Re: gcc5 ICE xserver build on ARM

>> On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 07:14:43AM +0100, Marek Polacek wrote: >> > On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 12:26:57AM -0500, David Airlie wrote: >> > > Just kicked off an Xserver build in rawhide, >> > > >> > > and it appears gcc ICE. >> > > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=8960146&name=build.

Re: gcc5 ICE xserver build on ARM

On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 11:21 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 11:18:54AM +0000, Peter Robinson wrote: >> Please file a bug and mark it a blocker to ARMTracker bug. It might be >> similar to some of the other ARM ICEs we're getting but I'd sooner >&

Re: ANNOUNCE: OCaml compiler will be updated in Fedora Rawhide

On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 10:23 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > Update: It's nearly half way through the rebuilds now. Expected to be > all finished by this time tomorrow. What's the state of rawhide expected to be in the interim? Is today/tomorrow's compose going to be hosed? Peter -- devel m

Re: Access to failed builds [Was: gcc5 ICE xserver build on ARM]

On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 8:56 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 08:45:09AM +, Andrew Haley wrote: >> On 17/02/15 07:21, David Airlie wrote: >> >> > Well I can't provide any info, I don't have an ARM box here, and it >> > happens in the buildroot which I don't think I can access

Re: Access to failed builds [Was: gcc5 ICE xserver build on ARM]

> Indeed, reproducing the failures only to get a /tmp/ccXX.out file > is not exactly fun. > > In a related vein, I think ABRT should bundle the /tmp/ccXX.out > files to its reports as well. From time to time we get reports as > , but suc

Re: Gnome in F22 not automouting sdcards / usb-sticks

On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 2:54 PM, Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi All, > > I've upgraded both my main workstation as well as my laptop to F22, > and I've noticed that my stock Gnome desktop no longer automounts > sdcards / usbsticks. > > If I start "files" it sees the device show up just fine, and > doub

Re: systemd-219 issues with 22 and Rawhide composes

On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 3:47 PM, Harald Hoyer wrote: > To prevent surprises on the next systemd updates like in > , we will not apply > workarounds anymore in rawhide and track the issues on >

Re: systemd-219 issues with 22 and Rawhide composes

On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 4:11 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote: > On Fri, 20.02.15 16:03, Peter Robinson (pbrobin...@gmail.com) wrote: > >> On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 3:47 PM, Harald Hoyer wrote: >> > To prevent surprises on the next systemd updates like in >> > <https:/

Re: systemd-219 issues with 22 and Rawhide composes

>> >> > Sorry for the inconvenience and feel free to add bugs to the tracker, >> >> > which are >> >> > caused by systemd changes and have to be fixed in other components. >> >> >> >> Are you going to start notifying deve@ of upcoming changes that may >> >> impact other areas of the distro too rat

Re: So everything in Rawhide must be compiled with -fPIC?

>> I've never argumented against the goal that web browser or all network aware >> services should be PIEs, after all, why would we (Ulrich Drepper and myself) >> add the PIE support into the toolchain otherwise? >> I'm just not convinced most of the unpriviledged programs should be PIEs. > > Thank

Re: So everything in Rawhide must be compiled with -fPIC?

On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 6:40 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 12:21 PM, Peter Robinson wrote: >> Also I've seen no performance analysis across all three architectures >> to see the impact. I'll happily send you an XO-1 to test on (our >> lowest su

Re: So everything in Rawhide must be compiled with -fPIC?

On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 6:55 PM, Till Maas wrote: > On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 05:21:59PM +0000, Peter Robinson wrote: >> >> I've never argumented against the goal that web browser or all network >> >> aware >> >> services should be PIEs, after all, wh

Re: i686 kernel bug priority plan

>> This is an opportunity for community members for whom i686 is a >> passion to join the team to participate in the bugfixing required. >> We previously called out the need for assistance[2], but had no >> substantial response. We hope that being transparent about our >> priorities will prompt int

Re: i686 kernel bug priority plan

>> i686 Kernel SIG steps up and agrees to handle bugs on that platform > > > Interesting so you are saying that the kernel sub community is effectively > only x86_64 > > If you are going down that road you better ask for every kernel SIG > to emerge or step up in the process. > > Where does ARM fi

