date:20200527

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1837338

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version|perl-Alien-pkgconf-0.17-1.f |perl-Alien-pkgconf-0.17-1.f
   |c33 |c33
   |perl-Alien-pkgconf-0.17-1.f |perl-Alien-pkgconf-0.17-1.f
   |c31 |c31
   ||perl-Alien-pkgconf-0.17-1.f
   ||c32



--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2020-b5b573d669 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
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

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20200526.n.0 changes

2020-05-27 Thread Fedora Rawhide Report

OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20200525.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20200526.n.0

= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images:  2
Added packages:  1
Dropped packages:6
Upgraded packages:   74
Downgraded packages: 0

Size of added packages:  22.17 MiB
Size of dropped packages:31.70 MiB
Size of upgraded packages:   4.52 GiB
Size of downgraded packages: 0 B

Size change of upgraded packages:   79.07 MiB
Size change of downgraded packages: 0 B

= ADDED IMAGES =

= DROPPED IMAGES =
Image: Workstation live ppc64le
Path: 
Workstation/ppc64le/iso/Fedora-Workstation-Live-ppc64le-Rawhide-20200525.n.0.iso
Image: Silverblue dvd-ostree x86_64
Path: 
Silverblue/x86_64/iso/Fedora-Silverblue-ostree-x86_64-Rawhide-20200525.n.0.iso

= ADDED PACKAGES =
Package: mupen64plus-2.5-7.fc33
Summary: Nintendo 64 Emulator
RPMs:mupen64plus mupen64plus-devel
Size:22.17 MiB


= DROPPED PACKAGES =
Package: cudd-3.0.0-9.fc31
Summary: CU Decision Diagram Package
RPMs:cudd cudd-devel
Size:25.43 MiB

Package: deepin-notifications-3.2.1-2.fc30
Summary: System notifications for linuxdeepin desktop environment
RPMs:deepin-notifications
Size:542.92 KiB

Package: deepin-qml-widgets-2.3.6-7.fc31
Summary: Deepin QML widgets
RPMs:deepin-qml-widgets
Size:1.48 MiB

Package: glite-lbjp-common-gss-3.2.16-13.fc32
Summary: Wrapper of Globus GSS/SSL implementation used by gLite LB and JP
RPMs:glite-lbjp-common-gss glite-lbjp-common-gss-devel
Size:245.28 KiB

Package: meataxe-2.4.24-20.fc31
Summary: Matrix representations over finite fields
RPMs:meataxe meataxe-devel meataxe-libs
Size:3.82 MiB

Package: nuvola-app-google-calendar-1.2-7.fc29
Summary: Google Calendar web app for Nuvola Player 3
RPMs:nuvola-app-google-calendar
Size:208.27 KiB


= UPGRADED PACKAGES =
Package:  LaTeXML-0.8.4-3.fc33
Old package:  LaTeXML-0.8.4-1.fc32
Summary:  Converts TeX and LaTeX to XML/HTML/ePub/MathML
RPMs: LaTeXML
Size: 2.05 MiB
Size change:  1.52 KiB
Changelog:
  * Tue Jan 28 2020 Fedora Release Engineering  - 
0.8.4-2
  - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_32_Mass_Rebuild

  * Mon May 25 2020 W. Michael Petullo  - 0.8.4-3
  - Patch to fix TikZ rendering issue while waiting for a merge into 0.8.5


Package:  bashtop-0.9.3-1.fc33
Old package:  bashtop-0.8.30-1.fc33
Summary:  Linux resource monitor
RPMs: bashtop
Size: 62.20 KiB
Size change:  4.59 KiB
Changelog:
  * Mon May 25 2020 Alessio  - 0.9.3-1
  - 0.9.3 release


Package:  biblesync-2.1.0-1.fc33
Old package:  biblesync-2.0.1-6.fc32
Summary:  A Cross-platform library for sharing Bible navigation
RPMs: biblesync biblesync-devel
Size: 357.36 KiB
Size change:  -6.38 KiB
Changelog:
  * Mon May 25 2020 Greg Hellings  - 2.1.0-1
  - Upstream version 2.1.0
  - Remove pkgconfig file patch


Package:  bind-32:9.11.19-1.fc33
Old package:  bind-32:9.11.18-2.fc33
Summary:  The Berkeley Internet Name Domain (BIND) DNS (Domain Name System) 
server
RPMs: bind bind-chroot bind-devel bind-dlz-filesystem bind-dlz-ldap 
bind-dlz-mysql bind-dlz-mysqldyn bind-dlz-sqlite3 bind-dnssec-utils bind-libs 
bind-libs-lite bind-license bind-lite-devel bind-pkcs11 bind-pkcs11-devel 
bind-pkcs11-libs bind-pkcs11-utils bind-sdb bind-sdb-chroot bind-utils 
python3-bind
Size: 33.01 MiB
Size change:  10.34 KiB
Changelog:
  * Fri May 15 2020 Petr Menk  - 32:9.11.19-1
  - Update to 9.11.19 (CVE-2020-8616, CVE-2020-8617)


Package:  bmake-20200524-1.fc33
Old package:  bmake-20180512-4.fc31
Summary:  The NetBSD make(1) tool
RPMs: bmake
Size: 781.24 KiB
Size change:  22.06 KiB
Changelog:
  * Tue Jan 28 2020 Fedora Release Engineering  - 
20180512-5
  - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_32_Mass_Rebuild

  * Fri Feb 28 2020 Luis Bazan  - 20200212-1
  - New upstream version

  * Mon May 25 2020 Petr Menk  - 20200524-1
  - Update to version 20200524


Package:  buildah-1.15.0-0.64.dev.git0ac2a67.fc33
Old package:  buildah-1.15.0-0.63.dev.gitdbf0777.fc33
Summary:  A command line tool used for creating OCI Images
RPMs: buildah buildah-tests
Size: 79.28 MiB
Size change:  -34.77 KiB
Changelog:
  * Mon May 25 2020 RH Container Bot  - 
1.15.0-0.64.dev.git0ac2a67
  - autobuilt 0ac2a67


Package:  conmon-2:2.0.17-0.2.dev.git82e9358.fc33
Old package:  conmon-2:2.0.17-0.1.dev.git82e9358.fc33
Summary:  OCI container runtime monitor
RPMs: conmon
Size: 213.93 KiB
Size change:  547 B
Changelog:
  * Mon May 25 2020 Lokesh Mandvekar  - 
2:2.0.17-0.2.dev.git82e9358
  - depend on glib2


Package:  darkhttpd-1.12-10.fc33
Old package:  darkhttpd-1.12-10.fc32
Summary:  A secure, lightweight, fast, single-threaded HTTP/1.1 server
RPMs: darkhttpd
Size: 153.12 KiB
Size change:  -441 B

Package:  dnsperf-2.3.4-1.fc33
Old package:

[389-devel] 389 DS nightly 2020-05-28 - 95% PASS

2020-05-27 Thread vashirov

https://fedorapeople.org/groups/389ds/ci/nightly/2020/05/28/report-389-ds-base-1.4.4.2-20200527giteb191f5.fc32.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

Re: [Rawhide] Missing boost-python3-devel in repository

2020-05-27 Thread Luya Tshimbalanga



On 2020-05-26 3:48 a.m., Jonathan Wakely wrote:

On 23/05/20 12:18 -0700, Luya Tshimbalanga wrote:

On 2020-05-23 11:20 a.m., Igor Raits wrote:

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

On Sat, 2020-05-23 at 11:09 -0700, Luya Tshimbalanga wrote:

Hello team,

It looks like the build system is missing boost-python3-devel which
causes openvdb to fail as  result below:

https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=44871050

Could someone resolve the issue?

So the issue is coming from this commit:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/boost/c/1f2e448e099a867f9da62b9da009d3dec5e1ad64?branch=master 



The boost-python3-devel has been merged into the boost-devel package,
but the provides have not been added.

Thanks for the notification. It would be great that modificaiton was 
posted in the mailing list in a future.


I suggested making that change weeks ago in
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/B4LDABNDO7E3PH263ZU6ZR4SLP6WMNCJ/ 



Last week I said I wanted to go ahead with that change, in
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/242AZ4C3YOBUR64NPFVLAVFOLJ3SJXX5/ 


and then (after discussion on IRC) sent another mail in that thread
saying I was going ahead with that. It probably should have been
announced in a separate thread, but it *was* announced in a [HEADS UP]
thread related to Python.


Making a separate thread would be easier in the future when it comes to 
important major change.






Nevertheless, I updated the spec file to reflect the change.

https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=44873827

https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/openvdb/blob/master/f/openvdb.spec


Great, thanks.



No problem.

--
Luya Tshimbalanga
Fedora Design Team
Fedora Design Suite maintainer
___
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 1840363] perl-Compress-Bzip2-2.27 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1840363

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2020-3ea2ed182b has been pushed to the Fedora 31 testing repository.
In short time you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
--advisory=FEDORA-2020-3ea2ed182b`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-3ea2ed182b

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information
on how to test updates.


-- 
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 1837338] perl-Alien-pkgconf-0.17 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1837338

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
   Fixed In Version|perl-Alien-pkgconf-0.17-1.f |perl-Alien-pkgconf-0.17-1.f
   |c33 |c33
   ||perl-Alien-pkgconf-0.17-1.f
   ||c31
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed||2020-05-28 01:59:46



--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2020-874592ae24 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
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 elections voting now open

2020-05-27 Thread Jerry James

On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 6:22 PM Ben Cotton  wrote:
> Don't forget to claim your "I Voted" badge when you cast your ballot.

