date:20211012

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1980682

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |MODIFIED



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-bd137ce693 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 35.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-bd137ce693


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1980682
___
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 1980682] Upgrade perl-Data-GUID to 0.050

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1980682

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |MODIFIED



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-bd137ce693 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 35.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-bd137ce693

--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-418ea72cb3 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 34.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-418ea72cb3


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1980682
___
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 1917521] Upgrade perl-Calendar-Simple to 2.0.1

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1917521

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |MODIFIED



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-78fa4ebc53 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 35.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-78fa4ebc53


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1917521
___
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 1917521] Upgrade perl-Calendar-Simple to 2.0.1

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1917521

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |MODIFIED



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-78fa4ebc53 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 35.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-78fa4ebc53

--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-2ff97582b0 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 34.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-2ff97582b0


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1917521
___
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 1829902] Upgrade perl-Algorithm-Dependency to 1.112

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1829902



--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-d640ea3bbe has been submitted as an update to Fedora 35.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-d640ea3bbe


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1829902
___
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 1829902] Upgrade perl-Algorithm-Dependency to 1.112

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1829902

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |MODIFIED



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-afa95e1cc4 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 34.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-afa95e1cc4


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1829902
___
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 owner required for ImageMagick

2021-10-12 Thread Luya Tshimbalanga



On 2021-10-12 15:37, Michael Cronenworth wrote:

Hi all,

I would like to put out a public call for a new primary owner for 
ImageMagick[1].


I only picked it up a few years ago to prevent it from being orphaned, 
but I no longer have the desire or time to maintain it.


Thanks,
Michael

[1] https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ImageMagick


Hello Michael,

I will take that package because it is used by Fedora Design team for 
conversion and some applications depend on it.


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

GNOME 42 - Initial Software port to GTK4 (MR!944)

2021-10-12 Thread Reon Beon via devel

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OapTyDo2hk4

GNOME GTK4 PortInitiative (ISSUE26)
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/Initiatives/-/issues/26
___
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] Fedora EPEL 8 updates-testing report

2021-10-12 Thread updates

The following Fedora EPEL 8 Security updates need testing:
 Age  URL
   2  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-dd446b153c   
libopenmpt-0.5.12-1.el8


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

libtraceevent-1.2.1-1.el8

Details about builds:



 libtraceevent-1.2.1-1.el8 (FEDORA-EPEL-2021-83b30f74f4)
 Library to parse raw trace event formats

Update Information:

Add libtraceevent to EPEL8

ChangeLog:


References:

  [ 1 ] Bug #2009581 - libtraceevent: build for epel8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2009581


___
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 2012875] perl-Graphics-TIFF-17 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2012875



--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-3b8d7416ae has been pushed to the Fedora 33 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
--advisory=FEDORA-2021-3b8d7416ae`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-3b8d7416ae

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=2012875
___
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 2012875] perl-Graphics-TIFF-17 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2012875



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-ec1a9e7532 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
--advisory=FEDORA-2021-ec1a9e7532`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-ec1a9e7532

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=2012875
___
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: API endpoint listing ISOs and checksums for Fedora releases and Rawhide?

On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 3:25 PM Adam Williamson
 wrote:
>
> So to answer Neal's question: you can use PDC directly, or you can use
> fedfind which will talk to PDC for you, plus do a bunch of other stuff,
> like the above, and also synthesizing metadata for pre-Pungi 4 stable
> releases so you can interact with them via fedfind using the same
> interfaces as post-Pungi 4 composes...
>
> Hanging over all of this is the threat that PDC might go away at some
> point, which would be a bit of an inconvenience. In A World Where there
> is no PDC, you have to grab the metadata files for composes that still
> exist from kojipkgs; there is no record of the metadata for composes
> that have been garbage-collected. For stable releases you'd have to
> parse whatever metadata you can just out of the actual release tree on
> the mirrors.
>

Maybe it might be worth considering to generating a json blob to put
into the mirrored tree? The problem I *actually* have is that we don't
have a predictable/reliable name that I can hard-code in to correctly
fetch the ISO. We don't generate unversioned links to versioned ISO
files, which is where the complication comes from.



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

Updated Zstd Planned For Linux 5.16 With Better Performance

2021-10-12 Thread Reon Beon via devel

As reported on last week, an updated Zstd implementation for the Linux kernel 
is being re-attempted by Zstd developer Nick Terrell at Facebook. Today he sent 
out the latest Zstd kernel patches to provide a much newer version of the code 
compared to what is currently mainlined and will provide much better 
performance and numerous fixes.