Re: i686 kernel bug priority plan

On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 2:14 PM, Peter Robinson wrote: >>> i686 Kernel SIG steps up and agrees to handle bugs on that platform >> >> >> Interesting so you are saying that the kernel sub community is effectively >> only x86_64 >> >> If you are going do

Re: i686 kernel bug priority plan

> i686 Kernel SIG steps up and agrees to handle bugs on that platform Interesting so you are saying that the kernel sub community is effectively only x86_64 If you are going down that road you better ask for every kernel SIG to emerge or step up in

Re: Bodhi issue

On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 2:36 PM, Steve Grubb wrote: > Hello, > > Yesterday I built a security update for the suricata package, 3.2.1-1: > > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=10021 > > Any time I try to create the bodhi new release, it finds an older build, > 3.2-1. > Typin

Re: GRIPE: A package is not FTBFS if the dependencies can't be installed

>> > I received a FTBFS[1] on one of my packages for the F26 rebuild only to >> > find out the only reason it failed (that I know of thus far) is that not >> > all the dependencies could be installed. >> > >> > The root cause seems to be that not all dependent packages were rebuilt >> > when boost

Re: Orphaning ptpd

On Sat, Feb 18, 2017 at 10:29 AM, Jon Kent wrote: > Hi, > > I'm afraid I'm going to have to orphan the ptpd package, as I no longer have > the means to test it. I can take that, feel free to assign it to me (FAS pbrobinson) Peter ___ devel mailing list

Re: Please provide "Minimal CD" of Fedora

On Sun, Feb 19, 2017 at 12:15 PM, Radka Janekova wrote: > Hi, > > Fedora has to offer these: > Workstation - https://getfedora.org/en/workstation > Server - https://getfedora.org/en/server > Cloud - https://getfedora.org/en/cloud > Atomic - https://getfedora.org/en/atomic/ > Spins - https://spins

Re: F26 Self Contained Change: Arm Support In FMW

>>> = Proposed Self Contained Change: Arm Support In FMW = >>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ArmSupportInFmw >>> >>> Change owner(s): >>> * Martin Bříza >>> >>> Fedora Media Writer will gain the ability to write ARM images to SD >>> cards and other portable media. >>> >>> >>> == Detailed

Re: Bodhi broken now?

On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 4:02 AM, Randy Barlow wrote: > On Tue, 2017-02-28 at 23:39 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >> I get this doing 'fedpkg update': >> >> fedora.client.bodhi.BodhiClientException: Unable to create update. >> Authentication required >> >> It's unclear what authentication is

Re: Fedora 26 Mass Branching

That is now fixed. On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 9:26 AM, Jens-Ulrik Petersen wrote: > f27 builds in Koji are getting tagged with .fc26 currently, so I > suggest holding off on rawhide builds for now that you also want to > push to f26 until this is fixed. > > Jens > > On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 4:25 PM, Mo

Re: Fedora 26 Mass Branching

On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 10:38 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Wed, Mar 01, 2017 at 06:26:55PM +0900, Jens-Ulrik Petersen wrote: >> f27 builds in Koji are getting tagged with .fc26 currently, so I >> suggest holding off on rawhide builds for now that you also want to >> push to f26 until this is

Re: Voice recognition packages need a new maintainer

On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 2:35 AM, Jerry James wrote: > Hello everybody, > > I am the primary point of contact for a handful of voice > recognition-related packages: > - cmusphinx3 > - irstlm > - openfst > - opengrm-ngram > - pocketsphinx > - sphinxbase > - sphinxtrain > > I have not used these pack

Re: Voice recognition packages need a new maintainer

On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 4:59 AM, Jerry James wrote: > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 5:27 AM, Peter Robinson wrote: >> You can assign pocketsphinx and it's dep sphinxbase to me as I need >> them for a project I'm investigating ATM. > > Packagedb is claiming that you are

