Re: Retiring Packages with Broken Dependencies in branched (2017-06-12)
On Tuesday, June 13, 2017 12:38:11 AM CEST t...@fedoraproject.org wrote: > In preparation for the Final Freeze on 2017-06-27 Release > Engineering will retire all packages in Branched with broken dependencies and > all packages depending on these. If you get this e-mail directly this affects > at least one of your packages. Please fix the broken dependency as soon as > possible. ... > vim-syntastic praiskup 38 weeks ago Please don't remove this set of vim-syntastic* packages, there's nothing to do about this. Once we have fixed release engineering processes [1] that allow me to ExcludeArch/ExclusiveArch particular **sub**packages, I'll do so. Thanks! [1] https://pagure.io/pungi-fedora/issue/87 Pavel ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Retiring Packages with Broken Dependencies in branched (2017-06-12)
On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 7:58 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > Till, it'd be great if this kind of scary e-mail, affecting quite a > lot of packagers, would contain more details, hints, etc. It seems > people are confused ;) Yes, I'm confused, too. This report lists jacknativeclient. I've just done a search on my email: I've received exactly zero emails about problems with this package. (I counted twice.) There are no bugs filed on this package. It was built successfully just back in February. Koji shows zero failed builds. What exactly is the problem with it? -- Jerry James http://www.jamezone.org/ ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Retiring Packages with Broken Dependencies in branched (2017-06-12)
On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 01:50:38AM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 12:20:36AM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 04:12:04PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > > > On Mon, 2017-06-12 at 16:06 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > > > > On Mon, 2017-06-12 at 22:38 +, t...@fedoraproject.org wrote: > > > > > os-autoinstadamwill 73 > > > > > weeks ago > > > > > > > > Uh. What? I built this for fc26 in April. That's not 73 weeks ago. And > > > > 'dnf install os-autoinst' does not report any broken dependencies. > > > > > > > > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=878719 > > > > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-2a2d78207d > > > > > > Oh, I see the problem now, though it doesn't explain the '73 weeks > > > ago': > > > > > > [os-autoinst] > > > os-autoinst-openvswitch-4.4-18.20170410git97928a2.fc26.armv7hl > > > requires openvswitch > > > [os-autoinst] > > > os-autoinst-openvswitch-4.4-18.20170410git97928a2.fc26.ppc64 > > > requires openvswitch > > > > Where did you find this information? I tried to find out what is > > wrong with efl, and it install just fine on F26 here, and it was part > > of an update that went to stable 3 days ago. > > Found it: > https://taskotron.fedoraproject.org/artifacts/all/382ff930-4d3d-11e7-a421-5254008e42f6/task_output/efl-1.19.0-4.fc26.x86_64.log [sorry for posting so many times] This doesn't really explain anything, because tslib.i686 is available, and provides libts.so.0. Ah, OK, the update that fixes the .so name is in updates-testing, and I have updates-testing enabled. Till, it'd be great if this kind of scary e-mail, affecting quite a lot of packagers, would contain more details, hints, etc. It seems people are confused ;) Also, I think it'd make sense to filter out stuff that is fixed by updates in the pipeline. Zbyszek ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Retiring Packages with Broken Dependencies in branched (2017-06-12)
On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 03:47:48PM -0700, Josh Stone wrote: > On 06/12/2017 03:38 PM, t...@fedoraproject.org wrote: > > lldb airlied, daveisfera, 71 weeks ago > >jankratochvil, jvcelak, > >siddharths, tstellar > > Where does that 71 weeks come from? The lldb-3.9.1-4.fc26 reported > below was just in March, not to mention lldb-4.0.0-1.fc26 on May 12. not to mention that this lldb issue breaks rust which in turn breaks meson which in turn breaks anything using meson. I'm going out on a limb here and assume that packages using rust and meson are not necessarily EOL'd :) Cheers, Peter ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Retiring Packages with Broken Dependencies in branched (2017-06-12)