Speaking of the badge, the hover text on it reads:

I Voted: Fedora 32 -- Particpated in the Fedora 30 Elections!

which doesn't seem quite right
-- 
Jerry James
http://www.jamezone.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: Fedora 32 system-wide change proposal: reduce installation media size by improving the compression ratio of SquashFS filesystem

2020-05-27 Thread Chris Murphy

On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 6:03 PM Chris Murphy  wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 5:32 AM Bohdan Khomutskyi  wrote:
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > It was a long time since the last message in this change proposal.
> >
> > Recently I was working to reduce the impact of the increased compression 
> > ratio on the installation image size for Fedora. I have achieved 
> > outstanding results -- working proof of concept. With the following change: 
> > https://github.com/rhinstaller/anaconda/pull/2292 , not only the higher 
> > compression does not impact the installation time. In certain cases, the 
> > installation time is even reduced. This is because of the fact the 
> > filesystem internal structure aware process is used to install the system 
> > from the SquashFS. The new process also allows for taking advantage of the 
> > multi-core architecture of the system during installation -- does the 
> > decompression on multiple processors in parallel.
> >
> > The combination of https://github.com/rhinstaller/anaconda/pull/2292 and 
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Changes/OptimizeSquashFS should 
> > reduce _both_ the image size and the installation time. The installation 
> > time will be reduced in case the system is installed from the SquashFS. 
> > This is the case in Fedora Workstation.
> >
> > For optimization of the SquashFS, I will work on requesting the support of 
> > the required functionality in the Pungi compose build software.
>
> Hi, since the feedback was that a higher emphasis be placed on install
> time being reduced, even if there was some increase in ISO size (not
> without limit, it's a balancing act), I'm still curious how the change
> compares when using zstd, all other things being equal.
>
> For example Solus recently changed from xz to zstd in squashfs, and
> claim 3-4x faster install times, with some increase in image size.
> https://getsol.us/2020/01/25/solus-4-1-released/

From anaconda.log for a default/auto LVM+ext4 install using
Fedora-Workstation-Live-x86_64-32-1.6.iso
19:57:16 DBG ui.gui.spokes.installation_progress: The installation has finished.
19:51:52 DBG ui.gui.spokes.installation_progress: The installation has started.
00:05:24

This is not an exact comparison to using a plain squashfs image and
writing out (I'm guessing) 30,000 files to the install target. But,
using unsquashfs to extract the root.img and write it to the same
target:

real 0m50.315s user 2m18.318s sys 0m6.569s

I'm extracting just one file, the embedded ext4. But (a) unsquashfs is
parallelizing at about 270% CPU for a 3 virtual core VM and (b)
/dev/loop1 isn't busy at all. Does unsquashfs and ext4 slow down when
handed 30K files to write out instead of one big one? Dunno. But as
prior testing suggests this is a CPU bound problem, not a disk
contention problem - I'm definitely in the "tell me more" position.

2m18s is a lot better than 5m24s. And honestly 5m isn't bad, it's
takes a lot longer to install Windows 10 and macOS.

I still think that zstd would get even better decompression rates with
less of a CPU, and thus power hit, it could be splitting hairs. I'm
not sure.

-- 
Chris Murphy
___
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 32 elections voting now open

2020-05-27 Thread Ben Cotton

Voting in the Fedora 32 elections is now open. Go to the Elections app
to cast[1] your vote. Voting closes at 23:59 UTC on Thursday 11 June.
Don't forget to claim your "I Voted" badge when you cast your ballot.
Links to candidate interviews are in the Elections app and on the
Community Blog[2].

[1] https://elections.fedoraproject.org/
[2] https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/fedora-32-elections-voting-now-open/

-- 
Ben Cotton
He / Him / His
Senior Program Manager, Fedora & CentOS Stream
Red Hat
TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis
___
devel-announce mailing list -- devel-annou...@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-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

Fedora 32 elections voting now open

2020-05-27 Thread Ben Cotton

Voting in the Fedora 32 elections is now open. Go to the Elections app
to cast[1] your vote. Voting closes at 23:59 UTC on Thursday 11 June.
Don't forget to claim your "I Voted" badge when you cast your ballot.
Links to candidate interviews are in the Elections app and on the
Community Blog[2].

[1] https://elections.fedoraproject.org/
[2] https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/fedora-32-elections-voting-now-open/

-- 
Ben Cotton
He / Him / His
Senior Program Manager, Fedora & CentOS Stream
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

[EPEL-devel] Fedora EPEL 8 updates-testing report

2020-05-27 Thread updates

The following Fedora EPEL 8 Security updates need testing:
 Age  URL
  12  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2020-765ceaa306   
clamav-0.102.3-1.el8
  11  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2020-30aba92944   
log4net-2.0.8-10.el8
  11  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2020-2056b1c4a9   
exim-4.93-3.el8
   9  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2020-5660594875   
python-markdown2-2.3.9-1.el8
   9  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2020-c3fca161ee   
netdata-1.22.1-3.el8
   8  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2020-38309f9f6f   
transmission-2.94-9.el8
   7  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2020-06e970da9c   
knot-resolver-5.1.1-1.el8
   2  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2020-383149ca50   
perl-Email-MIME-1.949-1.el8 perl-Email-MIME-ContentType-1.024-1.el8


The following builds have been pushed to Fedora EPEL 8 updates-testing

python-grokmirror-1.2.0-5.el8

Details about builds:



 python-grokmirror-1.2.0-5.el8 (FEDORA-EPEL-2020-19dbf43e6d)
 Framework to smartly mirror git repositories

Update Information:

Introducing python-grokmirror to epel8

ChangeLog:



___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: [HEADS UP] Fedora 33 Python 3.9 rebuilds have started in a side tag


On 27. 05. 20 20:24, Miro Hrončok wrote:

I'm currently trying to build a live image, but it's running insanely
slow for some reason, mock in general on my Rawhide box seems to be
really slow and I'm not sure why. If it ever finishes I'll try it. But
so far at least I see no problems.


Hah, so it seems you're ahead of me =)

The live image build finally finished, but when I booted it to check
it, I found it includes both python3-3.8.3-1.fc33 and python3.9-
3.9.0~b1-1.fc33.x86_64 .

Digging into this I figured out it's because of libreoffice:
libreoffice-pyuno requires Python 3.8. So I went to Koji and
saw...you're rebuilding it already :)

https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1511799

I will test again when that's done.


If it ever finishes.


After 30 hours of s390x misery watching the build.log grow one line in 15 
minutes, I decided to gamble and I have restarted the build:


https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=45081892

--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
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

gap-pkg-ferret license change

2020-05-27 Thread Jerry James

Version 1.0.3 of gap-pkg-ferret changes the license from "GPLv2+ and
Public Domain" to "MPLv2.0 and Public Domain".  I will build version
1.0.3 in Rawhide shortly.
-- 
Jerry James
http://www.jamezone.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

[EPEL-devel] Re: Soname bump of libb2 on F31/EPEL7

2020-05-27 Thread Mukundan Ragavan

Scratch build of gtkhash does not appear to pull in libb2-0.98.1. Has
the buildroot override expired?

https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=45077601

On 5/26/20 1:49 PM, Antonio T. sagitter wrote:
> Mukundan, your package misses.
> Please, rebuild `gtkhash` against `libb2-0.98.1` or let me commit
> changes to it.
>
> On 25/05/20 19:18, Elliott Sales de Andrade wrote:
>> I made builds for R-argon2 last night as well, which you can
>> include in your update.
>>
>> - R-argon2-0.2.0-7.fc31
>>
>> Actually, there's no need for a _new_ update; you can just edit
>> the existing one.
>>
>> On Mon, 25 May 2020 at 08:41, Felix Schwarz
>>  wrote:
>>>
>>> builds for borgbackup done (finally): - borgbackup-1.1.11-3.el7 -
>>> borgbackup-1.1.11-5.fc31
>>>
>>> Please add these once you submit the final update.
>>>
>>> Felix
>>>

-- 
GPG Key: E5C8BC67



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: [EPEL-devel] Re: Soname bump of libb2 on F31/EPEL7

2020-05-27 Thread Mukundan Ragavan

Scratch build of gtkhash does not appear to pull in libb2-0.98.1. Has
the buildroot override expired?

https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=45077601

On 5/26/20 1:49 PM, Antonio T. sagitter wrote:
> Mukundan, your package misses.
> Please, rebuild `gtkhash` against `libb2-0.98.1` or let me commit
> changes to it.
>
> On 25/05/20 19:18, Elliott Sales de Andrade wrote:
>> I made builds for R-argon2 last night as well, which you can
>> include in your update.
>>
>> - R-argon2-0.2.0-7.fc31
>>
>> Actually, there's no need for a _new_ update; you can just edit
>> the existing one.
>>
>> On Mon, 25 May 2020 at 08:41, Felix Schwarz
>>  wrote:
>>>
>>> builds for borgbackup done (finally): - borgbackup-1.1.11-3.el7 -
>>> borgbackup-1.1.11-5.fc31
>>>
>>> Please add these once you submit the final update.
>>>
>>> Felix
>>>

-- 
GPG Key: E5C8BC67



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital 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: TeXLive 2020 landing in rawhide

2020-05-27 Thread Tom Callaway

There are some new subpackages (and some old ones went away), but
since every package had the release value bumped, this is expected.