Re: Fedora 26 Alpha status update

On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 11:39 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > Hi folks! Just wanted to let everyone know where we're at with the F26 > Alpha. > > An Alpha RC2 compose request is in, and RC2 should be building at > present. The main change between RC1 and RC2 is a fix for the problems > with gnome-ini

Re: Wifi was broken after latest NM update

On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 11:00 AM, Heiko Adams wrote: > tl;dr: Please test your shit better before pushing updates to the > users! There is absolutely no need to use language like that or refer to people's work as such. > Hi there, > I'm a little bit angry about the latest NM update. But from the

Re: a rawhide build not tagged into f27-build

> My build of updated poppler in Rawhide was not tagged into f27-build > automatically, as it used to be in the past: > > $ koji wait-repo --build=`fedpkg verrel` f27-build > Warning: nvr poppler-0.53.0-1.fc27 is not current in tag f27-build > latest build in f27-build is poppler-0.52.0-1.fc26 >

Re: Question on koji error: SSLError: [SSL: CERTIFICATE_VERIFY_FAILED] certificate verify failed (_ssl.c:661)

On Sun, Apr 23, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Kai Engert wrote: > On Sun, 2017-04-23 at 01:05 +, Globe Trotter wrote: >> Hi, >> I am trying to build a package on koji using: >> koji build --scratch f25 thaali-0.4.2-1.fc25.src.rpm >> >> and I get: >> SSLError: [SSL: CERTIFICATE_VERIFY_FAILED] certificate

Re: ARM and AArch64 GCC 7.1 ABI change

On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 4:52 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > Hi! > > A severe ABI bug on AArch64 and especially on ARM 32-bit has been > recently discovered and GCC 7.1 is going to have that ABI change in. > For details see http://gcc.gnu.org/PR77728 > gcc-7.1.1-0.16.fc{26,27} which I'll build tomorrow

Re: build tests failure on non x86_64 archs

On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 2:51 PM, Gianluca Sforna wrote: > While trying to update one of my packages (rdkit), I am hitting an > issue with its tests suite, so apparently every non-x86_64 build is > failing. Well if i686 fails too there's a problem > rawhide example: https://koji.fedoraproje

Re: mp3 encoding now ok

On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 10:35 PM, James Hogarth wrote: > > > On 15 May 2017 5:15 pm, "Tom Callaway" wrote: > > On 05/04/2017 09:09 AM, Jon Ciesla wrote: >> >> >> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 8:07 AM, Christian Schaller > > wrote: >> >> Hi, not sure why Spot hasn't chimed

Re: Deprecated net-tools? Mass bug filing?

On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 3:48 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 09:15:51AM +0100, James Hogarth wrote: >> On 17 May 2017 at 08:46, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: >> > Converting apps from nettools to iproute is often non-trivial piece >> > of work. As such isn't really something Fedor

Re: COPR Arm Builds?

On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 3:22 PM, Miroslav Suchý wrote: > Dne 25.5.2017 v 04:46 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a): >> Longer answer: yeah, we have wanted to do so for a long time, but just >> haven't gotten there. > > I will extend Nirik's answer. > There are old ARM machines which were used for Secondary Arch

Re: Updates not getting pushed to stable

On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 11:22 PM, Sandro Mani wrote: > Hi, > > I've got a couple of updates which are stuck waiting to get pushed to > stable: > > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-e46ec0bbe8 > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-19c1569283 > https://bodhi.fedorapr

Re: Retiring Packages with Broken Dependencies in branched (2017-06-12)

I'm not sure how all those people can be co-maintainers of efl. I'm not sure how that's meant to be interpreted but given some of the other responses I think this script as bit rotted some what. Peter > Affected (co)maintainers > alexl: efl > ankursinha: lldb, efl > atkac: efl > bpepple: efl > b

Re: Rawhide: where for art thou? (why no rawhide composes recently)

On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 2:11 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > Greetings. > > Some folks may have noticed that there have been no completed rawhide > composes in a while (13 days as of today). > > This has been due to a variety of bugs and issues, along with pungi now > failing composes that don't have all

Re: Rawhide: where for art thou? (why no rawhide composes recently)

