Re: Next F31 push?
Sérgio Basto wrote: > AFAIK , the logic is request an freeze exception , or next push will be > just after F31 GA . > I'd like have one unfreeze and push all packages that are waiting to be > pushed to stable, when we have an NO-GO. > I already made this request in past and, in resume, the idea was > rejected with some valid arguments, which I accepted ... I have also made this request more than once and would still be in favor of it, but the QA team is worried that this would introduce more bugs and either delay the release further or make us ship with more bugs. It is a tough call. I think such long freezes are a pain for packagers and also delay (and keep out of the GA images) bug fixes and even security fixes (also because the stable release updates are affected too if you do not want to break the upgrade path), but I also understand where QA is coming from. Kevin Kofler ___ 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: Next F31 push?
Hi, AFAIK , the logic is request an freeze exception , or next push will be just after F31 GA . I'd like have one unfreeze and push all packages that are waiting to be pushed to stable, when we have an NO-GO. I already made this request in past and, in resume, the idea was rejected with some valid arguments, which I accepted ... On Thu, 2019-10-17 at 19:54 -0500, Richard Shaw wrote: > I've got an update I've requested stable on which is now at 15 > days... > > I'm assuming the pause is due to beta freeze activities? > > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-95287d801f > > Thanks, > Richard > > ___ > 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 > > -- Sérgio M. B. ___ 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
[389-devel] 389 DS nightly 2019-10-18 - 94% PASS
https://fedorapeople.org/groups/389ds/ci/nightly/2019/10/18/report-389-ds-base-1.4.1.8-3.fc30.x86_64.html ___ 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to 389-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/389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[EPEL-devel] Fedora EPEL 6 updates-testing report
The following Fedora EPEL 6 Security updates need testing: Age URL 13 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-e7cdb404e5 libapreq2-2.13-2.el6 13 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-5393542b88 opendmarc-1.3.2-1.el6 12 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-864944c688 python34-3.4.10-4.el6 12 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-ee7bc290a9 golang-1.13.1-1.el6 5 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-55ba7663e0 yara-3.11.0-1.el6 2 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-be9b8a3985 wordpress-5.1.3-1.el6 The following builds have been pushed to Fedora EPEL 6 updates-testing ocserv-0.12.5-1.el6 sympa-6.2.48-2.el6 Details about builds: ocserv-0.12.5-1.el6 (FEDORA-EPEL-2019-f411d0ca20) OpenConnect SSL VPN server Update Information: Update to upstream 0.12.5 release ChangeLog: * Wed Oct 16 2019 Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos - 0.12.5-1 - Update to upstream 0.12.5 release sympa-6.2.48-2.el6 (FEDORA-EPEL-2019-6181673f24) Powerful multilingual List Manager Update Information: Fixes a packaging bug preventing to update the aliases file on new mailing list creation. ChangeLog: * Wed Oct 16 2019 Xavier Bachelot 6.2.48-2 - Don't require optional perl modules unavailable on EL8. - Disable httpd and lighttpd support for EL8 until missing bits are available. - Change sympa localstatedir owner/group to sympa:sympa. Fixes RHBZ#1761455. References: [ 1 ] Bug #1761455 - Unable update sympa_aliases file https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761455 ___ 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
[Bug 1762650] perl-Crypt-DH for EL 8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762650 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Crypt-DH-0.07-22.el8 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-57f58a3911 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1761738] Please build perl-ExtUtils-XSBuilder for EPEL 8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761738 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System --- perl-ExtUtils-XSBuilder-0.28-34.el8 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-baf3244deb -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[EPEL-devel] Fedora EPEL 8 updates-testing report
The following Fedora EPEL 8 Security updates need testing: Age URL 11 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-04183e6fbf scapy-2.4.3-2.el8 8 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-1c488e885d python-ecdsa-0.13.3-1.el8 6 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-942baf668f nsd-4.2.2-1.el8 The following builds have been pushed to Fedora EPEL 8 updates-testing PEGTL-2.8.1-1.el8 astyle-3.1-8.el8 fpm2-0.79-21.el8 gperftools-2.7-6.el8 hypre-2.18.1-1.el8 icewm-1.6.2-5.el8 jsoncpp-1.8.4-6.el8 libdmtx-0.7.5-4.el8 libpgf-6.14.12-12.el8 libslirp-4.0.0-3.el8 libtomcrypt-1.18.2-5.el8 libtommath-1.1.0-1.el8 mediainfo-19.09-1.el8 nordugrid-arc-6.3.0-1.el8 nut-2.7.4-26.el8 ocserv-0.12.5-1.el8 openhantek-2.16-1.el8 parallel-20190922-1.el8 perl-Any-URI-Escape-0.01-19.el8 perl-Cache-Memcached-1.30-21.el8 perl-Compress-LZF-3.8-14.el8 perl-Config-IniFiles-3.02-3.el8 perl-Convert-PEM-0.08-31.el8 perl-Cpanel-JSON-XS-4.14-1.el8 perl-Crypt-DES_EDE3-0.01-37.el8 perl-Crypt-DH-0.07-22.el8 perl-Crypt-URandom-0.36-14.el8 perl-Data-Compare-1.26-1.el8 perl-Email-MIME-1.946-8.el8 perl-Email-MIME-ContentType-1.022-8.el8 perl-Email-MIME-Encodings-1.315-17.el8 perl-Email-MessageID-1.406-14.el8 perl-ExtUtils-HasCompiler-0.021-8.el8 perl-ExtUtils-XSBuilder-0.28-34.el8 perl-FCGI-ProcManager-0.28-9.el8 perl-GTop-0.18-27.el8 perl-Geography-Countries-2009041301-27.el8 perl-HTML-Template-2.97-10.el8 perl-IPC-SharedCache-1.3-40.el8 perl-JSON-MaybeXS-1.004000-6.el8 perl-List-SomeUtils-0.56-8.el8 perl-Math-BigInt-GMP-1.6004-5.el8 perl-Module-Runtime-Conflicts-0.003-10.el8 perl-Module-Signature-0.83-5.el8 perl-Moo-2.003004-7.el8 perl-Regexp-Assemble-0.38-8.el8 perl-Scalar-Properties-1.100860-20.el8 perl-String-Random-0.30-6.el8 perl-Test-Distribution-2.00-32.el8 perl-Test-File-Contents-0.23-11.el8 perl-Throwable-0.200013-12.el8 perl-Unicode-Map8-0.13-33.el8 perl-Unicode-MapUTF8-1.11-40.el8 perl-User-Identity-0.99-8.el8 python-ipython_genutils-0.1.0-20.el8 python-prompt-toolkit-2.0.10-1.el8 python-traitlets-4.3.3-1.el8 rhash-1.3.8-1.el8 rubygem-rdiscount-2.2.0.1-1.el8 Details about builds: PEGTL-2.8.1-1.el8 (FEDORA-EPEL-2019-90fde5293d) Parsing Expression Grammar Template Library Update Information: Build for EPEL8 astyle-3.1-8.el8 (FEDORA-EPEL-2019-348bccf7ee) Source code formatter for C-like programming languages Update Information: new packages References: [ 1 ] Bug #1762497 - Please build libdmtx in normal EPEL8 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762497 [ 2 ] Bug #1762482 - Please build astyle in normal EPEL8 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762482 fpm2-0.79-21.el8 (FEDORA-EPEL-2019-662e105a48) Password manager with GTK2 GUI Update Information: First EPEL-8 build gperftools-2.7-6.el8 (FEDORA-EPEL-2019-876457d3f0) Very fast malloc and performance analysis tools Update Information: Build for EPEL-8. References: [ 1 ] Bug #1756968 - Please build gperftools for EPEL-8 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1756968 hypre-2.18.1-1.el8 (FEDORA-EPEL-2019-750b459652) High performance matrix preconditioners Update Information: Update to version 2.18.1 for bug fixes. Minor update to version 2.18.0. Add a minor version to the library soname. ChangeLog: * Tue Oct 15 2019 Dave love - 2.18.1-1 - New version * Tue
[Bug 1754282] [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-Compress-LZF
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1754282 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Compress-LZF-3.8-14.el8, perl-Cpanel-JSON-XS-4.14-1.el8, perl-JSON-MaybeXS-1.004000-6.el8 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-e12fbb0d29 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1762256] perl-Throwable for EL8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762256 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Throwable-0.200013-12.el8 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-9abbb5a1e8 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1761856] perl-HTML-Template for EL8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761856 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System --- perl-HTML-Template-2.97-10.el8 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-10dc6b152e -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1761847] perl-Convert-PEM for EL8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761847 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Convert-PEM-0.08-31.el8 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-6ab7dd2338 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1761846] perl-Config-IniFiles for EL8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761846 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Config-IniFiles-3.02-3.el8 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-4811cb7b72 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1761851] perl-Crypt-URandom for EL8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761851 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Crypt-URandom-0.36-14.el8 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-975072d164 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1761961] [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-Test-File-Contents
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761961 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Test-File-Contents-0.23-11.el8 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-0925875101 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1761849] perl-Crypt-DES_EDE3 for EL8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761849 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Crypt-DES_EDE3-0.01-37.el8 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-8e207afe66 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1761860] perl-String-Random for EL8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761860 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System --- perl-String-Random-0.30-6.el8 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-2fd74f43b8 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1762261] [RFE] EPEL8 branch of perl-Module-Runtime-Conflicts
