pygsl tests fail on s390x
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=113947607 Most of the errors are like this E numpy.core._exceptions._ArrayMemoryError: Unable to allocate 320. GiB for an array with shape (42949672961,) and data type float64 I am surprised with the fact that the s390x builders do not have at least 320 GiB of RAM, they are clearly under-powered. ;-) On a more serious, and boring, note does this warning rings a bell to anyone who had a similar problem? FWIW what is failing are the tests in x390x as they work for all other archs. Best regards, -- José Abílio Matos-- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Tellico license correction
While updating tellico and converting the license to a SPDX identifier I notice that the previous version was incomplete. Before it was referred as GPLv2.0-only but the code refers to it as GPL-2.0- or-later. This change should have been done several years ago but I did not noticed. Regards, -- José Abílio Matos ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Non-responsive maintainer check for jamatos
On Monday, 13 March 2023 03.50.01 WET Yaakov Selkowitz wrote: > This is a non-responsive maintainer check for jamatos (José Matos). Does > anyone know how to contact José? I am here and I will look into those issues. The end of the first semester fallback took a lot longer than I was expecting. -- José Abílio ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)
On Monday, 17 October 2022 08.28.11 WEST Jaroslav Mracek wrote: > Thank you for pointing this. Why DNF5 is not named as DNF and why we do not > plan to name it as DNF? DNF5 is a completely new product. That is where the irony is, it is a new product but you still keep the moniker DNF in the name (even if just for now). It is a contradictory message. :-) The funny part, at least for me, is the 5 in the name, that reminds me of rpm5. It seems that for package related issues 5 is a cursed number. :-) Regards, -- José Abílio Matos___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Important changes to software license information in Fedora packages (SPDX and more!)
On Tuesday, 2 August 2022 11.16.32 WEST Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > (I manually editted the above to put in line breaks as email servers/clients > may not be so happy with 10,000 char long lines That is so true that your message was labelled spam by my mail server (in this case using spamassassin). :-) -- José Abílio Matos signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Packages that failed to build with Python 3.11 (and what to do)
On Monday, 20 June 2022 12.45.07 WEST Tomas Hrnciar wrote: > python-doit immanetize jamatos Looking in to src I search for the build to understand why did it failed: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1989134 as far as I can see it built without any issue. Does that means that this is fixed and there is no need for an action by me? Regards, -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Missing dependency in Fedora 35 - bug 2097817
On Thursday, 16 June 2022 17.55.45 WEST Antonio T. sagitter wrote: > Hi all. > > I need to downgrade python-reportlab in Fedora 35 for a missing runtime > dependency. What's the most accurate way? > > Bug ticket: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2097817 > Update: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-23aefe21ad > > Regards. Not to be the bad news bringer but I think that the only way is to use epoch in the spec file. And to rebuild with a higher epoch. Something that I do not remember is what to do the with the other releases. Are we still forced, in order to ensure an upgrade path, to keep the epoch? Or can we assume that system-upgrade will allow to get rid of that artifact (of all the things I could call to epoch I think that this is the nicest). :-) Regards, -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Problem with SSL in Fedora 36
On Monday, 14 March 2022 16.53.18 WEST José Abílio Matos wrote: > Thank you. > > I copied and pasted and while changing the option I left one of those rogue > characters, keeping always the preffix. :-( > > > I will try and see your suggestion. After today's update to openssl-1:3.0.2-4.fc36.x86_64 the problem is gone. :-) -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Unannounced .so version bump in libcerf
On Tuesday, 12 April 2022 03.41.48 WEST Christoph Junghans wrote: > On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 9:50 AM Ben Beasley wrote: > > The libcerf package was updated to version 2.1 in Rawhide yesterday[1], > > which included an unannounced .so version bump from “1” to “2”. > > My mistake, I thought I did a "dnf repoquery --whatrequires > libcerf.so.1", but it only showed libecpint. A better approach is to ask what are the src packages that depend on the devel subpackage: # repoquery -q --repo=rawhide-source --whatrequires libcerf-devel LabPlot-0:2.8.1-4.fc36.src gnuplot-0:5.4.3-2.fc36.src libecpint-0:1.0.7-4.fc37.src -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Batch updates PETSc-3.17 hypre-2.24.0 superlu_dist-7.2.0
On Thursday, 7 April 2022 09.21.00 WEST Antonio T. sagitter wrote: > If bout++ and Octave are ready for Sundials 6, we can. I am not sure that Octave is ready for Sundials 6, at least Octave 6, yet the recently released Octave 7 (this week) should support it. Looking a bit further it seems that the support is only for Octave 7: https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?61701 -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Problem compiling tellico in F37 (linker stage)
On Friday, 25 March 2022 02.20.13 WET Mamoru TASAKA wrote: > At least for both tellico and ghostwriter cases, I tried mockbuild and > just downgrading binutils / binutils-gold to 2.37-24.fc36.x86_64 makes linkage > succeed, so for now I filed against binutils: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2068343 Thank you for reporting this. :-) -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Problem compiling tellico in F37 (linker stage)
Hi, in order to rebuild tellico, to fix a FTBFS bug, I get in the link stage the following error: /usr/bin/ld: /usr/lib64/libQt5WebEngineCore.so.5.15.8: undefined reference to `std::__cxx11::basic_string, std::allocator >::_M_replace_aux(unsigned long, unsigned long, unsigned long, char)@GLIBCXX_3.4.21' /usr/bin/ld: /usr/lib64/libQt5WebEngineCore.so.5.15.8: undefined reference to `std::__cxx11::basic_string, std::allocator >::_M_append(char const*, unsigned long)@GLIBCXX_3.4.21' /usr/bin/ld: /usr/lib64/libQt5WebEngineCore.so.5.15.8: undefined reference to `std::__cxx11::basic_string, std::allocator >::_M_construct(unsigned long, char)@GLIBCXX_3.4.21' /usr/bin/ld: /usr/lib64/libQt5WebEngineCore.so.5.15.8: undefined reference to `std::__cxx11::basic_string, std::allocator >::_M_create(unsigned long&, unsigned long)@GLIBCXX_3.4.21' This fails in x86* and arm64 and succeeds in ppc64le and x390x: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=84590646 Is this related to LTO? Or is it something else? Regards, -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Problem with SSL in Fedora 36
On Monday, 14 March 2022 16.53.18 WET José Abílio Matos wrote: > Thank you. > > I copied and pasted and while changing the option I left one of those rogue > characters, keeping always the preffix. :-( > > > I will try and see your suggestion. After a reboot: # update-crypto-policies --show LEGACY The error remains: The underlying socket is having troubles when processing connection to imap.xxx.xx.xx:993: Error during SSL handshake: error:0A0C0103:SSL routines::internal error Regards, -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Problem with SSL in Fedora 36
On Monday, 14 March 2022 16.46.39 WET Simo Sorce wrote: > If you have actually copy/pasted from the terminal it looks to me you > used an incorrect character when trying to pass a long option, at least > my MUA shows me you prepend long option names with "–-" instead of > using the correct "--", maybe your terminal uses the same glyph to > represent to different characters? > > Simo. Thank you. I copied and pasted and while changing the option I left one of those rogue characters, keeping always the preffix. :-( I will try and see your suggestion. -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Problem with SSL in Fedora 36
On Monday, 14 March 2022 10.49.38 WET Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > What's the version of openssl? The version on F36, that I am using is 3.0.0. > Is there a public server which you can tell us the name of which gives > this error? I am connecting to an exchange email server (2010) using imap with TLS. > Did anything crash (is there a core dump in coredumpctl)? > > Rich. As far as I can see the answer is no. E.g. running kmail from the command line I do not see any trace either in output messages or in the journal. Thank you. :-) -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Problem with SSL in Fedora 36
