Re: Donate 1 minute of your time to test upgrades from F33 to F34

[Ludovic Hirlimann via devel]

On 2/20/21 10:49 AM, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
>   sudo dnf --releasever=34 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f34 \
>     --enablerepo=updates-testing --enablerepo=updates-testing-modular \
>     distro-sync 


 Problem: package gnome-tour-40~beta-3.fc34.x86_64 obsoletes
gnome-getting-started-docs < 3.38.1-2 provided by
gnome-getting-started-docs-3.38.0-2.fc34.noarch
  - package gnome-getting-started-docs-fr-3.38.0-2.fc34.noarch requires
gnome-getting-started-docs = 3.38.0-2.fc34, but none of the providers
can be installed
  - problem with installed package gnome-tour-3.38.0-2.fc33.x86_64
  - problem with installed package
gnome-getting-started-docs-fr-3.38.1-1.fc33.noarch
  - gnome-tour-3.38.0-2.fc33.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade
repository
  - gnome-getting-started-docs-fr-3.38.1-1.fc33.noarch does not belong
to a distupgrade repository

Ludovic

-- 
https://ludovic.hirlimann.net || https://liberapay.com/lhirlimann/

___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Fedora-Cloud-33-20210225.0 compose check report

[Fedora compose checker]

No missing expected images.

Soft failed openQA tests: 1/7 (x86_64), 1/7 (aarch64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)

Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-33-20210224.0):

ID: 788980  Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/788980
ID: 788987  Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/788987

Passed openQA tests: 6/7 (x86_64), 6/7 (aarch64)
-- 
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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Fedora 35 Change: Autoconf-2.71 (Self-Contained Change proposal)

[Ondrej Dubaj]

Brian,

I understand, but as I already said, compat package can lead to
unwillingness to move forward to autoconf-2.71. For example, we can have a
compat package for f35 to have time to deal with the problems, but
certainly not for f36 or f37. After release of autoconf-2.71, I expect most
of the upstream packages moving to autoconf-2.71 in one year time, so
hopefully no compat package will be needed.

Why are you not thinking of moving parted to autoconf-2.71 ? Are there any
special reasons for not doing this?

Thanks.

Ondrej

On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 6:36 PM Brian C. Lane  wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 08:14:17AM +0100, Ondrej Dubaj wrote:
> > Brian,
> >
> > you are right there are some changes which are now backward compatible.
> > That's the reason why we need cross-component cooperation from other
> > maintainers to detect these pieces and potentially report them to
> upstream
> > and see if they are willing to fix them. Another option is also to
> create a
> > compat package for autoconf-2.69 for f35, but it can lead to a result,
> > where some of the maintainers/upstreams will never use autoconf-2.71.
>
> I think we need to create a 2.69 compat package. I certainly have no
> current plans to switch upstream parted to 2.71 and while I now have a
> wonderful 1.8M patch that fixes it for Fedora I'd rather just use the
> upstream tar release with 2.69 until we're comfortable moving.
>
> Having 2.71 available is valuable, so both should be packaged, but it
> should not be a requirement at this point.
>
> Brian
>
> --
> Brian C. Lane (PST8PDT) - weldr.io - lorax - parted - pykickstart
>
>
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Please remove "-i" from "%forgemeta" templates on wiki

[Tim Landscheidt]

Kevin Kofler via devel  wrote:

>> I don't think "documentation is harder to keep up to date there" is right,

> Well, I guess it does not apply that much to the pages which were already in
> an ACL-locked namespace, in particular, the packaging guidelines that can
> only be edited by FPC. I cannot speak for the FPC whether it is easier,
> harder, or the same difficulty to do the edits now vs. on the wiki.

> But as far as I can tell, the move also affects wiki contents that were not
> previously ACL-locked, and for those, it makes a big difference whether
> anyone with a FAS account can just edit them on the wiki or whether one has
> to dig up the source code in some Git repository and send a pull request
> (and not get any instant feedback whether the changes even compile without
> also installing some documentation processing toolchain). I guess most
> people can only try to get someone else to do the editing work, or will just
> shrug it off as "it's wrong and I cannot edit it".

> Wikis have a much lower barrier to entry than setups of the
> docs.fedoraproject.org type.

> […]

Personally, I cannot edit the wiki, but can submit pull re-
quests for the docs (and have done so).

Maybe due to my GNU socialization, I also really like good,
single-truth documentation.  Where wikis are curated to a
degree that makes them usable, the effort spent seems com-
parable to a Git forge (except that as a user, one cannot
discern a wiki edit by someone who knows what they are doing
from one that was overlooked or one that someone wants to
fix in the future, but has not gotten around to it).

Tim
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[389-devel] 389 DS nightly 2021-02-25 - 95% PASS

[vashirov]

https://fedorapeople.org/groups/389ds/ci/nightly/2021/02/25/report-389-ds-base-2.0.3-20210225git60e35aac5.fc33.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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1932287] perl-Data-Printer-1.000001 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1932287

Upstream Release Monitoring  
changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Summary|perl-Data-Printer-1.00  |perl-Data-Printer-1.01
   |is available|is available



--- Comment #2 from Upstream Release Monitoring 
 ---
Latest upstream release: 1.01
Current version/release in rawhide: 0.40-11.fc34
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Data-Printer/

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/2771/


-- 
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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1932000] perl-Test-NoBreakpoints-0.17 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1932000



--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-357d14f43c has been pushed to the Fedora 33 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
--advisory=FEDORA-2021-357d14f43c`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-357d14f43c

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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1931471] perl-DBD-Mock-1.59 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1931471



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-ece51f9d84 has been pushed to the Fedora 33 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
--advisory=FEDORA-2021-ece51f9d84`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-ece51f9d84

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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1931135] perl-Module-CoreList-5.20210220 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1931135



--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-aafc00d3b9 has been pushed to the Fedora 33 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
--advisory=FEDORA-2021-aafc00d3b9`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-aafc00d3b9

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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1899994] perl-Module-CoreList-5.20201120 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=184



--- Comment #21 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2021-7e1b6d0ac2 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 Modular 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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1909492] perl-Config-Perl-V-0.33 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1909492



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2021-6d25713de2 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 Modular 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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1909154] perl-ExtUtils-Install-2.20 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1909154



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2021-6d25713de2 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 Modular 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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1905544] perl-PerlIO-via-QuotedPrint-0.09 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1905544



--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2021-6d25713de2 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 Modular 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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1906719] perl-Text-Balanced-2.04 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1906719



--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2021-6d25713de2 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 Modular 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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1897847] perl-Pod-Simple-3.42 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1897847



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2021-6d25713de2 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 Modular 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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1897670] perl-IPC-SysV-2.09 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1897670



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2021-6d25713de2 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 Modular 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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1887487] perl-Pod-Simple-3.41 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887487



--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2021-6d25713de2 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 Modular 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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1879289] perl-ExtUtils-Install-2.18 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1879289



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2021-6d25713de2 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 Modular 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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1932000] perl-Test-NoBreakpoints-0.17 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1932000



--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-6600f6c532 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
--advisory=FEDORA-2021-6600f6c532`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-6600f6c532

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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1931471] perl-DBD-Mock-1.59 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1931471

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-67c1384800 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
--advisory=FEDORA-2021-67c1384800`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-67c1384800

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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1931135] perl-Module-CoreList-5.20210220 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1931135

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-2fd7bd74cc has been pushed to the Fedora 32 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
--advisory=FEDORA-2021-2fd7bd74cc`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-2fd7bd74cc

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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1899994] perl-Module-CoreList-5.20201120 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=184



--- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2021-0b994a1a92 has been pushed to the Fedora 33 Modular 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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1909492] perl-Config-Perl-V-0.33 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1909492

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|RAWHIDE |ERRATA



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2021-bc244f7da3 has been pushed to the Fedora 33 Modular 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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1909154] perl-ExtUtils-Install-2.20 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1909154

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|RAWHIDE |ERRATA



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2021-bc244f7da3 has been pushed to the Fedora 33 Modular 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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1905544] perl-PerlIO-via-QuotedPrint-0.09 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1905544

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|RAWHIDE |ERRATA



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2021-bc244f7da3 has been pushed to the Fedora 33 Modular 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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1906719] perl-Text-Balanced-2.04 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1906719

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|RAWHIDE |ERRATA



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2021-bc244f7da3 has been pushed to the Fedora 33 Modular 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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1897847] perl-Pod-Simple-3.42 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1897847

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|RAWHIDE |ERRATA



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2021-bc244f7da3 has been pushed to the Fedora 33 Modular 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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1897670] perl-IPC-SysV-2.09 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1897670

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|RAWHIDE |ERRATA



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2021-bc244f7da3 has been pushed to the Fedora 33 Modular 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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1887487] perl-Pod-Simple-3.41 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887487

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|RAWHIDE |ERRATA



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2021-bc244f7da3 has been pushed to the Fedora 33 Modular 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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1879289] perl-ExtUtils-Install-2.18 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1879289

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|RAWHIDE |ERRATA



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2021-bc244f7da3 has been pushed to the Fedora 33 Modular 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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1850772] Add perl-Email-Valid to EPEL8

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1850772

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2021-b314160e0b has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 testing
repository.

You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-b314160e0b

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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1807857] please build perl-Sys-SigAction on EPEL8

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1807857

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2021-a6333d6872 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 testing
repository.

