On 02/27/2015 11:48 AM, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
On Thu, 2015-02-26 at 15:46 +0100, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
On 02/26/2015 02:46 PM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
On 02/26/2015 10:13 AM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
On 02/26/2015 09:23 AM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
On 02/26/2015 09:20 AM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
On 02
On 02/27/2015 11:47 AM, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Jiri Vanek"
To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Friday, February 27, 2015 11:43:53 AM
Subject: Re: F22 System Wide Change: Legacy implementations of the Java
platform in Fedora
On 02/26/201
On 02/27/2015 11:58 AM, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Jiri Vanek"
To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
Sent: Friday, February 27, 2015 12:54:04 PM
Subject: Re: F22 System Wide Change: Legacy implementations of the Java
platform
On 02/27/2015 12:04 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
On 02/27/2015 10:47 AM, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote:
If we want to be sure that this legacy jdk will not interfere with
the system JDK let it not provide anything via alternatives. That
way people that want it can use it by playing with PATH/JAVA_HOME
(
On 02/27/2015 12:57 PM, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote:
Shouldn't this one replace 3). As if there are no alternatives, priorities are
meaningless.
Sound good.
J.
Alexander Kurtakov
Red Hat Eclipse team
- Original Message -
From: "Jiri Vanek"
To: devel@lists.fedorap
On 02/27/2015 12:04 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
On 02/27/2015 10:47 AM, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote:
If we want to be sure that this legacy jdk will not interfere with
the system JDK let it not provide anything via alternatives. That
way people that want it can use it by playing with PATH/JAVA_HOME
(
On 02/26/2015 02:54 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
= Proposed System Wide Change: Legacy implementations of the Java platform in
Fedora =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/LegacyJDKsInFedora
== Detailed Description ==
This is no real work proposal.
Stepping back, I’m not sure this has been sai
On 06/16/2015 05:16 PM, gil wrote:
hi
I'm working for upgrade springframework-batch (spring-batch) [1].
There are still some packages under review:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1228203
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1228503
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=
On 06/22/2015 02:56 PM, gil wrote:
HI
I have intention to orphaning/retire jasperreports [1] ,
because it fails build [2] with new batik (1.8)
and newer release use non free itext 5.x library.
[1] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/jasperreports/
[2] http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji
yyang maven-plugin-testing maven-plugin-tools maven-wagon maven2 modello
plexus-active-collections plexus-component-api plexus-containers
zbyszekclosure-compiler diffoscope gnulib hdfview jblas jhdf5 js-zlib
neurord nom-tam-fits
Thanx!
J.
--
Jiri Vanek
Senior QE engineer, OpenJDK QE
SOP for more information.
Very bad timing:(
I hope it will get fixed asap.
I'm really sorry for troubles!
J.
>
> On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 5:05 PM Jiri Vanek <mailto:jva...@redhat.com>> wrote:
>
>
>
> Please s
On 6/9/20 5:07 PM, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 4:52 PM Fabio Valentini wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 4:05 PM Jiri Vanek wrote:
>>> Please see
>>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Java11#common_issues_packagers_can_face_and_gathe
a.2C_eg_java-11-openjdk.29
Thanx for investigations!
J.
>
> Reference here:
>
> https://bugs.mysql.com/bug.php?id=99750
>
> Best regards,
> Ondrej
>
> On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 6:42 PM Jiri Vanek <mailto:jva...@redhat.com>> wrote:
>
> On 6/9/20 5:
iki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/java-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
>
--
Jiri Vanek
Senior QE engineer, OpenJDK QE lead, Mgr.
Red Hat Czech
jva...@redhat.comM: +420775390109
___
d
gt; Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>
--
s://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>
--
Jiri Vanek
Senior QE engineer, OpenJDK QE lead, Mgr.
Red Hat Czech
j
nk it, and stat
rebuilding on pretty fresh field
J.
--
Jiri Vanek
Senior QE engineer, OpenJDK QE lead, Mgr.