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762261 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Module-Runtime-Conflicts-0.003-10.el8 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-c4da423c9b -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1762245] perl-Test-Distribution for EL 8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762245 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Module-Signature-0.83-5.el8, perl-Test-Distribution-2.00-32.el8 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-c87175fecf -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1761854] perl-FCGI-ProcManager for EL8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761854 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System --- perl-FCGI-ProcManager-0.28-9.el8 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-a0e7ec5fd0 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1761859] perl-Regexp-Assemble for EL8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761859 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Regexp-Assemble-0.38-8.el8 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-385651a1dc -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1762253] perl-Moo for EL8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762253 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Moo-2.003004-7.el8 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-ad33471a82 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1762272] perl-Email-MIME for EL8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762272 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Email-MIME-1.946-8.el8, perl-Email-MIME-ContentType-1.022-8.el8, perl-Email-MIME-Encodings-1.315-17.el8, perl-Email-MessageID-1.406-14.el8 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-22348a08e1 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1762510] Please build perl-Any-URI-Escape in normal EPEL8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762510 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Any-URI-Escape-0.01-19.el8 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-6c0e6c1ed5 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1762242] perl-Unicode-MapUTF8 for EL 8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762242 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Unicode-MapUTF8-1.11-40.el8 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-a54aeeb49c -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1762023] [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-List-SomeUtils
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762023 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System --- perl-ExtUtils-HasCompiler-0.021-8.el8, perl-List-SomeUtils-0.56-8.el8 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-4e8e47a7d1 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1761845] perl-Cache-Memcached for EL8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761845 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Cache-Memcached-1.30-21.el8 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-b698c2cae3 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1762246] perl-Unicode-Map8 for EL 8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762246 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Unicode-Map8-0.13-33.el8 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-baabb1355a -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Next F31 push?
I've got an update I've requested stable on which is now at 15 days... I'm assuming the pause is due to beta freeze activities? https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-95287d801f Thanks, Richard ___ 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: Modularity and the system-upgrade path
Adam Williamson wrote: > Of course if you just don't modularize FreeIPA at all you don't have > the kickstart problem, but then you *do* still have the 'we're stuck > shipping this one version of FreeIPA for the next seventy jillion > years' problem. That is purely a RHEL thing though. I do not see how this is relevant to the discussion on whether to allow default streams *in Fedora*. Kevin Kofler ___ 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: Modularity and the system-upgrade path
Stephen Gallagher wrote: > I think that's a little harsh (but probably fair given my tone above). > Can we agree that we're both on the same side: we want Fedora to be > excellent? I accept your apologies for your harsh tone (and I appreciate your much more constructive reply this time, thank you!) and I would like to apologize for my harsh tone as well. (I know I can be quite rude at times, especially when triggered.) Yes, I agree that wanting Fedora to be excellent is probably what we all want. We may disagree about the way to get there, but let us sort this out constructively. Kevin Kofler ___ 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
[Bug 1762936] [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-Text-Reform
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762936 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED --- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-EPEL-2019-6a814b1aab has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 8. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-6a814b1aab -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1762969] New: [RFE] EPEL8 branch of perl-Crypt-PasswdMD5
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762969 Bug ID: 1762969 Summary: [RFE] EPEL8 branch of perl-Crypt-PasswdMD5 Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-Crypt-PasswdMD5 Assignee: p...@city-fan.org Reporter: emman...@seyman.fr QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: imlinux+fed...@gmail.com, p...@city-fan.org, perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Blocks: 1762923 Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora It would be helpful if this module was packaged for EPEL8 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762923 [Bug 1762923] perl-Authen-Simple for EL8 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1762923] perl-Authen-Simple for EL8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762923 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1762969 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762969 [Bug 1762969] [RFE] EPEL8 branch of perl-Crypt-PasswdMD5 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Modularity and the system-upgrade path
Przemek Klosowski via devel wrote: > 3. modularity allows choosing non-default versions, which is great for > a particular application, but conflicts with other apps, forcing us > to choose only one of them. This provides a working solution for at > least some people, so it's useful for e.g. Redhat, but it makes life > hard for an end-user that just wants to have a system with a > complete set of software Exactly. And we already have a solution to that (allowing to choose non- default versions of libraries without introducing this type of conflicts), it is called compatibility packages. Kevin Kofler ___ 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: Modularity and the system-upgrade path
Alexander Bokovoy wrote: > This does not work for server components and is not generalizable. For > example, you cannot have multiple versions of Samba running on the same > system. You cannot have multiple versions of FreeIPA running on the same > system either. These server components have requirements beyond package > installability. Technically, you can, on a different port. Of course, this kind of service is probably more or less useless on a non-default port though. But you would not be running multiple versions of the server at once. Why would you want to do that? You would possibly parallel-install the client libraries, if you have software linked to different versions of it, but why the server? Servers are typically pretty much leaf applications and as such can be handled as any other leaf application, by shipping a default version in the distribution and alternate versions in a module. Of course, if the server links to the client library (e.g., MySQL and early versions of MariaDB used to do that, before the separate MariaDB Connector/C was introduced), then the module must include a version of the client library packaged in a way that does not conflict with the system version that client applications are linked to. But this can always be done. > We have an answer for those use cases with VMs and containers and they > aren't requiring parallel installability. Parallel installability of leaf software is not what I am proposing. It is only needed for libraries. Kevin Kofler ___ 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 32 System-Wide Change proposal: Modules in Non-Modular Buildroot
On Thu, 2019-10-17 at 15:04 -0400, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > Not without using their packaging system, their build system and > their > other design choices. Frankly, this is not a bad caveat. Keep in mind that we also had to change our build system for modularity. > Working out slots would mean needing to make > changes into how RPM works and how yum/dnf work. This is also true for modularity. > It might also not be > possible because a bit of Gentoo's magic is letting the local system > build all the different slot choices instead of having to build all > the combinatorics that having 3 different glibc and N gcc compilers > would need. Conary had use flags without the local system doing the builds. But in general, I think the slots thing would not require any local builds - it's just a way to specify cleanly which versions of something can be available for parallel install and which cannot. By the way, I think I started using Gentoo in 2004 or so, and back then they didn't have parallel installability, but they did have parallel availability, even without slots. They just had various versions of each package available in the same repository at the same time, and I could use the package manager to express which one I want. > To do the magic NixOS does.. we need to eject the FHS and > use a similar system. At that point, we aren't developing Fedora > anymore.. we are developing a clone of NixOS or Gentoo. Well there's more to the distro than the package manager. I think we could use great tools that other distros have made instead of having to make our own just because we want to be more separate from them. > [And there > would be no magic way to move from a Fedora 33 system to Fedora-Nix- > 34 > or Fedora-Gen-34.. at which point we might as well just call the > whole > thing from scratch.] If we are going that far we might as well > rewrite > conary in python3 or rust and start from there... I agree that upgrading would be hard. Resurrecting conary for Python 3 would be awesome, I'm sad that it is just sitting there in Python 2.old not being used - it's really good. Rust is also great. 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