On Monday, 14 March 2022 11.04.56 WET Simo Sorce wrote: > Have you tried setting crypto policies to LEGACY in case the server is > old and supports only bad cryptography? > > Simo. How do I do that? Running update-crypto-policies always returns an error saying that the argument is not recognised: [root@griffin ~]# update-crypto-policies –-set LEGACY usage: update-crypto-policies.py [-h] [--set [POLICY] | --show | --is-applied | --check] [--no-reload] update-crypto-policies.py: error: unrecognized arguments: –-set LEGACY [root@griffin ~]# update-crypto-policies –-show usage: update-crypto-policies.py [-h] [--set [POLICY] | --show | --is-applied | --check] [--no-reload] update-crypto-policies.py: error: unrecognized arguments: –-show [root@griffin ~]# update-crypto-policies –-check usage: update-crypto-policies.py [-h] [--set [POLICY] | --show | --is-applied | --check] [--no-reload] update-crypto-policies.py: error: unrecognized arguments: –-check What am I missing? Regards, -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Problem with SSL in Fedora 36
In one, and just one, of my email accounts the upgrade to F36 failed with this: The underlying socket is having troubles when processing connection to imap.xxx.xx.xx:993: Error during SSL handshake: error:0A0C0103:SSL routines::internal error No email program works, I tried kmail, trojitá, thunderbird. The connection fails immediatelly with the above error. Where should I fill this report, under openssl? Searching a bit this seems related to: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/OpenSSL3.0 Regards, -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Donate 1 minute of your time to test upgrades from F35 to F36
On Saturday, 12 March 2022 15.35.02 WET Ian McInerney via devel wrote: > Why are you suggesting reporting it to fedora-obsolete-packages? The Julia > package is not obsolete, and the maintainers are acutely aware of the > install > problem and are tracking it in the appropriate FTBFS/FTI bugzilla entries > (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2045732, > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2044284), but they need upstream > input on the fixes in order to get it working. Considering this an obsolete > package just because it has this install error right now is in my opinion > very short-sighted. > > -Ian Ian, I think that it was my message that induced Miroslav into mistake. I can see how it can be read that way. What I should have said is that the version available in F35 is newer than that available in F36+. Mea culpa. :-) -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Donate 1 minute of your time to test upgrades from F35 to F36
On Saturday, 12 March 2022 11.23.11 WET José Abílio Matos wrote: > Error: > Problem: package julia-1.7.0.0-1.fc36.x86_64 requires > libmbedcrypto.so.3()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed - > package julia-1.7.0.0-1.fc36.x86_64 requires libmbedtls.so.12()(64bit), but > none of the providers can be installed - package julia-1.7.0.0-1.fc36.x86_64 > requires libmbedx509.so.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be > installed - problem with installed package julia-1.7.2-1.fc35.x86_64 > - mbedtls-2.16.12-1.fc35.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository > - julia-1.7.2-1.fc35.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository Replying to myself julia 1.7.2 is not available in Fedora 36+ only in Fedora 35. Downgrading julia (that does back to 1.7.0beta4-1 the update still fails with: Error: Problem: package julia-1.7.0.0-1.fc36.x86_64 requires libmbedcrypto.so.3() (64bit), but none of the providers can be installed - package julia-1.7.0.0-1.fc36.x86_64 requires libmbedtls.so.12()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed - package julia-1.7.0.0-1.fc36.x86_64 requires libmbedx509.so.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed - problem with installed package julia-1.7.0beta4-1.fc35.x86_64 - mbedtls-2.16.12-1.fc35.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository - julia-1.7.0beta4-1.fc35.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository Finally removing julia it works: ... Transaction Summary == Install 74 Packages Upgrade8143 Packages Remove4 Packages Downgrade 9 Packages Total download size: 7.5 G Operation aborted. Interestingly one of the packages that will be downgraded is tellico, that I have built, and where only F36 has the previous package while F34, F35 and F37 (rawhide) have the same version. So I failed to notice the branching of F36. :-( Fortunately the solution, in this case, is simple. :-) -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Donate 1 minute of your time to test upgrades from F35 to F36
On Friday, 11 March 2022 17.43.01 WET Miroslav Suchý wrote: > Do you want to make Fedora 36 better? Please spend 1 minute of your time and > try to run: > > # Run this only if you use default Fedora modules > # next time you run any DNF command default modules will be enabled again > sudo dnf module reset '*' > > dnf --releasever=36 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f36 \ > --enablerepo=updates-testing \ > $(rpm -q fedora-repos-modular >/dev/null && echo > --enablerepo=updates-testing-modular) \ --assumeno distro-sync > > > This command does not replace `dnf system-upgrade`, but it will reveal > potential problems. > > You may also run `dnf upgrade` before running this command. > > > The `--assumeno` will just test the transaction, but does not make the actual > upgrade. > > > In case you hit dependency issues, please report it against the appropriate > package. > > Or against fedora-obsolete-packages if that package should be removed in > Fedora 36. Please check existing reports against > > fedora-obsolete-packages first: > > https://red.ht/2kuBDPu > > and also there is already bunch of "Fails to install" (F36FailsToInstall) > reports: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi? bug_id=1992487_id_type=anddependso > n=tvp_id=12486533 > > Thank you > > Miroslav This is what I get: Error: Problem: package julia-1.7.0.0-1.fc36.x86_64 requires libmbedcrypto.so.3() (64bit), but none of the providers can be installed - package julia-1.7.0.0-1.fc36.x86_64 requires libmbedtls.so.12()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed - package julia-1.7.0.0-1.fc36.x86_64 requires libmbedx509.so.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed - problem with installed package julia-1.7.2-1.fc35.x86_64 - mbedtls-2.16.12-1.fc35.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository - julia-1.7.2-1.fc35.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Should python3dist(...) provides generator fail when the version is = 0?
On Monday, 7 February 2022 13.58.24 WET Charalampos Stratakis wrote: > Makes a lot of sense to error out the build in this case. I agree. I can not imagine a case where this makes sense, or if I ever found an example where that was ever the case... -- José Abílio ___ python-devel mailing list -- python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Announcing LLVM Snapshot Packages for Fedora Linux
On Tuesday, 1 February 2022 11.54.01 WET Jonathan Wakely wrote: > Which is also mentioned at https://jwakely.github.io/pkg-gcc-latest/ > so I've added a link to that page from the copr description. Thank you. That answered all my questions (regarding this issue :-) ). Regards, -- José Abílio ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Announcing LLVM Snapshot Packages for Fedora Linux
On Thursday, 27 January 2022 16.14.36 WET José Abílio Matos wrote: > $ src/lyx > > [1] 61542 > > src/lyx: /lib64/libstdc++.so.6: version `GLIBCXX_3.4.30' not found (required > by src/lyx) > > > Any help here? OK, one option is set the linker path $ LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/opt/gcc-latest/lib64/ src/lyx -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Announcing LLVM Snapshot Packages for Fedora Linux
On Wednesday, 3 November 2021 13.47.22 WET Jonathan Wakely wrote: > Nice to see this going public, I will definitely be using it, thanks! > > And I'll shamelessly plug my copr with weekly GCC snapshots ;-) > https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/jwakely/gcc-latest/ Thank you for providing it. :-) I have one question, how should we use it? Case in point, I am using it to compile LyX in order to fix the issues raised in rawhide. In order to do that I configure LyX (using autotools) with: path/to/lyx/configure --with-version-suffix=-devel CC=/opt/gcc-latest/bin/gcc CXX=/opt/gcc-latest/bin/g++ in order to use the latest gcc. Compiling I got an issue with a missing import. After fixing this it compiled. The problem is running the resulting binary: $ src/lyx [1] 61542 src/lyx: /lib64/libstdc++.so.6: version `GLIBCXX_3.4.30' not found (required by src/lyx) Any help here? Regards, -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Package Review / Sponsorship Request
On Thursday, 6 January 2022 09.02.02 WET Mark E. Fuller wrote:
> Good day all,
>
> I have just submitted a review request
> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2037645) for Cantera, a
> chemical kinetics, thermodynamics, and transport tool suite
> (https://cantera.org/,
> https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/fuller/Cantera/).
>
> As this is my first package, I appreciate any constructive feedback and
> am looking for a sponsor.
> I am particularly interested in having the package ultimately available
> in EPEL as this would make installation on many HPC resources very simple.
>
> Regards,
> Fuller
Hi Mark,
I can review this an sponsor you.
Welcome to Fedora. :-)
On a first read you do not need to do a detailed listing in %files.
For example for cantera-common just writing
%{_datadir}/%{name}
will cover all the files that are inside that folder.
I will give a more detailed review in the bugzilla entry.
Best regards,
--
José Abílio___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: How do we announce new packages?