You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-a6333d6872

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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1928408] perl-Log-Agent-1.004 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1928408

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version|perl-Log-Agent-1.004-1.fc35 |perl-Log-Agent-1.004-1.fc35
   |perl-Log-Agent-1.004-1.fc33 |perl-Log-Agent-1.004-1.fc33
   ||perl-Log-Agent-1.004-1.fc32



--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-ed46daa43c 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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1928408] perl-Log-Agent-1.004 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1928408

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
   Fixed In Version|perl-Log-Agent-1.004-1.fc35 |perl-Log-Agent-1.004-1.fc35
   ||perl-Log-Agent-1.004-1.fc33
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed||2021-02-24 20:40:15



--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-113f8eb2a5 has been pushed to the Fedora 33 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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1928387] perl-ExtUtils-CBuilder-0.280236 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1928387

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
   Fixed In Version|perl-ExtUtils-CBuilder-0.28 |perl-ExtUtils-CBuilder-0.28
   |0236-1.fc35,|0236-1.fc35,
   |perl-ExtUtils-CBuilder-0.28 |perl-ExtUtils-CBuilder-0.28
   |0236-1.fc34 |0236-1.fc34
   ||perl-ExtUtils-CBuilder-0.28
   ||0236-1.fc33
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed||2021-02-24 20:40:10



--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-2eee8b7183 has been pushed to the Fedora 33 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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1925453] Upgrade perl-IO-Interactive to 1.023

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1925453

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version|perl-IO-Interactive-1.023-1 |perl-IO-Interactive-1.023-1
   |.fc34   |.fc34
   |perl-IO-Interactive-1.023-1 |perl-IO-Interactive-1.023-1
   |.fc33   |.fc33
   |perl-IO-Interactive-1.023-1 |perl-IO-Interactive-1.023-1
   |.fc32   |.fc32
   |perl-IO-Interactive-1.023-1 |perl-IO-Interactive-1.023-1
   |.el7|.el7
   ||perl-IO-Interactive-1.023-1
   ||.el8



--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2021-414bf334ea has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1925453] Upgrade perl-IO-Interactive to 1.023

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1925453

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version|perl-IO-Interactive-1.023-1 |perl-IO-Interactive-1.023-1
   |.fc34   |.fc34
   |perl-IO-Interactive-1.023-1 |perl-IO-Interactive-1.023-1
   |.fc33   |.fc33
   |perl-IO-Interactive-1.023-1 |perl-IO-Interactive-1.023-1
   |.fc32   |.fc32
   ||perl-IO-Interactive-1.023-1
   ||.el7



--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2021-e642bf1199 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1932000] perl-Test-NoBreakpoints-0.17 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1932000

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-1c0d2f1002 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
--advisory=FEDORA-2021-1c0d2f1002`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-1c0d2f1002

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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1932000] perl-Test-NoBreakpoints-0.17 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1932000



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-357d14f43c has been submitted as an update to Fedora 33.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-357d14f43c


-- 
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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1932000] perl-Test-NoBreakpoints-0.17 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1932000



--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-6600f6c532 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 32.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-6600f6c532


-- 
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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1932000] perl-Test-NoBreakpoints-0.17 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1932000



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-1c0d2f1002 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 34.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-1c0d2f1002


-- 
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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1932000] perl-Test-NoBreakpoints-0.17 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1932000

Petr Pisar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
   Fixed In Version||perl-Test-NoBreakpoints-0.1
   ||7-1.fc35




-- 
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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Please remove "-i" from "%forgemeta" templates on wiki

[Kevin Kofler via devel]

Matthew Miller wrote:
> I don't think "documentation is harder to keep up to date there" is right,

Well, I guess it does not apply that much to the pages which were already in 
an ACL-locked namespace, in particular, the packaging guidelines that can 
only be edited by FPC. I cannot speak for the FPC whether it is easier, 
harder, or the same difficulty to do the edits now vs. on the wiki.

But as far as I can tell, the move also affects wiki contents that were not 
previously ACL-locked, and for those, it makes a big difference whether 
anyone with a FAS account can just edit them on the wiki or whether one has 
to dig up the source code in some Git repository and send a pull request 
(and not get any instant feedback whether the changes even compile without 
also installing some documentation processing toolchain). I guess most 
people can only try to get someone else to do the editing work, or will just 
shrug it off as "it's wrong and I cannot edit it".

Wikis have a much lower barrier to entry than setups of the 
docs.fedoraproject.org type.

> or necessarily harder to find (although I hoped we would have a decent
> search solution by now!).

The lack of a search solution makes it very much harder to find anything on 
docs.fedoraproject.org than on the wiki.

That said, finding content on the wiki was also unnecessarily hard, but that 
was not a result of the wiki technology, but of how it was (mis)used in 
Fedora: In particular, a few years ago, the wiki's front page was redesigned 
to no longer be a table of contents for the various wiki contents, but 
instead mainly link to non-wiki content, making it much harder to find the 
actual wiki contents. You actually have to click on Subprojects / All 
Projects in the menu on the top to get something vaguely resembling a table 
of contents. In a well-structured wiki, all content must be reachable from 
the front page, only following wiki links (no menus, no search, etc.).

> But the value is in having a curated space, because the wiki serves too
> many different purposes to ever be that -- it's _always_ doomed to be a
> documentation trap.

I disagree. The wiki has become a documentation trap because most useful 
documentation was actively moved out of the wiki and because central wiki 
pages (and especially the front page) were filled with external links 
instead of wiki links. That has destroyed the entire essence of the wiki. Of 
course, if the wiki is not used as designed and if all useful content gets 
immediately transfered out as soon as it becomes useful, the wiki becomes 
redundant and the remaining documentation on it becomes undiscoverable, 
unmaintained, and useless. But the wiki is *not* "doomed" to be like that, 
it is the (ab)use made of it in Fedora that made it that way.

And I also object to the claim that that "the wiki serves too many different 
purposes" is the issue, quite the opposite: the wiki serves too *few* 
purposes now. It has become only the trashcan for anything not fitting on 
some other medium. Of course, if you treat it as a trashcan, it becomes one. 
The wiki is most useful if *all* documentation actually resides on it, and 
if as few ACL protections as possible are used. (And where ACLs are needed, 
edits by non-ACL-members should preferably be held for sighting rather than 
rejected outright. Mediawiki actually supports that: it is used, e.g., on 
the German Wikipedia.)

Having all documentation reside on the wiki would bring several advantages 
at once:
* Users would always know where to find documentation: "It's on the wiki."
  (This is actually the exact same argument that was made for moving to
  docs.fedoraproject.org. The problem is: not all documentation is actually
  there. Some is still on the wiki, some is on other fedoraproject.org
  pages, etc.)
* Developers would always know where to not only find, but also edit
  documentation, and they would be able to edit it without lots of red tape.
* The external links on the front page would automatically become internal
  links.
* The Mediawiki search functionality would automatically search all
  documentation.

Kevin Kofler
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1932000] perl-Test-NoBreakpoints-0.17 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1932000



--- Comment #4 from Petr Pisar  ---
An enhancement 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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: OCaml 4.12

[Jerry James]

On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 8:45 AM Richard W.M. Jones  wrote:
> OCaml 4.12.0 was just released.  I'll take a look at builds this
> weekend.
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1893381

Great!  Feel free to shout at me if any of my packages break.

Also, I have pushed changes to ocaml-csexp and ocaml-menhir to upgrade
them to their latest versions, but will wait for your rebuild to do
the actual builds.

Regards,
-- 
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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: systemd-resolved fallback DNS servers: usability vs. GDPR

[Michael Catanzaro]

FWIW I agree that systemd-resolved is *much* less important for servers 
and containers than it is on desktops.


That said, the benefit of having a DNS cache is very real, as is the 
benefit of a unified, standardized API for controlling your DNS 
configuration that's the same regardless of which type of system you 
are running.


On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 3:18 pm, Paul Wouters  wrote:
I'm confused here too, since AFAIK NM does not support tying queries 
for

certain domains to certain nameservers,


No, it does. If it didn't, we would not have working split DNS, since 
NetworkManager must propagate its configuration down to 
systemd-resolved.


___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: systemd-resolved fallback DNS servers: usability vs. GDPR

[Paul Wouters]

On Wed, 24 Feb 2021, Colin Walters wrote:


It's trickier than that because local caching nameservers can provide real 
benefits in various server scenarios, and also the IoT/edge case (as usual) 
blurs the traditional datacenter/mobile boundary.  (IoT can be servers with 
WiFi)

We ended up enabling resolved in FCOS, although it took a bit because it broke 
OpenShift, see:
https://github.com/openshift/okd-machine-os/pull/15
https://github.com/openshift/machine-config-operator/pull/2377
https://github.com/openshift/okd-machine-os/pull/47
etc.


It's hard to read through those. It's a big nest of issues, fixes and
reverts on adding/removing systemd-resolved. I couldn't figure out
the DNS setup based on these reports.


(It's really complex for OpenShift because we have a split between the host DNS 
and pod DNS which is served by CoreDNS, yet some cases span those, plus some 
on-premise installs differ from cloud/Iaas in this)


I'm confused here too, since AFAIK NM does not support tying queries for
certain domains to certain nameservers, and I was told that NM
configures DNS, not systemd-resolved, so how is that done in this case
then? For VPN, to support split-DNS you ran a full resolver like
unbound that has this support, and does not get configured through NM.

I guess I can't say more unless someone can point me to some
documentation on the DNS deployment details there. However, this
all changes nothing that different systems want to use different
DNS solutions, and making systemd-resolved part of the init package
so it is mandatory to install is not appropriate.

Paul
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: systemd-resolved fallback DNS servers: usability vs. GDPR

[Alexander Bokovoy]

On ke, 24 helmi 2021, Lennart Poettering wrote:

On Mi, 24.02.21 12:49, Paul Wouters (p...@nohats.ca) wrote:


The scenario of roaming laptops/phones is completely different from
this. Which is why I have argued for a long time now that
systemd-resolved should not be installed by default on servers or
containers. It adds complexity without any real gain in these
deployments and makes DNS issues harder to troubleshoot.


There are two kinds of containers: docker-style containers that only
have a single process (more or less) in them, or nspawn-style
containers that have a full init system in them, that may run their
own network management solution and maybe sshd or so, that basically
behave like a VM (except they don't do any hw/storage management
themselves, but leave that to the host).

I think for nspawn-style containers the difference to the host should
be kept at a minimum, and thus whatever a host running the same OS
would run should also run inside the container. For docker-style
containers the same obviously doesn't apply: if there's no init system
inside the container it doesn't really make sense to run arbitrary
services (and resolved is one) in them either.


We run FreeIPA in a nspawn-style containers (podman rootless containers
since Fedora 33) and we actually would benefit from the ability to
disable systemd-resolved for the cases when IPA is deployed with
integrated DNS server. Right now we are configuring systemd-resolved
during IPA installation with integrated DNS to pass-through requests for
IPA-hosted primary DNS zone to the local IPA DNS server but this is not
enough as users can (and probably would) add multiple DNS zones. Setting
a routing domain '~.' is probably a too much of an overhead here.



I think the caching and DoT stuff that resolved provides is useful on
any system, and that includes servers, and I think it would be good to
minimize the difference in the APIs (and that includes D-Bus APIs)
when we can. So I'd recommend doing resolved on server images too.


This seems contradicting? The last resort method only sends all DNS
queries to google as a last resort? It still means that in 100% of
the cases that the last resort is activated, it sends all traffic to
google? Furthermore, since it hides that this is happening, once
the network is broken, it never gets fixed, and thus leads to the
fallback always kicking in.