Re: Fedora 32 System-Wide Change proposal: Modules in Non-Modular Buildroot
On 10/17/19 1:32 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 03:05:43PM -0700, John M. Harris Jr wrote: >> Realistically, I believe that default streams themselves are something we >> should avoid, if the cost is low, and it is. There are many users, >> probably the vast majority of users, that don't use Modularity. It's great >> to have the option available, but to force it upon them is really >> unfortunate. > > I don't think characterizing this as "forced upon users" is a good framing. > It's unnecessarily hostile. Users who happen to get packages which are in a > default stream shouldn't experience any practical difference from having a > non-modular package. > I don't like the language either, but it's undeniable that dealing with modules is different than dealing with normal packages. Enabling a module excludes those packages in the module from "normal" depsolving. I've just run into that with the RHEL8 rhn-tools module which provides koan (and excludes cobbler). I couldn't install my own cobbler or koan packages (with higher EVRs) from my copr until I disabled that module - and it was not easy to figure that out. I'm also not adverse to learning new ways of doing things. I think modules can still provide some clear benefits to users and developers eventually, but let's not pretend there are no differences involved. -- Orion Poplawski Manager of NWRA Technical Systems 720-772-5637 NWRA, Boulder/CoRA Office FAX: 303-415-9702 3380 Mitchell Lane or...@nwra.com Boulder, CO 80301 https://www.nwra.com/ smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature ___ 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 32 System-Wide Change proposal: Modules in Non-Modular Buildroot
On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 9:33 PM Matthew Miller wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 03:05:43PM -0700, John M. Harris Jr wrote: > > Realistically, I believe that default streams themselves are something we > > should avoid, if the cost is low, and it is. There are many users, > > probably the vast majority of users, that don't use Modularity. It's great > > to have the option available, but to force it upon them is really > > unfortunate. > > I don't think characterizing this as "forced upon users" is a good framing. > It's unnecessarily hostile. I agree that the language is a tad aggressive, but still: > Users who happen to get packages which are in a > default stream shouldn't experience any practical difference from having a > non-modular package. And yet, the differences *are undeniably there*, and users are expected to fix issues this causes on their systems down the road themselves, even if they didn't consciously "opted in" to anything. I'd not characterize this as "forcing something upon users", but it's still getting in through the back door while they're possibly not looking. (And that's why the first thing I do for all my new fedora installs is to disable modular repos, just so no modules get installed "accidentally".) Fabio > -- > Matthew Miller > > Fedora Project Leader > ___ > 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 ___ 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: Building eBPF programs
On Thu, 17 Oct 2019 22:21:39 +0100 Tom Hughes wrote: > On 17/10/2019 21:39, Steve Grubb wrote: > > On Thursday, October 17, 2019 4:21:44 PM EDT Tom Hughes wrote: > >> On 17/10/2019 20:44, Steve Grubb wrote: > >>> I don't think __x86_64__ is defined as the program is aimed at > >>> eBPF in the > >>> kernel. In rawhide, we no longer have glibc-devel(x86-32) to > >>> allow this to > >>> resolve. However, I think that the assumption of not having > >>> __x86_64__ defined means we are targeting i686 is wrong. What > >>> should I do? Do we not support eBPF programs on Fedora? > >> > >> I can still see glibc-devel.i686 in rawhide which provides that. > > > > In rawhide I got [1]: > > > > No matching package to install: 'glibc-devel(x86-32)' > > > > But on my local system, F30, it works fine. > > I just tried it with mock on F30: > > mock -r fedora-rawhide-x86_64 --install 'glibc-devel(x86-32)' > > and that worked fine. > > >> As far as I know the 32 bit multilib packages aren't going away. > > > > Hmm. I still wonder if the headers might need reworking to not > > assume 32 bit if the target is bpf. > > I don't know enough about how the BPF backend works to be > able to comment on that. I guess the problem will be building in koji, it isn't multi-lib capable. Dan ___ 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: Building eBPF programs
On 17/10/2019 21:39, Steve Grubb wrote: On Thursday, October 17, 2019 4:21:44 PM EDT Tom Hughes wrote: On 17/10/2019 20:44, Steve Grubb wrote: I don't think __x86_64__ is defined as the program is aimed at eBPF in the kernel. In rawhide, we no longer have glibc-devel(x86-32) to allow this to resolve. However, I think that the assumption of not having __x86_64__ defined means we are targeting i686 is wrong. What should I do? Do we not support eBPF programs on Fedora? I can still see glibc-devel.i686 in rawhide which provides that. In rawhide I got [1]: No matching package to install: 'glibc-devel(x86-32)' But on my local system, F30, it works fine. I just tried it with mock on F30: mock -r fedora-rawhide-x86_64 --install 'glibc-devel(x86-32)' and that worked fine. As far as I know the 32 bit multilib packages aren't going away. Hmm. I still wonder if the headers might need reworking to not assume 32 bit if the target is bpf. I don't know enough about how the BPF backend works to be able to comment on that. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ 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: Modularity and the system-upgrade path
On Thu, 2019-10-17 at 14:44 -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote: > On 10/17/19 2:35 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > On Thu, 2019-10-17 at 09:32 -0700, John M. Harris Jr wrote: > > > On Thursday, October 17, 2019 1:59:19 AM MST Alexander Bokovoy wrote: > > > > The one thing we are using default modular stream in RHEL 8 for is to be > > > > able to provide access to packages in kickstart that were moved to > > > > modules in RHEL 8. An example is idm:client stream which is a default > > > > module stream in RHEL 8 exactly for this reason, to be able to install > > > > ipa-client package and enroll a system into IPA from a kickstart file. > > > > > > > > We don't package FreeIPA in modules in Fedora yet but this is one of > > > > real examples how default module streams are helpful to maintain > > > > coherent user experience for existing users of kickstart files. > > > > > > > > -- > > > > / Alexander Bokovoy > > > > Sr. Principal Software Engineer > > > > Security / Identity Management Engineering > > > > Red Hat Limited, Finland > > > > > > You could install the ipa-client package and enroll a system into IPA > > > from a > > > kickstart in RHEL 7 too.. Without modules. That's what I've deployed for > > > the > > > environments I support, for example. Using a module is not required there. > > > > That wasn't the point, though - the point was the answer the question > > "why do we need *default* module streams?" > > > > The logic is this: FreeIPA maintainers wanted FreeIPA to be a module in > > RHEL, to take advantage of the added flexibility around lifecycles and > > version bumps (basically so each RHEL release isn't tied to one version > > of FreeIPA forever). But if it's modularized and there's no concept of > > 'default stream modules', this is a thing that breaks: you can't > > install it from a kickstart. So, *given that* we wanted to modularize > > FreeIPA in RHEL *and* we also want to still make it deployable via > > kickstart, that creates a requirement for default stream modules or > > something a lot like it. > > This doesn't seem quite true. You couldn't install it with the same kickstart > you used for EL7, but you could use the new module command or syntax in > kickstart: > > module --name=NAME [--stream=STREAM] > > and/or > > %packages > @module:stream/profile Hmm, yeah, I guess the concern is really about *existing* kickstarts. -- 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 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
[Bug 1748209] Please add CPAN's XML::Feed to EPEL-6 and EPEL-7
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1748209 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|--- |WONTFIX Last Closed||2019-10-17 20:47:11 --- Comment #2 from Emmanuel Seyman --- A month later, it looks like no one is interested enough in EPEL 6/7 to maintain this package. If you feel differently, please reopen this bug, asking for commit access. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Modularity and the system-upgrade path