The Zstd code currently within the Linux kernel is out-of-date and it's taken 
an unfortunate amount of time to get it updated. Fortunately, the new code is 
introducing a new kernels-style wrapper API around Zstd that should allow for 
these code updates to be performed smoother and more easily moving forward. In 
fact, the Zstd kernel code is working towards being automatically 
generated/derived from the upstream Zstd sources.

The Zstd code currently within the kernel is four years old (Zstd 1.3.1) and 
since then there have been many fixes and performance improvements. With this 
Zstd update, Btrfs Zstd compression can be a few percent faster, Btrfs Zstd 
decompression can be around ~15% faster, SquashFS Zstd decompression is around 
15% faster too, F2FS Zstd decompression during reads can be around 20% faster, 
zRAM decompression can be around 30% faster, kernel Zstd image decompression 
can be around 35% faster, and initramfs Zstd decompression and building was 
around 5% faster.

Already these patches provide big speed-ups for the Linux kernel Zstd 
performance especially on the decompression side while Zstd 1.5.1 will be 
released soon with even more performance optimizations. Additionally, for 
logistics this patch series takes the code up to Zstd 1.4.10 while the 
follow-on patch once upstreamed will take it to that upcoming Zstd 1.5.1 state.

More details on this proposed Zstd updated implementation for the Linux kernel 
via this patch series. The hope is now to get that code pulled into Linux-Next 
so it can be tested more broadly over the next few weeks and then to ideally 
see this updated code merged next month for the Linux 5.16 merge window.
https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item=Zstd-Linux-5.16-Plans
___
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 owner required for ImageMagick

2021-10-12 Thread Michael Cronenworth


Hi all,

I would like to put out a public call for a new primary owner for 
ImageMagick[1].

I only picked it up a few years ago to prevent it from being orphaned, but I no 
longer have the desire or time to maintain it.


Thanks,
Michael

[1] https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ImageMagick
___
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: Self Introduction: Maxwell G (@gotmax23)

2021-10-12 Thread Kevin Fenzi

On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 10:44:14PM -0500, Maxwell G via devel wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> 
> I am Maxwell G or @gotmax23 on FAS and Github. I am relatively new to
> Linux but after trying different distros, I settled on Fedora. I don't
> have a lot of time between school and having chronic pain, but I'd like
> to give back and contribute as much as I can.
> 
> I created a package for yt-dlp, a fork of youtube-dl with extra fixes
> and features, and submitted a [review request][1] on Bugzilla. I still
> need a sponsor and someone to review my submission.
> 
> I am a big Ansible user and would be happy help with Fedora's Ansible
> packages. I already maintain `ansible-collection-community-general`on
> the AUR, so it would be non-trivial for me to maintain it in Fedora. I
> have identified some other areas I could help with, but I don't want to
> bite off more than I can chew. Either way, I will [continue][2]
> submitting PRs to fix issues or update versions for the packages that I
> use.

Thanks for the PR's! :) 

kevin


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

Re: OCaml packages failing in ELN

2021-10-12 Thread Jerry James

On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 6:09 AM Stephen Gallagher  wrote:
> OK, for the short term, I'm just going to tag the Rawhide builds of
> ocaml packages into ELN. If you want me to do a mini-mass-rebuild for
> ELN after that, let me know.

I do not have any particular need for a mini-mass-rebuild.  If Richard
Jones is okay with this, so am I.

> I'm not sure how things got into the current state, but given that it
> looks as if this OCAML build happened pretty much on the same day that
> we deployed the new DistroBuildSync that handles the
> tag-waitforrepo-build process, I'm guessing we probably just missed a
> couple that happened to be problematic.

Oh, okay, that makes sense.  Let's see how it does on future OCaml
mass rebuilds, then.  Thanks for fixing things up.  Regards,
-- 
Jerry James
http://www.jamezone.org/
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Qt package licenses

2021-10-12 Thread Jerry James

I'm doing a review of a MinGW build of a Qt 6 package:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2009214

During the license check portion of the review, I have become
increasingly convinced that our qt5-* and qt6-* packages have
incorrect License fields.  Currently they have "LGPLv2 with exceptions
or GPLv3 with exceptions".  I believe that most or all of them should
have one of these two instead:

- LGPLv3 or GPLv2+
- LGPLv3 or GPLv2+ with exceptions

Could one or two of you license-minded people read through the
comments on that bug and indicate whether you think the analysis is
correct or not, please?
-- 
Jerry James
http://www.jamezone.org/
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: API endpoint listing ISOs and checksums for Fedora releases and Rawhide?