On Sunday, 2 January 2022 21.08.45 WET Matthew Miller wrote: > 1. As previously noted, Fedora Magazine seems like the right audience. Maybe > interested people could collect topics and run an article every month? FWIW I agree with you. In particular I remember a similar effort for R packages (the last example): https://rviews.rstudio.com/2021/12/21/november-2021-top-40-new-cran-packages/ There is a tag called "top-40" that it is not used consistently, e.g, the previous entry: https://rviews.rstudio.com/2021/11/29/october-2021-top-40-new-cran-packages/ The nice thing in this type of reports is how the different packages are placed together in related areas. And yes this is a time consuming task. :-) -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: F36 Change: Hunspell Dictionary dir change (System-Wide Change proposal)
On Wednesday, 29 December 2021 15.01.49 WET Ben Cotton wrote: > == Detailed Description == > In most of Linux distributions the standard Hunspell dictionary path > is `/usr/share/hunspell/` but in Fedora still has > `/usr/share/myspell/`. This effort is to follow default standard to > install all Hunspell dictionary into `/usr/share/hunspell/` instead of > `/usr/share/myspell/`. It is too late in my timezone to do a joke about this. :-D I am not sure if this is the cause but I had problems when I installed jupyterlab_spellchecker extension to work in Jupyter Lab. And it seems that I am not the only one: https://discourse.jupyter.org/t/jupyter-lab-dictionary-not-loaded/12228 it is difficult to remember how I fixed the issue but it was a frustrating and tiring experience. :-( I hope that this change help theses cases. Regards, -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Provisional %{pyproject_build_lib} macro
On Tuesday, 14 December 2021 20.11.54 WET Miro Hrončok wrote:
> Hello Pythonistas,
> the pyproject-rpm-macros-0-51 update (available in Rawhide+ELN and updates
> ready for 33 and 34) introduces a new provisional %{pyproject_build_lib}
> macro.
"ready for 33 and 34"
This is a proof, not that it were necessary, that Miro is true Pythonista by
heart. :-D
We always start counting on 0: so Fedora Core 0, ..., Fedora Core 5, Fedora 6,
... Fedora 34 (the current)
On the probably more serious side thank you for adding this. There were times
were this would have been useful to have this for reasons you have explained.
:-)
Thank you,
--
José Abílio___
python-devel mailing list -- python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Self Introduction: Titouan Bénard
On Friday, 24 September 2021 16.14.23 WEST Titouan Bénard wrote: > Hello, > > I'm Titouan, I have made some contribution in open > source and now I would like to contribute in Fedora. > > I would like to package python packages not present in Fedora. > > Thanks Hi Titouan, welcome to Fedora. :-) We look forward to your contributions. Feel free to ask for help if you need to. There is a python development list, associated to a SIG (Special Interest Group), in case you want to join: Fedora Python SIG Regards, -- José Abílio ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Self Introduction: Thomas Vandal
On Sunday, 12 September 2021 17.59.02 WEST Thomas Vandal wrote: > Hi, > > I am a PhD student in astronomy at the Université de Montréal, in > Canada. I use Fedora as my main OS and use Python a lot for my research > work. I am new to contributing to Fedora. I am interested in packaging > Python packages that I use for my research that is not yet available. > This includes data analysis packages, astronomy-focused packages, and > also more specialized packages related to my field of study > (exoplanets). > > For now, I am still learning about packaging for Fedora. Looking > forward to submit a first package. > > Best, > > Thomas Vandal Hi Thomas, looking forward to see your contributions. Feel free to ask questions. It is nice to see people working on Scientific Computing contributing to Fedora. :-) PS: Obligatory joke, a poor attempt at showing empathy to newcomers: the last time that I have studied Astronomy at University the number of known and confirmed exoplanets could be counted by hand. :-D :-) Regards, -- José Abílio ___ python-devel mailing list -- python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: f35-backgrounds ready for review
On Friday, 27 August 2021 18.31.36 WEST Kevin Fenzi wrote: > The other resource issue here is that when you modify the package to add > the new wallpapers, everyone who has any of the old ones installed will > need to pointlessly update them for the version change. > > But since that would only happen at branching once a cycle, perhaps > thats ok. > > kevin What you said makes sense, until we look into the gory details. :-) As an example look into f30-backgrounds, the current rawhide changelog for the spec files says: * Wed Jul 21 2021 Fedora Release Engineering - 30.1.2-6 - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_35_Mass_Rebuild * Tue Jan 26 2021 Fedora Release Engineering - 30.1.2-5 - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_34_Mass_Rebuild * Mon Jul 27 2020 Fedora Release Engineering - 30.1.2-4 - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_33_Mass_Rebuild * Tue Jan 28 2020 Fedora Release Engineering - 30.1.2-3 - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_32_Mass_Rebuild * Thu Jul 25 2019 Fedora Release Engineering - 30.1.2-2 - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_31_Mass_Rebuild So there is no change in this regard. :-) -- José Abílio ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Major update of Python packages next week: Flask 2.0, Werkzeug 2.0, Jinja 3.0, ItsDangerous 2.0, and MarkupSafe 2.0
On Thursday, 15 July 2021 19.05.31 WEST Miro Hrončok wrote: > Alea iacta est: > > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-238ef526b9 The last guy to say that had an untimely death, at the hand of friends (!!!). :-D Best regards, -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Self Introduction: Kyle Knoepfel
On Wednesday, 14 July 2021 14.09.15 WEST Kyle Knoepfel wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm Kyle Knoepfel, a software developer at Fermi National Accelerator > Laboratory. The majority of my projects are C++ based with a little Python > mixed in (a few of them can be found at https://github.com/knoepfel). > > I've volunteered to maintain the EPEL7 branch of nlohmann_json, which one of > our projects relies upon > (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1979694). > > I'm glad to join your ranks, and thanks upfront for your patience as I get > acclimated. > > Best regards, > Kyle Hi Kyle, do you have a sponsor? This is are you a packager already? Best regards, -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Orphaned packages looking for new maintainers
On Wednesday, 7 July 2021 11.59.18 WEST Chuck Anderson wrote: > I'm not listed as a (co)maintainer, so I'm not sure how I ended up on > this list. By a transitive dependency relation... :-) Basically one of your packages depends on another package that depends on guile22. -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Orphaned packages looking for new maintainers
On Thursday, May 20, 2021 1:15:57 AM WEST Ian McInerney wrote: > On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 9:56 PM Jerry James wrote: > > On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 7:39 AM Michael J Gruber > > > > wrote: > > > I'd say that packaging a texlive file in another package is wrong > > > > anyways, so I'd suggest 3) in any case, with the possibility that someone > > can still take up auctex, fix the emacs-lisp error and make auctex depend > > on texlive-preview (and, for good measure, fix the unversioned obsoletes > > for tetex-preview). > > > > > > It looks like an update to the latest version fixes the FTBFS. Since > > I use this package from time to time, I'll take it. Comaintainers > > welcome. > > -- > > Jerry James > > Thanks! +1 I am also (positively) affected by your decision. -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Documentation on how to install the jupyter stack on Fedora
Is there any place where we can find a central place for information for installing jupyter in Fedora? The best that I could found was an article on Fedora Magazine: https://fedoramagazine.org/jupyter-and-data-science-in-fedora/ In this case the question come from my wife who installed today a new machine with Fedora 34. My suggestions was to install python3-notebook but unless you know this it is not obvious where to search for it. Best regards, -- José Abílio ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: F35 Change: "Fedora Linux" in /etc/os-release
On Tuesday, March 23, 2021 1:40:11 AM WET Kevin Kofler via devel wrote: > Please keep in mind that Linus Torvalds himself announced his project with > the words: "It is NOT protable" [sic] "(uses 386 task switching etc),". [1] > The portability came much later, after major changes (such as rewriting > assembly code in C or making it selectable by platform). So it is not fair > to blame the FSF for not believing in the portability of Linux (the kernel) > at the very beginning. Nobody did, not even Linus himself. > > [1] > https://groups.google.com/g/comp.os.minix/c/dlNtH7RRrGA/m/SwRavCzVE7gJ?pli= > 1 > > Kevin Kofler Yes, but by 1994 when linux was ported to the DEC Alpha you could see that things were changing. So the much later is not much later than that. :-) I have fond memories of one of those machines where running Linux there made all the difference. :-) The only issue that we had was that with linux 2 the network driver, a Tulip, was removed from the kernel. OK, I could have swapped the network driver, but by that time it was not worth anymore. :-) -- José Abílio ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: F35 Change: "Fedora Linux" in /etc/os-release