On 10/17/19 2:35 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Thu, 2019-10-17 at 09:32 -0700, John M. Harris Jr wrote: >> On Thursday, October 17, 2019 1:59:19 AM MST Alexander Bokovoy wrote: >>> The one thing we are using default modular stream in RHEL 8 for is to be >>> able to provide access to packages in kickstart that were moved to >>> modules in RHEL 8. An example is idm:client stream which is a default >>> module stream in RHEL 8 exactly for this reason, to be able to install >>> ipa-client package and enroll a system into IPA from a kickstart file. >>> >>> We don't package FreeIPA in modules in Fedora yet but this is one of >>> real examples how default module streams are helpful to maintain >>> coherent user experience for existing users of kickstart files. >>> >>> -- >>> / Alexander Bokovoy >>> Sr. Principal Software Engineer >>> Security / Identity Management Engineering >>> Red Hat Limited, Finland >> >> You could install the ipa-client package and enroll a system into IPA from a >> kickstart in RHEL 7 too.. Without modules. That's what I've deployed for the >> environments I support, for example. Using a module is not required there. > > That wasn't the point, though - the point was the answer the question > "why do we need *default* module streams?" > > The logic is this: FreeIPA maintainers wanted FreeIPA to be a module in > RHEL, to take advantage of the added flexibility around lifecycles and > version bumps (basically so each RHEL release isn't tied to one version > of FreeIPA forever). But if it's modularized and there's no concept of > 'default stream modules', this is a thing that breaks: you can't > install it from a kickstart. So, *given that* we wanted to modularize > FreeIPA in RHEL *and* we also want to still make it deployable via > kickstart, that creates a requirement for default stream modules or > something a lot like it. This doesn't seem quite true. You couldn't install it with the same kickstart you used for EL7, but you could use the new module command or syntax in kickstart: module --name=NAME [--stream=STREAM] and/or %packages @module:stream/profile -- Orion Poplawski Manager of NWRA Technical Systems 720-772-5637 NWRA, Boulder/CoRA Office FAX: 303-415-9702 3380 Mitchell Lane or...@nwra.com Boulder, CO 80301 https://www.nwra.com/ smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature ___ 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: Building eBPF programs
On Thursday, October 17, 2019 4:21:44 PM EDT Tom Hughes wrote: > On 17/10/2019 20:44, Steve Grubb wrote: > > I don't think __x86_64__ is defined as the program is aimed at eBPF in > > the > > kernel. In rawhide, we no longer have glibc-devel(x86-32) to allow this > > to > > resolve. However, I think that the assumption of not having __x86_64__ > > defined means we are targeting i686 is wrong. What should I do? Do we not > > support eBPF programs on Fedora? > > I can still see glibc-devel.i686 in rawhide which provides that. In rawhide I got [1]: No matching package to install: 'glibc-devel(x86-32)' But on my local system, F30, it works fine. > As far as I know the 32 bit multilib packages aren't going away. Hmm. I still wonder if the headers might need reworking to not assume 32 bit if the target is bpf. -Steve [1] - https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/2047/38352047/ mock_output.log ___ 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
[Bug 1762911] perl-TheSchwartz-1.14 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762911 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Fixed In Version||perl-TheSchwartz-1.14-1.fc3 ||2 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2019-10-17 20:38:25 --- Comment #1 from Emmanuel Seyman --- Built for rawhide: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1402253 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Modularity and the system-upgrade path
On Thu, 2019-10-17 at 09:32 -0700, John M. Harris Jr wrote: > On Thursday, October 17, 2019 1:59:19 AM MST Alexander Bokovoy wrote: > > The one thing we are using default modular stream in RHEL 8 for is to be > > able to provide access to packages in kickstart that were moved to > > modules in RHEL 8. An example is idm:client stream which is a default > > module stream in RHEL 8 exactly for this reason, to be able to install > > ipa-client package and enroll a system into IPA from a kickstart file. > > > > We don't package FreeIPA in modules in Fedora yet but this is one of > > real examples how default module streams are helpful to maintain > > coherent user experience for existing users of kickstart files. > > > > -- > > / Alexander Bokovoy > > Sr. Principal Software Engineer > > Security / Identity Management Engineering > > Red Hat Limited, Finland > > You could install the ipa-client package and enroll a system into IPA from a > kickstart in RHEL 7 too.. Without modules. That's what I've deployed for the > environments I support, for example. Using a module is not required there. That wasn't the point, though - the point was the answer the question "why do we need *default* module streams?" The logic is this: FreeIPA maintainers wanted FreeIPA to be a module in RHEL, to take advantage of the added flexibility around lifecycles and version bumps (basically so each RHEL release isn't tied to one version of FreeIPA forever). But if it's modularized and there's no concept of 'default stream modules', this is a thing that breaks: you can't install it from a kickstart. So, *given that* we wanted to modularize FreeIPA in RHEL *and* we also want to still make it deployable via kickstart, that creates a requirement for default stream modules or something a lot like it. Of course if you just don't modularize FreeIPA at all you don't have the kickstart problem, but then you *do* still have the 'we're stuck shipping this one version of FreeIPA for the next seventy jillion years' problem. -- 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 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: Building eBPF programs
On 17/10/2019 20:44, Steve Grubb wrote: I don't think __x86_64__ is defined as the program is aimed at eBPF in the kernel. In rawhide, we no longer have glibc-devel(x86-32) to allow this to resolve. However, I think that the assumption of not having __x86_64__ defined means we are targeting i686 is wrong. What should I do? Do we not support eBPF programs on Fedora? I can still see glibc-devel.i686 in rawhide which provides that. As far as I know the 32 bit multilib packages aren't going away. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ 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
[Bug 1762923] perl-Authen-Simple for EL8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762923 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #1 from Emmanuel Seyman --- https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/18485 https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/18486 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1762928] [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-TeX-Hyphen
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762928 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|1762930 | Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762930 [Bug 1762930] [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-Text-Autoformat -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1762930] [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-Text-Autoformat
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762930 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On|1762928 | Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762928 [Bug 1762928] [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-TeX-Hyphen -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1762930] [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-Text-Autoformat
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762930 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1762936 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762936 [Bug 1762936] [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-Text-Reform -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1762936] New: [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-Text-Reform
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762936 Bug ID: 1762936 Summary: [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-Text-Reform Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-Text-Reform Assignee: emman...@seyman.fr Reporter: emman...@seyman.fr QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: emman...@seyman.fr, extras...@fedoraproject.org, p...@city-fan.org, perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org, st...@silug.org Depends On: 1762928 Blocks: 1762930 Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora +++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #1762930 +++ Please build perl-Text-Autoformat and its dependency perl-Text-Reform for EPEL-8. perl-Text-Reform builds cleanly but has a runtime dependency on perl-TeX-Hyphen (#1762928). perl-Text-Autoformat builds cleanly with overrides in place for perl-Text-Reform and perl-TeX-Hyphen. --- Additional comment from Emmanuel Seyman on 2019-10-17 20:05:58 UTC --- https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/18481 https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/18482 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762928 [Bug 1762928] [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-TeX-Hyphen https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762930 [Bug 1762930] [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-Text-Autoformat -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1762928] [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-TeX-Hyphen
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762928 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1762936 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762936 [Bug 1762936] [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-Text-Reform -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1762936] [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-Text-Reform
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762936 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #1 from Emmanuel Seyman --- https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/18483 https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/18484 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1762930] [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-Text-Autoformat
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762930 --- Comment #2 from Paul Howarth --- Don't forget to request branches of perl-Text-Reform too... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1762927] [RFE] EPEL8 branch of perl-Filesys-Notify-Simple
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762927 Paul Howarth changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[RFE] EPEL8 branch of |[RFE] EPEL8 branch of |perl-Plack |perl-Filesys-Notify-Simple -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1762930] [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-Text-Autoformat