2021-10-12 Thread Adam Williamson

On Tue, 2021-10-12 at 20:40 +0200, Frantisek Zatloukal wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> in testcloud (
> https://pagure.io/testcloud/blob/master/f/testcloud/util.py#_100 ), I am
> using adam's openqa nightlies.json for rawhide/branched:
> https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/nightlies.json (this isn't a "stable api")
> 
> and https://getfedora.org/releases.json for stable releases.
> 
> For programmatically determining which are the current fedora releases, I
> am using oraculum's
> https://packager-dashboard.fedoraproject.org/api/v1/releases (this wouldn't
> change nor break).
> 
> Hope it helped at least a bit!

Oh, that's what you're using it for? Hmm. Well, that's a bit
indirect...

Both of those sources are ultimately getting the data via my fedfind
tool:

https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/fedfind

so unless you actually need the extra information nightlies adds (i.e.
whether the images passed openQA tests), you might as well just use
fedfind directly.

fedfind's current source of truth for "what are the current releases"
is a JSON blob I maintain by hand:

https://fedorapeople.org/groups/qa/metadata/release.json

which you could also just query directly (to figure out the Rawhide
release number, add one to the otherwise highest release number). There
are alternative sources of truth for this, but they're all a bit
problematic. I have a speech I can give on this if you'd like to hear
it. :D

To go back to Neal's original question, there more or less *is* an API
for this, yes: PDC - https://pdc.fedoraproject.org/

Specifically, you want the compose-images endpoint:
https://pdc.fedoraproject.org/rest_api/v1/compose-images/

you pass it a compose ID, like this:

https://pdc.fedoraproject.org/rest_api/v1/compose-images/Fedora-Rawhide-20211012.n.0/

and get lots of lovely data. What it's actually giving you is the data
produced by pungi and included in the compose tree itself so long as
that's available:

https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/compose/rawhide/Fedora-Rawhide-20211012.n.0/compose/metadata/images.json

but PDC keeps the metadata around forever, while the composes disappear
after a couple of weeks.

Querying stable releases is a mite tricky. For a start, you need to
know the compose ID of the candidate compose that we ultimately
released. fedfind does this by parsing the compose label out of the
image filenames (using a regex with an expected format), then using PDC
to find the compose ID from the label. For a second, the data you get
will be in some senses a lie, because we hack up the compose when we
ship it as a stable release: we throw away some deliverables (so
they'll be in the metadata but you won't be able to find the files
anywhere once they're purged from kojipkgs / stage), and move others
around (so some of the relative paths in the metadata are wrong).
fedfind has some clever-clever logic to kinda meld what it knows about
the actual layout of the stable compose tree with the metadata from PDC
and present a more-or-less correct view of things.

So to answer Neal's question: you can use PDC directly, or you can use
fedfind which will talk to PDC for you, plus do a bunch of other stuff,
like the above, and also synthesizing metadata for pre-Pungi 4 stable
releases so you can interact with them via fedfind using the same
interfaces as post-Pungi 4 composes...

Hanging over all of this is the threat that PDC might go away at some
point, which would be a bit of an inconvenience. In A World Where there
is no PDC, you have to grab the metadata files for composes that still
exist from kojipkgs; there is no record of the metadata for composes
that have been garbage-collected. For stable releases you'd have to
parse whatever metadata you can just out of the actual release tree on
the mirrors.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA
IRC: adamw | Twitter: adamw_ha
https://www.happyassassin.net

-- 
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

Fedora-IoT-36-20211012.0 compose check report

Missing expected images:

Iot dvd aarch64
Iot dvd x86_64

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

Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-IoT-36-20211011.0):

ID: 1025771 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_clevis
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1025771
ID: 1025786 Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_clevis@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1025786

Passed openQA tests: 15/16 (x86_64), 14/15 (aarch64)

New passes (same test not passed in Fedora-IoT-36-20211011.0):

ID: 1025765 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_zezere_server
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1025765
ID: 1025779 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_zezere_ignition
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1025779

Installed system changes in test x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso 
install_default@uefi: 
System load changed from 0.45 to 0.11
Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1023595#downloads
Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1025775#downloads

Installed system changes in test aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso 
install_default_upload@uefi: 
System load changed from 0.82 to 0.42
Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1023600#downloads
Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1025780#downloads
-- 
Mail generated by check-compose:
https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: API endpoint listing ISOs and checksums for Fedora releases and Rawhide?