On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 12:20:36AM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 04:12:04PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > > On Mon, 2017-06-12 at 16:06 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > > > On Mon, 2017-06-12 at 22:38 +, t...@fedoraproject.org wrote: > > > > os-autoinstadamwill 73 weeks > > > > ago > > > > > > Uh. What? I built this for fc26 in April. That's not 73 weeks ago. And > > > 'dnf install os-autoinst' does not report any broken dependencies. > > > > > > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=878719 > > > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-2a2d78207d > > > > Oh, I see the problem now, though it doesn't explain the '73 weeks > > ago': > > > > [os-autoinst] > > os-autoinst-openvswitch-4.4-18.20170410git97928a2.fc26.armv7hl > > requires openvswitch > > [os-autoinst] > > os-autoinst-openvswitch-4.4-18.20170410git97928a2.fc26.ppc64 > > requires openvswitch > > Where did you find this information? I tried to find out what is > wrong with efl, and it install just fine on F26 here, and it was part > of an update that went to stable 3 days ago. Found it: https://taskotron.fedoraproject.org/artifacts/all/382ff930-4d3d-11e7-a421-5254008e42f6/task_output/efl-1.19.0-4.fc26.x86_64.log Zbyszek ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Retiring Packages with Broken Dependencies in branched (2017-06-12)
On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 04:12:04PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Mon, 2017-06-12 at 16:06 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > > On Mon, 2017-06-12 at 22:38 +, t...@fedoraproject.org wrote: > > > os-autoinstadamwill 73 weeks > > > ago > > > > Uh. What? I built this for fc26 in April. That's not 73 weeks ago. And > > 'dnf install os-autoinst' does not report any broken dependencies. > > > > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=878719 > > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-2a2d78207d > > Oh, I see the problem now, though it doesn't explain the '73 weeks > ago': > > [os-autoinst] > os-autoinst-openvswitch-4.4-18.20170410git97928a2.fc26.armv7hl > requires openvswitch > [os-autoinst] > os-autoinst-openvswitch-4.4-18.20170410git97928a2.fc26.ppc64 requires > openvswitch Where did you find this information? I tried to find out what is wrong with efl, and it install just fine on F26 here, and it was part of an update that went to stable 3 days ago. Zbyszek > so the problem is that the current stable openvswitch was not built for > two arches; the openvswitch package currently in updates-testing *is* > built for those arches, however. It seems pointless to send out an > update that disables the subpackage for two arches for a few days until > openvswitch is pushed stable. > > Perhaps the proliferation of arches in primary Koji might cause a > rethink of how this automatic retirement works? It wouldn't seem to be > a good idea to automatically retire this package (which is in fact > quite important, and under active maintenance) on this basis. > -- > Adam Williamson > Fedora QA Community Monkey > IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net > http://www.happyassassin.net > ___ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Retiring Packages with Broken Dependencies in branched (2017-06-12)
On Mon, 2017-06-12 at 16:06 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Mon, 2017-06-12 at 22:38 +, t...@fedoraproject.org wrote: > > os-autoinstadamwill 73 weeks ago > > Uh. What? I built this for fc26 in April. That's not 73 weeks ago. And > 'dnf install os-autoinst' does not report any broken dependencies. > > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=878719 > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-2a2d78207d Oh, I see the problem now, though it doesn't explain the '73 weeks ago': [os-autoinst] os-autoinst-openvswitch-4.4-18.20170410git97928a2.fc26.armv7hl requires openvswitch [os-autoinst] os-autoinst-openvswitch-4.4-18.20170410git97928a2.fc26.ppc64 requires openvswitch so the problem is that the current stable openvswitch was not built for two arches; the openvswitch package currently in updates-testing *is* built for those arches, however. It seems pointless to send out an update that disables the subpackage for two arches for a few days until openvswitch is pushed stable. Perhaps the proliferation of arches in primary Koji might cause a rethink of how this automatic retirement works? It wouldn't seem to be a good idea to automatically retire this package (which is in fact quite important, and under active maintenance) on this basis. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Retiring Packages with Broken Dependencies in branched (2017-06-12)