On Monday, March 22, 2021 5:02:47 PM WET Gordon Messmer wrote: > As a rationale, your explanation as a whole seems retaliatory, to me. > "The GNU project encouraged its volunteers to work on HURD instead of > Linux, so we'll not speak their name because this makes us unhappy." > > That doesn't seem like the kind of respectful, friendly environment that > Fedora explicitly is trying to foster. And that's why I think the name > "Fedora", by itself, is better. That name is neutral to the topic of > whether Linux or GNU/Linux is the OS that Fedora extends, rather than a > statement about our feelings toward the GNU project. I am sorry but I fail to see how this is the case. How are the statements not respectful? If you followed the discussion at the time that Stephen describes this is an accurate description of state of affairs. Just because you disagree it does not make it false. Just the first citation I found from reading LWN.net: https://lwn.net/Articles/395150/ There he find a reference to h-online: From http://www.h-online.com/open/features/GNU-HURD-Altered-visions-and-lost-promise-1030942.html%3Fanchor=trixandturns And there it says: """ The Free Software Foundation was initially sceptical of the capabilities of Linux as a portable operating system. Initial versions only ran on the IBM 386. According to Stallman: "We heard that Linux was not at all portable (this may not be true today, but that's what we heard then). And we heard that Linux was architecturally on a par with the Unix kernel; our work was leading to something much more powerful". """ We own a lot to the GNU project but that does not make it immune to critics. -- José Abílio ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: F35 Change: "Fedora Linux" in /etc/os-release
On Tuesday, March 9, 2021 4:34:48 PM WET Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote: > Fedora is. Linux isn't. Linux is just an OS kernel. It cannot be used > without helpers like GNU libraries and utilities. Fedora is the project. How do you distinguish the project from the distribution? AFAICS this is an attempt to convey that distinction. Calling the distribution Fedora Linux does this in a formal way. -- José Abílio ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Donate 1 minute of your time to test upgrades from F33 to F34
On Saturday, February 20, 2021 12:13:05 PM WET Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > Looks OK. It is allowed for packages to be downgraded, if that's > what you meant as a bug. > > Zbyszek No the bug was that it worked. :-) Since there were no failures that went against my expectation and thus the bug. :-D It is the first time where I have no problem with dependencies at this stage, well done to the people who have been chasing this class of problems. -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Donate 1 minute of your time to test upgrades from F33 to F34
On Saturday, February 20, 2021 9:49:12 AM WET Miroslav Suchý wrote: > If you get this prompt: > >... >Total download size: XXX M >Is this ok [y/N]: > > you can answer N and nothing happens, no need to test the actual upgrade. Oops, I got this. ... Transaction Summary Install 198 Packages Upgrade7430 Packages Remove4 Packages Downgrade46 Packages Where should I report this bug? After all the normal is to get, as you stated, a dependency problem. So I guess that this can be counted as a bug. ;-) Thank you for all the hard work. :-) -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Orphaned packages looking for new maintainers
On Monday, February 8, 2021 9:17:07 PM WET Fabio Valentini wrote: > https://pagure.io/pagure-dist-git/issue/128 Thank you Fabio. :-) -- José Abílio ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Orphaned packages looking for new maintainers
On Monday, February 8, 2021 5:15:13 PM WET Adam Williamson wrote: > For the record it's also required by fedora-messaging, which is why > just about everything else in the world needed it The last release is from 2015, but there are different commits over the years with the last being 10 days ago to the development version. The code works with python since 3.4, and has worked with every new python version since then. Something that I am curious is that the package that was rebuilt on the mass rebuild does not show in the stable version of Fedora 34: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-blinker Is this expected? Regards, -- José Abílio ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Orphaned packages looking for new maintainers
On Monday, February 8, 2021 3:54:29 PM WET Miro Hrončok wrote: > python-blinker orphan, pjp, sundaram 0 weeks > ago I took python-blinker that is required by nikola. In particular it means that the following users/groups are covered: abompard: python-blinker adamwill: python-blinker adrian: python-blinker bruno: python-blinker cqi: python-blinker devrim: python-blinker firemanxbr: python-blinker fivaldi: python-blinker infra-sig: python-blinker jamatos: python-blinker jdornak: python-blinker jkaluza: python-blinker jsedlak: python-blinker kparal: python-blinker lsedlar: python-blinker maxamillion: python-blinker mrmeee: python-blinker ngompa: python-blinker pingou: python-blinker qa-tools-sig: python-blinker qwan: python-blinker ralph: python-blinker rkuska: python-blinker rmarko: python-blinker tjikkun: python-blinker Regards, -- José Abílio ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: src.fedoraproject.org branch conversion to rawhide/main tomorrow
On Friday, February 5, 2021 3:03:58 PM WET Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > for i in `ls -1` As far as I know there is no need to pass the -1. It should be enough for i in `ls` If the directories have spaces you need other technicalities, that is not the case for our directories. Regards, -- José Abílio ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: ECL soname bump
On Monday, February 1, 2021 11:12:53 PM WET Jerry James wrote: > Thank you for pointing that out. I think I see the problem. I'm > testing a fix now and will push it if it fixes the issue. When you do please let tell us, or let a note in the FTBFS maxima's report: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1923564 in order to issue a rebuild. Regards, -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: ECL soname bump
On Monday, February 1, 2021 4:53:25 PM WET Jerry James wrote: > A new version of ECL has been released, with an soname bump on the > shared library. Only maxima and sagemath depend on ECL, so I will > rebuild both of them after updating ECL in about a week. I will do > test builds in advance to identify any problems with the upgrade. Maxima failed to build on rawhide due to a crash on gcl on the configure stage: https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/9904/60929904/build.log -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: %{python3} no defined in epel-7-aarch64?
On Monday, January 4, 2021 7:54:54 PM WET Sérgio Basto wrote: > yes, you may want BR python36-devel , take a look at > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Bkabrda/EPEL7_Python3orhttps://src.fedor > aproject.org/rpms/python3-dateutil/blob/epel7/f/python3-dateutil.spec > id="-x-evo-selection-start-marker"> Thank you Sérgio. Since I was just trying an easy way I will skip this for the moment. -- José Abílio___ python-devel mailing list -- python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [EPEL-devel] Re: %{python3} no defined in epel-7-aarch64?
On Sunday, January 17, 2021 8:01:33 PM WET Jakub Kadlčík wrote: > Hello everyone, > as Florian pointed out, the aarch64 architecture support for EPEL 7 was > discontinued, so I just disabled the epel-7-aarch64 chroot in Copr as > well. Thank you Jakub. :-) Only when Florian sent the message I remembered that aarch64 was discontinued. With all things going it is easy for these details to escape and it is nice to have an automatic help in these cases. -- José Abílio___ python-devel mailing list -- python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Is there interest in Quantum computing in Fedora?
On Friday, January 15, 2021 7:08:34 PM WET Matthew Miller wrote: > As I understand it, IBM's state of the art beats that by one already! I knew that the number was higher than 64, but then I would ruin the joke. :-) At the same time if we do not measure it the number could be 64. :-D This is more a despair laugh in case you wondering. :-) I have been looking lately at things like Quantum Decision Theory where we use the quantum formalism to describe human cognitive processes. So it is more than just the quantum computing that is interesting. -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Is there interest in Quantum computing in Fedora?
On Friday, January 15, 2021 12:58:28 PM WET Stephen Coady wrote: > For the moment, I'm concentrating on getting the QISKIT [1] libraries > packaged in Fedora. I should hopefully have some updates together for > this very soon. That would be nice to have. Are there any new requirements, other naturally than the Qiskit's sub- packages, that are not yet on Fedora? Regards, -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Is there interest in Quantum computing in Fedora?
On Friday, January 15, 2021 4:10:42 PM WET Matthew Miller wrote: > I'd love to see us in this area. Matthew, I can understand your point of view. Since the platforms that we support are mostly 64-bit you would like also to see Fedora support (pure) 64 qubits systems. ;-) And yes, I am aware that in one case it is the word size and in the other the whole size. :-) -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Un-retire the package python-pyswip
On Friday, January 8, 2021 3:38:44 PM WET Christoph Karl wrote: > Hello everyone! > > I want to un-retire the package python-pyswip. > > According to "dead.package" the reason for retiring this package is/was: > "SWI Prolog (package pl) has been retired from Fedora, this package > provided Python bindings for SWI Prolog." > > I checked this with Jerry James (maintainer of SWI Prolog (package pl): > To his recall, the former maintainer of that package retired it on the > same day that he saved SWI Prolog from being retired. > > PySwip seems to have an active upstream. > > For me a Python/Prolog bridge has two advantages: > *) Easier to learn Prolog because I am familiar with Python. > *) Possibility to extend Python with Prolog-reasoning. > > Best Regards > Christoph Hi Christoph, since the package was retired for so long it needs to be re-review again to be un-retired. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Orphaned_package_that_need_new_maintainers Retired Fedora packages (master/devel/rawhide branch retired) require a re- review if they are retired for more than eight weeks or if there is no previous review of the package. Submit a review request (a new bugzilla ticket) and have the package approved by a reviewer as if it were new to Fedora. See the package review The package was retired in May of 2019 and so this applies here. Best regards, -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Updating armadillo and dependent packages (rawhide)
Hi, a bit later than what I expected (holidays are a busy time as well :-) ) I will update armadillo to 10.1.0. This implies an so bump and so I will update it in a side tag together with the dependent packages gdal and mlpack. I intend to do this for rawhide, and later for Fedora 33 and 32. Best regards, -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
%{python3} no defined in epel-7-aarch64?