2021-10-12 Thread Frantisek Zatloukal

Hi,

in testcloud (
https://pagure.io/testcloud/blob/master/f/testcloud/util.py#_100 ), I am
using adam's openqa nightlies.json for rawhide/branched:
https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/nightlies.json (this isn't a "stable api")

and https://getfedora.org/releases.json for stable releases.

For programmatically determining which are the current fedora releases, I
am using oraculum's
https://packager-dashboard.fedoraproject.org/api/v1/releases (this wouldn't
change nor break).

Hope it helped at least a bit!

On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 7:53 PM Neal Gompa  wrote:

> Hey all,
>
> I'm working on extending quickemu[1] to be able to easily spin up
> Fedora VMs, but our lack of a static URL formula for fetching ISOs
> makes this a bit difficult.
>
> Do we have some kind of API endpoint that has the necessary
> information for this? It'd be nice to be able to fetch some kind of
> JSON file with the necessary information so that tools can fetch it
> programmatically...
>
> Thanks in advance and best regards!
>
> [1]: https://github.com/wimpysworld/quickemu
>
> --
> 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.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
>


-- 

Best regards / S pozdravem,

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

Fedora-Rawhide-20211012.n.0 compose check report

Missing expected images:

Xfce raw-xz armhfp

Compose PASSES proposed Rawhide gating check!
All required tests passed

Failed openQA tests: 6/206 (x86_64), 7/132 (aarch64)

New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20211011.n.0):

ID: 1025071 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_update_graphical
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1025071
ID: 1025077 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_notifications_postinstall
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1025077
ID: 1025104 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 base_services_start@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1025104
ID: 1025127 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso support_server@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1025127
ID: 1025148 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso 
install_repository_nfs_variation@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1025148
ID: 1025298 Test: aarch64 universal install_with_swap@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1025298

Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20211011.n.0):

ID: 1025051 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso apps_startstop
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1025051
ID: 1025073 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso apps_startstop
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1025073
ID: 1025089 Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso evince
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1025089
ID: 1025164 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso server_cockpit_basic@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1025164
ID: 1025178 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz gedit@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1025178
ID: 1025278 Test: aarch64 universal upgrade_minimal_64bit@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1025278
ID: 1025284 Test: aarch64 universal install_asian_language@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1025284

Soft failed openQA tests: 3/206 (x86_64), 2/132 (aarch64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)

Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20211011.n.0):

ID: 1025047 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso gedit
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1025047
ID: 1025090 Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso gedit
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1025090
ID: 1025101 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1025101
ID: 1025167 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz 
install_arm_image_deployment_upload@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1025167
ID: 1025185 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1025185

Passed openQA tests: 197/206 (x86_64), 123/132 (aarch64)

New passes (same test not passed in Fedora-Rawhide-20211011.n.0):

ID: 1025035 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso realmd_join_sssd
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1025035
ID: 1025065 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso anaconda_help
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1025065
ID: 1025068 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso install_default@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1025068
ID: 1025076 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_login
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1025076
ID: 1025109 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 
base_service_manipulation@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1025109
ID: 1025121 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso anaconda_help@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1025121
ID: 1025135 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso 
install_blivet_standard_partition_ext4@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1025135
ID: 1025161 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso realmd_join_cockpit@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1025161
ID: 1025190 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 
base_package_install_remove@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1025190
ID: 1025269 Test: aarch64 universal install_serial_console@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1025269
ID: 1025273 Test: aarch64 universal install_cyrillic_language@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1025273

Installed system changes in test x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_default@uefi: 
Used mem changed from 240 MiB to 213 MiB
Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1023241#downloads
Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1024987#downloads

Installed system changes in test x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_default_upload: 
System load changed from 0.30 to 0.19
Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1023254#downloads
Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1025000#downloads

Installed system changes in test x86_64 Workstation-live-iso 
install_default@uefi: 
Used swap changed from 8 MiB to 5 MiB
1 services(s) added since previous compose: fwupd.service
System load changed from 1.09 to 0.55
Previous test data:

Re: F36 Change: Make Authselect Mandatory (System-Wide Change proposal)

2021-10-12 Thread Michael Catanzaro

On Tue, Oct 12 2021 at 01:44:12 PM -0400, Neal Gompa 
 wrote:

Why hasn't the nsswitch.conf situation been fixed to work in
/usr/share like it does in /etc?