Tom

On 2020-05-27 at 00:52, ke...@scrye.com wrote:
> On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 05:05:32PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> ...snip...
>
> > there is, IIRC, supposed to be a 'spin review' process we go through
> > every release which should be run by the spin wrangler and that is
> > where max size changes are supposed to be done, but I don't think we've
> > had a spin wrangler or actually done that process for several releases.
> > So in lieu of that, I've just been telling people the above.
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Spins_Wrangler
>
> That process is long gone and dead. The only process we have now is if
> you want to add a new lab/spin you just use the Change process.
>
> I attempted to setup a process that required each spin to have a test at
> beta and final or be dropped, but it was added after beta that cycle, so
> we didn't do it then, and the next cycle a number of spins/labs failed
> to compose at beta for reasons beyond the owners control, so it sort of
> just got dropped. ;(
>
> We may want to revisit this, or at least drop any lab/spin that doesn't
> have a listed 'owner' (since we now have that in file).
>
> kevin
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: [HEADS UP] Fedora 33 Python 3.9 rebuilds have started in a side tag

On 27. 05. 20 19:27, Adam Williamson wrote:

On Tue, 2020-05-26 at 16:22 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:

On Tue, 2020-05-26 at 01:20 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:

On 22. 05. 20 20:05, Adam Williamson wrote:

On Fri, 2020-05-22 at 19:57 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:

On 22. 05. 20 19:23, Adam Williamson wrote:

So a request here: once the rebuilds are done, before we consider
moving them to Rawhide proper, can we have releng run a test compose
using the side tag and run openQA on it, to test for bugs in the
installer or key critpath components caused by the 3.9 changes? I don't
see anything about this in the Change page:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Python3.9
but I think it'd be good to catch at least any major issues before we
land the change rather than after...

I am all in if this is possible.

When we updated to Python 3.7 I wanted to do it, but I was told it was not
possible.

When we updated to Python 3.8, I've asked around once again, but was still not
possible.

ah, fun :/

we should at *least* be able to hack it up manually or in openQA,
though it may be ugly. if releng still can't do it, let me know and
I'll see if I can work something out.

AFAIK packages that are required to do a minimal compose should all be rebuilt
now. So you should be able to hack it up somehow. If packages are missing,
please let me knwo and I'll make sure to include them in the initial set for
Python 3.10.

So I got an installer image built and tested:

https://openqa.stg.fedoraproject.org/tests/overview?distri=fedora=Rawhide=Fedora-Rawhide-20200526-Python39-NOREPORT=1

and that looks good. The Cyrillic failure is a known bug in Rawhide,
and the other failures are things that are known to fail when we run
these tests with a netinst image as opposed to a DVD image (they rely
on the image containing packages).

I'm currently trying to build a live image, but it's running insanely
slow for some reason, mock in general on my Rawhide box seems to be
really slow and I'm not sure why. If it ever finishes I'll try it. But
so far at least I see no problems.

Hah, so it seems you're ahead of me =)

The live image build finally finished, but when I booted it to check
it, I found it includes both python3-3.8.3-1.fc33 and python3.9-
3.9.0~b1-1.fc33.x86_64 .

Digging into this I figured out it's because of libreoffice:
libreoffice-pyuno requires Python 3.8. So I went to Koji and
saw...you're rebuilding it already :)

https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1511799

I will test again when that's done.

If it ever finishes.

--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
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: Presentation

2020-05-27 Thread Yann Collette


I filled the review request here:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1840865

Le 27/05/2020 à 19:55, Vascom a écrit :

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_package_collection_maintainers#Create_Your_Review_Request

ср, 27 мая 2020 г., 20:53 Yann Collette >:



Le 27/05/2020 à 17:39, Peter Lemenkov a écrit :
> Hello Yann!
>
> ср, 27 мая 2020 г. в 15:05, mailto:ycollette.nos...@free.fr>>:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I just registered the Fedora devel list.
>> My name is Yann Collette.
>> I use Fedora distribution since ... (I started with a Linux
1.2.7 :) and stay attached to Redhat / Fedora for a lng time).
>> I use Fedora for music production and I manage a Fedora COPR
repo to provide tools related to music:
>>
>> https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/ycollet/linuxmao/
>>
>> All the spec files are on github:
>>
>> https://github.com/ycollet/fedora-spec
>
> Wow! That's a substantial amount of work! Well done!
>
>> If you're are looking for people to help packaging and
maintaining packages, I can help.
> As a person who is interested in a similarly obscure use cases I'd
> like to propose you a different way. Instead of waiting for someone
> who pops up and asks you for help with packaging you'd better to
step
> in and start adding packages to Fedora and helping with existing
ones.
>  From my experience people are more likely to act when something
big is
> going already. And the amount of packages you're dealing with is
> already huge!
>
> We can guide you with all technical details related to adding
rpms to
> Fedora repos.

OK, thanks.

I will first try to add lv2lint. It's a syntax checker for LV2
plugins.

https://gitlab.com/drobilla/lv2lint

The first step is to open a bug report on the Fedora bug tracker
to ask
to add this package and add a link to the src rpm file in the bug
report ?

The spec file for this package is already here:

https://github.com/ycollet/fedora-spec/blob/master/lv2lint/lv2lint.spec

___
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
___
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: Non-responsive maintainer: glances

2020-05-27 Thread Carl George

I did that yesterday, which appears to have got his attention.

https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2396

On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 10:05 AM Richard Shaw  wrote:
>
> I think it's time to submit a FESCo ticket per the guidelines.
>
> 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



-- 
Carl George
___
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: Presentation

2020-05-27 Thread Vascom

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_package_collection_maintainers#Create_Your_Review_Request

ср, 27 мая 2020 г., 20:53 Yann Collette :

>
> Le 27/05/2020 à 17:39, Peter Lemenkov a écrit :
> > Hello Yann!
> >
> > ср, 27 мая 2020 г. в 15:05, :
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> I just registered the Fedora devel list.
> >> My name is Yann Collette.
> >> I use Fedora distribution since ... (I started with a Linux 1.2.7 :)
> and stay attached to Redhat / Fedora for a lng time).
> >> I use Fedora for music production and I manage a Fedora COPR repo to
> provide tools related to music:
> >>
> >> https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/ycollet/linuxmao/
> >>
> >> All the spec files are on github:
> >>
> >> https://github.com/ycollet/fedora-spec
> >
> > Wow! That's a substantial amount of work! Well done!
> >
> >> If you're are looking for people to help packaging and maintaining
> packages, I can help.
> > As a person who is interested in a similarly obscure use cases I'd
> > like to propose you a different way. Instead of waiting for someone
> > who pops up and asks you for help with packaging you'd better to step
> > in and start adding packages to Fedora and helping with existing ones.
> >  From my experience people are more likely to act when something big is
> > going already. And the amount of packages you're dealing with is
> > already huge!
> >
> > We can guide you with all technical details related to adding rpms to
> > Fedora repos.
>
> OK, thanks.
>
> I will first try to add lv2lint. It's a syntax checker for LV2 plugins.
>
> https://gitlab.com/drobilla/lv2lint
>
> The first step is to open a bug report on the Fedora bug tracker to ask
> to add this package and add a link to the src rpm file in the bug report ?
>
> The spec file for this package is already here:
>
> https://github.com/ycollet/fedora-spec/blob/master/lv2lint/lv2lint.spec
>
> ___
> 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: Presentation

2020-05-27 Thread Yann Collette



Le 27/05/2020 à 17:39, Peter Lemenkov a écrit :

Hello Yann!

ср, 27 мая 2020 г. в 15:05, :

Hello,

I just registered the Fedora devel list.
My name is Yann Collette.
I use Fedora distribution since ... (I started with a Linux 1.2.7 :) and stay 
attached to Redhat / Fedora for a lng time).
I use Fedora for music production and I manage a Fedora COPR repo to provide 
tools related to music:

https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/ycollet/linuxmao/

All the spec files are on github:

https://github.com/ycollet/fedora-spec


Wow! That's a substantial amount of work! Well done!


If you're are looking for people to help packaging and maintaining packages, I 
can help.

As a person who is interested in a similarly obscure use cases I'd
like to propose you a different way. Instead of waiting for someone
who pops up and asks you for help with packaging you'd better to step
in and start adding packages to Fedora and helping with existing ones.
 From my experience people are more likely to act when something big is
going already. And the amount of packages you're dealing with is
already huge!

We can guide you with all technical details related to adding rpms to
Fedora repos.


OK, thanks.

I will first try to add lv2lint. It's a syntax checker for LV2 plugins.

https://gitlab.com/drobilla/lv2lint

The first step is to open a bug report on the Fedora bug tracker to ask 
to add this package and add a link to the src rpm file in the bug report ?