We do log on invalid configuration (such as the invalid DNS= lines
discussed earlier on this ML), as mentioned. And then proceed without
it, so that the fallback paths might apply (unless we can acquire DNS
info from elsewhere, e.g. DHCP).


I think one of the issues reported in the discussion you mention was
that systemd-resolved considered invalid a DNS= line where addresses
were separated by a comma rather than space. Can systemd-resolved be
improved to allow common separators like both space and comma?



--
/ Alexander Bokovoy
Sr. Principal Software Engineer
Security / Identity Management Engineering
Red Hat Limited, Finland
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Schedule for Thursday's FPC Meeting (2021-02-25 17:00 UTC)

[James Antill]

 Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FPC
meeting Thursday at 2021-02-25 17:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on
irc.freenode.net.

 Local time information (via. uitime):

= Day: Thursday ==
2021-02-25 09:00 PST  US/Pacific
2021-02-25 12:00 EST  --> US/Eastern <--
2021-02-25 17:00 GMT  Europe/London 
2021-02-25 17:00 UTC  UTC   
2021-02-25 18:00 CET  Europe/Berlin 
2021-02-25 18:00 CET  Europe/Paris  
2021-02-25 22:30 IST  Asia/Calcutta 
 New Day: Friday -
2021-02-26 01:00 HKT  Asia/Hong_Kong
2021-02-26 01:00 +08  Asia/Singapore
2021-02-26 02:00 JST  Asia/Tokyo
2021-02-26 03:00 AEST Australia/Brisbane


 Links to all tickets below can be found at: 

https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issues?status=Open=meeting

= Followup Actions =

#topic #pr-814
 * mhroncok
   talk to authors again, having a working example might help a lot

= Followup Issues =

#topic #907 Which %__foo macros for executables are acceptable? 
.fpc 907
https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/907

= Followup Pull Requests =

#topic #pr-814 Add SELinux Independent Policy Guidelines.
https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/pull-request/814

#topic #pr-1045 WIP: Add discussion of macro names beginning with underscores.
https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/pull-request/1045

= Open Floor = 

 For more complete details, please visit each individual ticket.  The
report of the agenda items can be found at:

https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issues?status=Open=meeting

 If you would like to add something to this agenda, you can:
  * Reply to this e-mail
  * File a new ticket at: https://pagure.io/packaging-committee
  * E-mail me directly
  * Bring it up at the end of the meeting, during the open floor topic. Note
    that added topics may be deferred until the following meeting.


___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: systemd-resolved fallback DNS servers: usability vs. GDPR

[Lennart Poettering]

On Mi, 24.02.21 12:49, Paul Wouters (p...@nohats.ca) wrote:

> The scenario of roaming laptops/phones is completely different from
> this. Which is why I have argued for a long time now that
> systemd-resolved should not be installed by default on servers or
> containers. It adds complexity without any real gain in these
> deployments and makes DNS issues harder to troubleshoot.

There are two kinds of containers: docker-style containers that only
have a single process (more or less) in them, or nspawn-style
containers that have a full init system in them, that may run their
own network management solution and maybe sshd or so, that basically
behave like a VM (except they don't do any hw/storage management
themselves, but leave that to the host).

I think for nspawn-style containers the difference to the host should
be kept at a minimum, and thus whatever a host running the same OS
would run should also run inside the container. For docker-style
containers the same obviously doesn't apply: if there's no init system
inside the container it doesn't really make sense to run arbitrary
services (and resolved is one) in them either.

I think the caching and DoT stuff that resolved provides is useful on
any system, and that includes servers, and I think it would be good to
minimize the difference in the APIs (and that includes D-Bus APIs)
when we can. So I'd recommend doing resolved on server images too.

> This seems contradicting? The last resort method only sends all DNS
> queries to google as a last resort? It still means that in 100% of
> the cases that the last resort is activated, it sends all traffic to
> google? Furthermore, since it hides that this is happening, once
> the network is broken, it never gets fixed, and thus leads to the
> fallback always kicking in.

We do log on invalid configuration (such as the invalid DNS= lines
discussed earlier on this ML), as mentioned. And then proceed without
it, so that the fallback paths might apply (unless we can acquire DNS
info from elsewhere, e.g. DHCP).

We currently do not log on non-existing configuration, i.e. if there's
networking available but no DNS server configured anywhere, and no DHCP
lease and nowhere else either. If figure we could print a short log
message in this case however, that would be useful I guess. I posted
an RFE bug about this now, to keep track of this.

https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/18788

Lennart

--
Lennart Poettering, Berlin
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Donate 1 minute of your time to test upgrades from F33 to F34

[Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek]

On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 12:08:56PM -0600, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
>  yum distro-sync --releasever 34
> Last metadata expiration check: 0:10:11 ago on Wed 24 Feb 2021 11:55:46 AM 
> CST.
> Error:
>  Problem: package gnome-tour-40~beta-3.fc34.x86_64 obsoletes
> gnome-getting-started-docs < 3.38.1-2 provided by
> gnome-getting-started-docs-3.38.0-2.fc34.noarch
>   - package gnome-getting-started-docs-es-3.38.0-2.fc34.noarch
> requires gnome-getting-started-docs = 3.38.0-2.fc34, but none of the
> providers can be installed
>   - problem with installed package gnome-tour-3.38.0-2.fc33.x86_64
>   - problem with installed package
> gnome-getting-started-docs-es-3.38.0-1.fc33.noarch
>   - gnome-tour-3.38.0-2.fc33.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade 
> repository
>   - gnome-getting-started-docs-es-3.38.0-1.fc33.noarch does not belong
> to a distupgrade repository
> (try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages)

This is fixed by gnome-tour-40~beta-4.fc34, which is tagged into f34.
I think there was no compose yesterday, so it hasn't been pushed out.

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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Sundials-5.7.0

[Antonio T. sagitter]

Side-tag is ready for building the related dependencies: 
f35-build-side-37890


On 22/02/21 19:13, Antonio T. sagitter wrote:

Hi all.

'sundials-5.7.0' is coming in Rawhide branch.
Is reasonable pushing it in f34 too?

Release notes: https://computing.llnl.gov/projects/sundials/release-history


___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure



--
---
Antonio Trande
Fedora Project
mailto: sagit...@fedoraproject.org
GPG key: 0x29FBC85D7A51CC2F
GPG key server: https://keys.gnupg.net/


OpenPGP_0x29FBC85D7A51CC2F.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys


OpenPGP_signature
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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[389-devel] Re: Were you unexpectedly subscribed to this list?

[Sean Maguire]

I'm on this list too, please take me off.  Sorry your list got targeted for
this

Sean Maguire
e: seanpmaguir...@gmail.com
c: 484.477.6096
w: seanpmaguire.com


On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 10:58 AM Mark Reynolds  wrote:

> We've had a very large inflow of subscriptions requests recently, and
> there are concerns something malicious might be going on.  If you are
> getting these emails, but you have not subscribed to this 389-devel
> mailing list please respond to me: mreyno...@redhat.com and I will get
> you removed asap.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> --
>
> 389 Directory Server Development Team
> ___
> 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
> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
>
___
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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: systemd-resolved fallback DNS servers: usability vs. GDPR

[Colin Walters]

On Wed, Feb 24, 2021, at 12:49 PM, Paul Wouters wrote:
>  Which is why I have argued for a long time now that
> systemd-resolved should not be installed by default on servers or
> containers. It adds complexity without any real gain in these
> deployments and makes DNS issues harder to troubleshoot.

It's trickier than that because local caching nameservers can provide real 
benefits in various server scenarios, and also the IoT/edge case (as usual) 
blurs the traditional datacenter/mobile boundary.  (IoT can be servers with 
WiFi)

We ended up enabling resolved in FCOS, although it took a bit because it broke 
OpenShift, see:
https://github.com/openshift/okd-machine-os/pull/15
https://github.com/openshift/machine-config-operator/pull/2377
https://github.com/openshift/okd-machine-os/pull/47
etc.

(It's really complex for OpenShift because we have a split between the host DNS 
and pod DNS which is served by CoreDNS, yet some cases span those, plus some 
on-premise installs differ from cloud/Iaas in this)



___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Donate 1 minute of your time to test upgrades from F33 to F34

[Dennis Gilmore]

 yum distro-sync --releasever 34
Last metadata expiration check: 0:10:11 ago on Wed 24 Feb 2021 11:55:46 AM CST.
Error:
 Problem: package gnome-tour-40~beta-3.fc34.x86_64 obsoletes
gnome-getting-started-docs < 3.38.1-2 provided by
gnome-getting-started-docs-3.38.0-2.fc34.noarch
  - package gnome-getting-started-docs-es-3.38.0-2.fc34.noarch
requires gnome-getting-started-docs = 3.38.0-2.fc34, but none of the
providers can be installed
  - problem with installed package gnome-tour-3.38.0-2.fc33.x86_64
  - problem with installed package
gnome-getting-started-docs-es-3.38.0-1.fc33.noarch
  - gnome-tour-3.38.0-2.fc33.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
  - gnome-getting-started-docs-es-3.38.0-1.fc33.noarch does not belong
to a distupgrade repository
(try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages)


is what I get here

On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 8:02 AM Geraldo Simião Kutz
 wrote:
>
> I tried here on a F33 kde spin (on bare metal Acer/intel notebook) and it 
> worked fine, just as expected:
> Instalar48 Pacotes
> Atualizar 2019 Pacotes
> Remover  5 Pacotes
> Desatualizar 2 Pacotes
> Tamanho total do download: 1.8 G
>
> regards
> Geraldo
>
> FAS: geraldosimiao
>
>
> Em sáb., 20 de fev. de 2021 às 06:49, Miroslav Suchý  
> escreveu:
>>
>> Do you want to make Fedora 34 better? Please spend 1 minute of your time and 
>> try to run:
>>
>># Run this only if you use default Fedora modules
>># next time you run any DNF command default modules will be enabled again
>>sudo dnf module reset '*'
>>
>>sudo dnf --releasever=34 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f34 \
>>  --enablerepo=updates-testing --enablerepo=updates-testing-modular \
>>  distro-sync
>>
>> This command does not replace `dnf system-upgrade`, but it will reveal 
>> potential problems. You may also run `dnf
>> upgrade` before running this command.
>>
>> If you have have rdma-core.i686 installed you have to pass `--allowerasing`.
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1919864
>>
>>
>> If you get this prompt:
>>
>>...
>>Total download size: XXX M
>>Is this ok [y/N]:
>>
>> you can answer N and nothing happens, no need to test the actual upgrade.
>>
>> But very likely you get some dependency problem now. In that case, please 
>> report it against the appropriate package. Or
>> against fedora-obsolete-packages if that package should be removed in Fedora 
>> 34. Please check existing reports against
>> fedora-obsolete-packages first:
>>https://red.ht/2kuBDPu
>> and also there is already bunch of "Fails to install" reports:
>>https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=F34FailsToInstall
>>
>> Thank you
>>
>> P.S. sent from workstation successfully upgraded to F34 :)
>>
>> --
>> Miroslav Suchy, RHCA
>> Red Hat, Associate Manager, Community Packaging Tools, #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
>> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
>> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
>
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct: 
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives: 
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Opendmarc orphaned

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 09:20:20AM +0100, Tomas Korbar wrote:
> Hi guys,
> unfortunately i do not have time to maintain opendmarc [0] and thus i am
> orphaning it.
> Feel free to take the package.