Red Hat Czech
jva...@redhat.comM: +420775390109
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
On 6/29/20 1:59 PM, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 2:39 PM Jiri Vanek <mailto:jva...@redhat.com>> wrote:
>
> Current stats from my testing samples:
> 408 failing
> 263 passing
>
>
> Are these nu
sts.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>
On 7/1/20 4:09 PM, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 4:00 PM Jiri Vanek wrote:
>>
>> On 7/1/20 3:21 PM, Fabio Valentini wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 3:09 PM Aleksandar Kurtakov
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Fabio, does i
.
Thoughts?
J.
--
Jiri Vanek
Senior QE engineer, OpenJDK QE lead, Mgr.
Red Hat Czech
jva...@redhat.comM: +420775390109
___
devel-announce mailing list -- devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-announce-le
ines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>
--
Jiri Vanek
Senior QE engineer, OpenJDK QE lead, Mgr.
Red Hat Czech
jva...@redhat.comM: +420775390109
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraprojec
ease
contriute, or sugest next steps here. I would liek to have it java-packaging
gudelines change, and
self-contained f33 change, but it may be to late.
I see yo already track the Fabio's to-high bytecode issue, but my proposal is
to prevent it in
future. However, it do not seem to be facing to
Hi!
Side tag was merged, java-11-openjdk now should be system JDK.
Don't hesitate to reach me if you encounter some misbehaving!
J.
On 7/11/20 10:24 AM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
> Hello!
>
> toatal packages: 610
> passed: 427
> failed: 176
>
> From the failures, there is 2
Hi!
I'm no longer interested in maintaining of visualvm -
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/visualvm/ - Simply I didn't used it for last three
years
If somebody still is using it, I will happily retire ownership to him/her.
Looking forward to meet the successor,
J.
--
deve
On 02/24/2015 01:34 PM, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
On Tue, 2015-02-24 at 12:43 +0100, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
[...]
option one - introducing new packages - preferred
1. main jdk is proclaimed as dead as it was until now. The new jdk is derived
as new package prviousName-legacy
Fedora al
Package maintainers are responsible for their packages. If maintainer of
"main JDK" is also maintaining "legacy JDK" then (s)he should be
responsible for both of them. I don't see why any special rule should be
defined.
You missed very important point. The maintainer will never be same. We (peo
On 02/24/2015 01:50 PM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
On Tuesday, 24 February 2015 at 13:34, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
On Tue, 2015-02-24 at 12:43 +0100, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
[...]
option one - introducing new packages - preferred
1. main jdk is proclaimed as dead as it was un
On 02/24/2015 12:43 PM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
I am against official guidelines or policy for legacy JDK packages. I
don't think that any such policy is needed and it would only encourage
adoption of old packages for which there might be no security updates.
Well thats the point - people are c
On 02/24/2015 02:17 PM, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Jiri Vanek"
To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2015 3:02:38 PM
Subject: Re: F22 System Wide Change: Legacy implementations of the Java
platform in Fedora
On 02/24/201
On 02/24/2015 02:58 PM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
On Tuesday, 24 February 2015 at 14:28, Jiri Vanek wrote:
[...]
There were several attempts in past like "can you please support jdk
7,6...in newer fedoras" and we always told no. When come speech about "do
On 02/24/2015 03:11 PM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
On Tuesday, 24 February 2015 at 15:09, Deepak Bhole wrote:
* Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski [2015-02-24 09:04]:
On Tuesday, 24 February 2015 at 14:28, Jiri Vanek wrote:
[...]
There were several attempts i
On 02/24/2015 04:03 PM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
On 02/24/2015 03:51 PM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
2.) Ensure dist upgrades remove old JDK package (which may no longer
get security updates).
Firstly, as I understand upgrade isn't supposed to remove packages by
default, unless they are obsole
On 02/25/2015 10:07 AM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
On 02/25/2015 06:39 AM, Hedayat Vatankhah wrote:
However, if there are JAR files which are useful
for a developer, they can have a -legacy version too!