The spec file for this package is already here:

https://github.com/ycollet/fedora-spec/blob/master/lv2lint/lv2lint.spec

___
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 1840603] perl-Text-CSV_XS-1.43 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1840603

Paul Howarth  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
   Fixed In Version||perl-Text-CSV_XS-1.43-1.fc3
   ||3
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
   Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
Last Closed||2020-05-27 17:41:27



--- Comment #1 from Paul Howarth  ---
Build done:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=45071884


-- 
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: [HEADS UP] Fedora 33 Python 3.9 rebuilds have started in a side tag

2020-05-27 Thread Adam Williamson

On Tue, 2020-05-26 at 16:22 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 2020-05-26 at 01:20 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > On 22. 05. 20 20:05, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2020-05-22 at 19:57 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > > > On 22. 05. 20 19:23, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > > > So a request here: once the rebuilds are done, before we consider
> > > > > moving them to Rawhide proper, can we have releng run a test compose
> > > > > using the side tag and run openQA on it, to test for bugs in the
> > > > > installer or key critpath components caused by the 3.9 changes? I 
> > > > > don't
> > > > > see anything about this in the Change page:
> > > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Python3.9
> > > > > but I think it'd be good to catch at least any major issues before we
> > > > > land the change rather than after...
> > > > 
> > > > I am all in if this is possible.
> > > > 
> > > > When we updated to Python 3.7 I wanted to do it, but I was told it was 
> > > > not possible.
> > > > 
> > > > When we updated to Python 3.8, I've asked around once again, but was 
> > > > still not
> > > > possible.
> > > 
> > > ah, fun :/
> > > 
> > > we should at *least* be able to hack it up manually or in openQA,
> > > though it may be ugly. if releng still can't do it, let me know and
> > > I'll see if I can work something out.
> > 
> > AFAIK packages that are required to do a minimal compose should all be 
> > rebuilt 
> > now. So you should be able to hack it up somehow. If packages are missing, 
> > please let me knwo and I'll make sure to include them in the initial set 
> > for 
> > Python 3.10.
> 
> So I got an installer image built and tested:
> 
> https://openqa.stg.fedoraproject.org/tests/overview?distri=fedora=Rawhide=Fedora-Rawhide-20200526-Python39-NOREPORT=1
> 
> and that looks good. The Cyrillic failure is a known bug in Rawhide,
> and the other failures are things that are known to fail when we run
> these tests with a netinst image as opposed to a DVD image (they rely
> on the image containing packages).
> 
> I'm currently trying to build a live image, but it's running insanely
> slow for some reason, mock in general on my Rawhide box seems to be
> really slow and I'm not sure why. If it ever finishes I'll try it. But
> so far at least I see no problems.

Hah, so it seems you're ahead of me =)

The live image build finally finished, but when I booted it to check
it, I found it includes both python3-3.8.3-1.fc33 and python3.9-
3.9.0~b1-1.fc33.x86_64 .

Digging into this I figured out it's because of libreoffice:
libreoffice-pyuno requires Python 3.8. So I went to Koji and
saw...you're rebuilding it already :)

https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1511799

I will test again when that's done.
-- 
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 1840363] perl-Compress-Bzip2-2.27 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1840363



--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2020-3ea2ed182b has been submitted as an update to Fedora 31.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-3ea2ed182b


-- 
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 1840363] perl-Compress-Bzip2-2.27 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1840363



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2020-5c3d40ee89 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 32.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-5c3d40ee89


-- 
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: F30 security update submitted for stable "marked obsolete" instead of being pushed

2020-05-27 Thread Tomasz Torcz

On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 09:39:47AM -0500, Richard Shaw wrote:
> > Yeah, I think that'd be better then simply dropping them, if it's
> > reasonably easy to implement. By releasing those updates we make
> > things a bit nicer for users who are staying on a
> > now-slightly-but-as-time-goes-on-more-and-more-so out-of-date release,
> > and we'd be conserving the work of our packagers. But if it would be a
> > major hassle for infra or releng, then meh.
> >
> 
> I think a phased approach would be (hopefully) easy to implement.
> 
> 1. Stop builds at 
> 2. Stop submitting updates on +1 week

 2½. Push to stable all updates with non-negative karma at +2 weeks?

> 3. Stop allowing pushes to stable on +2 weeks.


-- 
Tomasz TorczOnly gods can safely risk perfection,
to...@pipebreaker.pl it's a dangerous thing for a man.  — Alia
___
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 1840295] perl-HTTP-Daemon-6.10 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1840295

Petr Pisar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
   Fixed In Version||perl-HTTP-Daemon-6.10-1.fc3
   ||3
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
Last Closed||2020-05-27 15:44:52



--- Comment #1 from Petr Pisar  ---
A change in computing a loopback URL. At least one known regression. Suitable
for Rawhide only.


-- 
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 1802607] perl-Net-DNS-1.24 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1802607



--- Comment #7 from Upstream Release Monitoring 
 ---
the-new-hotness/release-monitoring.org's scratch build of
perl-Net-DNS-1.24-1.fc30.src.rpm for rawhide completed
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=45068748


-- 
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: Presentation

2020-05-27 Thread Peter Lemenkov

Hello Yann!

ср, 27 мая 2020 г. в 15:05, :
>
> Hello,
>
> I just registered the Fedora devel list.
> My name is Yann Collette.
> I use Fedora distribution since ... (I started with a Linux 1.2.7 :) and stay 
> attached to Redhat / Fedora for a lng time).
> I use Fedora for music production and I manage a Fedora COPR repo to provide 
> tools related to music:
>
> https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/ycollet/linuxmao/
>
> All the spec files are on github:
>
> https://github.com/ycollet/fedora-spec


Wow! That's a substantial amount of work! Well done!

> If you're are looking for people to help packaging and maintaining packages, 
> I can help.

As a person who is interested in a similarly obscure use cases I'd
like to propose you a different way. Instead of waiting for someone
who pops up and asks you for help with packaging you'd better to step
in and start adding packages to Fedora and helping with existing ones.
From my experience people are more likely to act when something big is
going already. And the amount of packages you're dealing with is
already huge!

We can guide you with all technical details related to adding rpms to
Fedora repos.
-- 
With best regards, Peter Lemenkov.
___
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 1802607] perl-Net-DNS-1.24 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1802607



--- Comment #6 from Upstream Release Monitoring 
 ---
Created attachment 1692749
  --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1692749=edit
[patch] Update to 1.24 (#1802607)


-- 
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 1802607] perl-Net-DNS-1.24 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1802607

Upstream Release Monitoring  
changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Summary|perl-Net-DNS-1.23 is|perl-Net-DNS-1.24 is
   |available   |available



--- Comment #5 from Upstream Release Monitoring 
 ---
Latest upstream release: 1.24
Current version/release in rawhide: 1.21-2.fc32
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Net-DNS/

Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a
stable branch: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/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/3147/


-- 
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: new packages review tickets

2020-05-27 Thread Stephen John Smoogen

On Wed, 27 May 2020 at 10:35, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek 
wrote:

> On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 12:45:56PM +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> > It may sounds appealing to clean the plate and "resolve" a lot of
> > tickets. However, think about it from the other side: somebody is
> > waiting for review for years, then a ping will come, and if he
> > responds, then ... nothing. Just "yeah, we are not going to close
> > this". That is not very welcome. :(
>
> But if somebody is waiting for review for years, they (we?) are doing
> something wrong. Even is a review is waiting for a few weeks, people
> should ask on fedora-devel, or propose review swaps, or whatever. Just
> keeping tickets forever doesn't seem like a good option either.
>
>
Well it is quite clear we are doing something wrong and have been for as
long as the project has been going on. Normally we seem to get some point
where some people say 'gee this is awful' and then do some sort of
herculean backlog cleanup or close-out but in the end we just don't have a
lot of people who have time to do the level of reviews needed anymore than
we have the people to do the package maintenance or a billion other things
which have piled up.

Package reviews are like dirty dishes and laundry to a lot of people and
there are always something they would rather do or HAVE to than do it.
Until someone removes the Somebody Else's Problem Field from it.. reviews
will pile up.



> Zbyszek
> ___
> 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
>


-- 
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

Re: Packages still using %{?_smp_mflags} manually?

2020-05-27 Thread Tom Stellard

On 05/27/2020 07:47 AM, Richard Shaw wrote:
> On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 9:44 AM Tom Stellard  > wrote:
> 
> 
> Also, I used to use %make_build without the {}, but someone suggested[1] I
> add the {} in case the macro ever became a function.
> 
> -Tom
> 
> [1] 
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Digest-SHA/pull-request/1#comment-37158
> 
> 
> Well the packaging guidelines don't use them. If the macro did become a 
> function I would expect that a mass automated change would need to be 
> performed first anyway.
> 

Ok, would you like me to update the pull requests?

-Tom

> 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: Non-responsive maintainer: glances

I think it's time to submit a FESCo ticket per the guidelines.

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: Packages still using %{?_smp_mflags} manually?

On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 9:44 AM Tom Stellard  wrote:

>
> Also, I used to use %make_build without the {}, but someone suggested[1] I
> add the {} in case the macro ever became a function.
>
> -Tom
>
> [1]
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Digest-SHA/pull-request/1#comment-37158


Well the packaging guidelines don't use them. If the macro did become a
function I would expect that a mass automated change would need to be
performed first anyway.

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: Packages still using %{?_smp_mflags} manually?

2020-05-27 Thread Tom Stellard

On 05/27/2020 05:19 AM, Richard Shaw wrote:
> On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 10:12 PM Tom Stellard  > wrote:
> 
> On 05/21/2020 07:57 AM, Richard Shaw wrote:
> > Not really a big deal but %build_make has been available for quite a 
> while. I noticed a few of my packages still supply _smp_mflags manually.
> >
> > Is this worth a script and automatic BZ? Probably not, but I think 
> there is an intrinsic value to consistency.
> >
> 
> I've been going through and fixing this manually in some spec files.
> Do you want to merge these and do the builds?
> 
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/dumpet/pull-request/1
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/byaccj/pull-request/1
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/splix/pull-request/1
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/qiv/pull-request/1
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/tss2/pull-request/8
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/marisa/pull-request/3
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ldns/pull-request/2
> 
> 
> While it's a simple change, we should wait a little a little while and see if 
> the maintainers respond. Also, it doesn't hurt anything but typically it's 
> "%make_build / %make_install" without the {}.
> 

These changes were actually submitted a while ago.  Some pull requests are
2-3 months old.