On Mon, 2017-06-12 at 22:38 +, t...@fedoraproject.org wrote: > os-autoinstadamwill 73 weeks ago Uh. What? I built this for fc26 in April. That's not 73 weeks ago. And 'dnf install os-autoinst' does not report any broken dependencies. https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=878719 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-2a2d78207d -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Migrating sub-package to a different package: How to resolve file conflicts
On 06/12/2017 05:41 PM, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 5:34 PM, Tom Stellard wrote: >> On 06/12/2017 05:22 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: >>> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 05:01:19PM -0400, Tom Stellard wrote: Hi, I'm working on moving the llvm-devel sub-package from the llvm package to a new llvm4.0 package, however, when I upgrade from the llvm sub-package to the llvm4.0 sub-package, I am getting file conflicts. This can be reproduced on rawhide with these commands: [root@746864b6a202 /]# dnf install llvm-devel [root@746864b6a202 /]# dnf install 'dnf-command(copr)' [root@746864b6a202 /]# dnf copr enable tstellar/llvm-versioned [root@746864b6a202 /]# dnf install llvm-devel-4.0.0-13.fc27 >>> >>> You'll have to install the devel package at the same time you update to >>> the new version of the base package. (Fortunately, DNF now again >>> follows the yum convention of translating install to upgrade when you >>> are asking to install an updated package. >>> >>> >> >> The old base package: 'llvm' is being deprecated and is being moved >> into 'llvm4.0' as a sub-package. For example: >> >> Before: >> +llvm >> - llvm >> - llvm-devel >> - llvm-libs >> - llvm-static >> - llvm-doc >> >> After: >> >> + llvm (deprecated) >> >> +llvm4.0: >>-llvm4.0 >> - llvm4.0-devel >> - llvm4.0-libs >> - llvm >> - llvm-devel >> - llvm-libs >> - llvm-static >> - llvm-doc >> > > Why? What's the compelling reason to do this? And if we're doing this > to llvm, are we going to do this to gcc, too? > > > I want to make it possible to have multiple versions of the LLVM libraries installed at the same time. The reason for this is that all the various packages that depend on LLVM don't all have their upstream move to the newest version at the same time. This makes it very difficult to get new versions of clang into Fedora, because we get blocked until all the other packages (e.g. pocl, beignet, rust, etc.) get support upstream for the latest version of LLVM. My idea was to have separate llvm4.0, llvm5.0, llvm6.0, etc packages that provided the versions libs, and I would like to have a llvm metapackage that will pull in the most recent llvmX.0 package. I thought it would be easiest to have the llvm-* packages as sub-packages of llvmX.0, because then I could still have unversioned packages for things like static libs, all part of a single build. I thought bundling llvm-* sub-packages in llvmX.0 would be easiest, but it's not something that is a requirement for me. My main goal is to have multiple LLVM versions installed at once. No plans to do this for gcc, because gcc is only compiler not a library, like LLVM, though I would like to do this for the clang libraries as well. -Tom ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Retiring Packages with Broken Dependencies in branched (2017-06-12)
On 06/12/2017 03:38 PM, t...@fedoraproject.org wrote: > lldb airlied, daveisfera, 71 weeks ago >jankratochvil, jvcelak, >siddharths, tstellar Where does that 71 weeks come from? The lldb-3.9.1-4.fc26 reported below was just in March, not to mention lldb-4.0.0-1.fc26 on May 12. > Depending on: lldb (21), status change: 2016-01-27 (71 weeks ago) > rust (maintained by: group::rust-sig, ignatenkobrain, jistone, ttorling) > rust-lldb-1.17.0-1.fc26.i686 requires lldb = 3.9.1-4.fc26, > python-lldb = 3.9.1-4.fc26 > > cargo (maintained by: group::rust-sig, ignatenkobrain, jistone, > ttorling) > cargo-0.18.0-1.fc26.i686 requires rust = 1.17.0-1.fc26 > cargo-0.18.0-1.fc26.src requires rust = 1.17.0-1.fc26 If it comes down to it, I'll just remove the rust-lldb subpackage, but I don't see what the actual problem is... ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Retiring Packages with Broken Dependencies in branched (2017-06-12)