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762930 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #1 from Emmanuel Seyman --- https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/18481 https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/18482 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1762271] perl-Mail-Message for EL8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762271 Paul Howarth changed: What|Removed |Added CC||p...@city-fan.org Depends On||1749231, 1762252, 1753543 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1749231 [Bug 1749231] perl-HTML-Format for EL8 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1753543 [Bug 1753543] perl-Font-AFM for EL8 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762252 [Bug 1762252] perl-Email-Simple for EL8 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1762252] perl-Email-Simple for EL8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762252 Paul Howarth changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1762271 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762271 [Bug 1762271] perl-Mail-Message for EL8 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1749231] perl-HTML-Format for EL8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1749231 Paul Howarth changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1762271 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762271 [Bug 1762271] perl-Mail-Message for EL8 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1753543] perl-Font-AFM for EL8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1753543 Paul Howarth changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1762271 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762271 [Bug 1762271] perl-Mail-Message for EL8 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1762930] [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-Text-Autoformat
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762930 Paul Howarth changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1762271 Depends On||1762928 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762271 [Bug 1762271] perl-Mail-Message for EL8 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762928 [Bug 1762928] [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-TeX-Hyphen -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1762271] perl-Mail-Message for EL8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762271 Paul Howarth changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1762930 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762930 [Bug 1762930] [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-Text-Autoformat -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1762928] [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-TeX-Hyphen
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762928 Paul Howarth changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1762930 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762930 [Bug 1762930] [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-Text-Autoformat -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1762930] New: [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-Text-Autoformat
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762930 Bug ID: 1762930 Summary: [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-Text-Autoformat Product: Fedora EPEL Version: epel8 Status: NEW Component: perl-Text-Autoformat Assignee: emman...@seyman.fr Reporter: p...@city-fan.org QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: emman...@seyman.fr, perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org, st...@silug.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Please build perl-Text-Autoformat and its dependency perl-Text-Reform for EPEL-8. perl-Text-Reform builds cleanly but has a runtime dependency on perl-TeX-Hyphen (#1762928). perl-Text-Autoformat builds cleanly with overrides in place for perl-Text-Reform and perl-TeX-Hyphen. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1744690] [RFE] EPEL8 branch of perl-Plack
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1744690 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|1744708 | Depends On||1744699, 1744707, 1762923, ||1744708, 1744709, 1761854, ||1762927 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1744699 [Bug 1744699] [RFE] EPEL8 branch of perl-Apache-LogFormat-Compiler https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1744707 [Bug 1744707] [RFE] EPEL8 branch of perl-CGI-Compile https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1744708 [Bug 1744708] [RFE] EPEL8 branch of perl-CGI-Emulate-PSGI https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1744709 [Bug 1744709] [RFE] EPEL8 branch of perl-FCGI-Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761854 [Bug 1761854] perl-FCGI-ProcManager for EL8 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762923 [Bug 1762923] perl-Authen-Simple for EL8 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762927 [Bug 1762927] [RFE] EPEL8 branch of perl-Plack -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1762923] perl-Authen-Simple for EL8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762923 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1744690 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1744690 [Bug 1744690] [RFE] EPEL8 branch of perl-Plack -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1744699] [RFE] EPEL8 branch of perl-Apache-LogFormat-Compiler
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1744699 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1744690 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1744690 [Bug 1744690] [RFE] EPEL8 branch of perl-Plack -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1744709] [RFE] EPEL8 branch of perl-FCGI-Client
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1744709 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1744690 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1744690 [Bug 1744690] [RFE] EPEL8 branch of perl-Plack -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1762927] [RFE] EPEL8 branch of perl-Plack
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762927 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1744690 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1744690 [Bug 1744690] [RFE] EPEL8 branch of perl-Plack -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1744707] [RFE] EPEL8 branch of perl-CGI-Compile
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1744707 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1744690 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1744690 [Bug 1744690] [RFE] EPEL8 branch of perl-Plack -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1761854] perl-FCGI-ProcManager for EL8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761854 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1744690 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1744690 [Bug 1744690] [RFE] EPEL8 branch of perl-Plack -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1744708] [RFE] EPEL8 branch of perl-CGI-Emulate-PSGI
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1744708 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1744690 Depends On|1744690 | Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1744690 [Bug 1744690] [RFE] EPEL8 branch of perl-Plack -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1762928] New: [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-TeX-Hyphen
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762928 Bug ID: 1762928 Summary: [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-TeX-Hyphen Product: Fedora EPEL Version: epel8 Status: NEW Component: perl-TeX-Hyphen Assignee: jpazdzi...@redhat.com Reporter: p...@city-fan.org QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: jose.p.oliveira@gmail.com, jpazdzi...@redhat.com, perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org, rob.my...@gtri.gatech.edu, st...@silug.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora This is a runtime dependency of perl-Text-Reform. It builds cleanly in EPEL-8. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1762927] New: [RFE] EPEL8 branch of perl-Plack
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762927 Bug ID: 1762927 Summary: [RFE] EPEL8 branch of perl-Plack Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-Filesys-Notify-Simple Assignee: robinlee.s...@gmail.com Reporter: emman...@seyman.fr QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: jose.p.oliveira@gmail.com, perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org, robinlee.s...@gmail.com Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora It would be helpful if this module was packaged for EPEL8 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Building eBPF programs
Hello, I am in the process of building a new version of suricata, and IDS program that watches network traffic. It has a new module that uses eBPF for high speed network packet categorization. When building, it uses the following command: /usr/bin/clang -Wall -Iinclude -O2 \ -I/usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu/ \ -D__KERNEL__ -D__ASM_SYSREG_H \ -target bpf -S -emit-llvm xdp_lb.c -o xdp_lb.ll It eventually includes /usr/include/features.h which in turn includes /usr/include/gnu/stubs.h. That file has this code: #if !defined __x86_64__ # include #endif I don't think __x86_64__ is defined as the program is aimed at eBPF in the kernel. In rawhide, we no longer have glibc-devel(x86-32) to allow this to resolve. However, I think that the assumption of not having __x86_64__ defined means we are targeting i686 is wrong. What should I do? Do we not support eBPF programs on Fedora? Thanks, -Steve ___ 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
[Bug 1762923] New: perl-Authen-Simple for EL8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762923 Bug ID: 1762923 Summary: perl-Authen-Simple for EL8 Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-Authen-Simple Assignee: emman...@seyman.fr Reporter: emman...@seyman.fr QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: emman...@seyman.fr, jose.p.oliveira@gmail.com, perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Hi, Could you please build perl-Authen-Simple in EPEL 8 ? It's in the dependency chain of a package I'd like to build for EPEL 8. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Logs from Open NeuroFedora team meeting at 1500 UTC on Thursday, 17th October.