Sadly, I use this package, so I guess I will take it. 

co-maintainers welcome as always. 

kevin


signature.asc
Description: 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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: systemd-resolved fallback DNS servers: usability vs. GDPR

[Paul Wouters]

On Tue, 23 Feb 2021, Lennart Poettering wrote:


And yeah, call me a hypocrite, but if I have the choice between having
no Internet at all or using some public DNS servers for DNS, and
leaking a tiny bit of information to those DNS server providers then I
am definitely preferring to have Internet, thank you very much.


In practise, this is not often the case. Almost always, the network will
provide working DNS via DHCP. If not, then the network is severely
broken and hacking up a DNS workaround is likely to fail anyway. Like,
you can't get past hotspot/captive portal.

Newly installed and booted server/cloud images should _really_ use the
DHCP obtained DNS servers. It is very likely their correct functioning
depends on local DNS zones and local resources pointed to by DNS not
available when bypassing the local DNS for public DNS services. It is
also likely that those networks even restrict DNS to only allow their
own DNS servers to be used for security and compliance reasons, and
using public DNS would be a violation of network policy.

The scenario of roaming laptops/phones is completely different from
this. Which is why I have argued for a long time now that
systemd-resolved should not be installed by default on servers or
containers. It adds complexity without any real gain in these
deployments and makes DNS issues harder to troubleshoot.


One could even go further: the privacy level using those public DNS
servers might actually be higher than using the DHCP-provided ones in
many cases, simple because we can use DoT on the former (admittedly
not yet the default in resolved though, but hopefully soon), but
almost never can on the latter, and what's worse the latter are
usually provided by crappy edge networks like Internet Cafés and such
where the fact we send stuff unencrypted is just awful.


I agree with this, but the caveat here is that the solution should take
into account isolating the hotspot/signon network from the OS, and not
mix that into your caches when you later bring up more private/trustworthy
DNS servers. But as I said, I'm fine with the default of
systemd-resolved here, although I would strongly prefer to be able to
not install or remove the package for advanced users like me with
specific DNS and DNSSEC requirements that cannot have systemd-resolved
interfering with the system.


Now, Fedora made its choice here, and I'll accept that, but I still
think it's a bad one, that trades a misunderstood concept of privacy
against a major step forward in userfriendliness. i.e. I am not sure
it's a good choice to limit Fedora's userspace needlessly to people
who can fix their DNS configuration. It's a pretty tiny elite group of
people to be in after all...


It seems to have a price of network administrators having their DNS
broken in a string of different ways resulting in filed bugs at
systemd upstream that takes years to get addressed. It can be argued
that this price is too high for the feature of helping nontechnical
laptop users that stumbled into a broken network.

Meanwhile, applications like firefox are absorbing DNS anyway, adding
another layer in the fight over who gets to configure and process DNS:
DHCP, systemd-resolved, NetworkManager, Gnome, or applications.


(Oh, and I don't appreciate those people at all, who claim that
"resolved sends all DNS lookups" to Google because it's a lie, we
never did that, we only did that in case no better DNS configuration
was available, i.e. as *last* *resort*, one step before giving up
entirely).


This seems contradicting? The last resort method only sends all DNS
queries to google as a last resort? It still means that in 100% of
the cases that the last resort is activated, it sends all traffic to
google? Furthermore, since it hides that this is happening, once
the network is broken, it never gets fixed, and thus leads to the
fallback always kicking in.

If anything, these recurring discussions, and long turnover of
systemd-resolverd bugs show that systemd-resolved should be a choice
and not being pushed as mandatory. And I am fine with saying that for
Workstation or Desktop installs, we lean to the side of userfriendly
and give them systemd-resolved. But it has no place as a default
binary or service on servers, containers or cloud images launched
within actively managed networks.

Paul
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[389-devel] Re: Were you unexpectedly subscribed to this list?

[gbrown]

I did not subscribe please remove. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Feb 24, 2021, at 10:13 AM, david taylor  wrote:
> 
> 
> Did not subscribe, please remove
> 
> From: Mark Reynolds 
> Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2021 10:57 AM
> To: 389 Directory server developer discussion. 
> <389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org>
> Subject: [389-devel] Were you unexpectedly subscribed to this list?
>  
> We've had a very large inflow of subscriptions requests recently, and 
> there are concerns something malicious might be going on.  If you are 
> getting these emails, but you have not subscribed to this 389-devel 
> mailing list please respond to me: mreyno...@redhat.com and I will get 
> you removed asap.
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> -- 
> 
> 389 Directory Server Development Team
> ___
> 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
> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
> ___
> 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
> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
___
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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Fedora 35 Change: Autoconf-2.71 (Self-Contained Change proposal)

[Brian C. Lane]

On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 08:14:17AM +0100, Ondrej Dubaj wrote:
> Brian,
> 
> you are right there are some changes which are now backward compatible.
> That's the reason why we need cross-component cooperation from other
> maintainers to detect these pieces and potentially report them to upstream
> and see if they are willing to fix them. Another option is also to create a
> compat package for autoconf-2.69 for f35, but it can lead to a result,
> where some of the maintainers/upstreams will never use autoconf-2.71.

I think we need to create a 2.69 compat package. I certainly have no
current plans to switch upstream parted to 2.71 and while I now have a
wonderful 1.8M patch that fixes it for Fedora I'd rather just use the
upstream tar release with 2.69 until we're comfortable moving.

Having 2.71 available is valuable, so both should be packaged, but it
should not be a requirement at this point.

Brian

-- 
Brian C. Lane (PST8PDT) - weldr.io - lorax - parted - pykickstart
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1932429] New: Please add perl-Nmap-Parser to epel8

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1932429

Bug ID: 1932429
   Summary: Please add perl-Nmap-Parser to epel8
   Product: Fedora EPEL
   Version: epel8
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-Nmap-Parser
  Severity: low
  Assignee: jples...@redhat.com
  Reporter: mvanwin...@ias.edu
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: iarn...@gmail.com, jples...@redhat.com,
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org, sin...@gmail.com
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Description of problem:

It would be nice to have perl-Nmap-Parser in epel8

Additional info:

I am a person who does things with this Perl module on EL7 machines.  This
would be nice to have in EL8.

Thanks


-- 
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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: [dns-sig] Re: split-DNS, resolvconf on Fedora

[Paul Wouters]

On Mon, 22 Feb 2021, Petr Menšík wrote:


Wouldn't it be much simpler, if I could just dnf remove systemd-resolved
in case I don't want it?


In the past I also mentioned this. The overwhelming majority of installs
do not gain any benefit from te systemd-resolved service. Most servers,
containers and even workstations are installed and given DNS
configurations via DHCP, manager by a network administrator.

systemd-resolved addresses a problem with finding printers and resolving
a .box domain for router reconfiguration. And it provides partial
solutions for split-DNS views when VPN's are deployed on laptops.

There is no technical reason why this is not in its own package. There
has been some focussing on reducing minimal installs, and this is a
prime candidate for that. I'm fine with the workstation or desktop
installs bringing this package in by default. But I see only potential
harm from installing it on servers, containers and most virtual machines.

Paul
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: systemd-resolved fallback DNS servers: usability vs. GDPR

[Colin Walters]

On Wed, Feb 24, 2021, at 9:19 AM, Tadej Janež wrote:
>
> This is the thing that is probably hurting users the most. They have a
> working F33 cloud instance and after systemd is upgraded, the instance
> will *probably* (i.e. if users didn't configure DNS themselves and
> relied on cloud-init) be heavily broken, i.e. DNS resolution not
> working.

For Fedora CoreOS one of our principles is that the system is identical across 
bare metal and cloud; we force bare metal system installs into extra 
provisioning ("install" is "dd image to disk") in order to make sure that 
Ignition and everything involved runs in a uniform fashion.  There's no 
cloud-init vs kickstart vs something else. 

We use NetworkManager across the board for the same reason.

And, we also have unified CI that tests the entire OS image (ostree commit) as 
a single unit before shipping out updates to everyone.  And we also do "staged 
rollouts" so that if we did encounter a problem like this, we can stop the 
rollout so not everyone would get hit.

We also have automatic updates on by default - we couldn't do that without the 
above.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[rpms/perl-Test-NoBreakpoints] PR #1: Tests

[Petr Pisar]

ppisar closed without merging a pull-request against the project: 
`perl-Test-NoBreakpoints` that you
are following.

Closed pull-request:

``
Tests
``

https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Test-NoBreakpoints/pull-request/1
___
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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Please remove "-i" from "%forgemeta" templates on wiki

[Matthew Miller]

On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 11:06:50PM +0200, Otto Urpelainen wrote:
> >It would be nice if the wiki page could be updated to avoid
> >luring packagers into using these templates, perhaps with a
> >hatnote that the content is historical (?) and only the tem-
> >plates in the packaging guidelines should be used.
> 
> Unfortunately, the Fedora wiki is a documentation trap, full of outdated
> or obsolete pages whose advice should not be followed. Mixed with other
> pages that have useful content that cannot be found elsewhere, so you
> cannot simply disregard the wiki either.

Let's identify content that is useful and can't be found elsewhere, and
either migrate it or find some way to mark its status on the wiki itself.