Greetings. Some folks may have noticed that there have been no completed rawhide composes in a while (13 days as of today). This has been due to a variety of bugs and issues, along with pungi now failing composes that don't have all required release blocking items

Re: F26 Mesa update

On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 1:32 AM, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > Hello, > > Is there a reason for delaying the update for mesa-17.1.2 to F26? > > We're getting buildroot failures for some F26 packages that depend on mesa > (llvm was updated). The mesa update and the buildroot failures were unrelated

Re: Rawhide: where for art thou? (why no rawhide composes recently)

On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 4:36 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On 06/13/2017 03:47 PM, Peter Robinson wrote: >> >> For actual artifacts such as cloud/disk/installer images I agree but >> at least pushing out individual packages so people can do "dnf >> upgrade" pick

Re: Tool for generating a rootfs for foreign arch (aarch64 on x86_64, for example)?

On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 3:08 AM, Neal Gompa wrote: > Hey all, > > I'm trying to find a way to bootstrap a Fedora rootfs from x86_64 for > aarch64 (similar to debootstrap with "debootstrap --arch arm64 > "), but I can't seem to find any. > > I recall that we added qemu-user-static back in Fedora 2

Re: Tool for generating a rootfs for foreign arch (aarch64 on x86_64, for example)?

On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 3:03 PM, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 9:55 AM, Josh Boyer wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 9:33 AM, Neal Gompa wrote: >>> On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 9:29 AM, John Reiser wrote: On 06/22/2017 0013Z, Neal Gompa wrote: > > Yes, we do have debootstr

Re: Retiring Packages with Broken Dependencies in branched (2017-06-26)

On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 8:56 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 07:02:25AM +, t...@fedoraproject.org wrote: >> libguestfs (maintained by: rjones, agk, group::virtmaint-sig, mdbooth, >> ptoscano) >> libguestfs-1.36.4-1.fc26.src requires java-1.8.0-openj

Re: Fedora Modules & Fedora 27 Server Edition (Changes)

On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 4:49 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 04:06:18PM +0200, Petr Šabata wrote: >> > Hmmm, so, if I want some random utility (let's say gcal, which I don't >> > package, or calc, which I do) on my server, what are my options? Can I > [...] >> The modular relea

Re: floppy-support being retired (was: Retiring Packages with Broken Dependencies in branched (2017-06-26))

On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 10:03 AM, Björn Persson wrote: > t...@fedoraproject.org wrote: >> floppy-support bruno 162 weeks ago > > So are floppies now definitely a thing of the past according to Fedora? Well they definitely are a thing of the past, there's n

Re: floppy-support being retired (was: Retiring Packages with Broken Dependencies in branched (2017-06-26))

>> On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 10:03 AM, Björn Persson wrote: >>> t...@fedoraproject.org wrote: floppy-support bruno 162 weeks ago >>> >>> So are floppies now definitely a thing of the past according to Fedora? >> >> Well they definitely are a thing of the

Re: Intel i915 firmwares

On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 2:08 PM, Michael Catanzaro wrote: > On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 5:52 AM, Tomasz Torcz wrote: >> >> The same upstream which did not release stable version of Xorg Intel >> driver >> for past three years? ;-) >> According to the link, the firmwares are needed for HDMI audio,

Re: Proposed Mass Bug Filing: Renaming "python-" binary packages to "python2-"

On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 2:39 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Wed, 2017-06-28 at 16:21 +0200, Iryna Shcherbina wrote: >> 2) Using `python-` instead of `python2-` in the dependencies for the >> Python 2 binary RPM [2]. > > I'm not sure this list is terribly useful, because of the above. There > are

Re: [Test-Announce] Fedora 26 Candidate RC-1.4 Available Now!