I have used copr to build the first alpha release of lyx-2.4:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/jamatos/lyx-devel/build/1858028/
For EPEL7 it build for x86_64 and it fails for aarch64, due to %{python3} not
being defined.
The spec file has BR: python3-devel.
In the install stage I have this:
%py_byte_compile %{python3} %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/%{name}/lyx2lyx
This fails in epel-7-aarch64:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/jamatos/lyx-devel/epel-7-aarch64/01858028-lyx-devel/build.log.gz
"
+ python_binary='%{python3}'
+
buildroot_path=/builddir/build/BUILDROOT/lyx-devel-2.4.0-0.2.alpha1.el7.aarch64/usr/share/lyx-devel/lyx2lyx
~/build/BUILDROOT/lyx-devel-2.4.0-0.2.alpha1.el7.aarch64
~/build/BUILD/lyx-2.4.0-alpha1
+ bytecode_compilation_path=./usr/share/lyx-devel/lyx2lyx
+ failure=0
+ pushd /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/lyx-devel-2.4.0-0.2.alpha1.el7.aarch64
+ xargs -0 '%{python3}' -O -m py_compile
+ find ./usr/share/lyx-devel/lyx2lyx -type f -a -name '*.py' -print0
xargs: %{python3}: No such file or directory
+ failure=1
+ xargs -0 '%{python3}' -m py_compile
+ find ./usr/share/lyx-devel/lyx2lyx -type f -a -name '*.py' -print0
xargs: %{python3}: No such file or directory
+ failure=1
~/build/BUILD/lyx-2.4.0-alpha1
+ popd
+ test 1 -eq 0
"
while in the corresponding x86_64 the first line correctly sets:
+ python_binary=/usr/bin/python3
Is this known?
Regards,
--
José Abílio___
python-devel mailing list -- python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[EPEL-devel] Re: Version of gcc in EPEL7
On Monday, January 4, 2021 3:30:20 PM WET Troy Dawson wrote: > [root@centos7 ~]# g++ -dumpversion > 4.8.5 > [root@centos7 ~]# g++ -dumpfullversion > g++: fatal error: no input files > compilation terminated. > [root@centos7 ~]# rpm -qf /usr/bin/g++ > gcc-c++-4.8.5-44.el7.x86_64 Thank you. :-) -- José Abílio___ epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to epel-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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[EPEL-devel] Version of gcc in EPEL7
Hi, last week I have compiled the first alpha release of LyX 2.4 in copr. As I have been doing in other cases I have built the package in EPEL 7 and 8, together with the supported Fedora versions and rawhide. The code only failed in EPEL 7. In a sense this was to be expected since the code requires at least gcc 4.9 (full C++ support for regex is the culprit here). The reason why I am writing this is because there is a test in the autotools base to catch older versions of gcc and for some reason it is not working. I have been asked what is the output of g++ -dumpversion and g++ -dumpfullversion in EPEL. Could anyone that has an available installation send me that output, please? The other tangential question is if there is a newer gcc version that can be used in EPEL7. I think this question has been answered several times in this list but my search-fu is not working at the moment. What I wrote above only applies to EPEL 7 as EPEL 8 is working perfectly and I have recently released the stable version of LyX there. Best regards, -- José Abílio___ epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to epel-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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Review request/swap python-enrich
On Saturday, January 2, 2021 1:34:32 PM WET chedi toueiti wrote: > Hi, > > This package is a new dependency of python-molecule. Can someone take a look > and review it please. > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1911296 > > Happy to review in exchange. Done. :-) -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: What is the most time consuming task for you as packager?
On Wednesday, December 16, 2020 7:15:21 PM WET Jonathan Wakely wrote: > Creating the dependency graph by hand is fairly tedious, but maybe I'm > missing an automated way. The point of creating that graph is to avoid > wasting time and power doing and redoing builds that will fail until > something else has been built (which is the problem with mock's > --chain command, if I understand correctly). > > Once I have that graph, I use Make to control the process, because it > handles the dependency graph, as well as parallelism, and not > rebuilding things unnecessarily. If I am reading it right this is a task for "Fed Brunch": https://github.com/juhp/fbrnch#readme Jens Petersen did a presentation about this at Fedora Nest this year, the package is available in copr: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/petersen/fbrnch/ Honestly I have not yet tried it. I have been busy with other projects but this seems to fulfill some of your specifications. Regards, -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Mass spec file change: Adding BuildRequires: make
On Wednesday, December 16, 2020 3:51:16 PM WET Tom Stellard wrote: > I'm only excluding packages that invoke make through the %cmake_build or > %cmake_install macros. armadillo invokes make directly, which is why it > is on the list. > > -Tom You are right, in the %check section. OK I have added make as an explicit BR to armadillo and emacs-common-ess. Thank you. :-) -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Mass spec file change: Adding BuildRequires: make
On Wednesday, December 16, 2020 8:01:23 AM WET Tom Stellard wrote: > Here is the list of packages for Dec 16: > https://fedorapeople.org/~tstellar/br_make_day2.txt > > -Tom Hi Tom, I have two packages in your list: armadillo and emacs-common-ess. My issue is with armadillo that it has BuildRequires cmake. So I think that in this case the BuildRequires make does not make sense. Bellow I am speculating. :-) Assuming that the check was done using a script (the only sane way to do it), cmake requirement line appears as: BuildRequires: cmake, lapack-devel, arpack-devel so if the script searches for cmake as the only element it will fail. Best regards, -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: heads up: nss 3.59 breaks firefox add-ons
On Tuesday, December 15, 2020 8:04:24 PM WET Alexander Ploumistos wrote: > > I'm running firefox 83.0-13.fc33.x86_64 with nss 3.59.0-2.fc33 > installed since it hit my local updates-testing mirror and all my > add-ons are looking good. Could there be something else that's causing > trouble? I have the following from the nss family: > nss-3.59.0-2.fc33.i686 > nss-3.59.0-2.fc33.x86_64 > nss-softokn-3.59.0-2.fc33.i686 > nss-softokn-3.59.0-2.fc33.x86_64 > nss-softokn-freebl-3.59.0-2.fc33.i686 > nss-softokn-freebl-3.59.0-2.fc33.x86_64 > nss-sysinit-3.59.0-2.fc33.x86_64 > nss-util-3.59.0-2.fc33.i686 > nss-util-3.59.0-2.fc33.x86_64 Did you restart firefox since updating? -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: heads up: nss 3.59 breaks firefox add-ons
On Tuesday, December 15, 2020 7:17:21 PM WET Kevin Fenzi wrote: > If you upgrade in f33 or rawhide to nss 3.59, all your firefox add-ons > will stop working. Worse they will appear corrupted, so you will have to > remove them and re-install them (after downgrading nss). > > For now, downgrade nss or avoid updating to it until things can get > sorted out. > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1908018 > > kevin Thank you Kevin for the note. I had updated by I downgraded thanks to you. :-) Regards, -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Failed to pair: org.bluez.Error.AuthenticationFailed
On Wednesday, December 9, 2020 3:40:47 AM WET Steve Dickson wrote: > Its a kernel problem... On the 5-9 kernel I tried > bluez-5.53, bluez-5.54, bluez-5.5 all failed > with Connection refused (111) > > Then I tried bluez-5.5 on the last 5.8 kernel > (5.8.18-300.fc33)... everything worked again > > steved. I will probably add this information to the bug report that you opened. I tried the last kernel from rawhide: 5.10.0-0.rc6.20201204git34816d20f173.92.fc34 And the problem still persists there. :-( -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Failed to pair: org.bluez.Error.AuthenticationFailed
On Tuesday, December 8, 2020 9:04:20 PM WET Steve Dickson wrote: > Its a kernel problem... On the 5-9 kernel I tried > bluez-5.53, bluez-5.54, bluez-5.5 all failed > with Connection refused (111) > > Then I tried bluez-5.5 on the last 5.8 kernel > (5.8.18-300.fc33)... everything worked again! > > steved. You are right. I reinstalled the same kernel and now bluetooth works. Thank you. :-) -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Failed to pair: org.bluez.Error.AuthenticationFailed
On Tuesday, December 8, 2020 1:31:15 PM WET Peter Robinson wrote: > On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 1:10 PM Steve Dickson wrote: > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > I realize this is probably not the most appropriate list > > to ask this question... but > > > > > > > > I have a pair of Jabra Elite 45h headphones that > > was working just fine until I updated to Fedora 33. > > > > > > > > When I try to pair via bluetoothctl I get the following error > > > > > > > > [bluetooth]# pair 70:BF:92:D6:51:CB > > Attempting to pair with 70:BF:92:D6:51:CB > > [CHG] Device 70:BF:92:D6:51:CB Connected: yes > > Failed to pair: org.bluez.Error.AuthenticationFailed > > [CHG] Device 70:BF:92:D6:51:CB Connected: no > > > > > > > > when I try to pair via the GUI I get > > bluetoothd[8275]: profiles/audio/avdtp.c:avdtp_connect_cb() connect to > > 70:BF:92:D6:51:CB: Connection refused (111) > > > > > > > It probably does not matter but I do have selinux set to permissive > > > > > > > > Anybody have clue as to what is going on? > > > Do you have a relatively new laptop with a Intel bluetooth adapter, > something like AX2xx series? If so it might be this issue [1] in > conjunction with the 5.9 kernel, I can't tell if the problem was > resolved but there seems to be a workaround [2] search for > IdentityResolvingKey for the relevant bit. > > > [1] https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-bluetooth/msg88074.html > [2] https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-bluetooth/msg88147.html Clearly I am stealing the thread but I also have a problem with bluetooth in Fedora 33 and I unable to point what is the problem. I have followed the instruction at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_debug_Bluetooth_problems # hciconfig hci0: Type: Primary Bus: USB BD Address: xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx ACL MTU: 1021:6 SCO MTU: 255:12 DOWN RX bytes:1566 acl:0 sco:0 events:170 errors:0 TX bytes:35258 acl:0 sco:0 commands:170 errors:0 Trying to bring it to a working state does not work either: # hciconfig up shows the same output as above. # lsusb | grep -i blue Bus 003 Device 002: ID 13d3:3548 IMC Networks Bluetooth Radio This pair shows up in drivers/bluetooth/btusb.c Yet something seems to go awry since: # systemctl status bluetooth ● bluetooth.service - Bluetooth service Loaded: loaded (/usr/lib/systemd/system/bluetooth.service; enabled; vendor preset: enabled) Active: active (running) since Wed 2020-12-02 07:02:48 WET; 7h ago Docs: man:bluetoothd(8) Main PID: 842 (bluetoothd) Status: "Running" Tasks: 1 (limit: 37766) Memory: 1.6M CPU: 58ms CGroup: /system.slice/bluetooth.service └─842 /usr/libexec/bluetooth/bluetoothd -d Dec 02 14:29:03 griffin bluetoothd[842]: src/agent.c:agent_ref() 0x55fc8419fac0: ref=1 Dec 02 14:29:03 griffin bluetoothd[842]: src/agent.c:register_agent() agent :1.3771 Dec 02 14:29:25 griffin bluetoothd[842]: src/agent.c:agent_disconnect() Agent :1.3771 disconnected Dec 02 14:29:25 griffin bluetoothd[842]: src/agent.c:agent_destroy() agent :1.3771 Dec 02 14:29:25 griffin bluetoothd[842]: src/agent.c:agent_unref() 0x55fc8419fac0: ref=0 Dec 02 14:29:42 griffin bluetoothd[842]: src/agent.c:agent_ref() 0x55fc8419fac0: ref=1 Dec 02 14:29:42 griffin bluetoothd[842]: src/agent.c:register_agent() agent :1.3775 Dec 02 14:29:59 griffin bluetoothd[842]: src/agent.c:agent_disconnect() Agent :1.3775 disconnected Dec 02 14:29:59 griffin bluetoothd[842]: src/agent.c:agent_destroy() agent :1.3775 Dec 02 14:29:59 griffin bluetoothd[842]: src/agent.c:agent_unref() 0x55fc8419fac0: ref=0 The last part does not look right. But is it a problem of the kernel or the daemon? Any help is appreciated -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: updating nbconvert