-- 
Matthew Miller

Fedora Project Leader
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Please remove "-i" from "%forgemeta" templates on wiki

[Matthew Miller]

On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 02:48:31AM +0100, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> Otto Urpelainen wrote:
> > Unfortunately, the Fedora wiki is a documentation trap, full of outdated
> > or obsolete pages whose advice should not be followed. Mixed with other
> > pages that have useful content that cannot be found elsewhere, so you
> > cannot simply disregard the wiki either.
> 
> The move to docs.fedoraproject.org was really a mistake. Documentation is 
> harder to keep up to date there, also harder for readers to find there, the 
> duplication between old wiki pages and new docs.fedoraproject.org pages is a 
> common issue, and some information is not on docs.fedoraproject.org at all 
> (but in some old wiki page that is harder to find now that most 
> documentation was moved off the wiki).
> 
> I really fail to see what value that move has brought us.

I don't think "documentation is harder to keep up to date there" is right,
or necessarily harder to find (although I hoped we would have a decent
search solution by now!). But the value is in having a curated space,
because the wiki serves too many different purposes to ever be that -- it's
_always_ doomed to be a documentation trap. 


-- 
Matthew Miller

Fedora Project Leader
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1932000] perl-Test-NoBreakpoints-0.17 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1932000

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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[rpms/perl-Test-NoBreakpoints] PR #1: Tests

[Petr Pisar]

ppisar opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-Test-NoBreakpoints` 
that you are following:
``
Tests
``

To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Test-NoBreakpoints/pull-request/1
___
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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2021-02-24)

[Clement Verna]

Minutes: 
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-2/2021-02-24/fesco.2021-02-24-15.00.html
Minutes (text):
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-2/2021-02-24/fesco.2021-02-24-15.00.txt
Log: 
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-2/2021-02-24/fesco.2021-02-24-15.00.log.html

Meeting summary
---
* init process  (cverna, 15:00:50)

* 2584 - Fedora 34 incomplete changes: 100% complete dealine  (cverna,
  15:04:04)
  * Patches in Forge Macros is still in ASSIGNED  (bcotton, 15:06:42)
  * LINK: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1866896
(bcotton, 15:06:48)
  * X.org Utility Deaggregation is still in ASSIGNED  (bcotton,
15:07:56)
  * LINK: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1867220
(bcotton, 15:07:58)
  * LINK:

https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/redhat-rpm-config/pull-request/109#comment-63117
looks like no redhat-rpm-config person approved at the PR.
(decathorpe, 15:08:57)
  * LINK:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?component=Package%20Review=ajax%40redhat.com=1=substring_id=11712217_format=advanced
and look at the last bunch?  (nirik, 15:11:04)
  * LINK:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/redhat-rpm-config/pull-request/118
(mhroncok, 15:41:01)
  * ACTION: bcotton to talk to eclipseo and go sig about splitting the
forge macros into a separate package  (mhroncok, 15:48:51)

* #2578: Preset Request: google-guest-agent.service
  google-startup-scripts.service google-shutdown-scripts.service
  (cverna, 15:58:45)
  * AGREED: systemd preset request for google-guest-agent.service
google-startup-scripts.service google-shutdown-scripts.service was
approved  (+7, 0, 0)  (cverna, 16:06:28)

* Next week's chair  (cverna, 16:06:47)
  * ACTION: zbyszek to chair next week's meeting  (cverna, 16:07:59)

* Open Floor  (cverna, 16:08:15)
  * The voting season is open on
https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/milestone/34/beta/buglist.
(zbyszek, 16:15:57)

Meeting ended at 16:18:49 UTC.




Action Items

* bcotton to talk to eclipseo and go sig about splitting the forge
  macros into a separate package
* zbyszek to chair next week's meeting




Action Items, by person
---
* bcotton
  * bcotton to talk to eclipseo and go sig about splitting the forge
macros into a separate package
* zbyszek
  * zbyszek to chair next week's meeting
* **UNASSIGNED**
  * (none)




People Present (lines said)
---
* cverna (59)
* zbyszek (47)
* bcotton (38)
* mhroncok (30)
* nirik (20)
* zodbot (18)
* decathorpe (18)
* dcantrell (12)
* sgallagh (10)
* King_InuYasha (9)
* bcotton_ (2)
* ignatenkobrain (0)
* Conan_Kudo (0)
* Eighth_Doctor (0)
* Sir_Gallantmon (0)
* Son_Goku (0)
* Pharaoh_Atem (0)
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[389-devel] Re: Were you unexpectedly subscribed to this list? (PLEASE REMOVE FROM MAILING LIST)

[Joseph Antonie]

Hello Mark

Not sure if you are actually real or not, but it would be nice if you could 
remove anto...@charter.net and also antoniela...@hotmail.com from the list.

Thanks.


From: Mark Reynolds
Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2021 9:59 AM
To: 389 Directory server developer discussion.
Subject: [389-devel] Were you unexpectedly subscribed to this list?

We've had a very large inflow of subscriptions requests recently, and
there are concerns something malicious might be going on.  If you are 
getting these emails, but you have not subscribed to this 389-devel
mailing list please respond to me: mreyno...@redhat.com and I will get
you removed asap.

Sincerely,

--

389 Directory Server Development Team
___
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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure



--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
___
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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[389-devel] Re: Were you unexpectedly subscribed to this list?

[david taylor]

Did not subscribe, please remove


From: Mark Reynolds 
Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2021 10:57 AM
To: 389 Directory server developer discussion. 
<389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org>
Subject: [389-devel] Were you unexpectedly subscribed to this list?

We've had a very large inflow of subscriptions requests recently, and
there are concerns something malicious might be going on.  If you are
getting these emails, but you have not subscribed to this 389-devel
mailing list please respond to me: mreyno...@redhat.com and I will get
you removed asap.

Sincerely,

--

389 Directory Server Development Team
___
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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
___
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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[389-devel] Re: Were you unexpectedly subscribed to this list?

[scott cashproperties . net]

Mark

Yes, some idiot adding me to thousands of these email lists, sport for the 
problem, please delete me.

Scott Cash
Cash Properties Inc
PO Box 2117
Granite Bay, CA 95746
(916) 747-8510
BRE: 01113056

> On Feb 24, 2021, at 7:59 AM, Mark Reynolds  wrote:
> 
> We've had a very large inflow of subscriptions requests recently, and there 
> are concerns something malicious might be going on.  If you are getting these 
> emails, but you have not subscribed to this 389-devel mailing list please 
> respond to me: mreyno...@redhat.com and I will get you removed asap.
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> -- 
> 
> 389 Directory Server Development Team
> ___
> 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://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.fedoraproject.org_en-2DUS_project_code-2Dof-2Dconduct_=DwIGaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM=_cyTKVSFMYR8Jmqx6ZPbTFGSGmFmAoJq-I7Cdk2vF6k=IdXOeNHuy6xKh3E3M3RIXcdS_gRFbgZfn5cXCzhoWvI=dbjFVeLgWHe4ITs8z3xmM_jCE2gs3RSlW9XGPFM9_Ss=
> List Guidelines: 
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__fedoraproject.org_wiki_Mailing-5Flist-5Fguidelines=DwIGaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM=_cyTKVSFMYR8Jmqx6ZPbTFGSGmFmAoJq-I7Cdk2vF6k=IdXOeNHuy6xKh3E3M3RIXcdS_gRFbgZfn5cXCzhoWvI=mgGAFSVUFHE-3scdyA4nYKkUdQI0973F6RYYBZvpeKU=
> List Archives: 
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.fedoraproject.org_archives_list_389-2Ddevel-40lists.fedoraproject.org=DwIGaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM=_cyTKVSFMYR8Jmqx6ZPbTFGSGmFmAoJq-I7Cdk2vF6k=IdXOeNHuy6xKh3E3M3RIXcdS_gRFbgZfn5cXCzhoWvI=3jNPahurrn4f3rJDr_IlQyWUZBRaql_8x3WZzG8UnaE=
> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__pagure.io_fedora-2Dinfrastructure=DwIGaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM=_cyTKVSFMYR8Jmqx6ZPbTFGSGmFmAoJq-I7Cdk2vF6k=IdXOeNHuy6xKh3E3M3RIXcdS_gRFbgZfn5cXCzhoWvI=8RHwiCr5nF7DdoK5n0OTRaYd5K9PjTwAn6UpSOnHQq8=
___
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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[389-devel] Were you unexpectedly subscribed to this list?

[Mark Reynolds]

We've had a very large inflow of subscriptions requests recently, and 
there are concerns something malicious might be going on.  If you are 
getting these emails, but you have not subscribed to this 389-devel 
mailing list please respond to me: mreyno...@redhat.com and I will get 
you removed asap.


Sincerely,

--

389 Directory Server Development Team
___
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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: OCaml 4.12

[Richard W.M. Jones]

OCaml 4.12.0 was just released.  I'll take a look at builds this
weekend.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1893381

Rich.

-- 
Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com
virt-builder quickly builds VMs from scratch
http://libguestfs.org/virt-builder.1.html
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[rpms/perl-App-cpm] PR #1: Tests

[Petr Pisar]

ppisar opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-App-cpm` that you 
are following:
``
Tests
``

To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-App-cpm/pull-request/1
___
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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[389-devel] SPAM-unsubscribe

[Ashlee Smith]

REMOVE ME FROM THIS AND ALL LISTS!

 ——
Do not feel obligated to respond in the evening or on weekends. 

Sent from my iPhone, so please pay no mind to typos or grammatical errors. 