In preparation for the Final Freeze on 2017-06-27 Release Engineering will retire all packages in Branched with broken dependencies and all packages depending on these. If you get this e-mail directly this affects at least one of your packages. Please fix the broken dependency as soon as possible. If you know for sure that the package should be retired, please do so now with a proper reason: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_remove_a_package_at_end_of_life Package(co)maintainers Status Change === AcetoneISO spot 160 weeks ago OmegaT olea, mtasaka 160 weeks ago RackTables coec 160 weeks ago Raysebhtml, jussilehtola 160 weeks ago YafaRayluya, slaanesh 15 weeks ago asterisk jsmith, gtjoseph, itamarjp,83 weeks ago lbazan, russellb atomicapp vpavlin, golang-sig, 103 weeks ago jchaloup, lalatendu ayttm mintojoseph160 weeks ago banshee-community-extensions chkr, elsupergomez 160 weeks ago beacon satyak 160 weeks ago compat-gcc-34 jakub 160 weeks ago consul fpokorny, golang-sig, 74 weeks ago jchaloup, sspreitz eclipse-avrvladimirk, akurtakov 160 weeks ago eflspot, dchen, sereinit 114 weeks ago elemental rhl27 weeks ago erlang-riak_pipe peter, erlang-sig 160 weeks ago etcd jchaloup, avesh, cypret, 110 weeks ago eparis, golang-sig, gscrivano, jcajka, lsm5, peter, walters fedora-dockerfiles adimania, lsm5, scollier 130 weeks ago floppy-support bruno 160 weeks ago fusionforgebeuc, nerville 136 weeks ago gcc-python-plugin dmalcolm, jakub160 weeks ago gearmand ktdreyer, blakegardner 160 weeks ago getdp ignatenkobrain, group 80 weeks ago ::neuro-sig, smani gif2pngsundaram 160 weeks ago git-annex mathstuf, haskell-sig 160 weeks ago gofed jchaloup, fale, golang-sig 115 weeks ago golang-github-docker-go- jchaloup 65 weeks ago connections golang-github-docker- fpokorny, eparis, jchaloup,95 weeks ago libcontainer lsm5, vbatts golang-github-fsouza-go- fpokorny, eparis, golang- 95 weeks ago dockerclient sig, jchaloup, lsm5, maxamillion golang-github-gonum-matrix fpokorny, jchaloup 86 weeks ago golang-github-kubernetes- fpokorny, jchaloup 86 weeks ago heapster golang-github-mistifyio-go-jchaloup 57 weeks ago zfs golang-github-samalba- fpokorny, golang-sig, 97 weeks ago dockerclient jchaloup golang-googlecode-go-exp fpokorny, golang-sig, 97 weeks ago jchaloup, lsm5, vbatts grass devrim, neteler, oliver, 160 weeks ago pertusus, rezso, volter gyachi sundaram, ghosler 160 weeks ago homerunjmarrero 160 weeks ago iwhd meyering, clalance, zaitcev160 weeks ago java-gnome abo160 weeks ago kf5-libkface rdieter70 weeks ago ledger radford, jamielinux160 w
[Fedocal] Reminder meeting : Modularity WG (once every two weeks)
Dear all, You are kindly invited to the meeting: Modularity WG (once every two weeks) on 2017-06-13 from 10:00:00 to 11:00:00 US/Eastern At fedora-meetin...@irc.freenode.net The meeting will be about: Meeting of the Modularity Working Group. More information available at: [Modularity Working Group wiki page](https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Modularity_Working_Group) The agenda for the meeting is available at [modularity-wg-agendas pad](https://board.net/p/modularity-wg-agendas). Source: https://apps.fedoraproject.org/calendar/meeting/5249/ ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Building protobuf 3.3.1 for rawhide
I'm building protobuf 3.3.1 for rawhide. This includes a soname bump so I'll be rebuilding dependent packages as well. -- Orion Poplawski Technical Manager 720-772-5637 NWRA, Boulder/CoRA Office FAX: 303-415-9702 3380 Mitchell Lane or...@nwra.com Boulder, CO 80301 http://www.nwra.com ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Migrating sub-package to a different package: How to resolve file conflicts
