[Bug 2007499] New: Please update to > 1.02

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007499

Bug ID: 2007499
   Summary: Please update to > 1.02
   Product: Fedora
   Version: 34
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-GnuPG-Interface
  Assignee: emman...@seyman.fr
  Reporter: rc040...@freenet.de
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: emman...@seyman.fr, fed...@mj41.cz,
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org,
xav...@bachelot.org
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Description of problem:
rt > 4.4.4
and
rt > 5.0.2
require perl(GnuPG::Interface) >= 1.02

The versions provided by fc33 and fc34 do not suffice this requirement:
fc34: perl-GnuPG-Interface-1.01
fc33: perl-GnuPG-Interface-1.00

Thus, this prevents me from upgrading rt4 to rt-4.4.5 (an upstream bugfix
release).

I'd ask you to upgrade perl-GnuPG-Interface to 1.02 on fc33 and f34.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007499
___
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: openbabel-3.1* in Rawhide

[Alexander Ploumistos]

On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 3:37 PM Antonio T. sagitter
 wrote:
>
> gnome-chemistry-utils is ready for openbabel3; it's in my Copr project.

Well done Antonio!
I will give it a try this weekend.
___
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

remove-retired-packages

[Miroslav Suchý]

Hi.

I created small script `remove-retired-packages`. You can try it using:

$ sudo dnf copr enable msuchy/remove-retired-packages

$ remove-retired-packages

This script removes packages retired between Fedora N and Fedora N-1. You can 
run it with parameter:

$ remove-retired-packages  30

And it will remove all packages retired between Fedora N and Fedora 30.

It removes packages one-by-one. And you have the option to skip specific 
package.

The source is here:

https://github.com/xsuchy/fedora-upgrade/blob/main/remove-retired-packages

I will welcome PR. Especially for the wording of the printed text.

If I get positive feedback I turn this into F36 Change proposal.

Miroslav
___
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

[EPEL-devel] Re: proposed recommendation - missing devel packages

[Orion Poplawski]

On 9/23/21 9:00 AM, Miro Hrončok wrote:

On 23. 09. 21 5:41, Orion Poplawski wrote:

-Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}
+Requires: utf8proc%{?_isa} >= %{version}-%{release}


I'd assume that anybody (even you) might need to rebuild this package in 
EPEL at any time for various reasons and %{release} might be larger than 
the RHEL package release. This >= requireement will break.


Also, if the RHEL version gets updated to e.g. 2.1.2 (unlikely, but not 
impossible), the EPEL devel package will still be able to be installed, 
which is probably undesired.


If you don't need to follow RHEL's release number that much, I suggest 
to do:


Requires: utf8proc%{?_isa} = %{version}

And if you do, I suggest to do:

%global rhel_release 5
Requires: (utf8proc%{?_isa} = %{version} with utf8proc%{?_isa} >= 
%{version}-%{rhel_release})


You could even incorporate the RHEL's release to the EPEL's release, if 
you feel like it:


%global rhel_release 5
%global base_release 1

Release:  %{rhel_release}.%{base_release}%{?dist}


Side note: I also suggest to BuildRequire the runtime requirement (sans 
%{?_isa}) and track the package in Koschei. That way, you can get a 
notification if the requirement was broken by an RHEL update and the 
EPEL package needs to be updated as well.




Thanks, good ideas!

--
Orion Poplawski
he/him/his - surely the least important thing about me
Manager of NWRA Technical Systems  720-772-5637
NWRA, Boulder/CoRA Office FAX: 303-415-9702
3380 Mitchell Lane   or...@nwra.com
Boulder, CO 80301 https://www.nwra.com/



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Why is %_host defined as armv7hl-redhat-linux-gnu on the arm builders?

[Tom Stellard]

Hi,

I've noticed that the %_host macro is defined as armv7hl-redhat-linux-gnu on
the arm builders.  I believe this is coming from the mockhost config
option in kojid.

In /usr/lib/rpm/macros %_host is defined as armv7hl-redhat-linux-gnueabi
which matches the gcc triple used on arm.  Is there a particular reason
for overriding this %_host definition?

-Tom
___
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 2006977] perl-Math-BigInt-FastCalc-0.5011 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2006977

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-332617f8d1 has been pushed to the Fedora 35 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
--advisory=FEDORA-2021-332617f8d1`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-332617f8d1

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.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2006977
___
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 1949278] perl-Net-Stomp-0.61 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1949278

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-a66952c302 has been pushed to the Fedora 35 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
--advisory=FEDORA-2021-a66952c302`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-a66952c302

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.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1949278
___
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 2007171] Upgrade perl-App-Cme to 1.033

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007171

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-b62483f3fc has been pushed to the Fedora 35 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
--advisory=FEDORA-2021-b62483f3fc`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-b62483f3fc

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.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007171
___
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 2007048] perl-Convert-ASN1-0.33 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007048

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-8e22452051 has been pushed to the Fedora 35 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
--advisory=FEDORA-2021-8e22452051`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-8e22452051

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.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007048
___
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: Linux Plumbers Conference - Open Printing Micro Conference

[Brandon Nielsen]

On 9/22/21 12:54 AM, Zdenek Dohnal wrote:

On 9/21/21 1:21 PM, Neal Gompa wrote:

On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 5:36 AM Zdenek Dohnal  wrote:

- several other printer applications was implemented by Till
Kamppeter[1][2][3][4] - Till makes it available as Snaps, I'm planning
to package it into Fedora as rpm first, then later as a flatpacks


How would these even work as Flatpaks? They are not graphical
applications or even console applications. These are helper services
for CUPS. I wouldn't expect those to work in Flatpak at all.


(here I'm starting to talk based on talks I've seen and how I've 
understood them - I still haven't had time to deeply test them by 
myself, I've only tried briefly lprint last year...)


Actually they are console applications - you can start them by CLI as an 
user or make them start on startup by its service unit. Once you 
configure your device at http://localhost:8000 (web ui for the printer 
application), your device will become available via mDNS and you can 
print without any other configuration (if your mDNS support in Fedora 
works). Or if you don't trust your local network, you can install the 
queue with uri - 
|ipp://localhost:8000/ipp/print/|


Ad printer apps being in flatpack - as you can see in the github 
issue[1], ps-printer-application and hplip-printer-application are 
available in SNAP repositories (CUPS has its SNAP as well in SNAP 
store). IIUC flatpack is based on the similar technology as snap, so my 
thoughts were the flatpack version is also possible.



[1] https://github.com/OpenPrinting/ps-printer-app/issues/9



--
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
devel mailing list --devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email todevel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of 
Conduct:https://docs.fedoraproject.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


--
Zdenek Dohnal
Software Engineer
Red Hat Czech - Brno TPB-C


___
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



For anyone looking to play with these right now without a snap, I've 
started a copr[0]. I don't have the systemd service working yet, but you 
can start the printer app server manually.


It gives you a good feel for where the project is going.

[0] - https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/nielsenb/printer-apps/
___
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

[EPEL-devel] Re: proposed recommendation - missing devel packages

[Orion Poplawski]

On 9/23/21 7:28 AM, Troy Dawson wrote:

That looks great, and very close to what I've done.
I have a couple of variations.
I think the biggest is that I set a variable called rhel_name and then 
change %{name} to %{rhel_name}.  It looks like you only had two 
instances of %{name} but I've had a couple with many instances of it, 
and this makes it easier.
The second is that I usually put a link to the upstream spec file, in 
comments.  I use the CentOS Stream git repo, because it's publicly 
available.  This is mainly for me, cuz I never know where to find them.

So, this is at the top of my spec files.

# This spec file is derived from the RHEL8 spec file.
#   They should be kept in sync over time.
# https://git.centos.org/rpms/libpinyin/blob/c8/f/SPECS/libpinyin.spec 


%global rhel_name libpinyin
%global _debugsource_template %{nil}

But, that's just my preferences.  I think yours should be fine.


Thanks, good ideas.

I'm thinking we might want to break this out from a question in the FAQ 
to it's own page.


+1



Troy



--
Orion Poplawski
he/him/his - surely the least important thing about me
Manager of NWRA Technical Systems  720-772-5637
NWRA, Boulder/CoRA Office FAX: 303-415-9702
3380 Mitchell Lane   or...@nwra.com
Boulder, CO 80301 https://www.nwra.com/



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

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

[updates]

The following Fedora EPEL 8 Security updates need testing:
 Age  URL
   1  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-7d0a7b6146   
libspf2-1.2.11-1.20210922git4915c308.el8
   1  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-3dbdaa5f12   
golang-github-prometheus-2.26.1-1.el8


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

gdal-3.0.4-9.el8
hw-probe-1.6-1.el8
notcurses-2.4.2-2.el8
swift-lang-5.5-1.el8

Details about builds:



 gdal-3.0.4-9.el8 (FEDORA-EPEL-2021-9eb72079dc)
 GIS file format library

Update Information:

Rebuild (libldap)

ChangeLog:

* Thu Sep 23 2021 Sandro Mani  - 3.0.4-9
- Rebuild (ldap)




 hw-probe-1.6-1.el8 (FEDORA-EPEL-2021-a29fd77e7b)
 Check operability of computer hardware and find drivers

Update Information:

Update to 1.6

ChangeLog:

* Wed Sep 22 2021 Andrey Ponomarenko  - 1.6-1
- Update to 1.6
* Thu Jul 22 2021 Fedora Release Engineering  - 1.5-6
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_35_Mass_Rebuild
* Tue Jan 26 2021 Fedora Release Engineering  - 1.5-5
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_34_Mass_Rebuild
* Tue Jul 28 2020 Adam Jackson  - 1.5-4
- Recommend edid-decode xdpyinfo xinput xrandr xvinfo, not xorg-x11-utils
* Tue Jul 28 2020 Fedora Release Engineering  - 1.5-3
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_33_Mass_Rebuild
* Wed Jan 29 2020 Fedora Release Engineering  - 1.5-2
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_32_Mass_Rebuild




 notcurses-2.4.2-2.el8 (FEDORA-EPEL-2021-2e97d40eb0)
 Character graphics and TUI library

Update Information:

https://github.com/dankamongmen/notcurses/releases/tag/v2.4.2

ChangeLog:

* Mon Sep 20 2021 Nick Black  2.4.2-2
- RPMAUTOSPEC: unresolvable merge




 swift-lang-5.5-1.el8 (FEDORA-EPEL-2021-b4d202a2a4)
 Apple's Swift programming language

Update Information:

Updated to Swift 5.5-RELEASE    Updated to Swift 5.4.3-RELEASE

ChangeLog:

* Tue Sep 21 2021 Ron Olson  - 5.5-1
- Updated to Swift 5.5-RELEASE
* Fri Sep 17 2021 Ron Olson  - 5.4.3-2
- Added patch to allow building using Clang 13
* Wed Sep 15 2021 Ron Olson  - 5.4.3-1
- Updated to swift-5.4.3-RELEASE
* Fri Jul 23 2021 Fedora Release Engineering  - 
5.4.2-3
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_35_Mass_Rebuild


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

Re: Mangling shebangs in text files: How to detect them, bug in the current implementation and possible solutions

[Josh Stone]

On 9/23/21 2:11 AM, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 23. 09. 21 1:40, Josh Stone wrote:
>> On 9/22/21 4:21 AM, Miro Hrončok wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> for many releases, Fedora has the brp-mangle-sehbangs BuildRoot Policy 
>>> Script
>>> that does the following:
>>>
>>>1) Gets all executable files in the buildroot
>>>2) Gets all "text" files from those
>>>3a) Mangles shebangs that are "wrong"
>>>(e.g. #!/usr/bin/env node -> #!/usr/bin/node)
>>>3b) Removes executable bits from "text" files without shebangs
>>
>> While we're at it, can we teach the script to ignore Rust attributes?
>> They're written like #![attr...], and when that's on the first line some
>> editors try to be helpful and make the file executable. That's
>> considered an error with the current script since the "shebang" doesn't
>> start with '/', but it would be best IMO to have it remove the
>> executable bit.
> 
> I believe that currently the script would error:
> 
> ERROR: $f has shebang which doesn't start with '/' (#![attr...])
> 
> Have you ever seen that in a Fedora package?

That's the error I meant, and yes I have seen that in real builds. I
have a line in the rust.spec %prep to "chmod -x *.rs", but I've also
seen this pop up in individual rust-* crate packaging.
___
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: Package Update Guide: Updating inter-dependent packages

[Miro Hrončok]

On 23. 09. 21 17:28, Adam Williamson wrote:

... (in
fact, we could have a discussion about getting rid of buildroot
overrides, at this point).


Buildroot overrides still have their use cases. E.g. when there is an existing 
update stuck at testing (e.g. during a freeze) that is needed to allow building 
numerous other packages even in CIs.


E.g. https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/openssl/c/2fc4e025c7?branch=f35

--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Fedora Linux 35 Beta is GO

[Ben Cotton]

The Fedora Linux 35 Beta RC2 compose[1] is GO and will be shipped live
on Tuesday, 28 September 2021.

For more information please check the Go/No-Go meeting minutes[2] or log[3].

Thank you to everyone who has and still is working on this release!
The Final Freeze begins on
Tuesday 5 October.

[1] https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/35_Beta-1.2/
[2] 
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2021-09-23/f35-beta-go_no_go-meeting.2021-09-23-17.00.html
[3] 
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2021-09-23/f35-beta-go_no_go-meeting.2021-09-23-17.00.log.html

-- 
Ben Cotton
He / Him / His
Fedora Program Manager
Red Hat
TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis
___
devel-announce mailing list -- devel-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-announce-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Test-Announce] Fedora Linux 35 Beta is GO

[Ben Cotton]

The Fedora Linux 35 Beta RC2 compose[1] is GO and will be shipped live
on Tuesday, 28 September 2021.

For more information please check the Go/No-Go meeting minutes[2] or log[3].

Thank you to everyone who has and still is working on this release!
The Final Freeze begins on
Tuesday 5 October.

[1] https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/35_Beta-1.2/
[2] 
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2021-09-23/f35-beta-go_no_go-meeting.2021-09-23-17.00.html
[3] 
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2021-09-23/f35-beta-go_no_go-meeting.2021-09-23-17.00.log.html

-- 
Ben Cotton
He / Him / His
Fedora Program Manager
Red Hat
TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis
___
test-announce mailing list -- test-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to test-announce-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org
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

Fedora-IoT-35-20210923.0 compose check report

[Fedora compose checker]

No missing expected images.

Failed openQA tests: 1/15 (aarch64)

Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-IoT-35-20210922.0):

ID: 999225  Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_clevis@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/999225

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

Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-IoT-35-20210922.0):

ID: 999210  Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_clevis
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/999210

Passed openQA tests: 15/16 (x86_64), 14/15 (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: Free Pascal and the new glibc

[Mattia Verga via devel]

On 23/09/21 16:30, Mamoru TASAKA wrote:
> Mattia Verga via devel wrote on 2021/09/23 15:11:
>> I've created f35-build-side-46123 and tagged fpc-3.2.2-3.fc35 into that.
>>
>> Lazarus rebuild is in progress. I will take care of rebuilding the other
>> packages listed in bug 1987485 as soon as I can. If the maintainers of
>> those packages want to rebuild their package (in the side-tag), please
>> do so, it will speed up the process.
>>
>> Mattia
>>
>
> [tasaka1@localhost ~]$ dnf repoquery --arch=src --whatrequires lazarus
> ccdciel-0:0.9.75.1-2.fc36.src
> cqrlog-0:2.5.2-3.fc36.src
> doublecmd-0:0.9.10-2.fc34.src
> goverlay-0:0.6.3-1.fc36.src
> indistarter-0:2.2.0-4.fc36.src
> lazpaint-0:7.1.6-3.fc36.src
> skychart-0:4.3-7.4358svn.fc36.src
>
> [tasaka1@localhost ~]$ dnf repoquery --arch=src --whatrequires fpc
> ccdciel-0:0.9.75.1-2.fc36.src
> colorful-0:1.3-13.fc36.src
> cqrlog-0:2.5.2-3.fc36.src
> doublecmd-0:0.9.10-2.fc34.src
> fpc-0:3.2.2-3.fc36.src
> gearhead1-0:1.310-7.fc36.src
> hedgewars-0:1.0.0-19.fc35.src
> indistarter-0:2.2.0-4.fc36.src
> lazarus-0:2.0.12-3.fc36.src
> lazpaint-0:7.1.6-3.fc36.src
> nbc-0:1.2.1.r3-22.fc34.src
> skychart-0:4.3-7.4358svn.fc36.src
>
> Although hedgewars is listed, looking at hedgewars.spec and build.log, it uses
> "-DBUILD_ENGINE_C=1" option which converts .pas source to .c (using hedgewars 
> internal
> tool) and build .c files with clang, so hedgewars can be omitted from the 
> list above.
>
> Now I think all packages using fpc or lazarus on build are now rebuilt:
> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/builds?inherited=0=46123=-completion_time=1
>
> Regards,
> Mamoru
Wonderful! Thank you Mamoru, I've pushed a Bodhi update [1] from the
side-tag.

If we missed any package, just let me know and I'll edit the update.

Thanks all
Mattia

[1] https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-6c20029f5d

___
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-35-20210923.n.0 compose check report

[Fedora compose checker]

No missing expected images.

Failed openQA tests: 2/204 (x86_64), 5/141 (aarch64)

New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-35-20210922.n.0):

ID: 998728  Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso 
install_btrfs_preserve_home_uefi@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998728
ID: 998883  Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso release_identification@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998883
ID: 998922  Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz desktop_printing@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998922

Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-35-20210922.n.0):

ID: 998815  Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso apps_startstop
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998815
ID: 998861  Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso anaconda_help@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998861
ID: 998927  Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz gedit@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998927
ID: 999033  Test: aarch64 universal install_asian_language@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/999033

Soft failed openQA tests: 4/204 (x86_64), 3/141 (aarch64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)

New soft failures (same test not soft failed in Fedora-35-20210922.n.0):

ID: 998831  Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso evince
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998831

Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-35-20210922.n.0):

ID: 998789  Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso gedit
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998789
ID: 998832  Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso gedit
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998832
ID: 998843  Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998843
ID: 998850  Test: aarch64 Minimal-raw_xz-raw.xz 
install_arm_image_deployment_upload@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998850
ID: 998907  Test: aarch64 Server-raw_xz-raw.xz 
install_arm_image_deployment_upload@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998907
ID: 998934  Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998934

Passed openQA tests: 197/204 (x86_64), 133/141 (aarch64)

New passes (same test not passed in Fedora-35-20210922.n.0):

ID: 998777  Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso realmd_join_sssd
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998777
ID: 998788  Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso evince
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998788
ID: 998870  Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso install_vncconnect_server@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998870
ID: 998904  Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso server_cockpit_basic@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998904
ID: 998969  Test: x86_64 universal install_asian_language
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998969

Installed system changes in test x86_64 Server-boot-iso install_default: 
System load changed from 0.01 to 0.12
Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/996772#downloads
Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998723#downloads

Installed system changes in test x86_64 Workstation-live-iso 
install_default_upload: 
System load changed from 0.78 to 0.56
Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/996835#downloads
Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998786#downloads

Installed system changes in test x86_64 KDE-live-iso install_default_upload: 
System load changed from 1.27 to 0.92
Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/996860#downloads
Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998811#downloads

Installed system changes in test x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso 
install_default@uefi: 
System load changed from 0.57 to 0.68
Average CPU usage changed from 10.59523810 to 26.47142857
Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/996877#downloads
Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998828#downloads

Installed system changes in test x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso 
install_default_upload: 
Used swap changed from 7 MiB to 6 MiB
System load changed from 0.83 to 0.50
Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/996879#downloads
Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998830#downloads

Installed system changes in test x86_64 universal install_package_set_minimal: 
System load changed from 0.03 to 0.14
Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/997027#downloads
Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998978#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 

[Bug 2007254] perl-POE-Component-SSLify-1.012-24.fc36 FTBFS: Can't use an undefined value as a symbol reference at /builddir/build/BUILD/POE-Component-SSLify-1.012/blib/lib/POE/Component/SSLify.pm lin

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007254



--- Comment #2 from Petr Pisar  ---
It's not a problem with Net::SSLeay::CTX_set_options(). For some reason when
entering POE::Component::SSLify::_createSSLcontext() these OpenSSL errors are
found on the stack:

13073: 1 - error:0A000126:SSL routines::unexpected eof while reading
13073: 2 - error:0A000126:SSL routines::unexpected eof while reading

and as a result the next call of Net::SSLeay::die_if_ssl_error() reports an
error because the underlying Net::SSLeay::ERR_get_error() explores the error
stack.
I have to say the the error checking in POE::Component::SSLify is pretty bad
because the OpenSSL error stack is global and POE::Component::SSLify could
catch an unrelated error from a third-party OpenSSL call.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007254
___
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: Package Update Guide: Updating inter-dependent packages

[Adam Williamson]

On Thu, 2021-09-23 at 11:29 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Package_Update_Guide/#updating_inter_dependent_packages
> 
> Says:
> 
> """
> You may need a buildroot override to complete a multi-package update 
> successfully. For instance in the case described above, you may need to 
> rebuild 
> bar against the new libfoo package and submit both packages together as a 
> multi-package update. However, in the normal course of events, you would not 
> be 
> able to build another package against your new libfoo build until it reached 
> the stable state. To resolve this dilemma, you can request a buildroot 
> override, which causes the libfoo build to be included in the buildroot for a 
> short time in order to get the bar package build done.
> """
> 
> However, I think side-tags should be the preferred solution, as their impact 
> is 
> isolated. Buildroot overrides create temporary broken dependencies for 
> everybody, while side-tags don't.
> 
> My understanding was that this is the de-facto consensus, so I'd lie to 
> update 
> the docs to say something like:
> 
> """
> You may need to build the inter-dependent packages in a side tag.
> For instance in the case described above, you may need to rebuild bar against 
> the new libfoo package and submit both packages together as a multi-package 
> update. However, in the normal course of events, you would not be able to 
> build 
> another package against your new libfoo build until it reached the stable 
> state. To resolve this dilemma, you can request a side tag and build both 
> packages in it, which causes the libfoo build to be included in the bar 
> build's 
> buildroot.
> """
> 
> And than instead of describing the details, link to 
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/rawhide-gating/multi-builds/
> 
> Any suggestions or objections?