On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 11:41 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On 07/04/2017 03:46 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: >> On Tue, 2017-07-04 at 09:32 +0200, Christian Dersch wrote: >>> Looks like one compose failed *again* for some mirror issue… This time >>> it is Robotic [1] , but i've seen these random failures

Re: Fedora 27 mass rebuild at risk

On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 2:38 PM, Florian Weimer wrote: > On 07/07/2017 02:53 PM, Florian Weimer wrote: >> Besides the glibc downgrade, I'm not aware of anything else we could do >> to get ready for the mass rebuild in time. > > I discussed this with Carlos, and we came up with this: > > On POWER, t

Re: Coming soon: Pagure service for dist-git

On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 10:23 AM, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > On Fri, Jul 07, 2017 at 09:31:22AM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: >> On Fri, Jul 07, 2017 at 03:05:43AM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: >> > 3. The default landing page for a package shows a message about >> >the missing rea

Re: Coming soon: Pagure service for dist-git

On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 2:38 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 01:21:53PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote: >> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 10:23 AM, Pierre-Yves Chibon >> wrote: >> > On Fri, Jul 07, 2017 at 09:31:22AM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: &g

Re: Coming soon: Pagure service for dist-git

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 11:09 AM, Emmanuel Seyman wrote: > * Pierre-Yves Chibon [11/07/2017 11:41] : >> >> But it is constructed around the idea that there is only one package for a >> given >> name. > > I'm not sure the assumption is safe to make. A number of perl modules have two > packages (on

Re: No i686 kernel: Can we require SSE2 for i686?

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 9:26 PM, Florian Weimer wrote: > I ran into this unannounced change: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Stop_Building_i686_Kernels > > If this is accepted, all x86 hardware on which Fedora can run will > support SSE2, and we should reflect that in the i686 build f

Re: No i686 kernel: Can we require SSE2 for i686?

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 9:43 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 10:26:03PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: >> I ran into this unannounced change: >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Stop_Building_i686_Kernels >> If this is accepted, all x86 hardware on which Fedora can run wi

Re: No i686 kernel: Can we require SSE2 for i686?

On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 12:30 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On 07/12/2017 12:16 PM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: > >> I still have my N270 netbook, but I guess even more people still have >> Z6xx-based devices. Still, they're over 7 years old at this point. > > > The N270s are still support

Re: No i686 kernel: Can we require SSE2 for i686?

On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 12:43 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On 07/11/2017 10:43 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: >> >> On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 10:26:03PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: >>> >>> I ran into this unannounced change: >>>https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Stop_Building_i686_Kernels >>> If

Re: No i686 kernel: Can we require SSE2 for i686?

>> On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 01:43:53PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: >>> >>> If cost is an issue, consider to drop all these ppc, arm, s370 and >>> mips targets. >>> >>> Their user base is like magnitudes smaller than the i686 user base, >>> while these target are having a significant impact (and thu

Re: No i686 kernel: Can we require SSE2 for i686?

On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 9:40 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > On 12 July 2017 at 16:32, Adam Williamson wrote: > >> To give an example outside of the kernel, the installer 'Reclaim Space' >> function has been broken on i686 for about 10 months, and no-one seems >> to be lining up to fix that one

Re: Graphics driver support in F21+

>> >that you can do successfully complete a graphical DVD default package >> >install with 512MB of RAM, or a text network default package install. I >> >believe a text install may even work in 384MB, though I don't absolutely >> >remember, and you may have to pass the parameter that disable's >> >

Re: [Fedora Base Design WG] Initial committee proposal and selection reasoning

On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 2:56 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 03:43:24PM +0100, Phil Knirsch wrote: >> See my comments about Jon Disnard later in my text, i assumed he was >> still a community member only to hear about him being a RH employee >> for less than a month now on Frid

Re: Fedora search

On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 3:05 AM, Ben Boeckel wrote: > On Wed, 30 Oct, 2013 at 19:29:25 GMT, Michael Cronenworth wrote: >> What about using a custom Google search engine? >> >> https://www.google.com/cse/ > > Google is having more and more privacy issues lately. Why not use > DuckDuckGo and write a

Re: Rawhide nodebug and the 3.12 kernel

On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 8:42 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 3:39 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 06, 2013 at 12:30:37 -0800, >> Adam Williamson wrote: >>> >>> >>> FWIW the ship has probably sailed now, but I really don't think it'd be >>> much of a problem to have 3.12

