Re: Fwd: License: GPL-3.0-or-later AND GPL-2.0-or-later

On Tue, 2023-03-14 at 08:47 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote: > ... LibreOffice ... FWIW I updated the LibreOffice one a while ago and ended up with: MPL-2.0 AND Apache-2.0 AND LGPL-3.0-only AND LGPL-3.0-or-later AND CC0- 1.0 AND BSD-3-Clause AND (LGPL-2.1-only OR SISSL) AND (MPL-2.0 OR LGPL-

Re: poppler soname bump in Rawhide

On Mon, 2022-08-01 at 18:13 +0200, Marek Kasik wrote: > Hi, > > I plan to rebase poppler to 22.08.0 once it is available. The release > usually happens at the beginning of month so I'm waiting for it now. > Once it is ready, I'll build it in a side tag and will post it here. >   libreoffice

Re: [HEADS UP] Fedora 37 Boost 1.78 rebuilds starting in a side tag

On Wed, 2022-05-04 at 23:44 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 04. 05. 22 1:34, Thomas Rodgers wrote: > > We are starting the rebuilds for > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/F37Boost178  > >   in the f37- > > boost > > side tag. > > > > If

Re: Unannounced soname bump: liborcus

On Fri, 2022-02-04 at 11:20 +, Ian McInerney via devel wrote: > It appears that liborcus had an soname bump yesterday from 0.16 to > 0.17, and the dependent packages were not rebuilt at the time. This > seems to affect only LibreOffice, but makes it non-installable in > Rawhide. Can someone

Re: gcc-12.0.0-0.4.fc36 in rawhide

On Fri, 2022-01-14 at 15:31 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > If there are bugs on the compiler side, please let me know > immediately, so that those bugs can be fixed before the mass rebuild > next week. One of LibreOffice's import tests started to crash during rebuild with gcc-12, sbergman filed a

Re: F36 Change: Hunspell Dictionary dir change (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Thu, 2021-12-30 at 09:21 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 10:01:49AM -0500, Ben Cotton wrote: > > == How To Test == > > 1. Check if default installed dictionary path is > > `/usr/share/hunspell/` instead of `/usr/share/myspell/` > > Would it be possible to

Re: Any recent changes to the arm builders?

On Tue, 2021-08-17 at 08:21 -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote: > Looks like the vtk build just as it was about to finish (after 11+ > hours ...) restarted. This is pretty unworkable. > > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=73984672 Yeah, for libreoffice my last success took over 34

Re: Very strange compiler/linker related build failures in rawhide

On Fri, 2020-07-24 at 10:40 -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > On Fri, 2020-07-24 at 17:59 +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 5:48 PM Jeff Law wrote: > > > On Fri, 2020-07-24 at 17:44 +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 5:11 PM Jeff Law > > > > wrote: > >

Re: Unannounced soname bump - libwmf-0.2.so.7 -> libwmf-0.2.so.8

On Fri, 2019-02-01 at 15:56 +0100, Björn 'besser82' Esser wrote: > Am Freitag, den 01.02.2019, 14:09 +0100 schrieb Zdenek Dohnal: > > > The maintainer of libwmf should have communicated the soname bump and > possibly ask for help rebuilding the affected packages *before* > pushing or building the

I'm dropping libreoffice-gtk2

In favour of the libreoffice-gtk3 which has already been the default for the last few fedora releases ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct:

Re: Spam/scam links in bugzilla

On Thu, 2018-11-01 at 12:23 +0100, Alexander Ploumistos wrote: > Hello, > > A few minutes ago I was notified about a post in a closed bug. It > turns out that the account that made the post has been sporadically > spamming various bugs: >

hunspell soname bump

rawhide hunspell has been bumped to 1.6.2 from 1.5.4, which bumps libhunspell from 1.4 to 1.5. I believe everything that needs to be rebuilt has been rebuilt except firefox whose build fails on armv7hl with an apparently unrelated std::bad_alloc exception during its build

Bugzilla auto-CC

There was some discussion a while back about Bugzilla auto-CC https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/6315 https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/gnome-terminal has state "Unwatch" for me, and has since definitely yesterday, perhaps longer, but I was automatically added in CC to

Re: libicu soname bump in rawhide

On Fri, 2014-02-14 at 13:40 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 10:41:09PM +0100, Eike Rathke wrote: As pre-announced on devel@ I'm updating libicu to 52.1 When a shared library has so many dependencies and the SONAME has been bumped already ~ 50 times Well, icu went

Calibri/Cambria replacements Carlito/Caladea

I see that recently chromium appears to have commissioned two fonts claimed to be metrically equivalent to Calibri and Cambria. Which is super great from the perspective of giving LibreOffice a decent shot at laying out Microsoft Office documents that use the default Calibri equivalently. It would

arm build times

So, wondering... a) What is the fastest available arm hardware that works today with fedora ? b) The fedora builders are currently just one arm per build, right ? Any benefit to throwing distcc/icecream at the problem ? Wouldn't help the java builds, but would likely help e.g. the LibreOffice

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Wed, 2013-07-10 at 08:28 -0400, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote: I still have serious concerns regarding build times: * arm - https://arm.koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=150248 ~ 17h * current primary - https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=429023 ~1h 30m This is

Re: Proposed F19 Feature: Apache OpenOffice

On Wed, 2013-01-30 at 12:44 +, Jaroslav Reznik wrote: = Features/ApacheOpenOffice = https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/ApacheOpenOffice Feature owner(s): Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org Add Apache OpenOffice, the free productivity suite, to Fedora. A considerable cleanup has

Re: hunspell-en not installed by default anymore

On Tue, 2012-07-24 at 21:07 +0300, Ville Skyttä wrote: On 2012-07-24 16:58, Rex Dieter wrote: 1. hunspell re-add hard requirement on hunspell-en +1, https://bugzilla.redhat.com/573516 hunspell never had a hard rpm requires on hunspell-en as far as I can recall. Adding a hunspell-en

Re: Fwd: should we install google croscore font as a default font in fedora 18?