On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 5:34 PM, Tom Stellard wrote: > On 06/12/2017 05:22 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: >> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 05:01:19PM -0400, Tom Stellard wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I'm working on moving the llvm-devel sub-package from the llvm package to >>> a new llvm4.0 package, however, when I upgrade from the llvm sub-package >>> to the llvm4.0 sub-package, I am getting file conflicts. >>> >>> This can be reproduced on rawhide with these commands: >>> >>> [root@746864b6a202 /]# dnf install llvm-devel >>> [root@746864b6a202 /]# dnf install 'dnf-command(copr)' >>> [root@746864b6a202 /]# dnf copr enable tstellar/llvm-versioned >>> [root@746864b6a202 /]# dnf install llvm-devel-4.0.0-13.fc27 >> >> You'll have to install the devel package at the same time you update to >> the new version of the base package. (Fortunately, DNF now again >> follows the yum convention of translating install to upgrade when you >> are asking to install an updated package. >> >> > > The old base package: 'llvm' is being deprecated and is being moved > into 'llvm4.0' as a sub-package. For example: > > Before: > +llvm > - llvm > - llvm-devel > - llvm-libs > - llvm-static > - llvm-doc > > After: > > + llvm (deprecated) > > +llvm4.0: >-llvm4.0 > - llvm4.0-devel > - llvm4.0-libs > - llvm > - llvm-devel > - llvm-libs > - llvm-static > - llvm-doc > Why? What's the compelling reason to do this? And if we're doing this to llvm, are we going to do this to gcc, too? -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Migrating sub-package to a different package: How to resolve file conflicts
On 06/12/2017 05:22 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 05:01:19PM -0400, Tom Stellard wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I'm working on moving the llvm-devel sub-package from the llvm package to >> a new llvm4.0 package, however, when I upgrade from the llvm sub-package >> to the llvm4.0 sub-package, I am getting file conflicts. >> >> This can be reproduced on rawhide with these commands: >> >> [root@746864b6a202 /]# dnf install llvm-devel >> [root@746864b6a202 /]# dnf install 'dnf-command(copr)' >> [root@746864b6a202 /]# dnf copr enable tstellar/llvm-versioned >> [root@746864b6a202 /]# dnf install llvm-devel-4.0.0-13.fc27 > > You'll have to install the devel package at the same time you update to > the new version of the base package. (Fortunately, DNF now again > follows the yum convention of translating install to upgrade when you > are asking to install an updated package. > > The old base package: 'llvm' is being deprecated and is being moved into 'llvm4.0' as a sub-package. For example: Before: +llvm - llvm - llvm-devel - llvm-libs - llvm-static - llvm-doc After: + llvm (deprecated) +llvm4.0: -llvm4.0 - llvm4.0-devel - llvm4.0-libs - llvm - llvm-devel - llvm-libs - llvm-static - llvm-doc -Tom ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Migrating sub-package to a different package: How to resolve file conflicts
On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 05:01:19PM -0400, Tom Stellard wrote: > Hi, > > I'm working on moving the llvm-devel sub-package from the llvm package to > a new llvm4.0 package, however, when I upgrade from the llvm sub-package > to the llvm4.0 sub-package, I am getting file conflicts. > > This can be reproduced on rawhide with these commands: > > [root@746864b6a202 /]# dnf install llvm-devel > [root@746864b6a202 /]# dnf install 'dnf-command(copr)' > [root@746864b6a202 /]# dnf copr enable tstellar/llvm-versioned > [root@746864b6a202 /]# dnf install llvm-devel-4.0.0-13.fc27 You'll have to install the devel package at the same time you update to the new version of the base package. (Fortunately, DNF now again follows the yum convention of translating install to upgrade when you are asking to install an updated package. -- Matthew Miller Fedora Project Leader ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Migrating sub-package to a different package: How to resolve file conflicts