Also, I used to use %make_build without the {}, but someone suggested[1] I
add the {} in case the macro ever became a function.

-Tom

[1] 
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Digest-SHA/pull-request/1#comment-37158

> 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
> 
___
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: F30 security update submitted for stable "marked obsolete" instead of being pushed

On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 9:29 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <
zbys...@in.waw.pl> wrote:

> On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 03:12:44PM +0200, Marius Schwarz wrote:
> > Am 27.05.20 um 08:25 schrieb Artur Iwicki:
> > > While I understand the mechanism, I think that this needs to be
> communicated more clearly. I've been a packager for close to 3 years now
> and I admit until I read this e-mail I wasn't quite sure whether "no
> updates after EOL" meant "you can't submit stuff to bodhi", or whether it
> meant "the updates repo is frozen solid, whatever didn't make it in, well
> shucks". (As we can see, it's the latter.)
> >
> > I checked that update in question and it was ready 9 days ago, but
> > simply noone cared to give it karma.
> >
> > I think: To make to work effort acknowlaged, maintainers put into theire
> > work, all finished/not failed updates should be send to stable when EOL
> > is flipped.
>
> Yeah, I think that'd be better then simply dropping them, if it's
> reasonably easy to implement. By releasing those updates we make
> things a bit nicer for users who are staying on a
> now-slightly-but-as-time-goes-on-more-and-more-so out-of-date release,
> and we'd be conserving the work of our packagers. But if it would be a
> major hassle for infra or releng, then meh.
>

I think a phased approach would be (hopefully) easy to implement.

1. Stop builds at 
2. Stop submitting updates on +1 week
3. Stop allowing pushes to stable on +2 weeks.

Something like that anyway.

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: new packages review tickets

2020-05-27 Thread Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek

On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 12:45:56PM +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> It may sounds appealing to clean the plate and "resolve" a lot of
> tickets. However, think about it from the other side: somebody is
> waiting for review for years, then a ping will come, and if he
> responds, then ... nothing. Just "yeah, we are not going to close
> this". That is not very welcome. :(

But if somebody is waiting for review for years, they (we?) are doing
something wrong. Even is a review is waiting for a few weeks, people
should ask on fedora-devel, or propose review swaps, or whatever. Just
keeping tickets forever doesn't seem like a good option either.

Zbyszek
___
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: F30 security update submitted for stable "marked obsolete" instead of being pushed

2020-05-27 Thread Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek

On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 03:12:44PM +0200, Marius Schwarz wrote:
> Am 27.05.20 um 08:25 schrieb Artur Iwicki:
> > While I understand the mechanism, I think that this needs to be 
> > communicated more clearly. I've been a packager for close to 3 years now 
> > and I admit until I read this e-mail I wasn't quite sure whether "no 
> > updates after EOL" meant "you can't submit stuff to bodhi", or whether it 
> > meant "the updates repo is frozen solid, whatever didn't make it in, well 
> > shucks". (As we can see, it's the latter.)
> 
> I checked that update in question and it was ready 9 days ago, but
> simply noone cared to give it karma.
> 
> I think: To make to work effort acknowlaged, maintainers put into theire
> work, all finished/not failed updates should be send to stable when EOL
> is flipped.

Yeah, I think that'd be better then simply dropping them, if it's
reasonably easy to implement. By releasing those updates we make
things a bit nicer for users who are staying on a
now-slightly-but-as-time-goes-on-more-and-more-so out-of-date release,
and we'd be conserving the work of our packagers. But if it would be a
major hassle for infra or releng, then meh.

Zbyszek
___
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 1839623] perl-TeX-Encode-2.009 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1839623

Tom "spot" Callaway  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
   Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
Last Closed||2020-05-27 13:49:44



--- Comment #3 from Tom "spot" Callaway  ---
In rawhide.


-- 
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 1840363] perl-Compress-Bzip2-2.27 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1840363

Petr Pisar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
   Fixed In Version||perl-Compress-Bzip2-2.27-1.
   ||fc33



--- Comment #1 from Petr Pisar  ---
A bug-fix release suitable for all Fedoras.


-- 
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: F30 security update submitted for stable "marked obsolete" instead of being pushed

2020-05-27 Thread Marius Schwarz

Am 27.05.20 um 08:25 schrieb Artur Iwicki:
> While I understand the mechanism, I think that this needs to be communicated 
> more clearly. I've been a packager for close to 3 years now and I admit until 
> I read this e-mail I wasn't quite sure whether "no updates after EOL" meant 
> "you can't submit stuff to bodhi", or whether it meant "the updates repo is 
> frozen solid, whatever didn't make it in, well shucks". (As we can see, it's 
> the latter.)

I checked that update in question and it was ready 9 days ago, but
simply noone cared to give it karma.

I think: To make to work effort acknowlaged, maintainers put into theire
work, all finished/not failed updates should be send to stable when EOL
is flipped.

best regards,
Marius
___
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 1840363] perl-Compress-Bzip2-2.27 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1840363

Petr Pisar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC|ppi...@redhat.com   |
   Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value




-- 
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

Presentation

2020-05-27 Thread ycollette . nospam

Hello,

I just registered the Fedora devel list.
My name is Yann Collette.
I use Fedora distribution since ... (I started with a Linux 1.2.7 :) and stay 
attached to Redhat / Fedora for a lng time).
I use Fedora for music production and I manage a Fedora COPR repo to provide 
tools related to music:

https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/ycollet/linuxmao/

All the spec files are on github:

https://github.com/ycollet/fedora-spec

If you're are looking for people to help packaging and maintaining packages, I 
can help.

Best regards,

Yann
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Packages still using %{?_smp_mflags} manually?

On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 10:12 PM Tom Stellard  wrote:

> On 05/21/2020 07:57 AM, Richard Shaw wrote:
> > Not really a big deal but %build_make has been available for quite a
> while. I noticed a few of my packages still supply _smp_mflags manually.
> >
> > Is this worth a script and automatic BZ? Probably not, but I think there
> is an intrinsic value to consistency.
> >
>
> I've been going through and fixing this manually in some spec files.
> Do you want to merge these and do the builds?
>
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/dumpet/pull-request/1
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/byaccj/pull-request/1
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/splix/pull-request/1
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/qiv/pull-request/1
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/tss2/pull-request/8
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/marisa/pull-request/3
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ldns/pull-request/2


While it's a simple change, we should wait a little a little while and see
if the maintainers respond. Also, it doesn't hurt anything but typically
it's "%make_build / %make_install" without the {}.

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

Default BLAS/LAPACK implementation + runtime exchangeable backends

2020-05-27 Thread Iñaki Ucar

Hi,

I didn't find this proposal in the archives, so let me add something
to this discussion. Does anyone know about FlexiBLAS [1]? It seems
like the perfect solution to this problem, and AFAIK, only Arch
packages it. Here's a presentation [2] about it (not up-to-date with
the current feature-set, but still interesting).

TL;DR, the general idea would be to build everything in Fedora against
the libblas.so, liblapack.so and libumfpack.so wrappers provided by
FlexiBLAS, and then it redirects the calls to the proper library (that
could be openblas-serial by default, of course). Then it provides the
user with a nice mechanism to select a backend (not based on
update-alternatives, no root privileges required). Additionally, it
embeds some profiling capabilities, which is really nice.

I think it's very much worth a try. Opinions?

[1] https://www.mpi-magdeburg.mpg.de/projects/flexiblas
[2] 
https://www2.mpi-magdeburg.mpg.de/mpcsc/software/flexiblas/2018_talk_fin_flexiblas.pdf

-- 
Iñaki Úcar
___
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: new packages review tickets

2020-05-27 Thread Miroslav Suchý

Dne 24. 05. 20 v 10:02 Mattia Verga via devel napsal(a):
> - following the Policy for stalled package reviews [1], I would like to 
> mass comment on tickets submitted before 1/1/2017 (more than 3 years 
> old) asking the submitter if they're still interested in continue with 
> the review process and mark the ticket as NEEDINFO. After one month 
> without reply I will close the ticket, as per policy.

-1
I had phase of life when I worked on these archaeologic tickets. I even managed 
to process eight years old ticket!
Yes, for most tickets it was: Ping! Wait one month. Than one more gentle Ping! 
And if submitter does not respond, then I
closed the ticket.
But I never done that en-masse. For every such ping, I was prepared to work on 
that ticket.