On Friday, December 4, 2020 9:56:35 AM WET Lumír Balhar wrote: > Hello. > > I'm getting HTTP/404 for > https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/nonamedotc/nbconvert-6.0 > .7/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/01795156-python-nbconvert/ > > Could you please try to rebuild the package? > Have a nice day. > > Lumír Probably the build was erased, another place where it can be found is: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/nonamedotc/nbconvert-6.0.7/ fedora-rawhide-x86_64/01795144-python-nbconvert/ -- José Abílio___ python-devel mailing list -- python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: s390x only buildroot problem
On Sunday, November 29, 2020 3:20:34 PM WET Richard Shaw wrote: > Never mind, it has been reported and "fixed" it just needs to propagate to > the builders I suppose. > > Thanks, > Richard I am also in that queue. :-) Thank you for letting us know that the problem is fixed. -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Fedora 34 Change: GNU Toolchain update (gcc 11, glibc 2.33) (System-Wide Change)
On Friday, November 20, 2020 4:26:53 PM WET Ben Cotton wrote: > == Release Notes == > The GNU Compiler Collection version 11 will be released shortly. See > https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-11/changes.html. > > The GNU C Library version 2.32 will be released at the beginning of > August 2020. The current NEWS notes can be seen here as they are > added: https://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=blob;f=NEWS;hb=HEAD Just a small note, glibc was *already* released. :-) Please update the release notes. -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: video meeting to discuss Matrix/Element and IRC
On Thursday, November 19, 2020 5:54:52 PM WET Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > I'm not sure that message editing is a feature. In fairness as long as the grace period is fixed and small that is not a bad thing. E.g it allows you to fix lots of cases where you found that the message was incomplete after sending it or it had incorrect information that you only found after sending it. That allows to clean some noise and it is not a bad thing. :-) -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Self Introduction - Jason Edgecombe
On Monday, November 16, 2020 12:12:53 AM WET Jason Edgecombe wrote: > Hello everyone, Hi Jason, welcome to Fedora. :-) > I'm a Linux admin at a university supporting around 100+ EL7/8 and Ubuntu > machines. I've been using Linux as a hobby since around 1994 and > professionally since 1999. My first Linux experience was installing > Slackware from floppies on a computer with a 486DX processor (The > predecessor to the Pentium chip) My first experience was similar but with the DX2 (with an whooping 100 MHz). :-) > In my personal time, I'm learning a little about fedora packaging in order > to build some Fedora packages on RHEL8/CENTOS8 for my personal use. I'm > somewhat familiar with RPM spec files and building RPMs. Feel free to ask questions if you intend to submit packages for Fedora/EPEL. > Sincerely, > Jason Regards, PS: every time that by mistake I left the shift pressed for too long and write e.g. REgards it feels like I am applying a regular expression to something. Probably this is PTS . :-) -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: finding recursive builddeps
On Sunday, November 15, 2020 3:10:03 PM WET Jason Edgecombe wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I want to rebuild some of the fedora 33 packages for EL8 (vagrant, for > example), but I'm having trouble getting all of the build dependencies > right. I ran dnf to download the SRPMS with the --resolve option, but I'm > still missing dependencies when I submit the builds to copr. > > My current workflow is to download an RPM from Fedora 33, then submit it to > copr to build on the EPEL8 image in my personal COPR projects, waiting for > any library errors, then download those and build, repeat as needed. > > That workflow is tedious and I feel like there must be a better way, but I > don't know what that is. How can I recursively find all of the builddeps > for packages? > > Ideally, I would like some type of (semi-)automated way to track packages > on Fedora and automatically build them on EL8, but I'm at a loss for how to > do so. > > Thanks, > Jason IIRC to deal with dependencies Jens Petersen's fbrnch should help you do that: https://github.com/juhp/fbrnch The package is available in copr: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/petersen/fbrnch/ -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Lenovo portals for South America
On Thursday, November 12, 2020 11:24:47 PM WET Michael Catanzaro wrote: > This list is public, and archived by all sorts of different websites. > So too late Michael, everyone knows that the best way to keep a secret is to hide it in plain sight. :-) -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Deprecating SCP
On Monday, November 2, 2020 2:44:39 PM WET Jakub Jelen wrote: > I am looking for any kind of feedback from the idea through the > usability, implementation. Is this something you would like to see in > Fedora soon? Do you have something against this? Is your use case missing? Hi Jakub, if I am not sure if I understood what you said, you intend to deprecate the scp protocol/inner working but not the scp binary. Is that correct? I like the ease of the use of the scp, even if sometimes I would prefer it to have the same options as the usual cp. :-) Best regards, -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Mass spec change: Replace Python 3 version globs (3.?) with macros to support 3.10
On Thursday, October 29, 2020 10:49:27 PM WET Barry wrote: > After the trauma of the 3.0 release it would be mad to do a python 4.0 for > such a trivial reason as packagers that assumed, wrongly, that version can > only have single digits. > > Barry This now is an epistemological discussion. :-) I would not say that the assumption was wrong, IMHO it was right. People did not assume that version had a single digit they simply took what it worked. Because if you look back in history both python 1 and python 2 had only single digit so why should we add another level of complexity? The same already happened before and in this case it affected python when the linux major version went from 2 to 3. Because if we go to a defensive programming, as an example, we should always check the return value of printf (C/C++). There are places where it makes sense but in most places and in most cases that only makes the code longer, hard to read and hard to maintain. And that was one of the reasons why there are projects changing from the semantic versioning to a scheme where only the major version number is relevant, e.g. gcc, octave, the browsers... My original remark was on purpose ignoring that trauma, that in part was also self-inflicted, and joking about that. :-) After all this is one way to deal with trauma, or not? :-) Regards, -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Mass spec change: Replace Python 3 version globs (3.?) with macros to support 3.10
On Thursday, October 29, 2020 2:05:53 PM WET Tomas Hrnciar wrote: > Hello everyone, > > I am just letting you know that we successfully replaced all 3.? globs > yesterday. > > Regards, > Tomáš Hrnčiar Thank you for doing that, and also for the previous round. But FWIW I still think that it would have been easier/better to rename python 3.10 to 4.0. ;-) -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Problem opening postscript files in F33
On Saturday, October 17, 2020 9:14:59 PM WEST Christian Dersch wrote: > Same here, opening with Okular on F33 shows error messages such as > > (libspectre) ghostscript reports: fatal internal error > -100org.kde.okular.generators.spectre: Generated image does not match > wanted size: [0x0] vs requested [1328x1718] > > As libspectre is a Postscript library, I guess the issue is here. > > Greetings, > Christian Thank you for pointing me in the right direction. I found out that Arch users had the same problem and the solution there was simply to rebuild libspectre. I did the same locally: $ mock --rebuild libspectre-0.2.9-2.fc34.src.rpm # dnf reinstall /var/lib/mock/fedora-33-x86_64/result/ libspectre-0.2.9-2.fc33.x86_64.rpm and this fixed the problems I had with both evince and okular, including another that I found in the Arch report. Print preview was not working for *pdf* within okular. I found this problem is already reported and fixed for Fedora 32 and asked there for a rebuild for F33: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887544 Best regards, -- José Abílio ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Problem opening postscript files in F33
Hi, I found that postscript files that do not open with either evince or okular in F33 (I am aware that they use poppler as backend so probably the culprit is here). Evince tells me that it loading the file but it never ends. Okular accepts the file if I open it using "Import PostScript as PDF". If I use the ancient gv (ghostviewer) it works. One example of such a file is https://arxiv.org/ps/cond-mat/0210479 This is not critical in the sense that associating ps files with gv opens the files immediately although its aesthetics is ancient. :-) Am I the only seeing this or even using postscript files? :-) Best regards, -- José Abílio ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Could Bodhi create some temporary repositories before composes are ready?