Guess: probably nobody proposed it to the glibc developers yet.

Michael

___
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

API endpoint listing ISOs and checksums for Fedora releases and Rawhide?

Hey all,

I'm working on extending quickemu[1] to be able to easily spin up
Fedora VMs, but our lack of a static URL formula for fetching ISOs
makes this a bit difficult.

Do we have some kind of API endpoint that has the necessary
information for this? It'd be nice to be able to fetch some kind of
JSON file with the necessary information so that tools can fetch it
programmatically...

Thanks in advance and best regards!

[1]: https://github.com/wimpysworld/quickemu

-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.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: F36 Change: Make Authselect Mandatory (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 1:13 PM Michael Catanzaro  wrote:
>
>
> This change is well-considered and includes detailed reasoning to
> support it. Looks good to me.
>
> I think the change proposal should be renamed, though, since authselect
> would clearly not *actually* be mandatory. Of course you'll risk severe
> breakage if you turn it off and edit these low-level configurations
> directly, but that is really no different than it was before.
>
> On Tue, Oct 12 2021 at 11:45:28 AM -0400, Neal Gompa
>  wrote:
> > PAM gained support for systemd-style overlay configuration some time
> > ago. Actually a number of core system components did, if the libeconf
> > dependency is turned on. Instead of forcing authselect, we should
> > probably make sure base functional configuration is shipped in
> > something like /usr/share/pam/pam.d or something like that.
>
> That is not possible with nsswitch.conf, though. This proposal is a
> good solution to the problems we've had with correctly maintaining
> nsswitch.conf. The status quo (see "Therefore we can split users into
> four groups:" in the change proposal) is just not good compared to
> Fedora's usual quality standards, and this change proposal would
> address all of the problems we've had. Also, I'm pretty sure the
> scriptlets we currently rely on to maintain correct configurations just
> do not work at all on Silverblue/Kinoite/CoreOS (where editing /etc in
> RPM scriplets just does not work), and I suspect nobody really knows
> what the situation there is for users who have upgraded from older
> releases.
>

Why hasn't the nsswitch.conf situation been fixed to work in
/usr/share like it does in /etc?



-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.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 2012875] perl-Graphics-TIFF-17 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2012875

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-ad9e7cff8b 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-ad9e7cff8b`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-ad9e7cff8b

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=2012875
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Fedora-IoT-35-20211012.0 compose check report

No missing expected images.

Failed openQA tests: 2/16 (x86_64), 1/15 (aarch64)

New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-IoT-35-20211010.0):

ID: 1025442 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_zezere_server
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1025442
ID: 1025456 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_zezere_ignition
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1025456

Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-IoT-35-20211010.0):

ID: 1025463 Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_clevis@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1025463

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-35-20211010.0):

ID: 1025448 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_clevis
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1025448

Passed openQA tests: 13/16 (x86_64), 14/15 (aarch64)

Installed system changes in test x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso 
install_default_upload: 
System load changed from 0.17 to 0.28
Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1022156#downloads
Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1025441#downloads
-- 
Mail generated by check-compose:
https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: F36 Change: Make Authselect Mandatory (System-Wide Change proposal)

2021-10-12 Thread Michael Catanzaro



This change is well-considered and includes detailed reasoning to 
support it. Looks good to me.


I think the change proposal should be renamed, though, since authselect 
would clearly not *actually* be mandatory. Of course you'll risk severe 
breakage if you turn it off and edit these low-level configurations 
directly, but that is really no different than it was before.


On Tue, Oct 12 2021 at 11:45:28 AM -0400, Neal Gompa 
 wrote:

PAM gained support for systemd-style overlay configuration some time
ago. Actually a number of core system components did, if the libeconf
dependency is turned on. Instead of forcing authselect, we should
probably make sure base functional configuration is shipped in
something like /usr/share/pam/pam.d or something like that.


That is not possible with nsswitch.conf, though. This proposal is a 
good solution to the problems we've had with correctly maintaining 
nsswitch.conf. The status quo (see "Therefore we can split users into 
four groups:" in the change proposal) is just not good compared to 
Fedora's usual quality standards, and this change proposal would 
address all of the problems we've had. Also, I'm pretty sure the 
scriptlets we currently rely on to maintain correct configurations just 
do not work at all on Silverblue/Kinoite/CoreOS (where editing /etc in 
RPM scriplets just does not work), and I suspect nobody really knows 
what the situation there is for users who have upgraded from older 
releases.