There is no technical reason to suffix anything - you can put JARs that
depend on old version
): Jiri Vanek
IMHO, this is not implementable for a simple practical reason: All the JARs
we ship are built from source with our default JDK. They will in general NOT
work on any JRE that's older than the default JDK. (A JRE/JDK that's NEWER
than the default JDK can work though, e.g., the
4 February 2015 at 15:09, Deepak Bhole wrote:
* Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski [2015-02-24 09:04]:
On Tuesday, 24 February 2015 at 14:28, Jiri Vanek wrote:
[...]
There were several attempts in past like "can you please support jdk
7,6...in newer fedoras" and we always told no.
thann' Mierzejewski [2015-02-24 09:29]:
On Tuesday, 24 February 2015 at 15:09, Deepak Bhole wrote:
* Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski [2015-02-24 09:04]:
On Tuesday, 24 February 2015 at 14:28, Jiri Vanek wrote:
[...]
There were several attempts in past like "can you please support jdk
7,
On 02/24/2015 05:21 PM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
On 02/24/2015 04:59 PM, Pete Travis wrote:
On Feb 24, 2015 8:32 AM, "Mikolaj Izdebski" wrote:
On 02/24/2015 02:17 PM, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote:
I would much rather live without any legacy jdk, and if so then
without any
rules. But not settin
On 02/24/2015 08:36 PM, Sumit Bhardwaj wrote:
Hi All,
I have been reading this mail chain for some time and there is something I
wanted to say. It's kind
of a long mail, I apologize for taking so much of your time but request you to
please bear with me.
I work as a technical consultant on IBM
On 02/24/2015 06:22 PM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
On 02/24/2015 05:21 PM, Mario Torre wrote:
On Tue, 2015-02-24 at 15:37 +0100, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
On 02/24/2015 02:15 PM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
On 02/24/2015 12:43 PM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
I am against official guidelines or policy for
On 02/26/2015 09:20 AM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
On 02/26/2015 08:42 AM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
Also, my proposal of introducing "java" metapackage (see my other post
in this thread), which would always require the latest JDK, solves this
problem in a different way, without modifying ord
On 02/26/2015 09:16 AM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
On 02/25/2015 06:58 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
On 02/24/2015 06:41 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
Hello,
"java" would be the preferred JRE in Fedora. The package would have no
content, but it would have Requires on preferred Fedora JRE, currently
java-
On 02/26/2015 09:31 AM, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Mikolaj Izdebski"
To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 10:16:26 AM
Subject: Re: F22 System Wide Change: Legacy implementations of the Java
platform in Fedora
On 02/25/2015 06:
On 02/26/2015 09:43 AM, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Jiri Vanek"
To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 10:39:35 AM
Subject: Re: F22 System Wide Change: Legacy implementations of the Java
platform in Fedora
On 02/26/201
On 02/26/2015 10:13 AM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
On 02/26/2015 09:23 AM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
On 02/26/2015 09:20 AM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
On 02/26/2015 08:42 AM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
Also, my proposal of introducing "java" metapackage (see my other post
in this thread), which wo
On 02/24/2015 10:34 AM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
= Proposed System Wide Change: Legacy implementations of the Java platform in
Fedora =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/LegacyJDKsInFedora
Change owner(s): Jiri Vanek
Currently Fedora supports one main Java runtime and Java Development Kit
On 02/26/2015 04:20 PM, Robert Marcano wrote:
On 02/24/2015 05:04 AM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
= Proposed System Wide Change: Legacy implementations of the Java platform in
Fedora =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/LegacyJDKsInFedora
Change owner(s): Jiri Vanek
Currently Fedora supports
2015 05:04 AM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
= Proposed System Wide Change: Legacy implementations of the Java platform
in
Fedora =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/LegacyJDKsInFedora
Change owner(s): Jiri Vanek
Currently Fedora supports one main Java runtime and Java Development Kit
(JDK)
and fr
On 02/26/2015 02:51 PM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
On 02/24/2015 10:34 AM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
= Proposed System Wide Change: Legacy implementations of the Java platform in
Fedora =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/LegacyJDKsInFedora
Change owner(s): Jiri Vanek
Currently Fedora supports one
scribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
--
Jiri Vanek
Senior QE engineer, OpenJDK QE lead, Mgr.