It may sounds appealing to clean the plate and "resolve" a lot of tickets. 
However, think about it from the other side:
somebody is waiting for review for years, then a ping will come, and if he 
responds, then ... nothing. Just "yeah, we
are not going to close this". That is not very welcome. :(

> Then there are 352 tickets listed as "review in progress", but that's 
> also not true. Here we have tickets with review-flag set to ? (review in 
> progress) or + (package approved) since 2013. There are even some 
> tickets for which the git repo as been generated.
> These tickets probably need a manual check to choose the best course of 
> action. Some of those packages have been approved and imported in 
> Fedora, some of these have been later retired also from repositories... 
> but the review ticket has never been closed.
> I would propose to:
> 
> - if the package got approved and it's still in repos, just close the 
> review ticket as CURRENTRELEASE
> - if the package got approved and was later removed from repos, just 
> close the review ticket as NOTABUG
> - if the package got approved before 1/1/2019, but never imported in 
> repos, clear the review-flag and assignee and mark as NEEDINFO from the 
> submitter asking if they're still interested in this (we probably need 
> to decide what to do if the git repo has been already set up)
> - if the package got approved before 1/1/2020, but never imported in 
> repos, do not clear the approval and mark as NEEDINFO from the submitter 
> asking if they're still interested in this
> - for tickets with last change marked before 1/1/2019, if the 
> review-flag is set to be IN-PROGRESS, mark the ticket as NEEDINFO from 
> either the submitter or the reviewer

+1

-- 
Miroslav Suchy, RHCA
Red Hat, Associate Manager ABRT/Copr, #brno, #fedora-buildsys
___
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-Cloud-32-20200527.0 compose check report

2020-05-27 Thread Fedora compose checker

No missing expected images.

Soft failed openQA tests: 1/1 (x86_64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)

ID: 606014  Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/606014
-- 
Mail generated by check-compose:
https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: [HEADS UP] Fedora 33 Python 3.9 rebuilds have started in a side tag


On 22. 05. 20 3:06, Miro Hrončok wrote:
Hello, in order to deliver Python 3.9, we are running a coordinated rebuild in a 
side tag.


https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Python3.9

If you see a "Rebuilt for Python 3.9" (or similar) commit in your package, 
please don't rebuild it in regular rawhide.

If you need to, please let me know, so we can coordinate.


Hello.

I've seen more packages updated in rawhide after the "Rebuilt for Python 3.9" 
commit. Please don't rebuild the packages in regular rawhide unless it is 
critical. When it is critical, please let me know about it, so we can coordinate.


Thanks.

--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
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

Single-threaded OpenBLAS is not thread-safe

2020-05-27 Thread Iñaki Ucar

Hi,

I wanted to bring some attention to this in devel, not only to
openblas' maintainer (in CC), because there have been some discussions
around BLAS/LAPACK in the past here.

As Dave Love pointed out in a previous discussion, generally,
parallelization is made at the top level and then you simply call a
single-threaded BLAS/LAPACK implementation. But as it turns out,
openblas is not thread-safe in such a scenario since v0.3.7 at least.
To ensure thread-safety, we need to build single-threaded openblas
with USE_LOCKING=1 [1] (which we don't do now, and we should,
especially if we intend to make this implementation a system-wide
default [2]).

Some bug reports motivated the inclusion of this new flag in v0.3.7
(see [3, 4]). And I stumbled upon this due to a question in
r-sig-fedora [5] about a proper way to switch BLAS/LAPACK version in
Fedora motivated by this issue in an R package.

So it's clear that things are failing out there, and USE_LOCKING=1 is
a sensible default that we should apply. I didn't find though what's
the performance penalty of setting such a flag. But if that's
noticeable, then this is another argument in favour of providing a
proper mechanism for the user to switch the implementation, as e.g.
Debian does.

[1] 
https://github.com/xianyi/OpenBLAS/wiki/Faq/4bded95e8dc8aadc70ce65267d1093ca7bdefc4c#multi-threaded
[2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/OpenBLAS_as_default_BLAS
[3] https://github.com/xianyi/OpenBLAS/issues/2126
[4] https://github.com/xianyi/OpenBLAS/issues/2155
[5] https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-sig-fedora/2020-May/000616.html

-- 
Iñaki Úcar
___
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: Increasing the packaging team: regular workshops/vFADs/classroom sessions on packaging

2020-05-27 Thread Miroslav Suchý

Dne 21. 05. 20 v 10:52 Ankur Sinha napsal(a):
> Hi folks,
> 
> The packaging team is generally quite stretched, and we frankly need
> more people helping us out.
> 
> The main issue with newcomers taking on packaging is that the learning
> curve here is much more technical then a lot of other areas in Fedora.
> So, while it is still expected that folks read the docs and learn things
> themselves, perhaps we could be more active in helping them?
> 
> We've had rpm packaging classroom sessions in the past. Are any folks
> interested in restarting these? Maybe a different SIG could do a session
> each month to help newcomers get started with packaging their tools?
> Sponsors, what do you think?

There is already:
  
https://docs.pagure.org/copr.copr/user_documentation.html#how-can-i-package-software-as-rpm
It already includes two recordings of such workshops.

And I encourage everyone to particapate on
  https://rpm-packaging-guide.github.io/
You can contribute to this at:
  https://github.com/redhat-developer/rpm-packaging-guide


-- 
Miroslav Suchy, RHCA
Red Hat, Associate Manager ABRT/Copr, #brno, #fedora-buildsys



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital 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: Location of executable code

2020-05-27 Thread David Sastre

On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 10:43 PM Przemek Klosowski via devel <
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:

> On 5/23/20 12:18 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> >   Would the time be better spent enhancing SELinux?
>
> ThatSELinux already labels everything in /bin and /usr/libexec as
>
> system_u:object_r:bin_t:s0
>
> so maybe it could be leveraged to cover everything you are considering?
> Is there something fundamental missing in SELinux that forces a separate
> implementation?
>

The #2 FAQ in the project's README[1] provides guidance in this regard:

   1. Can SELinux or AppArmor do this instead?

SE Linux is modelling how an application behaves. It is not concerned about
where the application came from or whether its known to the system.
Basically, anything in /bin gets bin_t type by default which is not a very
restrictive label. MAC systems serve a different purpose. Fapolicyd by
design cares solely about if this is a known application/library. These are
complimentary security subsystems. There is more information about
application whitelisting use cases at the following NIST website:

https://www.nist.gov/publications/guide-application-whitelisting

[1]:
https://github.com/linux-application-whitelisting/fapolicyd/blob/master/README.md#faq
___
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 1840603] New: perl-Text-CSV_XS-1.43 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1840603

Bug ID: 1840603
   Summary: perl-Text-CSV_XS-1.43 is available
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-Text-CSV_XS
  Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
  Assignee: p...@city-fan.org
  Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: anon.am...@gmail.com, jose.p.oliveira@gmail.com,
ka...@ucw.cz, p...@city-fan.org,
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org,
xav...@bachelot.org
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Latest upstream release: 1.43
Current version/release in rawhide: 1.42-1.fc33
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Text-CSV_XS/

Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a
stable branch: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/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/3434/


-- 
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 1840295] perl-HTTP-Daemon-6.10 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1840295

Petr Pisar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC|ppi...@redhat.com   |
   Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value




-- 
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: How to debug live CD image?

2020-05-27 Thread Barry Scott



> On 24 May 2020, at 21:55, Paul Dufresne via devel 
>  wrote:
> 
> Le 20-05-24 à 05 h 47, Barry Scott a écrit :
>> ...
>> But I cannot boot a live CD image as it gets stuck
>> in "Monitoring of LVM2 mirrors, ...". This is not a
>> new problem I have seen this for a couple of Fedora
>> releases, but not reported it before.
> 
> Is it possible you don't wait enough, that is about 8 minutes by boot?

It is at 55mins 18s at the moment.

I'll test the respin later and report back.

> 
> Look https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1830896
> 
> I was introduced to this from eugine in: 
> https://ask.fedoraproject.org/t/boot-loading-time-is-very-high/6076/8
> 
> 
> ___
> 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: F30 security update submitted for stable "marked obsolete" instead of being pushed

2020-05-27 Thread Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski

On Wednesday, 27 May 2020 at 10:22, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 27. 05. 20 9:43, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> > On Wednesday, 27 May 2020 at 01:08, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > > On 27. 05. 20 0:56, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> > > > Can someone explain why my update[1] which was submitted for F30
> > > > stable was not pushed but "marked obsolete"? It was a security
> > > > update, too.
> > > > 
> > > > [1] https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-2d381e061b
> > > 
> > > Fedora 30 went EOL before the update was pushed to stable.
> > 
> > I would have expected that any updates submitted for stable before the
> > cut-off time would still be pushed and I was surprised that didn't
> > happen.
> 
> AFAIK this was never the case, but I'm not sure. I remember in the past the
> updates just kinda stuck in limbo (being pushed to stable for eternity). At
> least now they are marked as obsolete.

I see. I guess I haven't submitted an update so close to EOL date for
quite some time so I wasn't affected before.

> > Perhaps the cut-off time should have been communicated more
> > prominently.
> 
> Totally agree.
> 
> https://pagure.io/releng/issue/9479
> 
> > A warning in bodhi web interface would have helped, too.
> 
> And there as well.
> 
> https://github.com/fedora-infra/bodhi/issues/4040

Thank you for opening those.

Regards,
Dominik
-- 
Fedora   https://getfedora.org  |  RPM Fusion  http://rpmfusion.org
There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and
oppression to develop psychic muscles.
-- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Packages still using %{?_smp_mflags} manually?