On Tuesday, October 6, 2020 8:15:24 AM WEST Pavel Raiskup wrote: > The KMail app stopped working for me today, and I realized there's > update to which I'd like to give a try: > > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-15d324f87c If you had installed the previous update to kde apps: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-94522cc2fa I had the same problem and downgrading just kaccounts-integration, kaccounts- providers and ktp-accounts-kcm and restarting akonadi was enough to have akonadi/kmail working again. > In Bodhi, the suggested command to test this update is: > > sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing > --advisory=FEDORA-2020-15d324f87c > But that doesn't work because the mirrored updates-testing is not > yet updated. And downloading all the builds manually from Koji > is just too much work ATM. > > Would it be possible to enhance Bodhi so it provides the repositories > somewhere in the meantime, before composes are ready? > This is not the first time I'd found this feature very convenient. For the same reason, the same update, that is feature that I would like to have. :-) > Pavel -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Donate 1 minute of your time to test upgrades from F32 to F33
On Friday, October 2, 2020 10:05:11 AM WEST Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 02. 10. 20 10:59, José Abílio Matos wrote: > > Problem 2: package hippo-canvas-0.3.0-28.fc30.x86_64 requires > > > > libcroco-0.6.so.3()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed > > > >- libcroco-0.6.13-3.fc32.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade > > repository > > > >- problem with installed package hippo-canvas-0.3.0-28.fc30.x86_64 > > > > The second hippo-canvas has been retired in Fedora 31. Should I open a bug > > within the fedora-obsolete-package component? > > Yes please. Done: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1884548 -- José Abílio ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Donate 1 minute of your time to test upgrades from F32 to F33
On Friday, October 2, 2020 10:04:34 AM WEST Miro Hrončok wrote: > Or a broken sed in %prep: > > sed -i 's/python/python3/' *.py > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1871631 You are right, I arrived to the same conclusion. The sed call was required with previous versions but sugar-recall 7 has explicit "#!/usr/bin/python3 in the single file it uses it. I have removed that sed line and I will submit the corresponding builds to rawhide and Fedora 33. -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Donate 1 minute of your time to test upgrades from F32 to F33
On Friday, October 2, 2020 8:50:19 AM WEST Miroslav Suchý wrote: > Do you want to make Fedora 33 better? Please spend 1 minute of your time and > try to run: > ... In one machine I got this: Problem 1: problem with installed package sugar-recall-6-4.fc31.noarch - sugar-recall-6-4.fc31.noarch does not belong to a distupgrade repository - nothing provides /usr/bin/python33 needed by sugar-recall-7-1.fc33.noarch Problem 2: package hippo-canvas-0.3.0-28.fc30.x86_64 requires libcroco-0.6.so.3()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed - libcroco-0.6.13-3.fc32.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository - problem with installed package hippo-canvas-0.3.0-28.fc30.x86_64 The first really looks like a bug. I do not see any reason for a package to require python 3.3. The most likely explanation is a typo. The second hippo-canvas has been retired in Fedora 31. Should I open a bug within the fedora-obsolete-package component? Regards, -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Packages in rawhide not showing in src.fedoraproject.org
On Wednesday, September 30, 2020 2:45:28 PM WEST Iñaki Ucar wrote: > The thing is that R(package) is meant to provide the original > versioning (which allows hyphens and stuff), while R-package takes the > adaptation to our versioning system. The problem is that we generally > declare dependencies with R-package instead of R(package), and that's > an issue in cases like this. I think that preserving the original > versioning is a good idea, but we just need to switch to using > R(package) to declare all dependencies, like Python, tex, etc., > already do. After all there are no problem on our side. The bug is in the upstream package metadata that wrongly replaced the dash by the dot. That also says something about this version scheme (it is confusing), in particular because it is not uniform. :-) -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Packages in rawhide not showing in src.fedoraproject.org
On Wednesday, September 30, 2020 1:19:51 PM WEST Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > It actually queries bodhi and failing to find things in it, it fallsback to > mdapi normally. > Potential bug in the logic? Another example: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/texlive -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Packages in rawhide not showing in src.fedoraproject.org
On Wednesday, September 30, 2020 1:19:51 PM WEST Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > It actually queries bodhi and failing to find things in it, it fallsback to > mdapi normally. > Potential bug in the logic? I noticed it before, since at least June, in other packages so I would say yes. -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Packages in rawhide not showing in src.fedoraproject.org
On Wednesday, September 30, 2020 12:39:15 PM WEST Fabio Valentini wrote: > If anything, this is a bug in the R-rprojroot package, because version > 1.3.2 provides: "R(rprojroot) = 1.3-2", which is smaller than 1.3.2, > and hence is not enough for >= 1.3.2. Thank you Fabio. Since this is done automatically in rpm macros, there is a bug in there. I reported it to Elliot so now at the least the mystery is over. :-) -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Packages in rawhide not showing in src.fedoraproject.org
Hi, I am sorry if this has been discussed before but I do not remember it. The culprit to this message was the review of R-pak https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1883047 While running fedora-review that uses mock I found that I had an issue installing the corresponding rpm in rawhide. And surely enough running the same command it failed: # /usr/bin/dnf --installroot /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/root/ -- releasever 34 --setopt=deltarpm=False --allowerasing --disableplugin=local -- disableplugin=spacewalk install /home/jamatos/tmp/1883047-R-pak/results/R- pak-0.1.2-1.fc34.noarch.rpm --setopt=tsflags=nocontexts No matches found for the following disable plugin patterns: local, spacewalk fedora 4.4 MB/s | 74 MB 00:16 Last metadata expiration check: 0:00:17 ago on Wed 30 Sep 2020 10:21:53 AM WEST. Error: Problem: conflicting requests - nothing provides R(rprojroot) >= 1.3.2 needed by R-pak-0.1.2-1.fc34.noarch (try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages or '--nobest' to use not only best candidate packages) Consulting the page for R-rprojroot https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/R-rprojroot we also do not see any build for Fedora 34. I already saw this also for other packages where it only shows after a rebuild. On the other hand asking directly to rawhide we get: # dnf -q list R-rprojroot --disablerepo=\* --enablerepo=rawhide Available Packages R-rprojroot.noarch 1.3.2-9.fc33 rawhide And so in fact there is a match and so the packages is available at rawhide. My doubt and the reason to post this is to ask if this is the same issue or if it corresponds to different issues, one for src.fedoraproject.org (I always forget the backend name) and another for mock. Best regards, PS: no linkers or debug formats were involved in the compose of this message. :-) -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Fedora 33 - ssh clients - drop of PubkeyAcceptedKeyTypes=ssh-rsa
On Monday, September 21, 2020 6:30:47 PM WEST Ankur Sinha wrote: > I just updated to F33, and now I think I get the same issue with > BitBucket.org: > > $ ssh -Tv g...@bitbucket.org > ... > send_pubkey_test: no mutual signature algorithm > > It works if I use: > > $ ssh -Tv -oPubkeyAcceptedKeyTypes=+ssh-rsa g...@bitbucket.org > > Github and Gitlab seem to work fine, so this is Bitbucket specific. I hit that two week ago for bitbucket and other servers. In my case I got it connecting to lyx git server. At the time I wrote about it in the fedora-test mailing list. My workaround solution was to add to ~/.ssh/config Host * PubkeyAcceptedKeyTypes +rsa-sha2-256,rsa-sha2-512 That made the connections work again. -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: F33 update stuck for past 6 days in request for testing->stable