No objections. I wrote the current version of the text before on-demand
side tags were a thing. On-demand side tags are indeed better than
buildroot overrides in just about every way and should be preferred (in
fact, we could have a discussion about getting rid of buildroot
overrides, at this point).
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA
IRC: adamw | Twitter: adamw_ha
https://www.happyassassin.net

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

Re: Mangling shebangs in text files: How to detect them, bug in the current implementation and possible solutions

[Steve Grubb]

On Wednesday, September 22, 2021 5:34:17 PM EDT Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > From all the scan that we've done on fullish installs in the past,
> > there's
> > only 2 others that you might run across: application/x-elc (lisp) and
> > application/x-java-applet.
> > 
> > Maybe you just build in logic to workaround these 3 types? application/
> > javascript is really the only one I can think of that is common.
> 
> Yeah, maybe we should just do that. However, that would not cleanup the
> executable pngs.

They should be easy to identify, they start with 'image'. There's not many 
types on a typical system. This is what I see in /usr on a system with 5000 
packages installed:

application/gzip
application/javascript
application/json
application/octet-stream
application/vnd.ms-fontobject
application/x-bad-elf
application/x-executable
application/x-kdelnk
application/x-sharedlib
application/zip
audio/ogg
font/sfnt
image/gif
image/jpeg
image/png
image/vnd.microsoft.icon
text/html
text/plain
text/x-awk
text/x-c
text/x-gawk
text/x-lua
text/x-luatex
text/x-perl
text/x-python
text/x-ruby
text/x-shellscript
text/x-systemtap
text/x-tcl

You might just make a map since the list is not all that big. The biggest 
issue is when you have things text/plain or application/octet-stream. That 
means we don't know what it is.

-Steve

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

[Bug 2007259] perl-IO-Socket-SSL-2.072-2.fc36 FTBFS: read tests fail (with openssl1.1-1.1.1l?)

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007259



--- Comment #2 from Petr Pisar  ---
I think OpenSSL 1.1.1 is pulled in by few non-Perl packages. On my virtual
machine:

# rpm -q --whatrequires 'libssl.so.1.1()(64bit)'
ruby-libs-3.0.2-152.fc36.x86_64
krb5-libs-1.19.2-3.fc36.x86_64
root@fedora-36:~ # rpm -q --whatrequires 'libcrypto.so.1.1()(64bit)'
ruby-libs-3.0.2-152.fc36.x86_64
krb5-libs-1.19.2-3.fc36.x86_64
libarchive-3.5.2-2.fc36.x86_64
openssl1.1-1.1.1l-1.fc36.x86_64

I can see krb5-libs in root.log of the linked scratch build.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007259
___
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

[EPEL-devel] Re: proposed recommendation - missing devel packages

[Miro Hrončok]

On 23. 09. 21 5:41, Orion Poplawski wrote:

-Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}
+Requires: utf8proc%{?_isa} >= %{version}-%{release}


I'd assume that anybody (even you) might need to rebuild this package in EPEL 
at any time for various reasons and %{release} might be larger than the RHEL 
package release. This >= requireement will break.


Also, if the RHEL version gets updated to e.g. 2.1.2 (unlikely, but not 
impossible), the EPEL devel package will still be able to be installed, which 
is probably undesired.


If you don't need to follow RHEL's release number that much, I suggest to do:

Requires: utf8proc%{?_isa} = %{version}

And if you do, I suggest to do:

%global rhel_release 5
Requires: (utf8proc%{?_isa} = %{version} with utf8proc%{?_isa} >= 
%{version}-%{rhel_release})


You could even incorporate the RHEL's release to the EPEL's release, if you 
feel like it:


%global rhel_release 5
%global base_release 1

Release:  %{rhel_release}.%{base_release}%{?dist}


Side note: I also suggest to BuildRequire the runtime requirement (sans 
%{?_isa}) and track the package in Koschei. That way, you can get a 
notification if the requirement was broken by an RHEL update and the EPEL 
package needs to be updated as well.


--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 2007259] perl-IO-Socket-SSL-2.072-2.fc36 FTBFS: read tests fail (with openssl1.1-1.1.1l?)

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007259



--- Comment #1 from Paul Howarth  ---
These failures happened after I updated perl-Net-SSLeay to include upstream's
fixes for OpenSSL 3.0.0 (plus an additional workaround that upstream want to
fix differently) and rebuilt that package. The previous passing build would
have been with the old perl-Net-SSLeay that was built with OpenSSL 1.1.1. I
wonder what's still pulling in OpenSSL 1.1.1?


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007259
___
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: Free Pascal and the new glibc

[Mamoru TASAKA]

Mattia Verga via devel wrote on 2021/09/23 15:11:

I've created f35-build-side-46123 and tagged fpc-3.2.2-3.fc35 into that.

Lazarus rebuild is in progress. I will take care of rebuilding the other
packages listed in bug 1987485 as soon as I can. If the maintainers of
those packages want to rebuild their package (in the side-tag), please
do so, it will speed up the process.

Mattia




[tasaka1@localhost ~]$ dnf repoquery --arch=src --whatrequires lazarus
ccdciel-0:0.9.75.1-2.fc36.src
cqrlog-0:2.5.2-3.fc36.src
doublecmd-0:0.9.10-2.fc34.src
goverlay-0:0.6.3-1.fc36.src
indistarter-0:2.2.0-4.fc36.src
lazpaint-0:7.1.6-3.fc36.src
skychart-0:4.3-7.4358svn.fc36.src

[tasaka1@localhost ~]$ dnf repoquery --arch=src --whatrequires fpc
ccdciel-0:0.9.75.1-2.fc36.src
colorful-0:1.3-13.fc36.src
cqrlog-0:2.5.2-3.fc36.src
doublecmd-0:0.9.10-2.fc34.src
fpc-0:3.2.2-3.fc36.src
gearhead1-0:1.310-7.fc36.src
hedgewars-0:1.0.0-19.fc35.src
indistarter-0:2.2.0-4.fc36.src
lazarus-0:2.0.12-3.fc36.src
lazpaint-0:7.1.6-3.fc36.src
nbc-0:1.2.1.r3-22.fc34.src
skychart-0:4.3-7.4358svn.fc36.src

Although hedgewars is listed, looking at hedgewars.spec and build.log, it uses
"-DBUILD_ENGINE_C=1" option which converts .pas source to .c (using hedgewars 
internal
tool) and build .c files with clang, so hedgewars can be omitted from the list 
above.

Now I think all packages using fpc or lazarus on build are now rebuilt:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/builds?inherited=0=46123=-completion_time=1

Regards,
Mamoru
___
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 2007313] New: perl-App-cpm-0.997007 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007313

Bug ID: 2007313
   Summary: perl-App-cpm-0.997007 is available
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-App-cpm
  Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
  Assignee: jples...@redhat.com
  Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: jples...@redhat.com,
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Latest upstream release: 0.997007
Current version/release in rawhide: 0.997.006-1.fc35
URL: https://metacpan.org/release/App-cpm

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/8399/


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007313
___
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 35 compose report: 20210923.n.0 changes

[Fedora Rawhide Report]

OLD: Fedora-35-20210922.n.0
NEW: Fedora-35-20210923.n.0

= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images:  0
Added packages:  0
Dropped packages:2
Upgraded packages:   0
Downgraded packages: 0

Size of added packages:  0 B
Size of dropped packages:742.91 KiB
Size of upgraded packages:   0 B
Size of downgraded packages: 0 B

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

= ADDED IMAGES =

= DROPPED IMAGES =

= ADDED PACKAGES =

= DROPPED PACKAGES =
Package: php-patchwork-utf8-1.3.1-13.fc34
Summary: Portable and performant UTF-8, Unicode and Grapheme Clusters for PHP
RPMs:php-patchwork-utf8
Size:633.45 KiB

Package: php-simplesamlphp-saml2_3-3.4.2-4.fc34
Summary: SAML2 PHP library from SimpleSAMLphp (version 3)
RPMs:php-simplesamlphp-saml2_3
Size:109.46 KiB


= UPGRADED PACKAGES =

= DOWNGRADED PACKAGES =
___
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: openbabel-3.1* in Rawhide

[Antonio T. sagitter]

gnome-chemistry-utils is ready for openbabel3; it's in my Copr project.

On 9/1/21 10:35, Mamoru TASAKA wrote:



gnome-chemistry-utils

debian says only a small modification is needed:
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=946263#20


--
---
Antonio Trande
Fedora Project
mailto: sagit...@fedoraproject.org
GPG key: 0x29FBC85D7A51CC2F
GPG key server: https://keyserver1.pgp.com/


OpenPGP_0x29FBC85D7A51CC2F.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key


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

[EPEL-devel] Re: proposed recommendation - missing devel packages

[Troy Dawson]

That looks great, and very close to what I've done.
I have a couple of variations.
I think the biggest is that I set a variable called rhel_name and then
change %{name} to %{rhel_name}.  It looks like you only had two instances
of %{name} but I've had a couple with many instances of it, and this makes
it easier.
The second is that I usually put a link to the upstream spec file, in
comments.  I use the CentOS Stream git repo, because it's publicly
available.  This is mainly for me, cuz I never know where to find them.
So, this is at the top of my spec files.