Hi, I'm working on moving the llvm-devel sub-package from the llvm package to a new llvm4.0 package, however, when I upgrade from the llvm sub-package to the llvm4.0 sub-package, I am getting file conflicts. This can be reproduced on rawhide with these commands: [root@746864b6a202 /]# dnf install llvm-devel [root@746864b6a202 /]# dnf install 'dnf-command(copr)' [root@746864b6a202 /]# dnf copr enable tstellar/llvm-versioned [root@746864b6a202 /]# dnf install llvm-devel-4.0.0-13.fc27 Here is the error: Error: Transaction check error: file /usr/include/llvm from install of llvm-devel-4.0.0-13.fc27.x86_64 conflicts with file from package llvm-devel-4.0.0-4.fc27.x86_64 file /usr/include/llvm-c from install of llvm-devel-4.0.0-13.fc27.x86_64 conflicts with file from package llvm-devel-4.0.0-4.fc27.x86_64 I don't understand how a package can conflict with on older version of the same package. Here are the spec files: llvm-devel-4.0.0-13.fc27.x86_64: http://copr-dist-git.fedorainfracloud.org/cgit/tstellar/llvm-versioned/llvm4.0.git/tree/llvm4.0.spec llvm-devel-4.0.0-4.fc27.x86_64: https://src.fedoraproject.org/cgit/rpms/llvm.git/tree/llvm.spec Is this a bug in dnf/rpm or am I doing something wrong with the spec files? -Tom ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Directory permissions for games
On 06/03/2017 06:46 PM, Antonio Trande wrote: > Hi all. > > Crawl is not correctly working because of lack of directory permissions. > How can i correctly/safely set that permissions for saving data files of > Crawl? > > Bugzilla ticket: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1458489 > Affected package: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/crawl/ > > I have updated and modified data directory permissions of Crawl. This problem does not occur on my pc, Crawl packages need additional tests of someone else. Packages in testing on F >=24: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/?packages=crawl -- -- Antonio Trande sagitter AT fedoraproject dot org See my vCard. <> signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: btw and Monitoring functionality ? Re: PkgDB search / info functionality
On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 01:09:28PM +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote: > Hello , pkgdb also have Monitoring settings, Koschei integration, > timeline and Anitya , where do we have this on Pagure over Dist-Git ? The Koschei integration is going to move into Koschei's web UI. (Koschei actually already has this functionality, it is just turned off in Fedora's instance so that it only integrates with pkgdb instead. The Koschei team will just enable that config switch). For upstream release monitoring, we're going to move the values into the dist-git repo in the master branch, in a yaml file. the-new-hotness (which is the only tool which references those values) will have to be re-tooled to look for the values in the new location. signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
btw and Monitoring functionality ? Re: PkgDB search / info functionality
Hello , pkgdb also have Monitoring settings, Koschei integration, timeline and Anitya , where do we have this on Pagure over Dist-Git ? Thanks On Sun, 2017-06-11 at 23:27 -0400, Scott Talbert wrote: > Hi, > > I read the page about the PkgDB replacement[1] but it seems to focus > mainly on the "logged in" functionality of PkgDB. However, I also > use > PkgDB as a convenient way for searching all of Fedora's > packages. In > addition, I find the Builds status, Updates status, Package source, > Bug > Reports, and Packages links on the individual package pages very > helpful. > Yes, I could of course go directly to Koji, Bodhi, Bugzilla, etc., > but > this provides a very nice way to get all the information for a > package > easily. > > What is the plan for replacing this functionality? > > [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/WhatHappenedToPkgdb > > Scott > ___ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org -- Sérgio M. B. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora 26-20170611.n.1 compose check report
No missing expected images. Failed openQA tests: 7/128 (x86_64), 2/24 (i386), 1/2 (arm) New failures (same test did not fail in 26-20170605.n.0): ID: 107248 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_update_graphical URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/107248 ID: 107252 Test: i386 KDE-live-iso install_default URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/107252 ID: 107278 Test: x86_64 universal install_xfs URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/107278 ID: 107294 Test: x86_64 universal install_package_set_kde URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/107294 ID: 107302 Test: x86_64 universal install_xfs@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/107302 