Red Hat Czech
jva...@redhat.comM: +420775390109
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send
Trademark approval:
N/A (not needed for this Change)
--
Jiri Vanek
Senior QE engineer, OpenJDK QE lead, Mgr.
Red Hat Czech
jva...@redhat.comM: +420775390109
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email t
Hi!
Although it is more then nice to have giflib 5 in rawhide, I would encourage
you to untag[1] it from rawhide, and prepare doubled packages in koji to give
dependent packages time to rebuilt:
1) Find a provenpackager / releng member to work on rebuilding all the
packages quickly (in
Hello!
this link
> [1] https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/teams/fesco/fesco.2016-01-08-17.22.html
Do not explain more about the missing mass rebuild. Are there more infomration
about?
[2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/25/Schedule
Thanx!
J.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedo
On 11/30/2016 07:10 PM, Patrick マルタインアンドレアス Uiterwijk wrote:
Hi,
Hello,
I'm trying to create a new update and
I'm getting this error:
Builds : Unable to create update. Parent instance is not bound to a Session;
lazy load
operation of attribute 'release' cannot proceed
The build looks fine
On 12/01/2016 10:55 AM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
On 11/30/2016 07:10 PM, Patrick マルタインアンドレアス Uiterwijk wrote:
Hi,
Hello,
I'm trying to create a new update and
I'm getting this error:
Builds : Unable to create update. Parent instance is not bound to a Session;
lazy load
operation of
ternal to
> me.
Sure. If I did, then not intentionally. By jira ticket in the above I had in
mind general ticket on
pagure or similarly. The word jira did not belonged here. fixed the doc.
>
Thanx!
thanx a lot,
J.
--
Jiri Vanek
Senior QE engineer, OpenJDK QE lead, Mgr.
Red Hat Czec
On 3/30/20 5:26 PM, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 4:05 PM Ben Cotton wrote:
>>
>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Java11 .
>>
>> == Summary ==
>> Update the system JDK in Fedora from java-1.8.0-openjdk to java-11-openjdk.
>>
>&g
>
Sounds like good idea..the way how to go. Only I'm not familiar with how it
works.
--
Jiri Vanek
Senior QE engineer, OpenJDK QE lead, Mgr.
Red Hat Czech
jva...@redhat.comM: +420775390109
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.
Hello fellow java package maintainers!
We are planning to bump the JDK from java-1.8.0-openjdk to java-11-openjdk for
F33. Please see
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Java11
Short Story:
* if you have some java package, be aware that we are bumping JDK in rawhide
* Ensure your package
Hello fellow java package maintainers!
We are planning to bump the JDK from java-1.8.0-openjdk to java-11-openjdk for
F33. Please see
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Java11
Short Story:
* if you have some java package, be aware that we are bumping JDK in rawhide
* Ensure your package bu
people.org/java11/jvanek-java11-fedora-32-x86_64.cfg .
>> Eg:
>>
>> sudo cp downloaded-fedora-32-x86_64.cfg
>> /etc/mock/jvanek-java11-fedora-32-x86_64.cfg
>> or
>> cp downloaded-fedora-32-x86_64.cfg
>> ~/.config/mock/jvanek-java11-fedora-32-x86_6
On 5/4/20 11:15 AM, Iñaki Ucar wrote:
> Hi, thanks for your assistance, comments inline:
>
> On Mon, 4 May 2020 at 10:48, Jiri Vanek wrote:
>>
>> Generally, no program can say, that do not support jdk11, because any
>> javac/java application can be
>> *hacked* t
On 5/4/20 12:59 PM, Iñaki Ucar wrote:
> On Mon, 4 May 2020 at 11:22, Jiri Vanek wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks, but as I said above, the RStudio rpms don't pull the JVM,
>>> because it's not required at runtime. So I suppose that, beyond fixing
>>> the java-d
, future steps will be based.
Thanx!
J.
On 4/30/20 6:29 PM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
> Hello fellow java package maintainers!