> On Feb 24, 2021, at 6:30 AM, Ludwig Krispenz  wrote:
> 
> Hi Mark,
> 
> thanks for the answer, it took me a step further, but I still didn't succed.
> 
> 
> Hi William,
> 
> yes please update the contributing docs.
> 
> 
> Now to the remaining/new problems.
> 
> 1/3] I think Mark's suggestion does help the build with rust, but the case 
> where I didn't configure --enable-rust and failed in rust land shouldn't 
> happen - either rust is an option and everything should work if disabled or 
> it has to be on and not optional.
> 
> 
> 2/3] Before receiving Marks hint about updating dependencies I had tried to 
> build optimized rpms, (to overcome the debug and release mismatch) but got 
> this strange error.
> 
>  /usr/bin/mkdir -p 
> '/home/elkris/DEV/gh/two/389-ds-base/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/389-ds-base-2.0.3-20210224gitbda2c53d0.fc32.x86_64/usr/lib64/dirsrv'
>  /bin/sh ./libtool   --mode=install /usr/bin/install -c libslapd.la 
> libldaputil.la libns-dshttpd.la librewriters.la 
> '/home/elkris/DEV/gh/two/389-ds-base/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/389-ds-base-2.0.3-20210224gitbda2c53d0.fc32.x86_64/usr/lib64/dirsrv'
> libtool:   error: error: cannot install 'libslapd.la' to a directory not 
> ending in /opt/dirsrv/lib/dirsrv
> make[3]: *** [Makefile:4163: install-serverLTLIBRARIES] Error 1
> 
> 
> 3/3] When using the make command Mark provided everything seemed fin, until 
> it finally failed again:
> 
>  /usr/bin/mkdir -p 
> '/home/elkris/DEV/gh/two/389-ds-base/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/389-ds-base-2.0.3-20210224gitbda2c53d0.fc32.x86_64/usr/lib64/dirsrv'
>  /bin/sh ./libtool   --mode=install /usr/bin/install -c libslapd.la 
> libldaputil.la libns-dshttpd.la librewriters.la 
> '/home/elkris/DEV/gh/two/389-ds-base/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/389-ds-base-2.0.3-20210224gitbda2c53d0.fc32.x86_64/usr/lib64/dirsrv'
> libtool:   error: error: cannot install 'libslapd.la' to a directory not 
> ending in /opt/dirsrv/lib/dirsrv
> make[3]: *** [Makefile:4163: install-serverLTLIBRARIES] Error 1
> 
> 
> 
> .. contents:: :depth: 2
> 
> FAIL: test_slapd
> 
> 
> ==2968306==ASan runtime does not come first in initial library list; you 
> should either link runtime to your application or manually preload it with 
> LD_PRELOAD.
> FAIL test_slapd (exit status: 1)
> 
> + false
> error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.BQqMLc (%check)
> 
> 
> Any ideas are welcome,
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Ludwig
> 
>> On 24.02.21 00:35, William Brown wrote:
>> Should we update the contributing/build docs to reflect these steps?
>> 
 On 24 Feb 2021, at 07:10, Mark Reynolds  wrote:
>>> 
>>> You have to skip the npm audit check "SKIP_AUDIT_CI=1" for now, and the 
>>> rust stuff is a pain and it is hardcoded to be enabled. You always have to 
>>> update and download the latest Rust dependencies:
>>> 
>>> SKIP_AUDIT_CI=1 make -f rpm.mk update-cargo-dependencies 
>>> download-cargo-dependencies rpms
>>> 
>>> HTH,
>>> 
>>> Mark
>>> 
>>> On 2/23/21 1:40 PM, Ludwig Krispenz wrote:
 Hi,
 
 since a long time I was trying to build rpms and failed, here are the 
 issues I run into:
 
 1] problem with npm/audit
 
 I followed the suggestions here: 
 https://www.port389.org/docs/389ds/contributing.html (pushd/npm fix/popd), 
 but this didn't help, only commenting out audit-ci in 
 src/cockpit/389-console/node_modules.mk got me over this
 
 2] rust
 
 2.1]
 
 rpm build failed with:
 
 error: failed to get `concread` as a dependency of package `librslapd 
 v0.1.0 
 (/home/elkris/DEV/gh/two/389-ds-base/rpmbuild/BUILD/389-ds-base-2.0.3.20210223gitbda2c53d0/src/librslapd)`
 
 Caused by:
   failed to load source for dependency `concread`
 
 Caused by:
   Unable to update registry `https://github.com/rust-lang/crates.io-index`
 
 Caused by:
   failed to update replaced source registry 
 `https://github.com/rust-lang/crates.io-index`
 
 Caused by:
   failed to read root of directory source: 
 /home/elkris/DEV/gh/two/389-ds-base/rpmbuild/BUILD/389-ds-base-2.0.3.20210223gitbda2c53d0/vendor
 
 Caused by:
   No such file or directory (os error 2)
 make[1]: *** [Makefile:12715: 
 .../rpmbuild/BUILD/389-ds-base-2.0.3.20210223gitbda2c53d0/rs/rslapd/release/librslapd.a]
  Error 101
 
 
 ,
 
 It was right that there wasno rs/rslapd/release/librslapd.a file, not even 
 the directory rs existed. After configuring --enable-rust the directory 
 was created and populated.
 
 Q1: why does it try to pack rust stuff if it is not enabled ?
 
 2.2] Now the directory was there, but I still did get the same error. A 
 closer look showed that it was looking for 
 

[Bug 1931967] perl-App-cpm-0.997003 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1931967

Petr Pisar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Depends On||1932395





Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1932395
[Bug 1932395] Review Request: perl-CPAN-02Packages-Search - Search Perl modules
in 02packages.details.txt
-- 
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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: systemd-resolved fallback DNS servers: usability vs. GDPR

[Kevin Kofler via devel]

Tadej Janež wrote:
> On Tue, 2021-02-23 at 00:02 +0100, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
>> It is unfortunate that this behavior has changed in an update.
> 
> This is the thing that is probably hurting users the most. They have a
> working F33 cloud instance and after systemd is upgraded, the instance
> will *probably* (i.e. if users didn't configure DNS themselves and
> relied on cloud-init) be heavily broken, i.e. DNS resolution not
> working.
> 
> I actually think it would still be beneficial to flip this change, i.e.
> remove the "-Ddns-servers=" line
> (https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/systemd/blob/f33/f/systemd.spec#_372
> ), for the next F33 systemd update.

Sorry, but at this point, the update has happened, and the new state is 
really the desired state, so I do not believe that going back and forth 
would be an improvement.

Kevin Kofler
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1932390] New: perl-CPAN-FindDependencies-3.05 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1932390

Bug ID: 1932390
   Summary: perl-CPAN-FindDependencies-3.05 is available
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-CPAN-FindDependencies
  Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
  Assignee: jples...@redhat.com
  Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: i...@cicku.me, jples...@redhat.com,
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Latest upstream release: 3.05
Current version/release in rawhide: 3.04-2.fc34
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/CPAN-FindDependencies/

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/2729/


-- 
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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1931967] perl-App-cpm-0.997003 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1931967



--- Comment #1 from Petr Pisar  ---
This release requires a not-yet-packaged CPAN::02Packages::Search dependency.


-- 
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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[389-devel] Re: failed to build rpms

[Ludwig Krispenz]

Hi Mark,

thanks for the answer, it took me a step further, but I still didn't succed.


Hi William,

yes please update the contributing docs.


Now to the remaining/new problems.

1/3] I think Mark's suggestion does help the build with rust, but the 
case where I didn't configure --enable-rust and failed in rust land 
shouldn't happen - either rust is an option and everything should work 
if disabled or it has to be on and not optional.



2/3] Before receiving Marks hint about updating dependencies I had tried 
to build optimized rpms, (to overcome the debug and release mismatch) 
but got this strange error.


 /usr/bin/mkdir -p 
'/home/elkris/DEV/gh/two/389-ds-base/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/389-ds-base-2.0.3-20210224gitbda2c53d0.fc32.x86_64/usr/lib64/dirsrv'
 /bin/sh ./libtool   --mode=install /usr/bin/install -c libslapd.la 
libldaputil.la libns-dshttpd.la librewriters.la 
'/home/elkris/DEV/gh/two/389-ds-base/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/389-ds-base-2.0.3-20210224gitbda2c53d0.fc32.x86_64/usr/lib64/dirsrv'
libtool:   error: error: cannot install 'libslapd.la' to a directory not 
ending in /opt/dirsrv/lib/dirsrv

make[3]: *** [Makefile:4163: install-serverLTLIBRARIES] Error 1


3/3] When using the make command Mark provided everything seemed fin, 
until it finally failed again:


 /usr/bin/mkdir -p 
'/home/elkris/DEV/gh/two/389-ds-base/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/389-ds-base-2.0.3-20210224gitbda2c53d0.fc32.x86_64/usr/lib64/dirsrv'
 /bin/sh ./libtool   --mode=install /usr/bin/install -c libslapd.la 
libldaputil.la libns-dshttpd.la librewriters.la 
'/home/elkris/DEV/gh/two/389-ds-base/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/389-ds-base-2.0.3-20210224gitbda2c53d0.fc32.x86_64/usr/lib64/dirsrv'
libtool:   error: error: cannot install 'libslapd.la' to a directory not 
ending in /opt/dirsrv/lib/dirsrv

make[3]: *** [Makefile:4163: install-serverLTLIBRARIES] Error 1



.. contents:: :depth: 2

FAIL: test_slapd


==2968306==ASan runtime does not come first in initial library list; you 
should either link runtime to your application or manually preload it 
with LD_PRELOAD.

FAIL test_slapd (exit status: 1)

+ false
error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.BQqMLc (%check)


Any ideas are welcome,

Best regards,

Ludwig

On 24.02.21 00:35, William Brown wrote:

Should we update the contributing/build docs to reflect these steps?


On 24 Feb 2021, at 07:10, Mark Reynolds  wrote:

You have to skip the npm audit check "SKIP_AUDIT_CI=1" for now, and the rust 
stuff is a pain and it is hardcoded to be enabled. You always have to update and download 
the latest Rust dependencies:

SKIP_AUDIT_CI=1 make -f rpm.mk update-cargo-dependencies 
download-cargo-dependencies rpms

HTH,

Mark

On 2/23/21 1:40 PM, Ludwig Krispenz wrote:

Hi,

since a long time I was trying to build rpms and failed, here are the issues I 
run into:

1] problem with npm/audit

I followed the suggestions here: 
https://www.port389.org/docs/389ds/contributing.html (pushd/npm fix/popd), but 
this didn't help, only commenting out audit-ci in 
src/cockpit/389-console/node_modules.mk got me over this

2] rust

2.1]

rpm build failed with:

error: failed to get `concread` as a dependency of package `librslapd v0.1.0 
(/home/elkris/DEV/gh/two/389-ds-base/rpmbuild/BUILD/389-ds-base-2.0.3.20210223gitbda2c53d0/src/librslapd)`

Caused by:
   failed to load source for dependency `concread`

Caused by:
   Unable to update registry `https://github.com/rust-lang/crates.io-index`

Caused by:
   failed to update replaced source registry 
`https://github.com/rust-lang/crates.io-index`

Caused by:
   failed to read root of directory source: 
/home/elkris/DEV/gh/two/389-ds-base/rpmbuild/BUILD/389-ds-base-2.0.3.20210223gitbda2c53d0/vendor

Caused by:
   No such file or directory (os error 2)
make[1]: *** [Makefile:12715: 
.../rpmbuild/BUILD/389-ds-base-2.0.3.20210223gitbda2c53d0/rs/rslapd/release/librslapd.a]
 Error 101


,

It was right that there wasno rs/rslapd/release/librslapd.a file, not even the 
directory rs existed. After configuring --enable-rust the directory was created 
and populated.