Hello everyone! The logs for the NeuroFedora team meeting on 26th September are linked below: - HTML Logs: https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-neuro/2019-10-17/fedora-neuro.2019-10-17-15.00.log.html - HTML Minutes: https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-neuro/2019-10-17/fedora-neuro.2019-10-17-15.00.html The raw minutes for the meeting are posted below, for your convenience. = #fedora-neuro: NeuroFedora 2019-10-17 = Meeting started by MeWjOr at 15:00:32 UTC. The full logs are available at https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-neuro/2019-10-17/fedora-neuro.2019-10-17-15.00.log.html . Meeting summary --- * Agenda Summary (MeWjOr, 15:01:01) * https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/neuro-...@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/6XO6XQBIS3PT2WLNJ4I6NBH2HTVFUSDJ/ (MeWjOr, 15:01:07) * Introductions and roll call (MeWjOr, 15:01:15) * Tasks from last meeting (MeWjOr, 15:01:22) * Pagure tickets (MeWjOr, 15:01:27) * Bugs (MeWjOr, 15:01:35) * Neuroscience query of the week / podcast discussion (MeWjOr, 15:01:55) * Open floor (MeWjOr, 15:02:00) * Introductions and roll call (MeWjOr, 15:03:28) * Tasks from last meeting on 2019-10-10 (MeWjOr, 15:08:00) * Minutes: https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-neuro/2019-10-10/neurofedora.2019-10-10-15.01.html (MeWjOr, 15:08:08) * FranciscoD write blog post on NeuroFedora updates: Pending (MeWjOr, 15:08:23) * ACTION: FranciscoD write blog post on neurofedora updates (MeWjOr, 15:08:58) * mhough create ticket to document what ITK features we need, and block other packages that need them: Pending (MeWjOr, 15:09:17) * Pagure tickets (MeWjOr, 15:10:15) * Pagure tickets marked for this meeting: https://pagure.io/neuro-sig/NeuroFedora/issues?status=Open=S%3A+Next+meeting (MeWjOr, 15:10:26) * Issue #301: NeuroFedora brochure - https://pagure.io/neuro-sig/NeuroFedora/issue/301 (MeWjOr, 15:10:45) * ACTION: MeWjOr ask Dan1mal on the pagure issue if he can pursue the ticket with the design team (MeWjOr, 15:14:03) * Issue #250: Figure out badges rule to award badge automatically to pagure group members - https://pagure.io/neuro-sig/NeuroFedora/issue/250 (MeWjOr, 15:18:33) * Comp Neuro lab image PR has been merged: https://pagure.io/releng/issue/8873 (MeWjOr, 15:21:43) * Open bugs (MeWjOr, 15:27:26) * Open bugs: https://tinyurl.com/neurofedora-bugs (MeWjOr, 15:27:37) * LINK: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761576 is one (FranciscoD, 15:33:27) * LINK: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?bug_status=NEW_status=__open___status=__closed__=fangqq%40gmail.com=1=substring_id=10575809_format=advanced (FranciscoD, 15:34:34) * LINK: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1760617 (FranciscoD, 15:35:07) * ACTION: FranciscoD Review package: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1760617 (MeWjOr, 15:36:02) * ACTION: MeWjOr Pick and package something... (MeWjOr, 15:36:56) * Neuroscience query of the week/podcast discussion (MeWjOr, 15:37:31) * Podcast link: http://brainsciencepodcast.libsyn.com/bs-159-kevin-mitchell-author-of-innate-how-the-wiring-of-our-brains-shapes-who-we-are (FranciscoD, 15:38:49) * Open Floor (MeWjOr, 16:03:04) * LINK: https://research-fosdem.github.io/ (FranciscoD, 16:05:12) * Next meeting and chair (MeWjOr, 16:09:06) * ACTION: FranciscoD Set-up a new meeting time for the weekly meetings (MeWjOr, 16:14:15) Meeting ended at 16:15:00 UTC. Action Items * FranciscoD write blog post on neurofedora updates * MeWjOr ask Dan1mal on the pagure issue if he can pursue the ticket with the design team * FranciscoD Review package: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1760617 * MeWjOr Pick and package something... * FranciscoD Set-up a new meeting time for the weekly meetings Action Items, by person --- * FranciscoD * FranciscoD write blog post on neurofedora updates * FranciscoD Review package: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1760617 * FranciscoD Set-up a new meeting time for the weekly meetings * MeWjOr * MeWjOr ask Dan1mal on the pagure issue if he can pursue the ticket with the design team * MeWjOr Pick and package something... * **UNASSIGNED** * (none) People Present (lines said) --- * MeWjOr (123) * FranciscoD (96) * mhough (28) * zodbot (27) * gicmo (18) * zbyszek (11) * bt0 (3) * blackfile (1) * tg-fedneuro1 (1) * qicmo (0) Generated by `MeetBot`_ 0.1.4 .. _`MeetBot`: http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot -- Thanks Regards Aniket Pradhan http://home.iiitd.edu.in/~aniket17133/ Aliases: MeWjOr/major () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments ___
[Bug 1762918] New: [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-Email-Address-XS
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762918 Bug ID: 1762918 Summary: [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-Email-Address-XS Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-Email-Address-XS Assignee: jples...@redhat.com Reporter: p...@city-fan.org QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: jples...@redhat.com, perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora This is a runtime dependency of perl-Email-MIME, which is already built (https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-22348a08e1) but is currently uninstallable. Builds cleanly in EPEL-8. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Fedora 32 System-Wide Change proposal: Modules in Non-Modular Buildroot
On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 03:05:43PM -0700, John M. Harris Jr wrote: > Realistically, I believe that default streams themselves are something we > should avoid, if the cost is low, and it is. There are many users, > probably the vast majority of users, that don't use Modularity. It's great > to have the option available, but to force it upon them is really > unfortunate. I don't think characterizing this as "forced upon users" is a good framing. It's unnecessarily hostile. Users who happen to get packages which are in a default stream shouldn't experience any practical difference from having a non-modular package. -- Matthew Miller Fedora Project Leader ___ 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
[Bug 1762911] New: perl-TheSchwartz-1.14 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762911 Bug ID: 1762911 Summary: perl-TheSchwartz-1.14 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-TheSchwartz Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged Assignee: emman...@seyman.fr Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: emman...@seyman.fr, perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Latest upstream release: 1.14 Current version/release in rawhide: 1.13-1.fc31 URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/TheSchwartz/ Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a stable branch: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy More information about the service that created this bug can be found at: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upstream_release_monitoring Please keep in mind that with any upstream change, there may also be packaging changes that need to be made. Specifically, please remember that it is your responsibility to review the new version to ensure that the licensing is still correct and that no non-free or legally problematic items have been added upstream. Based on the information from anitya: https://release-monitoring.org/project/14387/ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1761539] [RFE] Please build for EPEL8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761539 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1761447 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761447 [Bug 1761447] Fusioninventory-agent dependency problems -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1761775] [RFE] Please build for EPEL8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761775 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1761447 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761447 [Bug 1761447] Fusioninventory-agent dependency problems -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1762233] [RFE] Please build for EPEL8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762233 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1761447 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761447 [Bug 1761447] Fusioninventory-agent dependency problems -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1744785] (RFE) EPEL8 branch of perl-Proc-Daemon
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1744785 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1761447 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761447 [Bug 1761447] Fusioninventory-agent dependency problems -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1761447] Fusioninventory-agent dependency problems
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761447 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added CC||emman...@seyman.fr Depends On||1761539, 1762233, 1744784, ||1744785, 1761775 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1744784 [Bug 1744784] (RFE) EPEL8 branch of perl-Net-SNMP https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1744785 [Bug 1744785] (RFE) EPEL8 branch of perl-Proc-Daemon https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761539 [Bug 1761539] [RFE] Please build for EPEL8 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761775 [Bug 1761775] [RFE] Please build for EPEL8 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762233 [Bug 1762233] [RFE] Please build for EPEL8 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1744784] (RFE) EPEL8 branch of perl-Net-SNMP