# This spec file is derived from the RHEL8 spec file.
#   They should be kept in sync over time.
# https://git.centos.org/rpms/libpinyin/blob/c8/f/SPECS/libpinyin.spec
%global rhel_name libpinyin
%global _debugsource_template %{nil}

But, that's just my preferences.  I think yours should be fine.

I'm thinking we might want to break this out from a question in the FAQ to
it's own page.

Troy


On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 8:42 PM Orion Poplawski  wrote:

> On 7/1/21 4:05 PM, Troy Dawson wrote:
> > I believe this is a recommendation, versus a policy.
> > I wanted to get people's thoughts on it, and if ya'll like it, put it in
> > the documentation.
> > 
> > In Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) 8, Red Hat decided to not ship all
> > packages that are built from RHEL spec files.  This will also be true of
> > RHEL 9, and possibly future RHEL releases.  These missing packages are
> > usually -devel packages and may impact an EPEL package build.
> > If your EPEL package is impacted by a missing -devel package, do the
> > following.
> >
> > 1 - Request the package be added to RHEL 8 and 9 CRB repository.
> > -- To initiate this process, please file a bug in
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com  and request
> it
> > be added to RHEL 8 and 9. Report the bug against the "CentOS Stream"
> > version of the "Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8" and/or "Red Hat Enterprise
> > Linux 9" product.
> > -- Be sure to say that it is impacting an EPEL build, and which package
> > it is impacting.
> >
> > 2 - Create an epel package that only has the missing packages.
> > -- Be prepared to maintain this package as long as it is needed.
> > -- It is recommended that you name it -epel
> > -- It is recommended that you add the epel-packaging-sig group as a
> > co-maintainer
> > -- It qualifies for an exception to the review process[1] so you can
> > request the repo with
> > --- fedpkg request-repo --exception -epel
> > -- If you need help building this, ask for help.  We have some examples.
> >
> > 3 - When/If the missing package(s) are added to RHEL CRB, retire your
> > -epel package.
> >
> > ---
> > Sorry, this is a little rushed.  I wanted to get something out sooner,
> > rather than later.
> >
> > Troy
>
> So, I've decided to try this with utf8proc.  I've requested the
> utf8proc-epel package and now requested an epel8 branch (and will retire
> the rawhide branch).
>
> These are the changes I have made, does this seem correct?  Notes on
> changes:
>
> * We are not shipping binaries, so need to disable the debug package
> * Need to change Name and %{name}
> * Need to explicitly name the devel package
> * Need to use relative Requires for the main package.  Both to allow
> RHEL to update and (in this case) to deal with module release tags
> * Remove the files installed for the main package
> * Remove %files and %post* for the main package
> * Add %changelog entry
>
> --- SPECS/utf8proc.spec 2021-09-22 21:24:59.304665646 -0600
> +++ /export/home/orion/fedora/utf8proc-epel/utf8proc-epel.spec
> 2021-09-22 21:32:01.568719918 -0600
> @@ -1,11 +1,13 @@
> +%global debug_package %{nil}
> +
>   Summary: Library for processing UTF-8 encoded Unicode strings
> -Name:utf8proc
> +Name:utf8proc-epel
>   Version: 2.1.1
>   Release: 5%{?dist}
>   License: Unicode and MIT
>   Group:   System Environment/Libraries
>   URL: http://julialang.org/utf8proc/
> -Source:
>
> https://github.com/JuliaLang/utf8proc/archive/v%{version}.tar.gz#/%{name}-v%{version}.tar.gz
> +Source:
>
> https://github.com/JuliaLang/utf8proc/archive/v%{version}/utf8proc-%{version}.tar.gz
>   BuildRequires: gcc
>
>   %description
> @@ -21,12 +23,12 @@
>
>   This package only contains the C library.
>
> -%package devel
> +%package -n utf8proc-devel
>   Summary:  Header files, libraries and development documentation for
> %{name}
>   Group:Development/Libraries
> -Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}
> +Requires: utf8proc%{?_isa} >= %{version}-%{release}
>
> -%description devel
> +%description -n utf8proc-devel
>   Contains header files for developing applications that use the %{name}
>   library.
>
> @@ -35,7 +37,7 @@
>   strings, unless you want to allocate memory yourself.
>
>   %prep
> -%setup -qn %{name}-%{version}
> +%setup -qn utf8proc-%{version}
>   # Disable slow tests and tests which require network access
>   sed -i '/-C bench/d;/\ttest.* data/d' Makefile
>   touch 

[Bug 2007254] perl-POE-Component-SSLify-1.012-24.fc36 FTBFS: Can't use an undefined value as a symbol reference at /builddir/build/BUILD/POE-Component-SSLify-1.012/blib/lib/POE/Component/SSLify.pm lin

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007254

Petr Pisar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED



--- Comment #1 from Petr Pisar  ---
This is a random failure in:

Net::SSLeay::CTX_set_options( $context, $options );
die_if_ssl_error( "ssl ctx set options $options" ) if !
$IGNORE_SSL_ERRORS;

where $options=Net::SSLeay::OP_ALL() and $context=Net::SSLeay::CTX_new().


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007254
___
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-20210923.n.0 compose check report

[Fedora compose checker]

Missing expected images:

Xfce raw-xz armhfp

Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check!
1 of 43 required test results missing
Unsatisfied gating requirements that could not be mapped to openQA tests:
MISSING: fedora.Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2.x86_64.64bit - compose.cloud_autocloud

Failed openQA tests: 6/206 (x86_64), 7/141 (aarch64)

New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20210922.n.0):

ID: 998167  Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_update_graphical
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998167
ID: 998204  Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 
base_package_install_remove@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998204
ID: 998205  Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 
base_service_manipulation@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998205
ID: 998216  Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso install_blivet_lvm_ext4@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998216
ID: 998233  Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso install_lvm_ext4@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998233
ID: 998382  Test: aarch64 universal upgrade_desktop_encrypted_64bit@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998382

Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20210922.n.0):

ID: 998169  Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso apps_startstop
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998169
ID: 998172  Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_login
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998172
ID: 998260  Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso server_cockpit_basic@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998260
ID: 998283  Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz gedit@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998283
ID: 998325  Test: x86_64 universal install_asian_language
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998325
ID: 998383  Test: aarch64 universal upgrade_minimal_64bit@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998383
ID: 998389  Test: aarch64 universal install_asian_language@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998389

Soft failed openQA tests: 7/206 (x86_64), 7/141 (aarch64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)

New soft failures (same test not soft failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20210922.n.0):

ID: 998324  Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_server_domain_controller
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998324
ID: 998373  Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_realmd_client
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998373

Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20210922.n.0):

ID: 998143  Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso gedit
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998143
ID: 998185  Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso evince
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998185
ID: 998186  Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso gedit
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998186
ID: 998197  Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998197
ID: 998206  Test: aarch64 Minimal-raw_xz-raw.xz 
install_arm_image_deployment_upload@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998206
ID: 998263  Test: aarch64 Server-raw_xz-raw.xz 
install_arm_image_deployment_upload@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998263
ID: 998272  Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz 
install_arm_image_deployment_upload@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998272
ID: 998290  Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998290
ID: 998323  Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_server_64bit
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998323
ID: 998377  Test: aarch64 universal upgrade_server_64bit@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998377
ID: 998388  Test: aarch64 universal upgrade_server_domain_controller@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998388
ID: 998399  Test: aarch64 universal upgrade_realmd_client@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998399

Passed openQA tests: 193/206 (x86_64), 125/141 (aarch64)

New passes (same test not passed in Fedora-Rawhide-20210922.n.0):

ID: 998109  Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_freeipa_replication_master
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998109
ID: 998122  Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_freeipa_replication_replica
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998122
ID: 998126  Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_freeipa_replication_client
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998126
ID: 998217  Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso anaconda_help@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998217

Skipped non-gating openQA tests: 2 of 347

Installed system changes in test x86_64 Server-boot-iso install_default: 
1 packages(s) added since previous compose: guile22
1 packages(s) removed since previous compose: guile
Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/995905#downloads
Current test data: 

Re: Package Update Guide: Updating inter-dependent packages

[Henrik Nordström]

tor 2021-09-23 klockan 11:29 +0200 skrev Miro Hrončok:
> 
> However, I think side-tags should be the preferred solution, as their
> impact is 
> isolated. Buildroot overrides create temporary broken dependencies
> for 
> everybody, while side-tags don't.

For stable releases I think I agree, even when there is just one
dependent package that have to be rebuilt as is in my case.

But would help with a little automation in fedpkg to reduce the amount
if information that have to be bounced via the package maintainer

* remember per fedora release that there is a side-tag created and make
"fedpkg update" submit the side-tag and not the individual package. For
example by storing them as .side-tag- file in the working
tree.

* Use that info in "fedpkg" automatic target selection to avoid needing
to manually specify --target to build.

* allow a depends-on package tree to be specified at fedpkg build time
in dependent packages to automate finding the correct target like
above.

* fedpkg update likewise should detect the side-tag and submit the
side-tag as the update and remove the now obsolete .side-tag-
file

There is a little inconsistency in that the package git trees will
reflect the side tags, but seems total overkill to enforce the use of
git branches for build side-tags.



For rawhide it adds yet another step to the process (submitting the
update). But on the other hand it's good to have similar process as for
stable branches in how to build dependent pacakgers so no worries.

> And than instead of describing the details, link to 
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/rawhide-gating/multi-builds/

The only objections there is that

a) It's name kind of implies that side-tags then only is about rawhide,
which isn't really the case.

b) The page still says "We are working on this workflow and will update
this page and send an announcement when it is ready or available for
testing" at the top, kind of saying that one should not yet follow what
the page says.


Regards
Henrik
___
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 2007259] New: perl-IO-Socket-SSL-2.072-2.fc36 FTBFS: read tests fail (with openssl1.1-1.1.1l?)