Re: Rawhide nodebug and the 3.12 kernel

>> Are you running any ARM machines? My understanding is that our F20 >> kernel has patches that enable important ARM stuff that isn't in >> rawhide (3.12) because it was conflicting with the churn. So that >> would need to be added and tested, given ARM is primary on F20. > > > Not with 3.12. Th

Re: Rawhide nodebug and the 3.12 kernel

>>> Are you running any ARM machines? My understanding is that our F20 >>> kernel has patches that enable important ARM stuff that isn't in >>> rawhide (3.12) because it was conflicting with the churn. So that >>> would need to be added and tested, given ARM is primary on F20. >> >> The main issu

Re: Draft Product Description for Fedora Workstation

On 7 Nov 2013 03:05, "Kevin Kofler" wrote: > > Josh Boyer wrote: > > What you say makes some sense. It also makes me very tired thinking > > about the threads coming when the details start getting presented by > > the WGs :). I guess that's what we've signed up for though. > > Well yes, each tim

Re: Draft Product Description for Fedora Workstation

On 7 Nov 2013 03:20, "Kevin Kofler" wrote: > > Olav Vitters wrote: > > > On Wed, Nov 06, 2013 at 01:00:16AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > >> Bastien Nocera wrote: > >> > Might not want to put answers in people's mouths. Did you read up on > >> > the various bundling techniques that were explored an

Re: Why aren't we using libvirt plugin in Vagrant?

On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 6:04 AM, Peeyush Gupta wrote: > Hi all, > > In relation to the change proposed here : > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Vagrant, I was wondering why aren't > we using libvirt plugin instead of KVM plugin? The thing is libvirt is used > more commonly than KVM, and co

Re: F20 Beta upgrade issues - network status gone

>> > - I don't have any Bluetooth status or display in gnome-shell now. I >> > did previously. I do not know what I need to install or tweak to get >> > it back, or where to report it. >> >> I'm not as sure about this one, but it's probably the same thing: no >> 'status' will be displayed unl

Re: F20 Beta upgrade issues - network status gone

>> but I do have a number of >> bluetooth devices (mouse, speakers, headset) that I use to be able to >> connect with a couple of clicks once paired but now every time I want >> to use them I have to go into the control panel which is a good dozen >> or more clicks. > > Mice, speakers and headsets

Re: What is support status of PowerVR GPUs in Fedora? (Intel D2500 and gma500_gfx)

On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 8:26 AM, valent.turko...@gmail.com wrote: > Thank you all for great feedback, I found these awesome online > resources for gma500_gfx - > https://gist.github.com/Aissen/2925633 > https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Poulsbo > https://wiki.ubuntu.com/HardwareSupportComponent

Re: What is support status of PowerVR GPUs in Fedora? (Intel D2500 and gma500_gfx)

On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 8:33 AM, valent.turko...@gmail.com wrote: > I was totally unaware of Intel using anything else than their own GPU > products. Have they backed away from this "strategy" since then? Are > there any other Intel CPU/GPU combinations that we should all stay > clear of if we wan

Re: What is support status of PowerVR GPUs in Fedora? (Intel D2500 and gma500_gfx)

On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 10:04 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 09:26:36AM +0100, valent.turko...@gmail.com wrote: >> So I have three options to suggest to my friend: >> - Latest Fedora or Mint but with Vesa driver only, and maybe can't >> even get full resolution then >> - O

Re: Fedora ARM Status Meeting 2013-12-04

On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 5:17 PM, Pavel Zhukov wrote: > Hi list(s), > > We still doesn't have gnat compiler for %{arm} in Fedora. We (Ada community) > have compiled gcc with ada support using gcc-4.8.2 src.rpm and tested in. > It seems workable. At least we were able to compile most of the > packag

Re: Fedora ARM Status Meeting 2013-12-04

On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 7:21 PM, Pavel Zhukov wrote: > On Wednesday, December 04, 2013 07:11:40 PM Peter Robinson wrote: >> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 5:17 PM, Pavel Zhukov wrote: >> > Hi list(s), >> > >> > We still doesn't have gnat compiler for %{arm

Re: Fedora ARM Status Meeting 2013-12-04

On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 7:18 AM, Pavel Zhukov wrote: > On Wednesday, December 04, 2013 07:28:09 PM Peter Robinson wrote: >> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 7:21 PM, Pavel Zhukov wrote: >> > On Wednesday, December 04, 2013 07:11:40 PM Peter Robinson wrote: >> >> On Wed, Dec 4,

Re: Mass rebuild miss-tagged?