Q1: why does it try to pack rust stuff if it is not enabled ?

2.2] Now the directory was there, but I still did get the same error. A closer look showed that it 
was looking for 
.../rpmbuild/BUILD/389-ds-base-2.0.3.20210223gitbda2c53d0/rs/rslapd/release/librslapd.a ,but what 
existed was .../rpmbuild/BUILD/389-ds-base-2.0.3.20210223gitbda2c53d0/rs/rslapd/debug/librslapd.a. 
Note "debug" -- "release". configure was run with --enable-debug

Q2: Is there somewhere a hardcoded/default assumpion of "release" ? in the 
cargo spec?

Thanks for any suggestions


Regards,

Ludwig
___
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: 

[Bug 1931967] perl-App-cpm-0.997003 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1931967

Petr Pisar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC|jples...@redhat.com |ppi...@redhat.com
   Assignee|jples...@redhat.com |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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: systemd-resolved fallback DNS servers: usability vs. GDPR

[Tadej Janež]

On Tue, 2021-02-23 at 00:02 +0100, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> Well, this silent fallback behavior is one of the reasons I have
> refused to 
> use systemd-resolved at all so far.
> 
> The issue with the cloud setups would also have been caught much
> earlier if 
> it had failed right away and not silently used an external DNServer. 
> Ignoring broken configuration and just using the default is not
> useful error 
> handling.

I guess having a fallback is a double-edged sword. On one hand, indeed,
this issue with broken cloud-init would have been caught earlier, but
on the other hand, some people couldn't care less which DNS servers are
being used if things "just work".

> 
> And the real issue is that systemd-resolved has broken cloud-init, so
> cloud-init needs to be fixed/updated.

Yes, this is the main issue for cloud setups.

However, enabling/disabling a fallback is still an issue on its own. I
wouldn't add much more since I think Lennart summed that up pretty well
in his post.

> It is unfortunate that this behavior has changed in an update.

This is the thing that is probably hurting users the most. They have a
working F33 cloud instance and after systemd is upgraded, the instance
will *probably* (i.e. if users didn't configure DNS themselves and
relied on cloud-init) be heavily broken, i.e. DNS resolution not
working.

I actually think it would still be beneficial to flip this change, i.e.
remove the "-Ddns-servers=" line
(https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/systemd/blob/f33/f/systemd.spec#_372
), for the next F33 systemd update.

>  This has 
> happened because all the complaints about the old behavior back when
> the 
> Change proposal was discussed (i.e., BEFORE Fedora 33 was released)
> were 
> completely ignored by the Change owners and by FESCo (even though the
> fix 
> was apparently a one-line change that could easily have been made
> before the 
> release).

I didn't follow that so I can't comment on it.





signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Fedora-IoT-35-20210224.0 compose check report

[Fedora compose checker]

Missing expected images:

Iot dvd x86_64
Iot dvd aarch64

Failed openQA tests: 5/15 (aarch64), 1/16 (x86_64)

New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-IoT-35-20210222.0):

ID: 788607  Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_rpmostree_overlay@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/788607
ID: 788615  Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso podman@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/788615
ID: 788616  Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso podman_client@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/788616

Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-IoT-35-20210222.0):

ID: 788596  Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso base_services_start
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/788596
ID: 788605  Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_clevis@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/788605
ID: 788612  Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso base_services_start@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/788612

Soft failed openQA tests: 3/16 (x86_64), 1/15 (aarch64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)

New soft failures (same test not soft failed in Fedora-IoT-35-20210222.0):

ID: 788588  Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso install_default@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/788588
ID: 788589  Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso install_default_upload
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/788589
ID: 788604  Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso install_default_upload@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/788604

Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-IoT-35-20210222.0):

ID: 788590  Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_clevis
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/788590

Passed openQA tests: 12/16 (x86_64), 9/15 (aarch64)

New passes (same test not passed in Fedora-IoT-35-20210222.0):

ID: 788599  Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_zezere_server
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/788599
ID: 788603  Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_zezere_ignition
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/788603
ID: 788609  Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_zezere_server@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/788609
ID: 788618  Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_zezere_ignition@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/788618

Installed system changes in test x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso 
install_default@uefi: 
Used mem changed from 171 MiB to 192 MiB
1 services(s) added since previous compose: getty@tty6.service
Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/786230#downloads
Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/788588#downloads

Installed system changes in test x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso 
install_default_upload: 
Used mem changed from 170 MiB to 192 MiB
1 services(s) added since previous compose: getty@tty6.service
Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/786232#downloads
Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/788589#downloads

Installed system changes in test aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso 
install_default_upload@uefi: 
Used mem changed from 183 MiB to 208 MiB
1 services(s) added since previous compose: getty@tty6.service
Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/786247#downloads
Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/788604#downloads
-- 
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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1932287] perl-Data-Printer-1.000000 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1932287



--- Comment #1 from Upstream Release Monitoring 
 ---
An HTTP error occurred downloading the package's new Source URLs: Getting
https://cpan.metacpan.org/modules/by-module/Data/Data-Printer-1.00.tar.gz
to ./Data-Printer-1.00.tar.gz


-- 
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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1932287] New: perl-Data-Printer-1.000000 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1932287

Bug ID: 1932287
   Summary: perl-Data-Printer-1.00 is available
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-Data-Printer
  Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
  Assignee: emman...@seyman.fr
  Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: emman...@seyman.fr, perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Latest upstream release: 1.00
Current version/release in rawhide: 0.40-11.fc34
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Data-Printer/

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/2771/


-- 
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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1850772] Add perl-Email-Valid to EPEL8

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1850772

Jakub Jedelsky  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Assignee|spo...@gmail.com|jakub.jedel...@gmail.com



--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jedelsky  ---
I found everything is ready and I'm able to run the build, thus ... it's almost
done.


-- 
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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1850772] Add perl-Email-Valid to EPEL8

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1850772

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED



--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2021-b314160e0b has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 8.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-b314160e0b


-- 
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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1932262] New: perl-MojoX-JSON-RPC-0.13 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1932262

Bug ID: 1932262
   Summary: perl-MojoX-JSON-RPC-0.13 is available
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-MojoX-JSON-RPC
  Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
  Assignee: emman...@seyman.fr
  Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: emman...@seyman.fr, perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Latest upstream release: 0.13
Current version/release in rawhide: 0.12-6.fc34
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/MojoX-JSON-RPC/

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/10799/


-- 
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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Fedora-IoT-33-20210224.0 compose check report

[Fedora compose checker]

No missing expected images.

Failed openQA tests: 1/15 (aarch64)

Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-IoT-33-20210214.0):

ID: 788245  Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_clevis@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/788245

Soft failed openQA tests: 3/16 (x86_64), 1/15 (aarch64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)

New soft failures (same test not soft failed in Fedora-IoT-33-20210214.0):

ID: 788228  Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso install_default@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/788228
ID: 788229  Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso install_default_upload
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/788229
ID: 788244  Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso install_default_upload@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/788244

Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-IoT-33-20210214.0):

ID: 788230  Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_clevis
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/788230

Passed openQA tests: 13/16 (x86_64), 13/15 (aarch64)

Installed system changes in test x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso 
install_default@uefi: 
1 services(s) added since previous compose: getty@tty6.service
Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/777689#downloads
Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/788228#downloads

Installed system changes in test x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso 
install_default_upload: 
1 services(s) added since previous compose: getty@tty6.service
Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/777680#downloads
Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/788229#downloads

Installed system changes in test aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso 
install_default_upload@uefi: 
1 services(s) added since previous compose: getty@tty6.service
Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/777697#downloads
Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/788244#downloads
-- 
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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: systemd-resolved fallback DNS servers: usability vs. GDPR

[Marius Schwarz]

Am 23.02.21 um 20:34 schrieb Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek:


Everything, that is not prepresenting a person, is not regulated by
GDPR, therefor it does not "need" to comply.

No. GDPR is about "personally identifying information". In particular,
it talks about information which may be combined with other information
(now or in the future) to identify a specific person. And an IP address
falls into this category in the general case.

The scenario we are considering here is e.g. a company which provides
computers with Fedora installed to its employees or customers. Whatever
resolver is used gets the source IP information which as described
above can be identifying (depending on the network setup and other
circumstances). By removing the fallback, we're removing a possible
information expose and violation of the law by the company.


I didn't say anything else ;)

If a  PC in a companies network, is accessing the companies dns cache, 
the dns cache uses it's own ip for the root dns request, hiding the 
personal IP from that root dns.  This is fine.


If the copmanies DNS cache is failing and the PC is falling back, using 
IPv6 to connect to a fallback server, that is an issue.


 I personally think, IPv4 doesn't matter here, as most companies do use 
NAT to connect the lan to the outside world. Individual traceback is no 
possible that way.


Which leads to the conclusion, that a workstation should not have 
fallbackservers for dns, where Cloudinstances need to check that 
requirement themselves as it matters how and where they do dns. It 
relies heavily on the service and how many people use it.


Best regards,
Marius Schwarz
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: OCaml 4.12

[Richard W.M. Jones]

On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 04:39:09PM -0700, Jerry James wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 10:21 AM Richard W.M. Jones  wrote:
> > Thanks again.  Let's see what happens when 4.12 is finally released.
> 
> I have picked up ocaml-ocp-indent, which was orphaned recently,
> because frama-c needs it.  I pushed some changes to the Rawhide branch
> today but haven't rebuilt.  I'll let the OCaml 4.12 rebuilds take care
> of that.  I'm going to do likewise with ocaml-menhir, probably in the
> next 24 hours.
> 
> I am thinking of picking up ocaml-merlin, which is also orphaned.  I
> have tried updating it to 4.1, but some tests are failing.  A little
> debugging work revealed that merlin is trying to read standard library
> *.cmt and *.cmti files, but we don't have them in our ocaml package.
> I see this in ocaml.spec:
> 
> # Remove .cmt and .cmti files, for now.  We could package them later.
> # See also: http://www.ocamlpro.com/blog/2012/08/20/ocamlpro-and-4.00.0.html
> find $RPM_BUILD_ROOT \( -name '*.cmt' -o -name '*.cmti' \) -a -delete
> 
> 
> Can we make "later" be when OCaml 4.12 is released?  They could go
> into a separate subpackage, since most OCaml packages won't need them.
> Thanks,

Sure thing.

Rich.