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007259

Bug ID: 2007259
   Summary: perl-IO-Socket-SSL-2.072-2.fc36 FTBFS: read tests fail
(with openssl1.1-1.1.1l?)
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
   URL: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=76
164451
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-IO-Socket-SSL
  Assignee: p...@city-fan.org
  Reporter: ppi...@redhat.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: caillon+fedoraproj...@gmail.com,
jose.p.oliveira@gmail.com, jples...@redhat.com,
mspa...@redhat.com, p...@city-fan.org,
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org, ppi...@redhat.com,
rhug...@redhat.com, rstr...@redhat.com,
sandm...@redhat.com
Blocks: 1992484 (F36FTBFS,RAWHIDEFTBFS)
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



perl-IO-Socket-SSL-2.072-2.fc36 fails to build in Fedora 36 because few tests
fail:

t/connectSSL-timeout.t  
Dubious, test returned 1 (wstat 256, 0x100)
Failed 8/16 subtests 

#   Failed test 'Server Getlines Check 1'
#   at t/core.t line 251.
#  got: '0'
# expected: '6'

#   Failed test 'Server Getlines Check 2'
#   at t/core.t line 253.
#  got: undef
# expected: '1.04
# '

#   Failed test 'Server Getlines Check 3'
#   at t/core.t line 255.
#  got: undef
# expected: '4
# '

#   Failed test 'Server Getlines Check 4'
#   at t/core.t line 257.
#  got: undef
# expected: 'y
# '
Use of uninitialized value in join or string at t/core.t line 259.
Use of uninitialized value in join or string at t/core.t line 259.
Use of uninitialized value in join or string at t/core.t line 259.

#   Failed test 'Server Getlines Check 5'
#   at t/core.t line 259.
#  got: ''
# expected: 'Test
# Beaver
# Beaver
# '

#   Failed test 'Client Sysread Check'
#   at t/core.t line 137.
#  got: '^@^@'
# expected: '^@^@wnf'

#   Failed test 'Client Getline Check'
#   at t/core.t line 147.
#  got: undef
# expected: 'Test
# '

#   Failed test 'Client Getc Check'
#   at t/core.t line 149.
#  got: '0'
# expected: '$'

#   Failed test 'Client Getlines Check 1'
#   at t/core.t line 152.
#  got: '0'
# expected: '6'

#   Failed test 'Client Getlines Check 2'
#   at t/core.t line 154.
#  got: undef
# expected: '1.04
# '

#   Failed test 'Client Getlines Check 3'
#   at t/core.t line 156.
#  got: undef
# expected: '4
# '

#   Failed test 'Client Getlines Check 4'
#   at t/core.t line 158.
#  got: undef
# expected: 'y
# '
Use of uninitialized value in join or string at t/core.t line 160.
Use of uninitialized value in join or string at t/core.t line 160.
Use of uninitialized value in join or string at t/core.t line 160.

#   Failed test 'Client Getlines Check 5'
#   at t/core.t line 160.
#  got: ''
# expected: 'Test
# Beaver
# Beaver
# '
t/core.t .. 
Failed 13/48 subtests 
[...]
t/public_suffix_ssl.t . ok
Use of uninitialized value $c[0] in string eq at t/readline.t line 34.
Use of uninitialized value $b in string eq at t/readline.t line 48.
Use of uninitialized value $b in concatenation (.) or string at t/readline.t
line 48.
Use of uninitialized value $c[0] in string eq at t/readline.t line 58.
Use of uninitialized value $c[0] in string eq at t/readline.t line 71.
Use of uninitialized value $c[0] in string eq at t/readline.t line 84.
t/readline.t .. 
Failed 5/19 subtests 
[...]
Test Summary Report
---
t/connectSSL-timeout.t  (Wstat: 256 Tests: 10 Failed: 2)
  Failed tests:  9-10
  Non-zero exit status: 1
  Parse errors: Bad plan.  You planned 16 tests but ran 10.
t/core.t(Wstat: 0 Tests: 48 Failed: 13)
  Failed tests:  22-34
t/readline.t(Wstat: 0 Tests: 19 Failed: 5)
  Failed tests:  4, 7, 10, 13, 16
Files=41, Tests=786, 45 wallclock secs ( 0.14 usr  0.05 sys +  9.49 cusr  1.18
csys = 10.86 CPU)
Result: FAIL

This is a difference between passing and failing build root:

Removed packages:
audit-libs-3.0.5-2.fc36
crypto-policies-20210819-1.gitd0fdcfb.fc36
curl-7.78.0-4.fc36
filesystem-3.14-7.fc35
gdb-minimal-10.2-6.fc35
glibc-2.34.9000-6.fc36
glibc-common-2.34.9000-6.fc36
glibc-gconv-extra-2.34.9000-6.fc36
glibc-minimal-langpack-2.34.9000-6.fc36
libcap-ng-0.8.2-6.fc35
libcurl-7.78.0-4.fc36
libdb-5.3.28-49.fc36
libnghttp2-1.44.0-2.fc35
librtas-2.0.2-11.fc35
libssh-0.9.5-3.fc36
libssh-config-0.9.5-3.fc36
libxcrypt-4.4.25-3.fc36
openldap-2.4.59-2.fc35
openssl1.1-1.1.1k-1.fc36
pam-1.5.2-1.fc36

[Bug 2007254] New: perl-POE-Component-SSLify-1.012-24.fc36 FTBFS: Can't use an undefined value as a symbol reference at /builddir/build/BUILD/POE-Component-SSLify-1.012/blib/lib/POE/Component/SSLify.p

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007254

Bug ID: 2007254
   Summary: perl-POE-Component-SSLify-1.012-24.fc36 FTBFS: Can't
use an undefined value as a symbol reference at
/builddir/build/BUILD/POE-Component-SSLify-1.012/blib/
lib/POE/Component/SSLify.pm line 457.
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
   URL: https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/package/perl-POE-Com
ponent-SSLify
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-POE-Component-SSLify
  Assignee: ppi...@redhat.com
  Reporter: ppi...@redhat.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: andrea.v...@gmail.com,
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org, ppi...@redhat.com
Blocks: 1992484 (F36FTBFS,RAWHIDEFTBFS)
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



perl-POE-Component-SSLify-1.012-24.fc36 fails to build in Fedora 36 because a
test fails:

t/simple_large.t .. ok
#   Failed test 'SERVER: SSLify_Options 156: private key
# '
#   at t/simple_parallel.t line 52.
#   Failed test 'SERVER: Server_SSLify Please do SSLify_Options() first ( or
pass in a $ctx object ) at /builddir/build/BUILD/POE-Component
-SSLify-1.012/blib/lib/POE/Component/SSLify.pm line 247.
# '
#   at t/simple_parallel.t line 55.
Can't use an undefined value as a symbol reference at
/builddir/build/BUILD/POE-Component-SSLify-1.012/blib/lib/POE/Component/SSLify.pm
line 457.
# Tests were run but no plan was declared and done_testing() was not seen.
# Looks like your test exited with 22 just after 94.
t/simple_parallel.t ... 
Dubious, test returned 22 (wstat 5632, 0x1600)
Failed 2/94 subtests 

A difference between passing and failing build root is at
. An update of
perl-Net-SSLeay from 1.90-4.fc35 to 1.90-6.fc36 looks suspicious.



Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1992484
[Bug 1992484] Fedora 36 FTBFS Tracker
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007254
___
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 2007251] New: perl-Crypt-SMIME-0.27-5.fc36 FTBFS with OpenSSL 3: Crypt::SMIME#setPublicKey: failed to load the public cert: error:0480006C:PEM routines::no start line

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007251

Bug ID: 2007251
   Summary: perl-Crypt-SMIME-0.27-5.fc36 FTBFS with OpenSSL 3:
Crypt::SMIME#setPublicKey: failed to load the public
cert: error:0480006C:PEM routines::no start line
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
   URL: https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/package/perl-Crypt-S
MIME
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-Crypt-SMIME
  Assignee: steve.tray...@cern.ch
  Reporter: ppi...@redhat.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org,
steve.tray...@cern.ch, xav...@bachelot.org
Blocks: 1992484 (F36FTBFS,RAWHIDEFTBFS)
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



perl-Crypt-SMIME-0.27-5.fc36 fails to build in Fedora 36 with OpenSSL 3.0.0
because tests fails like this:

# Testing Crypt::SMIME 0.27, Perl 5.034000, /usr/bin/perl
t/00-load.t ... ok
# Using `/usr/bin/openssl' to generate a keypair
Crypt::SMIME#setPublicKey: failed to load the public cert: error:0480006C:PEM
routines::no start line at t/01-smime.t line 131.
# Looks like your test exited with 255 just after 18.
t/01-smime.t .. 
Dubious, test returned 255 (wstat 65280, 0xff00)
Failed 7/25 subtests 
[...]
Test Summary Report
---
t/01-smime.t(Wstat: 65280 Tests: 18 Failed: 0)
  Non-zero exit status: 255
  Parse errors: Bad plan.  You planned 25 tests but ran 18.
t/02-smime.more.t   (Wstat: 65280 Tests: 12 Failed: 0)
  Non-zero exit status: 255
  Parse errors: Bad plan.  You planned 18 tests but ran 12.
t/03-chained-certs.t (Wstat: 768 Tests: 15 Failed: 3)
  Failed tests:  9, 13, 15
  Non-zero exit status: 3
t/04-taint.t(Wstat: 512 Tests: 7 Failed: 2)
  Failed tests:  4-5
  Non-zero exit status: 2
Files=9, Tests=61,  7 wallclock secs ( 0.05 usr  0.02 sys +  6.41 cusr  0.30
csys =  6.78 CPU)
Result: FAIL



Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1992484
[Bug 1992484] Fedora 36 FTBFS Tracker
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007251
___
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 2007247] perl-Crypt-SSLeay-0.72-32.fc36 FTBFS with OpenSSL 3: SSLeay.so: undefined symbol: SSLv3_client_method

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007247

Petr Pisar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1992484
   ||(F36FTBFS,RAWHIDEFTBFS)
URL||https://koschei.fedoraproje
   ||ct.org/package/perl-Crypt-S
   ||SLeay?collection=f36





Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1992484
[Bug 1992484] Fedora 36 FTBFS Tracker
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007247
___
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 2007247] New: perl-Crypt-SSLeay-0.72-32.fc36 FTBFS with OpenSSL 3: SSLeay.so: undefined symbol: SSLv3_client_method

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007247

Bug ID: 2007247
   Summary: perl-Crypt-SSLeay-0.72-32.fc36 FTBFS with OpenSSL 3:
SSLeay.so: undefined symbol: SSLv3_client_method
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-Crypt-SSLeay
  Assignee: jples...@redhat.com
  Reporter: ppi...@redhat.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: caillon+fedoraproj...@gmail.com, caol...@redhat.com,
jples...@redhat.com, ka...@ucw.cz, mspa...@redhat.com,
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org,
rhug...@redhat.com, rstr...@redhat.com,
sandm...@redhat.com
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



perl-Crypt-SSLeay-0.72-32.fc36 fails to build in Fedora 36 with the new OpenSSL
3.0.0 because the tests fail like this:

+ make test
"/usr/bin/perl" -MExtUtils::Command::MM -e 'cp_nonempty' -- SSLeay.bs
blib/arch/auto/Crypt/SSLeay/SSLeay.bs 644
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
#   Failed test 'use Crypt::SSLeay;'
#   at t/00-basic.t line 6.
# Tried to use 'Crypt::SSLeay'.
# Error:  Can't load
'/builddir/build/BUILD/Crypt-SSLeay-0.72/blib/arch/auto/Crypt/SSLeay/SSLeay.so'
for module Crypt::SSLeay:
/builddir/build/BUILD/Crypt-SSLeay-0.72/blib/arch/auto/Crypt/SSLeay/SSLeay.so:
undefined symbol: SSLv3_client_method at /usr/lib64/perl5/DynaLoader.pm line
193.
# � at t/00-basic.t line 6.
# Compilation failed in require at t/00-basic.t line 6.
# BEGIN failed--compilation aborted at t/00-basic.t line 6.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007247
___
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

[Fedocal] Reminder meeting : ELN SIG

[sgallagh]

Dear all,

You are kindly invited to the meeting:
   ELN SIG on 2021-09-24 from 12:00:00 to 13:00:00 US/Eastern
   At fedora-meet...@irc.libera.chat

The meeting will be about:



Source: https://calendar.fedoraproject.org//meeting/9920/

___
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: Package downgrades from F34 -> F35 (categorized list included)

[Fabio Valentini]

On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 5:36 PM Kevin Fenzi  wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 03:48:43PM +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 3:11 PM Michael Catanzaro  
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Sep 20 2021 at 02:43:20 PM +0200, Fabio Valentini
> > >  wrote:
> > > > As usual, I'm asking: Is it OK for me to fix obvious oversights, such
> > > > as "package was built successfully, it just needs to be submitted to
> > > > bodhi" or "packager obviously only forgot to merge a change to f35 and
> > > > build it there as well"? That should resolve ~55 of the total of ~120
> > > > "real" downgrade issues.
> > >
> > > Hi, I'd say if you're a provenpackager, then please do. Why not?
> > >
> > > As usual, nice investigation. Thanks!
> >
> > Alright, I've fixed issues for all packages where the fix was obvious.
>
> Awesome. :)
>
> > The next Fedora 35 updates-testing compose should have all updates, so
> > that should be in time for things to be in order by the time the beta
> > freeze lifts.
> >
> > This leaves the following packages that might need attention:
> >
> > - conmon: looks like rhcontainerbot is at it again
> > - glusterfs-selinux: mangled changelog, bungled update?
> > - gstreamer1*: versioning snafu in f34 (should resolve itself with the
> > next f35 update)
> > - lutris: updated only for stable branches, but not for f35+ (?)
> > - nodepool: updated only for stable branches, but not for f35+ (?),
> > might be a zuul issue?
> > - notcurses: looks like package maintainer is waiting for beta freeze to 
> > lift?
> > - toolbox: package history undecipherable to me, but the latest ^4
> > snapshot build is missing from f35 regardless
>
> I thought that was container only? or there's a package too?
>
> > - every package that switched to rpmautospec without checking for
> > mononotincally increasing NVR :(
>
> Can we identify all these?
>
> > Should I file bugs for those components?
>
> Please do!

Here's the bugs I filed:

conmon: version downgrade from f34 -> f35, updates stuck in bodhi
(looks like ignored gating results / rhcontainerbot fallout, again)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007221

glusterfs-selinux: mangled changelog and NVR downgrade from f34 -> f35
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007220

lutris: missing update to 0.5.8.4 in fedora 35 and in rawhide
(also uploaded .src.rpm files in the lookaside cache ...)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007226

nodepool: update to version 3.13.1 missing from Fedora 35 and rawhide
(seems to have been caused by a zuul PR oops, which was then forgotten about)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007227

toolbox: versioning mistakes, version downgrade from f34 -> f35,
updates stuck in bodhi
(users on neither fedora 34 nor 35 will get the latest version due to
versioning mistakes (e.g. using ^ instead of ~) and missing / stuck in
gating builds on Fedora 35)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007242

Some other packages should get resolved once the beta freeze is lifted
and updates-testing contents are finally pushed to stable.
I'll run the repository content analysis again at that point.

Fabio
___
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: Naming convention

[Florian Weimer]

* Dominik Mierzejewski:

> On Thursday, 23 September 2021 at 09:52, Filip Janus wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> I am wondering about the right name for Autoconf compact package. I need to
>> add the latest release of autoconf into EPEL so I need a package with a
>> different name. Currently, there are in fedora autoconf, autoconf213, and
>> autoconf268. The latest version is 2.71 so I have few options in my mind:
>> 
>>- compat-autoconf
>>- compat-autoconf27
>>- autoconf27
>> 
>> What do you think?
>
> The last one is almost the currently recommended convention. The correct
> name would be "autoconf2.7":
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Naming/#multiple

Shouldn't it be autoconf2.71, assuming that it is for autoconf 2.71?

Thanks,
Florian
___
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 rawhide compose report: 20210923.n.0 changes

[Fedora Rawhide Report]

OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20210922.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20210923.n.0

= SUMMARY =
Added images:1
Dropped images:  2
Added packages:  2
Dropped packages:21
Upgraded packages:   119
Downgraded packages: 0

Size of added packages:  102.22 KiB
Size of dropped packages:105.95 MiB
Size of upgraded packages:   1.78 GiB
Size of downgraded packages: 0 B

Size change of upgraded packages:   -291.28 MiB
Size change of downgraded packages: 0 B

= ADDED IMAGES =
Image: Xfce raw-xz aarch64
Path: Spins/aarch64/images/Fedora-Xfce-Rawhide-20210923.n.0.aarch64.raw.xz

= DROPPED IMAGES =
Image: Python_Classroom raw-xz aarch64
Path: 
Labs/aarch64/images/Fedora-Python-Classroom-Rawhide-20210922.n.0.aarch64.raw.xz
Image: Container_Minimal_Base docker aarch64
Path: 
Container/aarch64/images/Fedora-Container-Minimal-Base-Rawhide-20210922.n.0.aarch64.tar.xz

= ADDED PACKAGES =
Package: mingw-python-toml-0.10.2-1.fc36
Summary: MinGW Python toml
RPMs:mingw32-python3-toml mingw64-python3-toml
Size:78.44 KiB

Package: rust-wasmtime-types-0.30.0-2.fc36
Summary: WebAssembly type definitions for Cranelift
RPMs:rust-wasmtime-types+default-devel rust-wasmtime-types-devel
Size:23.79 KiB


= DROPPED PACKAGES =
Package: felix-gogo-command-1.1.2-2.fc35
Summary: Apache Felix Gogo command line shell for OSGi
RPMs:felix-gogo-command felix-gogo-command-javadoc
Size:314.94 KiB

Package: felix-gogo-parent-6-2.fc35
Summary: Parent pom for Apache Felix Gogo
RPMs:felix-gogo-parent
Size:13.85 KiB

Package: felix-gogo-shell-1.1.4-2.fc35
Summary: Apache Felix Gogo command line shell for OSGi
RPMs:felix-gogo-shell felix-gogo-shell-javadoc
Size:345.24 KiB

Package: felix-scr-2.1.26-2.fc35
Summary: Apache Felix Service Component Runtime (SCR)
RPMs:felix-scr felix-scr-javadoc
Size:907.49 KiB

Package: lucene-8.8.2-1.fc35
Summary: High-performance, full-featured text search engine
RPMs:lucene lucene-analysis lucene-analyzers-icu lucene-analyzers-kuromoji 
lucene-analyzers-nori lucene-analyzers-phonetic lucene-analyzers-smartcn 
lucene-analyzers-stempel lucene-backward-codecs lucene-classification 
lucene-codecs lucene-expressions lucene-grouping lucene-highlighter 
lucene-javadoc lucene-join lucene-memory lucene-misc lucene-monitor 
lucene-parent lucene-queries lucene-queryparser lucene-sandbox 
lucene-solr-grandparent lucene-suggest
Size:28.76 MiB

Package: mingw-qt6-qtquickcontrols2-6.1.2-1.fc36
Summary: Qt6 for Windows - QtQuickControls2 component
RPMs:mingw32-qt6-qtquickcontrols2 mingw64-qt6-qtquickcontrols2
Size:46.97 MiB

Package: mkdocs-alabaster-0.8.0-7.fc35
Summary: Alabaster port for MkDocs
RPMs:mkdocs-alabaster
Size:20.73 KiB

Package: mkdocs-bootstrap-1.1-8.fc35
Summary: Bootstrap theme for MKDocs
RPMs:mkdocs-bootstrap
Size:32.47 KiB

Package: mkdocs-bootswatch-1.1-6.fc35
Summary: Bootswatch themes for MkDocs
RPMs:mkdocs-bootswatch
Size:118.63 KiB

Package: mkdocs-cinder-1.0.3-7.fc35
Summary: A clean responsive theme for the MkDocs
RPMs:mkdocs-cinder
Size:236.25 KiB

Package: mkdocs-material-5.0.2-7.fc35
Summary: A material design theme for MkDocs
RPMs:mkdocs-material
Size:1.79 MiB

Package: nohang-0.2.0-6.fc35
Summary: Sophisticated low memory handler for Linux
RPMs:nohang nohang-desktop
Size:72.94 KiB

Package: php-patchwork-utf8-1.3.1-13.fc34
Summary: Portable and performant UTF-8, Unicode and Grapheme Clusters for PHP
RPMs:php-patchwork-utf8
Size:633.45 KiB

Package: python-lunr-0.5.8-7.fc35
Summary: A Python implementation of Lunr.js
RPMs:python3-lunr python3-lunr+languages
Size:79.85 KiB

Package: python-mdx_gh_links-0.2-7.fc35
Summary: Python-Markdown Github-Links Extension
RPMs:python3-mdx_gh_links
Size:15.39 KiB

Package: python-pymdown-extensions-7.0-6.fc35
Summary: Extension pack for Python Markdown
RPMs:python3-pymdown-extensions
Size:316.62 KiB

Package: python-typeshed-1:0.1-0.20191012git2.fc35
Summary: Static type information for python modules
RPMs:python-typeshed
Size:467.66 KiB

Package: qt6-qtquickcontrols2-6.1.2-1.fc36
Summary: Qt6 - module with set of QtQuick controls for embedded
RPMs:qt6-qtquickcontrols2 qt6-qtquickcontrols2-devel 
qt6-qtquickcontrols2-examples
Size:23.02 MiB

Package: rhino-1.7.7.1-15.fc35
Summary: JavaScript for Java
RPMs:rhino rhino-demo
Size:1.15 MiB