On Saturday, September 12, 2020 5:52:14 PM WEST Sérgio Basto wrote: > I agree , why not even have a count for starting to freeze ? , I though > that freeze just start after we have first beta candidate. It does not work that way. There is a freeze for beta and there is a freeze for the final release. After beta is released packages that transition to stable will go the repository that will be fedora 33. -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[EPEL-devel] Re: proposal: EPEL 8 Next
On Wednesday, September 9, 2020 5:56:43 PM WEST Patrick Riehecky wrote: > From a mulit-language perspective, I prefer not to use '4' in place of > the English word 'for'. It makes the translation work a bit wonky. Not only that, do not forget the meaning/association of 4 in different cultures. :-) -- José Abílio___ epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to epel-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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: F34 Change proposal: Wayland by Default for KDE Plasma Desktop (System-Wide Change)
On Wednesday, September 9, 2020 4:30:54 AM WEST Tom Seewald wrote: > Has anyone compiled a (non-exhaustive) list of known issues that are > specific to KDE Plasma with Wayland? https://community.kde.org/Plasma/Wayland_Showstoppers -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: F34 Change proposal: Wayland by Default for KDE Plasma Desktop (System-Wide Change)
On Tuesday, September 8, 2020 5:32:30 PM WEST Robert-André Mauchin wrote: > Please no, KWin Wayland makes my system crash as soon as I connect my second > screen, and does not support essential functions like Kwin scripting, make > Yakuake look terrible and the whole stuff feels buggy as hell. > Every time I used it thes past years, it felt buggy and in an unfinished > state, it was like being the tester of an alpha version. The main issue I have with wayland on kde is the support for the second screen. In the previous laptop it did not detect the second screen while with laptop the second screen is detected and show but I can not see its content. FWIW in both cases gnome on wayland had not these issues. If this issues are fixed I will gladly change, there are several features that I like there like the support for per screen scale multiplier. -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Still problems with s390x builds
On Saturday, 8 August 2020 16.26.39 WEST Andrea Musuruane wrote: > Can someone please check? > > Thanks! > > Andrea When that happens I issue another rebuild and the problem is solved. In other words this is a transient problem. -- José Abílio___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Problem building rpy in F33
On Wednesday, 5 August 2020 12.14.58 WEST Miro Hrončok wrote:
> Hey José Abílio o/
Hi Miro, :-)
thank you for pointing me in the right direction.
> This is https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/PythonMacroError
>
> And in the spec:
>
> # export PYTHONPATH=%{buildroot}%{python_sitearch}
>
> There are several things at play:
>
> - %{python_sitearch} is derived from %__python
> - commenting macros like this is not preventing them form being evaluated
I knew that but I forgot it \o/ since most of the time it is harmless. The
change that I have applied was to convert to python3_sitearch since I still
have hope that the tests will work again.
Best regards,
PS: I forgot to send the message... oops. :-)
--
José Abílio
___
python-devel mailing list -- python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Problem building rpy in F33
Hi, I am having troubles build rpy in Fedora 33 and I am running out of ideas. https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rpy An example of a failure is here: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=48721928 The problem says: error: attempt to use unversioned python, define %__python to /usr/bin/python2 or /usr/bin/python3 explicitly But I have no idea where does this comes from. Does anyone have any idea of what is going wrong? Regards, -- José Abílio ___ python-devel mailing list -- python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: What to do about FTBFS because auf cmake change?
On Tuesday, 4 August 2020 12.42.30 WEST Neal Gompa wrote:
> Then you should do the following:
>
> %undefine __cmake_in_source_build
>
> %cmake
> %cmake_build
> %cmake_install
Would not it be more clean to place the %undefine line inside guards?
%if (0%{?rhel} || (0%{?fedora} && 0%{?fedora} < 33))
%undefine __cmake_in_source_build
%endif
I am asking this because I always forgot when was a given functionality
introduced or it is no more required.
A simple example is "rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT" that I know that it is not
necessary in Fedora anymore but it is very easy to know in which epel version
it is necessary ( <= 6 I think).
Does that solution makes sense or am I over-engineering this?
Regards,
--
José Abílio
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Could not execute build: database outage
On Monday, 6 July 2020 18.55.11 WEST Kevin Fenzi wrote: > I restarted the database server this morning. It usually takes about 1.5 > seconds to restart, so you must have just hit it in that window. > > kevin My only concern was if there was any kind of (hidden) consequence of the error. From your answer I conclude that everything is OK and I just found a digital four-leaf clover. :-) Thank you Kevin for your prompt answer. -- José Abílio ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Could not execute build: database outage
While calling "fedpkg build" I got the warning (error?) displayed in the title: ... Could not execute build: database outage Apparently the build is over and well. :-) https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=46677172 This is just a report since everything is OK, I have used a side tag and the build shows there. Regards, -- José Abílio ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: Make btrfs the default file system for desktop variants
On Thursday, 2 July 2020 21.38.46 WEST Eric Sandeen wrote: > 3 files in lost+found, -1 files gone/unreachable This last line from the xfs test seems suspicious (the -1 file gone). :-) -- José Abílio ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Disable dmraid.service on first run if no dmraid sets are found - Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal
On Tuesday, 30 June 2020 00.56.23 WEST Alexander Ploumistos wrote: > I just tested it on F32 Workstation and for me it does. Have you > cleaned dnf's databases by any chance? I think either that or having > the packages as dependencies of something that was installed by the > user would prevent them from going away with dmraid. IIRC this is probably related with the dependencies of anaconda: # repoquery --whatrequires 'dmraid' --recursive Last metadata expiration check: 0:14:34 ago on Tue 30 Jun 2020 09:14:30 AM WEST. anaconda-0:32.24.5-1.fc32.x86_64 anaconda-0:32.24.7-1.fc32.x86_64 anaconda-0:32.24.7-2.fc32.x86_64 anaconda-install-env-deps-0:32.24.5-1.fc32.x86_64 anaconda-install-env-deps-0:32.24.7-1.fc32.x86_64 anaconda-install-env-deps-0:32.24.7-2.fc32.x86_64 anaconda-realmd-0:0.2-12.fc32.noarch dmraid-0:1.0.0.rc16-44.fc32.i686 dmraid-0:1.0.0.rc16-44.fc32.x86_64 dmraid-devel-0:1.0.0.rc16-44.fc32.x86_64 dmraid-events-0:1.0.0.rc16-44.fc32.x86_64 dmraid-events-logwatch-0:1.0.0.rc16-44.fc32.x86_64 kdump-anaconda-addon-0:005-8.20200220git80aab11.fc32.noarch libblockdev-dm-0:2.23-2.fc32.i686 libblockdev-dm-0:2.23-2.fc32.x86_64 libblockdev-dm-0:2.24-1.fc32.i686 libblockdev-dm-0:2.24-1.fc32.x86_64 libblockdev-dm-devel-0:2.23-2.fc32.i686 libblockdev-dm-devel-0:2.23-2.fc32.x86_64 libblockdev-dm-devel-0:2.24-1.fc32.i686 libblockdev-dm-devel-0:2.24-1.fc32.x86_64 libblockdev-plugins-all-0:2.23-2.fc32.x86_64 libblockdev-plugins-all-0:2.24-1.fc32.x86_64 oscap-anaconda-addon-0:1.0-6.fc32.noarch -- José Abílio ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.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.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