>
> We are planning to bump the JDK from java-1.8.0-openjdk to java-11-openjdk
> for F33. Please see
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Java11
>
> Sho
works in this regard, but since
> this is the default
> stream etc., wouldn't it be wise to coordinate such change with a general
> OpenJDK 11 default Fedora
> system wide change?
>
> E.g. would the dependent OpenJDK 8 packages still build in stable releases if
> this
On 10/26/19 4:33 PM, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 26, 2019 at 9:53 AM Jiri Vanek wrote:
>>
>> any package can switch to jdk11, but sysem jdk should be jdk8, at least for
>> some more time...
>>
>
> If anything, we're late to the party of moving to JDK 11
g about free and
open support, provided
by project groups, which consists from nearly all oepnjdk8 interested
corporations, and namely RH,
which is Openjdk8 project lead, and hundreds of community members.
Please really do not spread miss-informations like this.
J.
>
--
Jiri Va
ists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>
doraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraprojec
Hello! I woudl like to -
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/NodejsRepackaging#Feedback -
add, that also java is using alternatives for major versions of jdk
switching. Weahve master java - to switch runtime, and javac to switch
devel subpackages.
Man pages are also slaves to the java/javac ma
of course).
--
Jiri Vanek Mgr.
Principal QA Software Engineer
Red Hat Inc.
+420 775 39 01 09
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https
lot for writing this down. It is still a bti hard hard to grab that.
J.
--
Jiri Vanek Mgr.
Principal QA Software Engineer
Red Hat Inc.
+420 775 39 01 09
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel
/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
--
Jiri Vanek Mgr.
Principa
On 5/31/23 16:25, Robert Marcano via devel wrote:
On 5/31/23 9:44 AM, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 03:32:09PM +0200, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
On 31/05/2023 14:53, Jiri Vanek wrote:
It is built from sources of course!
What make you think it is not?
For double ensurenes
.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
--
Jiri Vanek Mgr.
Principal QA Software Engineer
Red Hat Inc.
+420 775 39 01 09
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code
rywhere, but it gave sense. If the hard demand will be to build also java-latest-opnejdk in oldest fedora, and repack in all fedoras, and built it in oldest
epel, and repack in all epels, then it gave somehow sesnse too. Although I would conisdered it a bit wasted cycle, it is acceptable.
Thanx!
/pagure.io/fesco/issue/2907
J.
--
Jiri Vanek Mgr.
Principal QA Software Engineer
Red Hat Inc.
+420 775 39 01 09
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fed
> That sounds like an effectively nonfree software. Users cannot build and
> distribute the binaries because the required tools are nonfree.
Not exactly. You can build it and use it freely. Unless you distribute it to
others and call it java...
J.
--
Jiri Vanek Mgr.
Principal QA So
t.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
--
Jiri Vanek Mgr.
Principal QA Software Engineer
Red Hat Inc.
+420 775 39 01 09
___
devel mailing list -- devel@l
idelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
--
Jiri Vanek Mgr.
Principal QA Software Engineer
Red Hat Inc.
+4
On 6/1/23 13:33, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
Jiri Vanek wrote:
At elast providing ofjava/openjdk is definitley out of scope.
I do not think a Provides would be a trademark violation. It is a part of
the standard procedure for renaming a package. But you would have to ask Red
Hat Legal for
All this change is about the burden of maintaining so many OpenJDK branches as packages in FEdora. Maybe Fedora should stop distributing ancient Java versions as one of our missions is to be cutting edge, maybe we are still encouraging too
many projects to stay running on Java 8.
I am saying
+0200, Jiri Vanek wrote:
This was heavily discussed when we moved to portable build in rpms -
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/JdkInTreeLibsAndStdclibStatic
Long story short yes, if yo wish to distribute jdk *binary* it have
to pass java compliance suite.
It sounds like the problem is the
On 5/31/23 20:02, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 07:38:38PM +0200, Jiri Vanek wrote:
Can you clarify this a bit? It sounds like some versions of the JDK in
Fedora will actually be built in EPEL. I feel that all Fedora packages
should actually built for Fedora, not RHEL
On 5/31/23 19:58, Chris Adams wrote:
Once upon a time, Jiri Vanek said:
I have fixed typo in the proposal " Should be built in oldest live EPEL" instead of
" Should be built in latest live EPEL", which was wrong.