-- 
Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com
virt-top is 'top' for virtual machines.  Tiny program with many
powerful monitoring features, net stats, disk stats, logging, etc.
http://people.redhat.com/~rjones/virt-top
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1850772] Add perl-Email-Valid to EPEL8

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1850772

Jakub Jedelsky  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Assignee|jakub.jedel...@gmail.com|spo...@gmail.com



--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jedelsky  ---
Hi Tom, I just checked build and there shouldn't be missing deps for epel8 now.
Could you proceed with the build, please?


-- 
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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

License change: R-dtplyr GPLv2+ -> MIT

[Elliott Sales de Andrade]

Upstream has relicensed; changes coming to F34+ only due to dependencies.

-- 
Elliott
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Fedora-Cloud-32-20210224.0 compose check report

[Fedora compose checker]

No missing expected images.

Soft failed openQA tests: 1/7 (x86_64), 1/7 (aarch64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)

Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-32-20210223.0):

ID: 787837  Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/787837
ID: 787844  Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/787844

Passed openQA tests: 6/7 (x86_64), 6/7 (aarch64)
-- 
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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1890793] EPEL8 Request: perl-Devel-REPL

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1890793



--- Comment #1 from Petr Pisar  ---
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/32316


-- 
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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1807857] please build perl-Sys-SigAction on EPEL8

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1807857



--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2021-a6333d6872 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 8.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-a6333d6872


-- 
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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1807857] please build perl-Sys-SigAction on EPEL8

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1807857

Petr Pisar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
   Fixed In Version||perl-Sys-SigAction-0.23-14.
   ||el8




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1932205] New: perl-IPTables-libiptc-0.52-36.fc35 FTBFS: iptables-detect-version.c:65:2: warning: #warning "This version of xtables is currently not supported by this Perl package

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1932205

Bug ID: 1932205
   Summary: perl-IPTables-libiptc-0.52-36.fc35 FTBFS:
iptables-detect-version.c:65:2: warning: #warning
"This version of xtables is currently not supported by
this Perl package
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
   URL: https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/package/perl-IPTable
s-libiptc
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-IPTables-libiptc
  Assignee: ppi...@redhat.com
  Reporter: ppi...@redhat.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org, ppi...@redhat.com
Blocks: 1927309 (F35FTBFS)
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



perl-IPTables-libiptc-0.52-36.fc35 fails to build in F35:

gcc -c  -I/usr/local/include -I./include -I. -D_REENTRANT -D_GNU_SOURCE -O2
-flto=auto -ffat-lto-objects -fexceptions -g -grecord-gcc-switches -pipe -Wall
-Werror=format-security -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -Wp,-D_GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS
-specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-hardened-cc1 -fstack-protector-strong
-specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-annobin-cc1 -mbranch-protection=standard
-fasynchronous-unwind-tables -fstack-clash-protection -fwrapv
-fno-strict-aliasing -I/usr/local/include -D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE
-D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -O2 -flto=auto -ffat-lto-objects -fexceptions -g
-grecord-gcc-switches -pipe -Wall -Werror=format-security
-Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -Wp,-D_GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS
-specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-hardened-cc1 -fstack-protector-strong
-specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-annobin-cc1  -mbranch-protection=standard
-fasynchronous-unwind-tables -fstack-clash-protection   -DVERSION=\"0.52\"
-DXS_VERSION=\"0.52\" -fPIC "-I/usr/lib64/perl5/CORE"  -g
-DIPTABLES_VERSION=\"1.4.4\" -DXTABLES_LIBDIR=\"\/lib/xtables\"
-DIPTABLES_VERSION_CODE=\ libiptc.c
gcc: fatal error: no input files
compilation terminated.
make: *** [Makefile:350: libiptc.o] Error 1
make: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs
make -C iptables/ all PREFIX="/usr" IPTABLES_VERSION="1.4.4"
XTABLES_LIBDIR="/lib/xtables" IPTABLES_VERSION_CODE="" EXTRALIBS="-lip4tc
-lxtables"
make[1]: Entering directory
'/builddir/build/BUILD/IPTables-libiptc-0.52/iptables'
make[1]: Leaving directory
'/builddir/build/BUILD/IPTables-libiptc-0.52/iptables'
make[1]: Entering directory
'/builddir/build/BUILD/IPTables-libiptc-0.52/iptables'
cc -O2 -Wall -Wunused -I/include -I/usr/include -I../include/ -fPIC
-DXTABLES_INTERNAL -g -DIPTABLES_VERSION=\"1.4.4\"
-DXTABLES_LIBDIR=\"/lib/xtables\" -DIPTABLES_VERSION_CODE=\ -c -o iptables.o
iptables-detect-version.c
make[1]: Leaving directory
'/builddir/build/BUILD/IPTables-libiptc-0.52/iptables'
make[1]: warning: jobserver unavailable: using -j1.  Add '+' to parent make
rule.
iptables-detect-version.c:65:2: warning: #warning "This version of xtables is
currently not supported by this Perl package" [-Wcpp]

A difference between passing and failing build root is at




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1927309
[Bug 1927309] Fedora 35 FTBFS Tracker
-- 
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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1932203] New: perl-Crypt-GPG-1.64-20.fc35 FTBFS: Use of uninitialized value in string eq at t/02-import.t line 40.

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1932203

Bug ID: 1932203
   Summary: perl-Crypt-GPG-1.64-20.fc35 FTBFS: Use of
uninitialized value in string eq at t/02-import.t line
40.
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
   URL: https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/package/perl-Crypt-G
PG
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-Crypt-GPG
  Assignee: redhat-bugzi...@linuxnetz.de
  Reporter: ppi...@redhat.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org,
redhat-bugzi...@linuxnetz.de
Blocks: 1927309 (F35FTBFS)
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



perl-Crypt-GPG-1.64-20.fc35 fails to build in mock/Koji environment because
tests fail there:

+ make test
PERL_DL_NONLAZY=1 "/usr/bin/perl" "-MExtUtils::Command::MM" "-MTest::Harness"
"-e" "undef *Test::Harness::Switches; test_harness(0, 'blib/lib', 'blib/arch')"
t/*.t
NOTE: If the tests are skipped, you may need to install gpg,
  and/or set the environment variable GPGBIN to the 
  location of the gpg binary.
  If the keygen test takes a long time you may need to 
  generate more randomness on your computer (by running a 
  recursive directory listing in the background, for 
  example).
process ended prematurely at
/builddir/build/BUILD/Crypt-GPG-1.64/blib/lib/Crypt/GPG.pm line 473.
process ended prematurely at
/builddir/build/BUILD/Crypt-GPG-1.64/blib/lib/Crypt/GPG.pm line 473.
t/01-keygen.t .. ok
Use of uninitialized value in string eq at t/02-import.t line 40.
# Failed test 1 in t/02-import.t at line 44
t/02-import.t .. 
Failed 1/1 subtests 
[...]
Test Summary Report
---
t/02-import.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 1 Failed: 1)
  Failed test:  1
t/03-export.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 10 Failed: 4)
  Failed tests:  1, 4, 6, 9
t/04-encdec.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 10 Failed: 10)
  Failed tests:  1-10
t/05-sigver.t (Wstat: 2560 Tests: 1 Failed: 1)
  Failed test:  1
  Non-zero exit status: 10
  Parse errors: Bad plan.  You planned 32 tests but ran 1.
t/06-keyops.t (Wstat: 2560 Tests: 0 Failed: 0)
  Non-zero exit status: 10
  Parse errors: Bad plan.  You planned 30 tests but ran 0.

A difference between passing and failing build root is at
. Because I
cannot reproduces in my virtual machine, I believe this could be triggered by a
new namespace-isolating mock which is also used in Koji.



Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1927309
[Bug 1927309] Fedora 35 FTBFS Tracker
-- 
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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Fedora-Rawhide-20210223.n.1 compose check report

[Fedora compose checker]

No missing expected images.

Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check!
3 of 43 required tests failed
openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING** 
below

Failed openQA tests: 26/187 (x86_64), 15/126 (aarch64)

New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20210222.n.0):

ID: 787442  Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso apps_startstop
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/787442
ID: 787450  Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso desktop_browser **GATING**
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/787450
ID: 787455  Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso desktop_login
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/787455
ID: 787484  Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso desktop_browser
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/787484
ID: 787539  Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso server_cockpit_basic@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/787539
ID: 787570  Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 base_selinux@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/787570
ID: 787577  Test: x86_64 universal install_arabic_language
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/787577
ID: 787580  Test: x86_64 universal install_blivet_btrfs@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/787580
ID: 787591  Test: x86_64 universal install_cyrillic_language
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/787591
ID: 787622  Test: x86_64 universal install_scsi_updates_img **GATING**
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/787622
ID: 787654  Test: aarch64 universal install_arabic_language@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/787654
ID: 787674  Test: aarch64 universal install_with_swap@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/787674
ID: 787706  Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_login
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/787706
ID: 787711  Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_update_graphical
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/787711
ID: 787721  Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz desktop_browser@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/787721

Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20210222.n.0):

ID: 787416  Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_cockpit_updates
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/787416
ID: 787425  Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso modularity_tests
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/787425
ID: 787451  Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso 
desktop_notifications_postinstall
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/787451
ID: 787511  Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso install_lvm_ext4@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/787511
ID: 787535  Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso modularity_tests@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/787535
ID: 787578  Test: x86_64 universal install_asian_language
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/787578
ID: 787639  Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_desktop_64bit
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/787639
ID: 787640  Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_desktop_encrypted_64bit
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/787640
ID: 787641  Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_kde_64bit
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/787641
ID: 787642  Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_minimal_64bit
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/787642
ID: 787643  Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_minimal_uefi@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/787643
ID: 787644  Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_server_64bit
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/787644
ID: 787645  Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_server_domain_controller
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/787645
ID: 787649  Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_realmd_client
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/787649
ID: 787655  Test: aarch64 universal install_asian_language@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/787655
ID: 787662  Test: aarch64 universal install_cyrillic_language@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/787662
ID: 787689  Test: aarch64 universal upgrade_2_server_domain_controller@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/787689
ID: 787690  Test: aarch64 universal upgrade_minimal_64bit@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/787690
ID: 787691  Test: aarch64 universal upgrade_server_64bit@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/787691
ID: 787692  Test: aarch64 universal upgrade_server_domain_controller@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/787692
ID: 787694  Test: aarch64 universal upgrade_2_realmd_client@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/787694
ID: 787695  Test: aarch64 universal upgrade_realmd_client@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/787695
ID: 787697  Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso apps_startstop
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/787697
ID: 787707  Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_browser **GATING**
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/787707