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1744784 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1761447 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761447 [Bug 1761447] Fusioninventory-agent dependency problems -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Modularity and the system-upgrade path
On to, 17 loka 2019, Kevin Kofler wrote: Dependencies aren't arbitrary; if they were, there would be probably no need to waste our time in working on the whole build part. Whether that is useful to you or other subset of Fedora maintainers is not guaranteed. However, using modular streams allows to solve problems you cannot easily solve otherwise within the same distribution for some use cases. This is one part of value it brings that seems to be constantly ignored with overly negative tone. [snip] Sure, for those things that can be installed in parallel. This is not true for a wast amount of software, we have other means to deal with it beyond what is being discussed in this thread. Everything can be installed in parallel if appropriately packaged. Having done the packaging tricks to allow kdelibs3-devel and kdelibs4-devel to coexist (in the same /usr prefix, something upstream did not support), I know exactly what I am talking about. (And for the next major version, kf5-*-devel, we actually got upstream to care about this, so it is parallel- installable with kdelibs3-devel and kdelibs4-devel out of the box. That is really the ideal state to reach.) This does not work for server components and is not generalizable. For example, you cannot have multiple versions of Samba running on the same system. You cannot have multiple versions of FreeIPA running on the same system either. These server components have requirements beyond package installability. We have an answer for those use cases with VMs and containers and they aren't requiring parallel installability. -- / Alexander Bokovoy Sr. Principal Software Engineer Security / Identity Management Engineering Red Hat Limited, Finland ___ 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 32 System-Wide Change proposal: Modules in Non-Modular Buildroot
On Thu, 17 Oct 2019 at 14:15, Randy Barlow wrote:
>
> Could we think of a solution that is simple so that packagers can more
> easily understand how it works?
The issue is how many different choices are you allowing and where you
are allowing them to be made. A lot of the gentoo and nixos seem to be
made on the personal system. I choose how I want to build out my box
and it builds itself to do that. If you push the decisions up into the
central build system, then you need to start working with other people
and letting them mess with your decisions. That means various design
choices no longer are simple.. and are less technical. They are
instead policy and bureaucracy in order to grease the interactions and
different opinions to get a compromise or in the end a hard decision
even when no one wants it.
The problem I found with both the documentation and most of our
conversations is that we have been trying to treat this as a
technology problem when it is a social one. A distribution is a social
contract between different packagers to make a 'product' (I am trying
for a word which is less commercial so if you know one.. use it
instead). A module is just a smaller social contract where we need to
make a set of things work together in a way that works both with the
larger product and its own self. Most of the rules in writing a good
spec file are meant to make it easier that someone else can maintain
it later.. that is a social requirement. We might dress it up with
'MUST have %{0fedora}' but it is a social contract. The rpm doesn't
care if I use %0fedora or 1. [Man I have digressed into finding the
source of the Nile somewhere.. ok pull it together smooge]
In the end, we need to work out what the social wants/needs for the
technological marvel we create are before we build it. The larger the
number of people you are working with said marvel, the more important
that social rules/upkeep is. Putting the brakes on the car after it is
going 100mph is a little late.
> Or better, can we employ a solution
> that another distribution has developed?
Not without using their packaging system, their build system and their
other design choices. Working out slots would mean needing to make
changes into how RPM works and how yum/dnf work. It might also not be
possible because a bit of Gentoo's magic is letting the local system
build all the different slot choices instead of having to build all
the combinatorics that having 3 different glibc and N gcc compilers
would need. To do the magic NixOS does.. we need to eject the FHS and
use a similar system. At that point, we aren't developing Fedora
anymore.. we are developing a clone of NixOS or Gentoo. [And there
would be no magic way to move from a Fedora 33 system to Fedora-Nix-34
or Fedora-Gen-34.. at which point we might as well just call the whole
thing from scratch.] If we are going that far we might as well rewrite
conary in python3 or rust and start from there...
So any solution will have to 'learn' the lessons of these groups but
design and write a solution from scratch to meet them.
--
Stephen J Smoogen.
___
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
[Bug 1762900] New: Bugzilla for EL8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762900 Bug ID: 1762900 Summary: Bugzilla for EL8 Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: bugzilla Assignee: ita...@ispbrasil.com.br Reporter: emman...@seyman.fr QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: emman...@seyman.fr, ita...@ispbrasil.com.br, perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Tracker bug for bugzilla missing deps in EPEL 8. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Modularity and the system-upgrade path
On 10/17/19 12:27 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: people are going to add things into their modules to make whatever software they need. If I find that I need libfoo2-2.34 in libreoffice and you need libfoo2-2.40 in evolution.. then only one of the two modules can be installed.You can either have libreoffice or you can have evolution. Cap't Obvious here, but I think the logic is like this: 1. in an ideal world software would build and run with the latest-greatest versions of everything as a default 2. ...but in the real world we have to sometimes chose a non-default versions. There's enough of this happening that we can't just say we'll work hard until we reach 1. 3. modularity allows choosing non-default versions, which is great for a particular application, but conflicts with other apps, forcing us to choose only one of them. This provides a working solution for at least some people, so it's useful for e.g. Redhat, but it makes life hard for an end-user that just wants to have a system with a complete set of software 4. such modularized solutions can be combined into usable systems by either containers or cooperating VMs, but again, it's harder for end-users and has other undesirable consequences, e.g. complicates security management The logical conundrum of modularity is that when we require non-default modules, then it logically follows that there will be conflicts (if there weren't, we wouldn't need modules) and so we are forced all the way into 4. unless we're lucky, and happen not to need the packages that depend on conflicting modules. The bottom line is that modularity is useful, but in the sense of insurance or fire extinguishers: it's good to have them but we should really hope that we won't have to use them. If only there was a way to limit the scope of the non-default modules to their dependencies--by using private library directories or something like that? I think it would solve the problem of parallel installation, and would simplify upgrades by making it explicit what pulled them in in the first place, and place joint responsibility for updates on these subsystems. This is essentially bundling, but exposed in the packaging system so it's more manageable. ___ 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
Fedora 31 Final is No-Go
Release status of Fedora 31 Final is NO-GO. Due to open blocker bugs and the lack of a release candidate, Fedora 31 Final was declared "No-Go". We will reconvene at 1400 UTC (note the departure from the usual time) on Thursday, 24 October[1] to target a release date of Tuesday 29 October. For more information, please see the minutes[2] from the Fedora 31 Final Go/No-Go meeting. [1] https://apps.fedoraproject.org/calendar/Fedora%20release/2019/10/24/#m9641 [2] https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/teams/f31-final-go_no_go-meeting/f31-final-go_no_go-meeting.2019-10-17-17.00.html -- Ben Cotton He / Him / His Fedora Program Manager Red Hat TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis ___ devel-announce mailing list -- devel-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-announce-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-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Test-Announce] Fedora 31 Final is No-Go