2020-05-27 Thread Björn 'besser82' Esser

Am Donnerstag, den 21.05.2020, 17:53 +0200 schrieb Igor Raits:
> > In the spec file of another one that I've inherited, I see "make V=1
> > %{?_smp_mflags}".
> 
> %make_build V=1

Not even neccessary since `V=1` already gets injected by the
`%make_build` macro at least since F32:

$ rpm -E %make_build
/usr/bin/make -O -j8 V=1 VERBOSE=1


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: Help needed with Fedora Python Classroom Lab container image

On Wed, 27 May 2020 at 10:09, Miro Hrončok  wrote:

> On 27. 05. 20 9:12, Clement Verna wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 27 May 2020 at 01:23, Miro Hrončok  > > wrote:
> >
> > Hello.
> >
> > There is a docker/podman container image part of the Fedora Python
> Classroom
> > Lab:
> >
> > https://labs.fedoraproject.org/en/python-classroom
> >
> > I need help with two main issues:
> >
> >
> > 1) The container doesn't built for Fedora 32:
> >
> > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=45001647
> >
> > But I get an error I don't understand (dnf exited with error, but I
> see no
> > error
> > message).
> >
> >
> > I have built it in rawhide [0][1] and f32 [2][3]
>
> Thank you! Should we bump the rawhide version so it is higher, or it
> doesn't matter?
>

It does not really mater, the release is automatically bumped by OSBS so it
depends of the order of the builds. But in the end it will be available as
registry.fp.o/f33/python-classroom:latest or
registry.fp.o/f32/python-classroom:latest


>
> > 2) I don't know how to get the previous images (namely Fedora 31)
> from the
> > registry. Apparently they have all ever just been in the candidate
> registry and
> > they have been all deleted... ?
> >
> > https://pagure.io/releng/issue/9473
> >
> > An actual user asked about the missing images, hence I don't want to
> stop
> > producing them, OTOH I clearly have no idea what am I doing. If
> somebody is
> > interested in participating, this would be really appreciated. If
> not, I think
> > we should remove the thing from Python Classroom's website.
> >
> >
> > I am happy to help here, I have given myself the commit permission on
> src.fp.o
> > so that I could create the update in bodhi.
>
> Thanks. When the update is pushed to stable, the image will be in the
> regular
> registry?
>

Yes


>
> --
> Miro Hrončok
> --
> Phone: +420777974800
> IRC: mhroncok
>
___
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: F30 security update submitted for stable "marked obsolete" instead of being pushed


On 27. 05. 20 9:43, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:

On Wednesday, 27 May 2020 at 01:08, Miro Hrončok wrote:

On 27. 05. 20 0:56, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:

Can someone explain why my update[1] which was submitted for F30
stable was not pushed but "marked obsolete"? It was a security
update, too.

[1] https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-2d381e061b


Fedora 30 went EOL before the update was pushed to stable.


I would have expected that any updates submitted for stable before the
cut-off time would still be pushed and I was surprised that didn't
happen.


AFAIK this was never the case, but I'm not sure. I remember in the past the 
updates just kinda stuck in limbo (being pushed to stable for eternity). At 
least now they are marked as obsolete.



Perhaps the cut-off time should have been communicated more
prominently.


Totally agree.

https://pagure.io/releng/issue/9479


A warning in bodhi web interface would have helped, too.


And there as well.

https://github.com/fedora-infra/bodhi/issues/4040

--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
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 1840560] New: perl-Prima-1.59 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1840560

Bug ID: 1840560
   Summary: perl-Prima-1.59 is available
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-Prima
  Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
  Assignee: ppi...@redhat.com
  Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: lkund...@v3.sk, perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org,
ppi...@redhat.com
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Latest upstream release: 1.59
Current version/release in rawhide: 1.58-1.fc33
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Prima/

Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a
stable branch: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/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/3289/


-- 
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: F30 security update submitted for stable "marked obsolete" instead of being pushed

2020-05-27 Thread Igor Raits

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

On Tue, 2020-05-26 at 23:16 -0700, John M. Harris Jr wrote:
> On Tuesday, May 26, 2020 9:56:48 PM MST Samuel Sieb wrote:
> > On 5/26/20 8:13 PM, John M. Harris Jr wrote:
> > 
> > > On Tuesday, May 26, 2020 4:08:52 PM MST Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > > 
> > > > On 27. 05. 20 0:56, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > > Can someone explain why my update[1] which was submitted for
> > > > > F30
> > > > > stable was not pushed but "marked obsolete"? It was a
> > > > > security
> > > > > update, too.
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Dominik
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > [1] 
> > > > > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-2d381e061b
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Fedora 30 went EOL before the update was pushed to stable.
> > > 
> > > And that killed a *security update*? Seriously?
> > 
> > That's what EOL means.  Once the switch is flipped, there are no
> > more 
> > updates.
> 
> This has come up before. That's pretty absurd. If people are still
> willing to 
> dedicate their time to updating it, why is that done for a release
> that's over 
> *just a year old*, especially given that there are a chunk of users
> stuck on 
> F30 forever, until they find a distro that isn't Fedora, or Fedora
> supports 
> i686 once more (So unlikely it's not even worth considering, really).

Why should Fedora provide resources for those maintainers. For a
project, F30 is EOL. That's it. Fedora is not going to support your
updates or anything like that. Doing that would give users false
assumptions that there are still updates coming in and all their
security bugs will be fixed.

If you want to provide any updates, you are free to do it in some other
place, be that COPR (though they also disable EOL chroots quite fast)
or your own buildsystem somewhere else.

> -- 
> John M. Harris, Jr.
> 
> ___
> 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
- -- 
Igor Raits 
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
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=Adyo
-END PGP 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

pam: removing libdb

2020-05-27 Thread Iker Pedrosa

Hi,

I'm facing a bugzilla [1] that asks to remove libdb dependency from pam
package and to change it to NDBM. So, I'd like to hear feedback from the
community. Is anybody using pam_userdb module? From those who are using it,
which database are you using? Will you have to migrate from one database to
the other in case of dropping support for libdb? Any other comments?

Links:
[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1788543

-- 

Iker Pedrosa

Software Engineer, Identity Management team

Red Hat 

___
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: Help needed with Fedora Python Classroom Lab container image


On 27. 05. 20 9:12, Clement Verna wrote:



On Wed, 27 May 2020 at 01:23, Miro Hrončok > wrote:


Hello.

There is a docker/podman container image part of the Fedora Python Classroom
Lab:

https://labs.fedoraproject.org/en/python-classroom

I need help with two main issues:


1) The container doesn't built for Fedora 32:

https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=45001647

But I get an error I don't understand (dnf exited with error, but I see no
error
message).


I have built it in rawhide [0][1] and f32 [2][3]


Thank you! Should we bump the rawhide version so it is higher, or it doesn't 
matter?


2) I don't know how to get the previous images (namely Fedora 31) from the
registry. Apparently they have all ever just been in the candidate registry 
and
they have been all deleted... ?

https://pagure.io/releng/issue/9473

An actual user asked about the missing images, hence I don't want to stop
producing them, OTOH I clearly have no idea what am I doing. If somebody is
interested in participating, this would be really appreciated. If not, I 
think
we should remove the thing from Python Classroom's website.


I am happy to help here, I have given myself the commit permission on src.fp.o 
so that I could create the update in bodhi.


Thanks. When the update is pushed to stable, the image will be in the regular 
registry?


--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
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: F30 security update submitted for stable "marked obsolete" instead of being pushed

2020-05-27 Thread Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski

On Wednesday, 27 May 2020 at 01:08, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 27. 05. 20 0:56, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> > Can someone explain why my update[1] which was submitted for F30
> > stable was not pushed but "marked obsolete"? It was a security
> > update, too.
> > 
> > [1] https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-2d381e061b
> 
> Fedora 30 went EOL before the update was pushed to stable.

I would have expected that any updates submitted for stable before the
cut-off time would still be pushed and I was surprised that didn't
happen.  Perhaps the cut-off time should have been communicated more
prominently.

A warning in bodhi web interface would have helped, too.

Regards,
Dominik
-- 
Fedora   https://getfedora.org  |  RPM Fusion  http://rpmfusion.org
There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and
oppression to develop psychic muscles.
-- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan
___
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: Non-responsive maintainer: glances

2020-05-27 Thread Didier Fabert

Hi,

If you just need to install glances, you can use my copr:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/tartare/glances/ which have an
up to date version for fedora, el7 and el8.

Cheers,

Didier.

Le 26/05/2020 à 16:43, Breno Brand Fernandes a écrit :
> I also had filed this ticket, back in Oct/2019 asking the EL8 build.
> 
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1763319
> 
> On Thu, 21 May 2020 at 14:26, Richard Shaw  > wrote:
> 
> I did a local update and tested it, being innocuous enough I went
> and and updated and am performing builds now. Hopefully madko will
> show back up at some point. 
> 
> I also did a local build for EPEL 8 but it needs two python
> packages: psutil & future
> 
> Both built fine from Fedora master so when I get a minute I may file
> bugs to request EPEL 8 branches.
> 
> 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
> 
> 
> ___
> 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
> 


pEpkey.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys
___
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: Help needed with Fedora Python Classroom Lab container image

On Wed, 27 May 2020 at 01:23, Miro Hrončok  wrote:

> Hello.
>
> There is a docker/podman container image part of the Fedora Python
> Classroom Lab:
>
>https://labs.fedoraproject.org/en/python-classroom
>
> I need help with two main issues:
>
>
> 1) The container doesn't built for Fedora 32:
>
>https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=45001647
>
> But I get an error I don't understand (dnf exited with error, but I see no
> error
> message).
>

I have built it in rawhide [0][1] and f32 [2][3]


>
>
> 2) I don't know how to get the previous images (namely Fedora 31) from the
> registry. Apparently they have all ever just been in the candidate
> registry and
> they have been all deleted... ?
>
>https://pagure.io/releng/issue/9473
>
> An actual user asked about the missing images, hence I don't want to stop
> producing them, OTOH I clearly have no idea what am I doing. If somebody
> is
> interested in participating, this would be really appreciated. If not, I
> think
> we should remove the thing from Python Classroom's website.
>

I am happy to help here, I have given myself the commit permission on
src.fp.o so that I could create the update in bodhi.