Package: rubygem-logstasher-1.3.0-7.fc35
Summary: Awesome rails logs
RPMs:rubygem-logstasher rubygem-logstasher-doc
Size:263.09 KiB

Package: takari-polyglot-0.4.6-2.fc35
Summary: Modules to enable Maven usage in other JVM languages
RPMs:takari-polyglot takari-polyglot-atom takari-polyglot-common 
takari-polyglot-javadoc takari-polyglot-maven-plugin 
takari-polyglot-translate-plugin takari-polyglot-xml
Size:529.71 KiB


= UPGRADED PACKAGES =
Package:  NetworkManager-1:1.32.12-1.fc36
Old package

Re: Package Update Guide: Updating inter-dependent packages

[Petr Pisar]

V Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 12:04:36PM +0200, Miro Hrončok napsal(a):
> On 23. 09. 21 11:48, Artur Frenszek-Iwicki wrote:
> > Sounds good. I took a look at the "multi builds" page - it describes the
> > process neatly, but I think there's one thing that could be added there:
> > what if you already built a package in the main tag (but it didn't go
> > through bodhi and get to stable)? Will it be included in the newly-created
> > side tag, or do you need to execute some command to add it there?
> 
> If it's rawhide or pre-beta-freeze branched, it will eventually reach it
> when it reaches stable automatically.
> 
> If it needs to go trough updatest testing to reach stable, you can tag the
> build to the side tga manually:
>
It's more complicated. Rawhide also goes through testing. E.g. gating tests
are performed at that stage. But the important difference is that Rawhide
updates are not owned by the package builder. They are owned by a robot.
That's becomes a hurdle later.

> $ koji tag f36-build-side-47819 python-foobar-0.13.6-1.fc36
> 
> You need to run koji wait-repo to verify it is in the buildroot.
> 
Once all builds are done in a side tag, you want to push them to testing.

You might create a new update. But first you need to remove the original build
from the old update. Because Bodhi does not allow multiple updates with the
same build. And you will find out that it's impossible:

If the old update is owned by a robot, you won't have permissions to edit it.
A dead end. Solution is rebuilding the package with a different release number
and keep the old update bitrot.

If the old update is owned by you, you won't be able to remove the old build
because Bodhi does not allow buildless update. Solution is add all the builds
from side tag to the old update. But bodhi will detect that they are from
a side tag and will reject them. You also cannot add them with a "from a side
tag" feature becuase Bodhi will detect that the old update is not of
a side-tag type.  Solution is tagging them to the candidate tag manually, and
then attaching them manually to the old update.

Hence, while side tags looks appealing, they are pretty troublesome when
interacting with Bodhi. Especially when you find out in the middle of rebuilds
that you need a side tag.

Maybe if Bodhi acquired "turn this update into a side tag" feature, side-tags
would become easier to handle.

-- Petr


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: Naming convention

[Miro Hrončok]

On 23. 09. 21 12:51, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:

On Thursday, 23 September 2021 at 09:52, Filip Janus wrote:

Hi all,
I am wondering about the right name for Autoconf compact package. I need to
add the latest release of autoconf into EPEL so I need a package with a
different name. Currently, there are in fedora autoconf, autoconf213, and
autoconf268. The latest version is 2.71 so I have few options in my mind:

- compat-autoconf
- compat-autoconf27
- autoconf27

What do you think?


The last one is almost the currently recommended convention. The correct
name would be "autoconf2.7":
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Naming/#multiple


Also, the autoconf2.7 EPEL package would need to be created in a way that would 
not conflict wit the RHEL's autoconf package, due to the EPEL policy that 
forbids conflicts with RHEL:


https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/GuidelinesAndPolicies#Policy_for_Conflicting_Packages

--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 2005724] perl-Devel-NYTProf-6.11 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2005724

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||jples...@redhat.com



--- Comment #1 from Jitka Plesnikova  ---
*** Bug 2007172 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2005724
___
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 2007172] Upgrade perl-Devel-NYTProf to 6.11

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007172

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Last Closed||2021-09-23 11:00:34



--- Comment #1 from Jitka Plesnikova  ---


*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 2005724 ***


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007172
___
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 2007171] Upgrade perl-App-Cme to 1.033

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007171

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED



--- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-b62483f3fc has been submitted as an update to Fedora 35.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-b62483f3fc


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007171
___
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 2007171] Upgrade perl-App-Cme to 1.033

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007171

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version||perl-App-Cme-1.033-1.fc36




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007171
___
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: Naming convention

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

On Thursday, 23 September 2021 at 09:52, Filip Janus wrote:
> Hi all,
> I am wondering about the right name for Autoconf compact package. I need to
> add the latest release of autoconf into EPEL so I need a package with a
> different name. Currently, there are in fedora autoconf, autoconf213, and
> autoconf268. The latest version is 2.71 so I have few options in my mind:
> 
>- compat-autoconf
>- compat-autoconf27
>- autoconf27
> 
> What do you think?

The last one is almost the currently recommended convention. The correct
name would be "autoconf2.7":
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Naming/#multiple

Regards,
Dominik
-- 
Fedora   https://getfedora.org  |  RPM Fusion  http://rpmfusion.org
There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and
oppression to develop psychic muscles.
-- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1927876] perl-Search-Elasticsearch-7.714 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1927876

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Summary|perl-Search-Elasticsearch-7 |perl-Search-Elasticsearch-7
   |.712 is available   |.714 is available



--- Comment #3 from Jitka Plesnikova  ---
Latest upstream release: 7.714
Current version/release in rawhide: 7.30-4.fc35
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Search-Elasticsearch/


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1927876
___
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 1997118] Upgrade perl-Proc-ProcessTable to 0.62

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1997118



--- Comment #1 from Jitka Plesnikova  ---
Latest Fedora delivers 0.59 version. Upstream released 0.62. When you have free
time, please upgrade it.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1997118
___
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 1997118] Upgrade perl-Proc-ProcessTable to 0.62

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1997118

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Summary|Upgrade |Upgrade
   |perl-Proc-ProcessTable to   |perl-Proc-ProcessTable to
   |0.611   |0.62




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1997118
___
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: Package Update Guide: Updating inter-dependent packages

[Miro Hrončok]

On 23. 09. 21 11:48, Artur Frenszek-Iwicki wrote:

Sounds good. I took a look at the "multi builds" page - it describes the 
process neatly,
but I think there's one thing that could be added there: what if you already 
built a package
in the main tag (but it didn't go through bodhi and get to stable)? Will it be 
included in the
newly-created side tag, or do you need to execute some command to add it there?


If it's rawhide or pre-beta-freeze branched, it will eventually reach it when 
it reaches stable automatically.


If it needs to go trough updatest testing to reach stable, you can tag the 
build to the side tga manually:


$ koji tag f36-build-side-47819 python-foobar-0.13.6-1.fc36

You need to run koji wait-repo to verify it is in the buildroot.

--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 2007172] New: Upgrade perl-Devel-NYTProf to 6.11

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007172

Bug ID: 2007172
   Summary: Upgrade perl-Devel-NYTProf to 6.11
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-Devel-NYTProf
  Assignee: jples...@redhat.com
  Reporter: jples...@redhat.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: iarn...@gmail.com, jples...@redhat.com,
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Latest Fedora delivers 6.10 version. Upstream released 6.11. When you have free
time, please upgrade it.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007172
___
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 2007171] New: Upgrade perl-App-Cme to 1.033

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007171

Bug ID: 2007171
   Summary: Upgrade perl-App-Cme to 1.033
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-App-Cme
  Assignee: jples...@redhat.com
  Reporter: jples...@redhat.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: jples...@redhat.com,
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Latest Fedora delivers 1.032 version. Upstream released 1.033. When you have
free time, please upgrade it.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007171
___
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: Package Update Guide: Updating inter-dependent packages

[Artur Frenszek-Iwicki]

Sounds good. I took a look at the "multi builds" page - it describes the 
process neatly,
but I think there's one thing that could be added there: what if you already 
built a package
in the main tag (but it didn't go through bodhi and get to stable)? Will it be 
included in the
newly-created side tag, or do you need to execute some command to add it there?

A.FI.
___
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-34-20210923.0 compose check report

[Fedora compose checker]

No missing expected images.

Soft failed openQA tests: 1/8 (x86_64), 1/8 (aarch64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)

Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-34-20210922.0):

ID: 997946  Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/997946
ID: 997954  Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/997954

Passed openQA tests: 7/8 (x86_64), 7/8 (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-packaging] Re: Mangling shebangs in text files: How to detect them, bug in the current implementation and possible solutions

[Richard W.M. Jones]

On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 11:13:37AM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 23. 09. 21 9:45, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> >After years of experience I wouldn't use "file" for anything I needed
> >to work reliably.
> >
> >If the test is really ELF or not ELF, how about detecting the ELF
> >header magic directly?
> 
> As I say in the rest of the email, I know how to detected elves. I
> just don't know if that's enough.

Oh I see - I misread your second email as eu-elfclassify pulling in
too many dependencies when in fact that was a different package.

Rich.

-- 
Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com
libguestfs lets you edit virtual machines.  Supports shell scripting,
bindings from many languages.  http://libguestfs.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

Package Update Guide: Updating inter-dependent packages

[Miro Hrončok]

https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Package_Update_Guide/#updating_inter_dependent_packages

Says:

"""
You may need a buildroot override to complete a multi-package update 
successfully. For instance in the case described above, you may need to rebuild 
bar against the new libfoo package and submit both packages together as a 
multi-package update. However, in the normal course of events, you would not be 
able to build another package against your new libfoo build until it reached 
the stable state. To resolve this dilemma, you can request a buildroot 
override, which causes the libfoo build to be included in the buildroot for a 
short time in order to get the bar package build done.

"""

However, I think side-tags should be the preferred solution, as their impact is 
isolated. Buildroot overrides create temporary broken dependencies for 
everybody, while side-tags don't.


My understanding was that this is the de-facto consensus, so I'd lie to update 
the docs to say something like:


"""
You may need to build the inter-dependent packages in a side tag.
For instance in the case described above, you may need to rebuild bar against 
the new libfoo package and submit both packages together as a multi-package 
update. However, in the normal course of events, you would not be able to build 
another package against your new libfoo build until it reached the stable 
state. To resolve this dilemma, you can request a side tag and build both 
packages in it, which causes the libfoo build to be included in the bar build's 
buildroot.

"""

And than instead of describing the details, link to 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/rawhide-gating/multi-builds/


Any suggestions or objections?