Was it from koji.fedoraproject, or arm.koji.fedoraproject? Peter On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 1:10 PM, Michael J Gruber wrote: > I got a message from buildsys about an unsuccessful tag which I hadn't > initiated - probably left over bits from the F20 mass rebuild. > > Should I simply (re)build on mast

Re: EPEL for RHEL7 Beta

On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 1:49 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: > sorry for half off-topic but are there any plans to > have EPEL pakcages for RHEL7 public-beta or even > still available and i am too stupid to find them? It's completely off-topic for this lists, there's an epel-devel list for EPEL discussi

Re: Rawhide unannounced ABI bumps: gnome-bluetooth

On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 4:31 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: > Yep, it's that time again, folks. I see errors in my daily update > indicating an unannounced API/ABI bump. > > gnome-bluetooth-3.11.3-1.fc21 (built yesterday) seems to have gone from > libgnome-bluetooth.so.12 to libgnome-bluetooth.so.13 a

Re: Unannounced soname bump: tracker

>> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=485698 >> >> the sonames of libtracker-extract, libtracker-miner and >> libtracker-sparql were bumped to 0.18.so.0 (from 0.16.so.0) without >> announcement, and without all dependent packages being successfully >> rebuilt. At least the followi

Re: Firefox Gtk3 test package

On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 3:49 PM, Martin Stransky wrote: > On 01/13/2014 04:41 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: >>> >>> I don't say it's important/newsworthy. It's just FYI. Please ignore if >>> you're not interested. >> >> >> Ok, I'll rephrase. >> >> I'm interested but I have no idea how this is different fr

Re: Firefox Gtk3 test package

>>> Ahh, Okay. The package is build with Gtk3 toolkit [1] (the recent >>> official >>> ones are Gtk2) so it's a regular Gtk3 app which should better fit to >>> Gnome 3 >>> desktop, use themes/skins and so. >>> >>> The long term plan is to switch Fedora Firefox to Gtk3 so this is just a >>> tech pre

Re: Firefox Gtk3 test package

On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 2:49 PM, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > H. Guémar wrote: >> >> What's the point ? There's absolutely no benefit in keeping Gtk+2 longer. >> Gtk+ 2.24.0 has been released 3 years ago (january, 2011) and is only >> receiving >> bugfix due to existing apps who didn't move to Gtk

Re: EPEL 7 question

>> > > I noticed that EPEL 7 branches were created for several of my packages >> > > that >> > > have el6 branches, but not all of them. I didn't request them (yet) so >> > > I'm >> > > wondering, are some packages automatically added or did someone else >> > > request >> > > them as a dependency t

Re: RFC: what to do with ums when the X server is not suid root ?

> As indicated here: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/XorgWithoutRootRights > > I'm working on making the X server run as a regular user. I actually have > this > pretty much working. > > So now it is time to start looking into some of the corner cases, or rather > at > the elephant in the

Re: RFC: what to do with ums when the X server is not suid root ?

>> So now it is time to start looking into some of the corner cases, or rather >> at >> the elephant in the room. What about non-kms drivers. We still have the vesa >> driver around as most prominent example, and this is useful for some oddball >> cards and for cards which are too new. > > -mga is

Re: RFC - Downgrade BlueZ to v4.101 in Fedora 20

On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 4:40 PM, Tomasz Torcz wrote: > On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 01:33:07AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: >> David Sommerseth wrote: >> > So, I wonder if it can be considered to enable a "downgrade path" for >> > bluez and depending packages, as described in the "Contingency Plan": >> >