On Thu, 2012-05-17 at 11:27 +0530, Parag N(पराग़) wrote: Currently, I have marked google-croscore-fonts as a optional package in comps-f18. Considering it has got more orthography support compared to Liberation font can we install it default? But, I would also say that we have active

Re: java-1.7.0-openjdk breaks java detection in LibreOffice?

On Wed, 2011-10-26 at 13:06 -0400, Jared K. Smith wrote: On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 12:50 PM, Heiko Adams fedora-upda...@heiko-adams.de wrote: is it just me or is java-1.7.0-openjdk breaking LibreOffice java detection? Sounds like it might be related to bug 748585. Nah, the *detection* of

who/where maintains http://mirrors.fedoraproject.org/releases.txt ?

http://mirrors.fedoraproject.org/releases.txt The fedora 16 section has ...mirrorlist?pub/... while the other sections have ...mirrorlist?path=pub/... and correspondingly preupgrade is unable to find the repo. So which of our components is the right one to log bugs for the releases.txt on

debugging build hang in koji ?

So, local mock x86_64 builds work just fine. But AFAICS the build just hangs in fairly random places when put through x86_64 koji, anyone got any good ideas about how to find out even what process is hung ? e.g. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=2589336name=build.logoffset=-4000

Re: rawhide report: 20101030 changes

On Sat, 2010-10-30 at 14:27 -0400, Orcan Ogetbil wrote: Will the corresponding Obsoletes/Provides be added to the libreoffice subpackages, or do we need to modify our Requires? The libreoffice subpackages have the corresponding Obsoletes. Provides are not there, mostly because they'd generally

Re: Orphaning openoffice.org-extendedPDF

On Fri, 2010-10-29 at 08:25 -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote: I'm orphaning openoffice.org-extendedPDF. I'm not sure it is useful anymore. I don't know if its useful either :-), but nevertheless I've now rebuilt this against LibreOffice. That'll clear the oh my god broken deps mail for you anyway.

Re: LibreOffice

On Sat, 2010-10-02 at 23:33 +0200, Mathieu Bridon wrote: On Sat, 2010-10-02 at 22:14 +0530, Ankur Sinha wrote: On Sat, 2010-10-02 at 15:21 +0100, Paul F. Johnson wrote: I have no problems helping package this behemoth! +1 : I can help out too. Given that the Fedora OOo maintainer [1]

Re: gcc-4.5-RH in F14

On Thu, 2010-07-08 at 17:51 -0700, Ulrich Drepper wrote: That's not so easy to generalize. As Jakub wrote, you need some form of workload. After the binaries are built this workload has to be executed. How to do that cannot really be summarized. Some packages might need to be installed to

Re: Licensing Guidelines Update - Please Read

On Wed, 2010-07-07 at 16:29 -0400, Tom spot Callaway wrote: Okay. Here's the list of packages that I think might be affected by this. Reminder: You need to check these packages and fix any which need fixing, then email me and let me know which ones you checked/fixed. Thanks! openoffice.org:

Re: gcc-4.5-RH in F14

On Thu, 2010-07-08 at 17:51 -0700, Ulrich Drepper wrote: Perhaps the best that can done is providing an example but I guess every package needs to have its own way implemented. FWIW, fired up with enthusiasm I splatted a double-build profile-generate and profile-use into hunspell as an example.

Re: gcc-4.5-RH in F14

On Thu, 2010-07-08 at 09:18 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote: Hi! F14 now has gcc-4.5-RH compiler instead of 4.4-RH. icu test-suite fails in koji with 4.5.0, but passes locally with 4.4.4. If I get a chance after fiddling with all the licence foo I'll see if its truly gcc related or some specific

quick hack to reannotate abrt traces with missing debuginfo

In case its useful, I've hacked together a quick utility to reannotate abrt traces which had missing debuginfo at the time of report with the correct source lines according to the debuginfo installed on the annotator's box. Should be safe for reports from prelinked binaries.

A comps OpenOffice.org-devel group ?

As per http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/CompsXml I'm wondering if a OpenOffice.org-development group makes sense for Comps ? I see that openoffice.org-testtools and openoffice.org-pyuno are listed at the moment in comps under Office/Productivity. Both of those are targeted at

Re: Candidate packages for removal due to FTBFS, implications

On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 07:27 -0600, Matt Domsch wrote: - Removing gmfsk also removes: This one is now fixed. - Removing gnome-scan also removes: There's a patch logged against this now FWIW Removing Io-language also removes: This one is now fixed.