--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: [Fedora-packaging] Re: Mangling shebangs in text files: How to detect them, bug in the current implementation and possible solutions

[Miro Hrončok]

On 23. 09. 21 9:45, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:

After years of experience I wouldn't use "file" for anything I needed
to work reliably.

If the test is really ELF or not ELF, how about detecting the ELF
header magic directly?


As I say in the rest of the email, I know how to detected elves. I just don't 
know if that's enough.


--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Mangling shebangs in text files: How to detect them, bug in the current implementation and possible solutions

[Miro Hrončok]

On 23. 09. 21 1:40, Josh Stone wrote:

On 9/22/21 4:21 AM, Miro Hrončok wrote:

Hello,

for many releases, Fedora has the brp-mangle-sehbangs BuildRoot Policy Script
that does the following:

   1) Gets all executable files in the buildroot
   2) Gets all "text" files from those
   3a) Mangles shebangs that are "wrong"
   (e.g. #!/usr/bin/env node -> #!/usr/bin/node)
   3b) Removes executable bits from "text" files without shebangs


While we're at it, can we teach the script to ignore Rust attributes?
They're written like #![attr...], and when that's on the first line some
editors try to be helpful and make the file executable. That's
considered an error with the current script since the "shebang" doesn't
start with '/', but it would be best IMO to have it remove the
executable bit.


I believe that currently the script would error:

ERROR: $f has shebang which doesn't start with '/' (#![attr...])

Have you ever seen that in a Fedora package?

--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1949278] perl-Net-Stomp-0.61 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1949278



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-a66952c302 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 35.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-a66952c302


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1949278
___
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 1949278] perl-Net-Stomp-0.61 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1949278

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
   Fixed In Version||perl-Net-Stomp-0.61-1.fc36
 Status|NEW |MODIFIED
   Assignee|lkund...@v3.sk  |jples...@redhat.com
 CC||jples...@redhat.com




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1949278
___
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: Strange mock chainbuild issue: package has incorrect checksum

[Julian Sikorski]

Am 22.09.21 um 18:45 schrieb Julian Sikorski:

W dniu 22.09.2021 o 18:42, Julian Sikorski pisze:

W dniu 22.09.2021 o 18:34, Julian Sikorski pisze:

W dniu 21.09.2021 o 23:12, Richard W.M. Jones pisze:

On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 10:16:17PM +0200, Julian Sikorski wrote:

W dniu 21.09.2021 o 11:00, Richard W.M. Jones pisze:

On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 11:45:39AM -0600, Jerry James wrote:
On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 10:49 AM Julian Sikorski 
 wrote:
my local kernel rebuilds have started failing for no apparent 
reason - I

was using a similar command successfully for several months.
/mnt/openmediavault is a samba share. This is what gets output 
into the log:


[snip]

/mnt/openmediavault/kernel/results/fedora-34-x86_64/pesign-113-16.fc35/pesign-113-16.fc34.x86_64.rpm: 


(39, fsync failed: Permission denied)


I suspect that  is the real problem, and the incorrect 
checksum is

a result of not being able to read or write the filesystem.  Can you
verify correct ownership and permissions on every directory in that
path?


If fsync(2) failed then that would be happening after the file
descriptor was open, so it wouldn't be filesystem permissions but
probably SELinux.

Rich.



I am seeing no errors in setroubleshoot and setting selinux to
permissive does not help either. Can it be the selinux of the
bootstrapped instance, and if so, how can I control it? There is
nothing obvious in the logs of the host:


AFAIK mock only ever uses one kernel (the host) so disabling SELinux
on the host rules out my SELinux theory.

Rich.

This is all super strange. If I delete the pesign result dir, it is 
built without issues. Moreover, repodata folder is also created, with 
the sha256 checksum in the file matching the one of the pesign rpm. 
What is odd though, is that even after mock fails, gedit is claiming 
that repomd.xml and the data file extracted from primary.xml.gz keep 
changing on disk. Can it be some odd system clock issue between my 
desktop an my NAS?


Best regards,
Julian


This "file changed on disk" issue affects every single file in the 
folders the last mock run touched, so e.g. 
/mnt/openmediavault/kernel/results/fedora-34-x86_64/kernel-5.14.6-300.s0ix03.fc34 
is affected, but 
/mnt/openmediavault/kernel/results/fedora-34-x86_64/kernel-5.14.5-300.s0ix01.fc34 
is not. What does gedit use to determine that the file changed? 
Timestamps shown by ls -l stay constant.


Best regards,
Julian


This is what stat shows:

$ LANG=C stat repomd.xml
   File: repomd.xml
   Size: 3098  Blocks: 2048   IO Block: 1048576 regular file
Device: 34h/52d    Inode: 27918863    Links: 1
Access: (0755/-rwxr-xr-x)  Uid: ( 1000/   julas)   Gid: ( 1000/   julas)
Context: system_u:object_r:cifs_t:s0
Access: 2021-09-22 18:26:02.683957700 +0200
Modify: 2021-09-22 18:25:59.823561400 +0200
Change: 2021-09-22 18:25:59.823561400 +0200
  Birth: 2021-09-22 18:25:59.793960700 +0200

I tried running chronyc makestep on both the NAS and the builder, it did 
not help either.


Best regards,
Julian
___
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 1997116] Upgrade perl-Image-ExifTool to 12.30

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1997116

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version||perl-Image-ExifTool-12.30-1
   ||.fc36
   ||perl-Image-ExifTool-12.30-1
   ||.fc35
   ||perl-Image-ExifTool-12.30-1
   ||.fc34
   ||perl-Image-ExifTool-12.30-1
   ||.fc33
 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
Last Closed||2021-09-23 08:42:06




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1997116
___
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 1913148] perl-TAP-Formatter-JUnit-0.13 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1913148

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version||perl-TAP-Formatter-JUnit-0.
   ||13-1.fc36
 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
 CC||jples...@redhat.com
   Assignee|berra...@redhat.com |jples...@redhat.com
   Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
Last Closed||2021-09-23 08:38:57




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1913148
___
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: Free Pascal and the new glibc

[Artur Frenszek-Iwicki]

> I've created f35-build-side-46123 and tagged fpc-3.2.2-3.fc35 into that.
> Lazarus rebuild is in progress.
Thanks. Lazarus has been built successfully.

> If the maintainers of those packages want to rebuild their package
> (in the side-tag), please do so, it will speed up the process.
I'll go over my packages (colorful, gearhead1, lazpaint) today.

Thanks again.
A.FI.
___
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 2007048] perl-Convert-ASN1-0.33 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007048



--- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-8e22452051 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 35.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-8e22452051


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007048
___
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 2007048] perl-Convert-ASN1-0.33 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007048

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version||perl-Convert-ASN1-0.33-1.fc
   ||36
 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007048
___
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

Naming convention

[Filip Janus]

Hi all,
I am wondering about the right name for Autoconf compact package. I need to
add the latest release of autoconf into EPEL so I need a package with a
different name. Currently, there are in fedora autoconf, autoconf213, and
autoconf268. The latest version is 2.71 so I have few options in my mind:

   - compat-autoconf
   - compat-autoconf27
   - autoconf27

What do you think?

-Filip-
___
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: Mangling shebangs in text files: How to detect them, bug in the current implementation and possible solutions

[Richard W.M. Jones]

After years of experience I wouldn't use "file" for anything I needed
to work reliably.

If the test is really ELF or not ELF, how about detecting the ELF
header magic directly?

$ if [[ $(dd if="/bin/ls" status=none bs=4 count=1) == $'\x7fELF' ]]; then echo 
elf ; else echo not-elf; fi
elf

$ if [[ $(dd if="/etc/passwd" status=none bs=4 count=1) == $'\x7fELF' ]]; then 
echo elf ; else echo not-elf; fi
not-elf

Rich.

-- 
Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com
Fedora Windows cross-compiler. Compile Windows programs, test, and
build Windows installers. Over 100 libraries supported.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MinGW
___
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-33-20210923.0 compose check report

[Fedora compose checker]

No missing expected images.

Soft failed openQA tests: 1/8 (x86_64), 1/8 (aarch64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)

Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-33-20210922.0):

ID: 997930  Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/997930
ID: 997938  Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/997938

Passed openQA tests: 7/8 (x86_64), 7/8 (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: Mangling shebangs in text files: How to detect them, bug in the current implementation and possible solutions

[Petr Pisar]

V Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 12:47:07PM -0400, Steve Grubb napsal(a):
> I find the file utility to be almost reliable. It changes how it identifies 
> ELF 
> files every couple releases. So, to stabilize this, fapolicyd-cli uses it's 
> own logic to determine what kind of ELF file it finds. I also regularly find 
> text/plain files where it cannot identify the language and files that are 
> application/octet-stream which are also misidentified.
> 
File's libmagic will always misdetect some files.

I'd like to see rpmbuild to prefer user.mime_type extended attribute over
libmagic guess. That way packagers could override the MIME type directly from
a spec file:

%install
setfattr -n 'user.mime_type' -v 'text/x-perl' %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/GET

If rpmbuild carried that attribute to RPM archive, rpm would set the attribute
when installing that package and it would become available to other tools like
fapolicyd-cli.

Technically we could patch libmagic to do that, but I feel that libmagic
upstream wouldn't like that. Maybe a place for an intermediate wrapper.

-- Petr


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

[Bug 2006977] perl-Math-BigInt-FastCalc-0.5011 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2006977



--- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-332617f8d1 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 35.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-332617f8d1


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2006977
___
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 2007048] perl-Convert-ASN1-0.33 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007048

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
   Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
 CC|caillon+fedoraproject@gmail |
   |.com, jples...@redhat.com,  |
   |ka...@ucw.cz,   |
   |mspa...@redhat.com, |
   |rhug...@redhat.com, |
   |rstr...@redhat.com, |
   |sandm...@redhat.com |




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007048
___
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 2006977] perl-Math-BigInt-FastCalc-0.5011 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2006977

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC|jples...@redhat.com,|
   |mspa...@redhat.com, |
   |ppi...@redhat.com   |
   Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
   Fixed In Version||perl-Math-BigInt-FastCalc-0
   ||.501.100-1.fc36
 Status|NEW |MODIFIED




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2006977
___
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: Free Pascal and the new glibc

[Mattia Verga via devel]

I've created f35-build-side-46123 and tagged fpc-3.2.2-3.fc35 into that.

Lazarus rebuild is in progress. I will take care of rebuilding the other
packages listed in bug 1987485 as soon as I can. If the maintainers of
those packages want to rebuild their package (in the side-tag), please
do so, it will speed up the process.

Mattia

___
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