ID: 107345 Test: i386 universal install_package_set_kde URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/107345 Old failures (same test failed in 26-20170605.n.0): ID: 107251 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_notifications_postinstall URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/107251 ID: 107254 Test: arm Minimal-raw_xz-raw.xz base_services_start_arm URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/107254 ID: 107309 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_server_domain_controller URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/107309 ID: 107322 Test: x86_64 universal install_cyrillic_language URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/107322 Soft failed openQA tests: 3/128 (x86_64), 2/24 (i386) (Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug) New soft failures (same test did not soft fail in 26-20170605.n.0): ID: 107215 Test: i386 Server-dvd-iso install_default URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/107215 ID: 107255 Test: x86_64 Atomic-dvd_ostree-iso install_default URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/107255 ID: 107256 Test: x86_64 Atomic-dvd_ostree-iso install_default@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/107256 Old soft failures (same test soft failed in 26-20170605.n.0): ID: 107214 Test: i386 Server-boot-iso install_default URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/107214 ID: 107323 Test: x86_64 universal install_asian_language URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/107323 Passed openQA tests: 118/128 (x86_64), 20/24 (i386), 1/2 (arm) New passes (same test did not pass in 26-20170605.n.0): ID: 107231 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso desktop_notifications_postinstall URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/107231 ID: 107239 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_notifications_live URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/107239 Installed system changes in test x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_default_upload: 39 packages(s) added since previous compose: ModemManager, ModemManager-glib, NetworkManager-bluetooth, NetworkManager-wifi, NetworkManager-wwan, atmel-firmware, b43-fwcutter, b43-openfwwf, bluez, bluez-libs... 1 services(s) added since previous compose: ModemManager.service Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/105951#downloads Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/107198#downloads Installed system changes in test x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_default@uefi: 39 packages(s) added since previous compose: ModemManager, ModemManager-glib, NetworkManager-bluetooth, NetworkManager-wifi, NetworkManager-wwan, atmel-firmware, b43-fwcutter, b43-openfwwf, bluez, bluez-libs... 1 services(s) added since previous compose: ModemManager.service System load changed from 0.34 to 0.21 Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/105952#downloads Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/107199#downloads Installed system changes in test i386 Server-dvd-iso install_default: 39 packages(s) added since previous compose: ModemManager, ModemManager-glib, NetworkManager-bluetooth, NetworkManager-wifi, NetworkManager-wwan, atmel-firmware, b43-fwcutter, b43-openfwwf, bluez, bluez-libs... 1 services(s) added since previous compose: ModemManager.service Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/105972#downloads Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/107215#downloads Installed system changes in test x86_64 Workstation-live-iso install_default_upload: 1 packages(s) added since previous compose: mod_http2 6 packages(s) removed since previous compose: js, libuv, nghttp2, nodejs, nodejs-emojione-json, npm System load changed from 1.00 to 0.66 Average CPU usage changed from 28.54285714 to 5.2 Used mem changed from 985 MiB to 847 MiB Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/105976#downloads Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/107220#downloads Installed system changes in test x86_64 Workstation-live-iso install_default@uefi: 1 packages(s) added since previous compose: mod_http2 6 packages(s) removed since previous compose: js, libuv, nghttp2, nodejs, nodejs-emojione-json, npm System load changed from 0.89 to 0.52 Used mem changed from 9