Re: Adjust wiki for ARM BeagleBone Black

>I adjusted this documentation in wiki: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/ARM/F20/Installation#For_the_BeagleBone_Black > >Added this important step to create image of Fedora 20 for BeagleBone > Black board. "this important step" being what exactly? Peter -- devel mailing l

Re: Adjust wiki for ARM BeagleBone Black

On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Jon wrote: > This was well intention wiki edit, and possibly unaware of in-flight > changes about to land in Fedora u-boot implementation. > > We are transitioning to "extlinux" which has better integration with > other parts of Fedora, and is arguably more user fri

Re: Fedora 24 Mass Rebuild

On 4 Feb 2016 7:06 pm, "Dave Johansen" wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 8:40 AM, Dennis Gilmore wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> >> Per the Fedora 24 schedule[1] we will be starting a mass rebuild for Fedora 24 >> very shortly. We are doing a mass rebuild for Fedora 24 for >> https://fedoraproject.org/w

Re: systemd stopped building on rawhide

>> systemd rawhide builds started failing in koji [1]: >> >> In file included from src/shared/firewall-util.c:23:0: >> /usr/include/linux/if.h:71:2: error: redeclaration of enumerator 'IFF_UP' >> IFF_UP= 1<<0, /* sysfs */ >> ^ >> /usr/include/net/if.h:44:5: note: previous definition of 'IF

Re: F24 Self Contained Change: System Python

>>> Part of the change is defining the exact subset. The idea is that it >>> should be small, to keep cloud images small for apps that don't use >>> Python themselves. >> >> Wouldn't it be a better goal to not have Python at all on Cloud images? >> > > So... no dnf? That seems a little unlikely to

Re: Erlang busted on i386 on rawhide... workaround for erlang-based packages?

On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 12:10 AM, Martin Langhoff wrote: > Hi folks, > > trying to upload a new release of elixir, I am butting into something that > looks and smells a lot like BZ#1240487 -- the (noarch) rpm builds nicely on > x86_64 but the erlang runtime segfaults every time on i386. > > This F

Re: Please stop modifying other people's packages without coordinating with them first

>>> > While I'm still very much on the fence about this, moving to pagure >>> > for dist-git might very much help in these situations. Being able >>> > to send a pull request with your changes easily means you've fixed >>> > it, the maintainer just needs to pull it in. All of the >>> > informatio

Re: GPG2 as default /usr/bin/gpg

>> > I am opposed to this. If a tool wants/needs to >> > use v2 it should be using gpg2 not gpg. gpg v1.4.x is still active >> > upstream and is shipped as gpg so we shouldn't be renaming it. >> >> Is there any sense upstream how much longer 1.x will be still >> supported? >> >> I was unaware it wa

Re: [GCC6] fatal error: You must enable NEON instructions (e.g. -mfloat-abi=softfp -mfpu=neon) to use these intrinsics.

On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 8:41 AM, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1307783 > > Looks like it failed on armv7 with this error, but it was working before... > Any ideas? It's an issue we see occasionally where the package thinks it knows better than the explicit CFL

Re: three questions: f24 branch, python3 default, where to put /etc/rsyslog.d/gluster.conf.example

> 1) usually after the branch I build new packages for rawhide (i.e. > $branch+1). But atm in the master branch, a `fedpkg build` gives me > > Could not execute build: Package glusterfs-3.7.8-1.fc24 has already > been built > > Am I just too early? Or is there something missing that's preventin

Re: three questions: f24 branch, python3 default, where to put /etc/rsyslog.d/gluster.conf.example

> Yeah, this is because the Samba and FreeIPA packages didn't quite finish > their python 3 conversion in time. By F25, we should be able to avoid > shipping python 2 in the default installation of Fedora Server. Except if you want to use ansible to managed that, although in theory support for th

Re: [GCC6] fatal error: You must enable NEON instructions (e.g. -mfloat-abi=softfp -mfpu=neon) to use these intrinsics.

>> Peter Robinson wrote: >>> It's an issue we see occasionally where the package thinks it knows >>> better than the explicit CFLAGs being set, I'll get it sorted out. >> >> But why are those intrinsics now requiring NEON at all? Those are G

<    4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   >