[0] - https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1516686
[1] -
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-CONTAINER-2020-0beba9bad3

[2] - https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1516687
[3] -
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-CONTAINER-2020-1acaf7ced0


>
> --
> Miro Hrončok
> --
> Phone: +420777974800
> IRC: mhroncok
> ___
> python-devel mailing list -- python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to python-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>
___
python-devel mailing list -- python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Help needed with Fedora Python Classroom Lab container image

On Wed, 27 May 2020 at 01:23, Miro Hrončok  wrote:

> Hello.
>
> There is a docker/podman container image part of the Fedora Python
> Classroom Lab:
>
>https://labs.fedoraproject.org/en/python-classroom
>
> I need help with two main issues:
>
>
> 1) The container doesn't built for Fedora 32:
>
>https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=45001647
>
> But I get an error I don't understand (dnf exited with error, but I see no
> error
> message).
>

I have built it in rawhide [0][1] and f32 [2][3]


>
>
> 2) I don't know how to get the previous images (namely Fedora 31) from the
> registry. Apparently they have all ever just been in the candidate
> registry and
> they have been all deleted... ?
>
>https://pagure.io/releng/issue/9473
>
> An actual user asked about the missing images, hence I don't want to stop
> producing them, OTOH I clearly have no idea what am I doing. If somebody
> is
> interested in participating, this would be really appreciated. If not, I
> think
> we should remove the thing from Python Classroom's website.
>

I am happy to help here, I have given myself the commit permission on
src.fp.o so that I could create the update in bodhi.


[0] - https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1516686
[1] -
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-CONTAINER-2020-0beba9bad3

[2] - https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1516687
[3] -
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-CONTAINER-2020-1acaf7ced0


>
> --
> Miro Hrončok
> --
> Phone: +420777974800
> IRC: mhroncok
> ___
> python-devel mailing list -- python-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to python-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/python-de...@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: F30 security update submitted for stable "marked obsolete" instead of being pushed

2020-05-27 Thread Emmanuel Seyman

* Artur Iwicki [27/05/2020 06:25] :
>
> While I understand the mechanism, I think that this needs to be communicated
> more clearly. I've been a packager for close to 3 years now and I admit until
> I read this e-mail I wasn't quite sure whether "no updates after EOL" meant
> "you can't submit stuff to bodhi", or whether it meant "the updates repo is
> frozen solid, whatever didn't make it in, well shucks". (As we can see, it's
> the latter.)

The Fedora 29 EOL message[1] was a bit more explicit:

"At that time, all open Bugzilla bugs will be closed and no more
package updates will be published."

Emmanuel

[1] 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/VUK3CJ5LO4ROUH3JTCDVHYAVVYAOCU62/
___
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: Help needed with Fedora Python Classroom Lab container image

On Wed, 27 May 2020 at 02:28, Adam Williamson 
wrote:

> On Wed, 2020-05-27 at 01:20 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > Hello.
> >
> > There is a docker/podman container image part of the Fedora Python
> Classroom Lab:
> >
> >https://labs.fedoraproject.org/en/python-classroom
> >
> > I need help with two main issues:
> >
> >
> > 1) The container doesn't built for Fedora 32:
> >
> >https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=45001647
> >
> > But I get an error I don't understand (dnf exited with error, but I see
> no error
> > message).
>
> Errors seem to be in x86_64.log:
>
> 2020-05-26 09:59:39,727 - atomic_reactor.util - DEBUG - Step 6/11 : RUN
> dnf -y --setopt=install_weak_deps=false --disablerepo rawhide-modular
>  install "@python-classroom" nano openssh-clients vim-enhanced wget man
>  && dnf clean all
> 2020-05-26 09:59:40,900 - atomic_reactor.util - DEBUG - ---> Running in
> 75ba910cc4cc
> 2020-05-26 09:59:42,917 - atomic_reactor.util - DEBUG -  [91mNo repository
> match: rawhide-modular
> 2020-05-26 09:59:42,917 - atomic_reactor.util - DEBUG -  [0m
> 2020-05-26 09:59:43,110 - atomic_reactor.util - DEBUG -
> atomic-reactor-koji-plugin-f32-container-candid 4.1 kB/s | 413  B 00:00
> 2020-05-26 09:59:43,289 - atomic_reactor.util - DEBUG - Fedora 32 openh264
> (From Cisco) - x86_64 34 kB/s | 5.1 kB 00:00
> 2020-05-26 09:59:43,542 - atomic_reactor.util - DEBUG - Fedora Modular 32
> - x86_64   20 MB/s | 4.9 MB 00:00
> 2020-05-26 09:59:44,455 - atomic_reactor.util - DEBUG - Fedora Modular 32
> - x86_64 - Updates6.4 MB/s | 1.6 MB 00:00
> 2020-05-26 10:03:19,281 - atomic_reactor.util - DEBUG - Fedora 32 - x86_64
> - Updates0.0  B/s |   0  B 03:34
> 2020-05-26 10:03:19,282 - atomic_reactor.util - DEBUG -  [91mErrors during
> downloading metadata for repository 'updates':
> 2020-05-26 10:03:19,283 - atomic_reactor.util - DEBUG - - Curl error (7):
> Couldn't connect to server for
> http://mirrors.dotsrc.org/fedora-buffet/fedora/linux/updates/32/Everything/x86_64/repodata/repomd.xml
> [Failed to connect to mirrors.dotsrc.org port 80: Connection refused]
> 2020-05-26 10:03:19,283 - atomic_reactor.util - DEBUG - - Curl error (7):
> Couldn't connect to server for
> https://mirror.lzu.edu.cn/fedora/updates/32/Everything/x86_64/repodata/repomd.xml
> [Failed to connect to mirror.lzu.edu.cn port 443: Connection refused]
> 2020-05-26 10:03:19,283 - atomic_reactor.util - DEBUG - - Curl error (7):
> Couldn't connect to server for
> http://mirrors.ircam.fr/pub/fedora/linux/updates/32/Everything/x86_64/repodata/repomd.xml
> [Failed to connect to mirrors.ircam.fr port 80: Connection refused]
> 2020-05-26 10:03:19,283 - atomic_reactor.util - DEBUG - - Curl error (7):
> Couldn't connect to server for
> http://fedora.cu.be/linux/updates/32/Everything/x86_64/repodata/repomd.xml
> [Failed to connect to fedora.cu.be port 80: Connection refused]
> 2020-05-26 10:03:19,283 - atomic_reactor.util - DEBUG - - Curl error (7):
> Couldn't connect to server for
> http://mirror.math.princeton.edu/pub/fedora/linux/updates/32/Everything/x86_64/repodata/repomd.xml
> [Failed to connect to mirror.math.princeton.edu port 80: Connection
> refused]
> 2020-05-26 10:03:19,283 - atomic_reactor.util - DEBUG - - Curl error (7):
> Couldn't connect to server for
> http://mirror.metrocast.net/fedora/linux/updates/32/Everything/x86_64/repodata/repomd.xml
> [Failed to connect to mirror.metrocast.net port 80: Connection refused]
> 2020-05-26 10:03:19,283 - atomic_reactor.util - DEBUG - - Curl error (7):
> Couldn't connect to server for
> http://mirrors.chroot.ro/fedora/linux/updates/32/Everything/x86_64/repodata/repomd.xml
> [Failed to connect to mirrors.chroot.ro port 80: Connection refused]
> 2020-05-26 10:03:19,283 - atomic_reactor.util - DEBUG - - Curl error (7):
> Couldn't connect to server for
> http://mirror.init7.net/fedora/fedora/linux/updates/32/Everything/x86_64/repodata/repomd.xml
> [Failed to connect to mirror.init7.net port 80: Connection refused]
> 2020-05-26 10:03:19,283 - atomic_reactor.util - DEBUG - - Curl error (7):
> Couldn't connect to server for
> http://download-ib01.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora/linux/updates/32/Everything/x86_64/repodata/repomd.xml
> [Failed to connect to download-ib01.fedoraproject.org port 80: Connection
> refused]
> 2020-05-26 10:03:19,283 - atomic_reactor.util - DEBUG - - Curl error (7):
> Couldn't connect to server for
> https://pubmirror1.math.uh.edu/fedora-buffet/fedora/linux/updates/32/Everything/x86_64/repodata/repomd.xml
> [Failed to connect to pubmirror1.math.uh.edu port 443: Connection refused]
> 2020-05-26 10:03:19,283 - atomic_reactor.util - DEBUG - - Curl error (7):
> Couldn't connect to server for
> https://fedora.mirror.liteserver.nl/linux/updates/32/Everything/x86_64/repodata/repomd.xml
> [Failed to connect to fedora.mirror.liteserver.nl port 443: Connection
> refused]
> 2020-05-26 10:03:19,283 -

Re: Help needed with Fedora Python Classroom Lab container image