ongoing discussion or requests from the maintainers, I'll
> not merge
On Mon, Mar 10, 2025, at 5:44 AM, Aoife Moloney via devel-announce wrote:
> Wiki - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/RPM-6.0
> Discussion thread -
> https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/f43-change-proposal-rpm-6-0-system-wide/146855
>
> This is a proposed Change for Fedora Linux.
> This do
On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 12:44:44PM +, Aoife Moloney via devel-announce
wrote:
> Wiki - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/RPM-6.0
> Discussion thread -
> https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/f43-change-proposal-rpm-6-0-system-wide/146855
>
> This is a proposed Change for Fedora Linux.
>
Hi all,
Yes, Dan was kind enough to tell me exactly this.
I will take me some time, though, as I have some other priorities.
Thanks and kind regards,
Antonio
El 8/3/25 a las 14:23, Michel Lind escribió:
Hi Antonio,
First of all, welcome!
On Thu, Mar 6, 2025, at 7:27 AM, Antonio wrote:
Hi D
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 '2025-03-11 17:00 UTC'
Links to all issues to be
Hello everyone,
Please join us at the next Open NeuroFedora team meeting on Monday, 10
March at 13:00 UTC. The meeting is a public meeting, and open for
everyone to attend. You can join us over on Matrix in the Fedora Meeting
channel:
https://matrix.to/#/#meeting:fedoraproject.org
You can use t
Wiki -
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Retire_gtk3-rs,_gtk-rs-core_v0.18,_and_gtk4-rs_v0.7
Discussion thread -
https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/f43-change-proposal-retire-gtk3-rs-gtk-rs-core-v0-18-and-gtk4-rs-v0-7-self-contained/146853
This is a proposed Change for Fedora Linux.
Thi
Michal Domonkos wrote on 2025/03/10 21:27:
Hello,
I'd like to submit a F42 update (rpm-4.20.1-1.fc42) but, in order for the build
to succeed, it requires a new build of gcc which fixes a failure on i686 [1].
The respective gcc update [2] is, however, currently on hold, due to the
pending F42 fre
Wiki - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Migrate_to_lastlog2
Discussion thread -
https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/f43-change-proposal-migrate-to-lastlog2-system-wide/146854
This is a proposed Change for Fedora Linux.
This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes
pro
Wiki -
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Copilot_Runtime_Verification_Framework
Discussion thread -
https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/f42-change-proposal-copilot-runtime-verification-framework-self-contained/146848
This is a proposed Change for Fedora Linux.
This document represents a p
Hi all,
So I've been doing some experiments with latest ccls version on COPR [1]
and this is what I found:
1.- It won't build on rawhide
rawhide currently sports clang/llvm v20, and ccls simply fails to build
with that (this would require changes upstream since the LLVM libs have
changed).
25 matches
Mail list logo