At the moment though, the oldest live EPEL is 7, not 8.
On 6/2/23 01:09, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
Demi Marie Obenour wrote:
I haven’t written Java in years, but my understanding is
that AOT compilation has three major advantages:
1. It reduces the size of total deliverables because the
final executable only includes the libraries it needs
t.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
--
Jiri Vanek Mgr.
Principal QA Software Engineer
Red Hat Inc.
+420 775 39 01 09
___
devel mailing list --
ks in fedora are already static, and we repack portable
> tarball into rpms. Currently, the portbale tarball is built for each
> Fedora and Epel version. Goal here is to build each jdk
> (8,11,17,21,latest (20)) only once, in oldest live Fedora xor Epel and
> repack in all live fedoras.
>
JDK will behave similarly. We ave (small) advantage that we have also
in-jdk-bundled tzdata. However fallback in case of removed system
tzdata is not automatic, and requires human touch. Long ago we have a
patch in jdk which looked to system tzdata - if they were present,
they were used. If not,
n epel, it will be built in oldest
> > possible epel and repacked in newer live epels.
> >
> >
> > == Owner ==
> > * Name: [[User:jvanek| Jiri Vanek]]
> >
> > * Email: jva...@redhat.com
> >
> >
> > == Detailed Description ==
> >
> &g
ch
> >>> Fedora and EPEL version. Goal here is to build each JDK
> >>> (8,11,17,21,latest (20)) only once, in oldest live Fedora repack in
> >>> all live Fedoras. If jdk is buitl in epel, it will be built in oldest
> >>> possible epel and repacked in ne
whide may remian self building. Aka using protbales
from rawhide to buidl rawhide's rpms.
Thax!
On Thu, 29 Jun 2023 at 19:43, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 10:14:31AM -0700, Tom Stellard wrote:
> > On 6/29/23 09:52, Jiri Vanek wrote:
> > > Hi Tom!
Everywhere&type=revision&diff=681794&oldid=681791
narrowed.
On Thu, 29 Jun 2023 at 21:16, Tom Stellard wrote:
>
> On 6/29/23 11:06, Jiri Vanek wrote:
> > Nope, xy stands for 1.8.0, 11, 17 and latest. It is enumerated several
> > time in the proposal. Still the
&g
wrote:
>
> On 6/29/23 13:07, Jiri Vanek wrote:
> > nn. You were right. There are going to be two separated packages.
> > Portable, built once in oldest live, and "normal" which is going to
> > repack them for all and shipp them.
> > My apologise f
anybody have any tips for similar machines?
As for tech spec - strongest rpi *2 :);
J.
--
Jiri Vanek Mgr.
Principal QA Software Engineer
Red Hat Inc.
+420 775 39 01 09
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
roject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
--
Jiri Vanek Mgr.
Principal QA Software Engineer
Red Hat Inc.
+420 775 39 01 09
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedorap
o spam, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
--
Jiri Vanek Mgr.
Principal QA Software Engineer
Red Hat Inc.
+420 775 39 01 09
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists
hi!
Yes, there is upcoming release in 17july, and in this release will be all
built on f39.
If there would be any intermittent release it would be already on f39
anyway.
I do not have strong preference on exclude/rebuild. I was going by moreover
middle path - to keep building on oldest supporte
Cool. TYVM!
On Mon, 24 Jun 2024 at 19:27, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 24. 06. 24 19:16, Jiri Vanek wrote:
> > hi!
> >
> > Yes, there is upcoming release in 17july, and in this release will be
> all
> > built on f39.
> >
> > If there would be any inter
On 02/20/2018 01:02 PM, Zdenek Dohnal wrote:
On 02/18/2018 06:09 PM, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
List of packages and respective maintainers:
https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal-pkgs.txt
Done in packages where I am admin.
TY!
J.
___
d
1 - 100 of 189 matches
Mail list logo