Release status of Fedora 31 Final is NO-GO. Due to open blocker bugs and the lack of a release candidate, Fedora 31 Final was declared "No-Go". We will reconvene at 1400 UTC (note the departure from the usual time) on Thursday, 24 October[1] to target a release date of Tuesday 29 October. For more information, please see the minutes[2] from the Fedora 31 Final Go/No-Go meeting. [1] https://apps.fedoraproject.org/calendar/Fedora%20release/2019/10/24/#m9641 [2] https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/teams/f31-final-go_no_go-meeting/f31-final-go_no_go-meeting.2019-10-17-17.00.html -- Ben Cotton He / Him / His Fedora Program Manager Red Hat TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis ___ test-announce mailing list -- test-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-announce-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/test-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org ___ 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: Modularity and the system-upgrade path
Alexander Bokovoy wrote: > On to, 17 loka 2019, Kevin Kofler wrote: >>Building against the distribution's version of libraries instead of some >>arbitrarily picked version is pretty much the whole point of non-modular >>packages. > Right, and building against carefully chosen collection of dependencies > is the whole point of modular packages. These are just two normal > requirements that aren't contradicting each other most of the time. Building against one shared distribution version of the library foo or building against a packager-chosen module stream version of the library foo are requirements that are very much contradicting each other by definition. > Modular builds treat non-modular packages as a base environment to build > on top. Sure, maintainers of modular streams need to take care of being > non-conflicting on top of that, but sometimes the conflict is > intentional as long as it is going to cover all dependencies broken by > that. See, for example, some of scenarios in > https://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/2019-September/017774.html Those are scenarios that are very specific to a long-term distribution such as RHEL or CentOS and do not commonly apply in Fedora. In Fedora, you would typically ship a new FreeIPA in one of 2 ways: 1. as an official update to the existing Fedora release, if it is suitably compatible for that, OR 2. in the next Fedora release, which is, at any point in time, at most 6 months away. Users who really cannot wait can get the update from a Copr. And in fact, FreeIPA in Fedora is not currently a module, as you pointed out in your mail. You would also likely not need to build against a newer krb5 than what Fedora ships. Or if you do, points 1 and 2 above also apply for krb5. That whole "too fast, too slow" thing is really an issue specific to LTS distributions and not a pressing issue for a fast-moving distribution such as Fedora at all. >>This is why building against arbitrary versions of non-leaf modules is a >>recipe for version hell. > You seem to be implying that whoever is maintaining a modular stream is > not worth to trust that they are doing some reasonable work. This is not a trust thing. No amount of "reasonable work" can prevent a module depending on libfoo-1 and a (from the user's point of view entirely unrelated) module depending on libfoo-2 from conflicting. The only "reasonable work" to do there is to package libfoo1 and libfoo2 as parallel- installable packages (one of which will probably be called just libfoo, the other the suffixed name) instead of module streams to prevent the client applications from conflicting. > Dependencies aren't arbitrary; if they were, there would be probably no > need to waste our time in working on the whole build part. Whether that > is useful to you or other subset of Fedora maintainers is not > guaranteed. However, using modular streams allows to solve problems you > cannot easily solve otherwise within the same distribution for some use > cases. This is one part of value it brings that seems to be constantly > ignored with overly negative tone. [snip] > Sure, for those things that can be installed in parallel. This is not > true for a wast amount of software, we have other means to deal with it > beyond what is being discussed in this thread. Everything can be installed in parallel if appropriately packaged. Having done the packaging tricks to allow kdelibs3-devel and kdelibs4-devel to coexist (in the same /usr prefix, something upstream did not support), I know exactly what I am talking about. (And for the next major version, kf5-*-devel, we actually got upstream to care about this, so it is parallel- installable with kdelibs3-devel and kdelibs4-devel out of the box. That is really the ideal state to reach.) Kevin Kofler ___ 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: Modularity and the system-upgrade path
On Thu, 2019-10-17 at 13:43 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 17. 10. 19 13:38, Alexander Bokovoy wrote: > > Had there be default module streams for Java packages in buildroot, we > > would have no problem. > > Had there been no default modular streams but regular packages instead, we > would > have no problem either. > > But to extend there a bit, that would also be coorect had there been no > computers. Imagine no computers / Only farms of yaks... -- 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 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 32 System-Wide Change proposal: Modules in Non-Modular Buildroot
On Thu, 2019-10-17 at 08:08 -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > One of the (often un- or misinformed) major arguments people keep > using against Modularity is "it makes packaging harder!". One thing I've found to be a problem with modularity is that it's easy to be un- or misinformed. I spent a lot of time reading the docs (and I'm glad there are docs, I'm not criticizing the docs) and I still found it difficult to modularize my rpick package. My experiences as a packager for the other distributions I've worked with that offer parallel installability (which necessarily means parallel availability) was that I didn't need to know very much to do it. It was generally obvious what to do to make my package use slots, for example. I think the problem is that modularity is complicated enough that it's hard to know it well without investment. Could we think of a solution that is simple so that packagers can more easily understand how it works? Or better, can we employ a solution that another distribution has developed? 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
[Bug 1761738] Please build perl-ExtUtils-XSBuilder for EPEL 8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761738 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED --- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-EPEL-2019-baf3244deb has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 8. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-baf3244deb -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1761738] Please build perl-ExtUtils-XSBuilder for EPEL 8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761738 Paul Howarth changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||p...@city-fan.org Assignee|tcall...@redhat.com |p...@city-fan.org --- Comment #2 from Paul Howarth --- https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/18472 https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/18473 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Fedora 32 System-Wide Change proposal: Modules in Non-Modular Buildroot
- Original Message - > From: "Randy Barlow" > To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" > > Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2019 1:18:08 PM > Subject: Re: Fedora 32 System-Wide Change proposal: Modules in Non-Modular > Buildroot > > On Thu, 2019-10-17 at 12:56 -0400, Randy Barlow wrote: > > I > > had to write a yaml file that listed hashes of every dependency of > > rpick, and every dependency of those dependencies, and their > > dependencies, and so on. > > By the way, I didn't actually end up doing this, Igor did it for me. I > didn't mean to take credit, I mean more that "I, the packager, had to > do this", not "I, Randy, had to do this". Igor rocks. Just for the obvious reply... :) `ref` behaves just like `git checkout` would. So yeah, you can pass a very explicit hash and then you won't get any updates until you bump the hash in the spec again. However, you could pass tags (like you mention in the comment next to each hash) or branches instead. The latter is what some other modules do, like the eclipse one: https://src.fedoraproject.org/modules/eclipse/blob/2019-06/f/eclipse.yaml#_1069 See also: https://github.com/fedora-modularity/libmodulemd/blob/master/spec.v2.yaml#L268-L273 In the latter case (in RHEL at least), you have to commit a (potentially empty) commit to the module and then a rebuild of the module will pull in the latest contents from the branches you specify for each component RPM. Perhaps we need to collect a "tips and tricks" section for modularity? HTH, Alex > > ___ > 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 > ___ 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: Do F31 updates not obsolete each other during freeze?
Randy Barlow wrote: > I'm not really sure which way would be better, but I think I lean > towards thinking that maybe Bodhi really should wait until updates are > all the way stable before accepting new updates for the same packages. That would not be acceptable. Mohan Boddhu's RFE: https://github.com/fedora-infra/bodhi/issues/2615 i.e., ensuring that the push queue is FIFO, is really the way to go. Kevin Kofler ___ 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