Michael

___
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: 20211012.n.0 changes

2021-10-12 Thread Fedora Rawhide Report

OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20211011.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20211012.n.0

= SUMMARY =
Added images:1
Dropped images:  3
Added packages:  1
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages:   92
Downgraded packages: 0

Size of added packages:  2.86 MiB
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Size of upgraded packages:   10.93 GiB
Size of downgraded packages: 0 B

Size change of upgraded packages:   15.50 MiB
Size change of downgraded packages: 0 B

= ADDED IMAGES =
Image: Container_Base docker aarch64
Path: 
Container/aarch64/images/Fedora-Container-Base-Rawhide-20211012.n.0.aarch64.tar.xz

= DROPPED IMAGES =
Image: Server raw-xz aarch64
Path: Server/aarch64/images/Fedora-Server-Rawhide-20211011.n.0.aarch64.raw.xz
Image: Python_Classroom raw-xz aarch64
Path: 
Labs/aarch64/images/Fedora-Python-Classroom-Rawhide-20211011.n.0.aarch64.raw.xz
Image: Python_Classroom live x86_64
Path: 
Labs/x86_64/iso/Fedora-Python-Classroom-Live-x86_64-Rawhide-20211011.n.0.iso

= ADDED PACKAGES =
Package: wget2-2.0.0-1.fc36
Summary: An advanced file and recursive website downloader
RPMs:wget2 wget2-devel wget2-libs
Size:2.86 MiB


= DROPPED PACKAGES =

= UPGRADED PACKAGES =
Package:  CubicSDR-0.2.5-18.20210814git0248e5a.fc36
Old package:  CubicSDR-0.2.5-17.20210814git0248e5a.fc36
Summary:  Cross-Platform Software-Defined Radio Panadapter
RPMs: CubicSDR
Size: 5.45 MiB
Size change:  -256 B
Changelog:
  * Tue Oct 12 2021 Richard Shaw  - 
0.2.5-18.20210814git0248e5a
  - Rebuild for hamlib 4.3.1.


Package:  anaconda-36.6-1.fc36
Old package:  anaconda-36.5-1.fc36
Summary:  Graphical system installer
RPMs: anaconda anaconda-core anaconda-dracut anaconda-gui 
anaconda-install-env-deps anaconda-install-img-deps anaconda-live anaconda-tui 
anaconda-widgets anaconda-widgets-devel
Size: 20.57 MiB
Size change:  40.89 KiB
Changelog:
  * Mon Oct 11 2021 Martin Kolman  - 36.6-1
  - Don't assume Python modules are in sysconfig.get_path('purelib') (miro)
  - Watch the org.freedesktop.hostname1 name (vponcova)
  - Make log copying truly the very last thing done (vslavik)
  - Rename string constant to make more sense (vslavik)
  - Move screenshot copying into the Task to copy logs (vslavik)
  - Add a quick howto for testing dracut changes (vslavik)
  - Mark the nompath option as deprecated (vslavik)
  - Don't consider the string module as deprecated (vslavik)
  - Fix typo and style (vslavik)
  - Remove ensure_str and decode_bytes (vslavik)
  - Stop using ensure_str in SimpleConfigParser (vslavik)
  - Stop using ensure_str in ProxyString (vslavik)
  - Uncouple ensure_str from {upper,lower}_ascii (vslavik)
  - Stop optionally decoding string data from RPM (vslavik)
  - Remove usage of ensure_str from have_word_match (vslavik)
  - Rename functions in string module to lower_case (vslavik)
  - Improve tests and docs of the new string module (vslavik)
  - Split string helpers from pyanaconda.core.util (vslavik)
  - Replace dummy callbacks (vponcova)
  - Remove the DBusMetaTask class (vponcova)
  - Remove unused arguments of the AnacondaPreParser class (vponcova)
  - Remove unused arguments of the AnacondaKSParser class (vponcova)
  - Remove the successful_checks property (vponcova)
  - Remove the sysroot_path function (vponcova)
  - Mark an unused variable with an underscore (vponcova)
  - Remove the SessionBus object (vponcova)
  - Remove the ANACONDA_DATA_DIR constant (vponcova)
  - Remove the minLevel argument (vponcova)
  - Remove the logLevelMap variable (vponcova)
  - Add systemd-machine-id-setup on Live to common bugs (vslavik)
  - Remove the mpath flag (vslavik)
  - Stop using the mpath flag (vslavik)


Package:  borgmatic-1.5.20-1.fc36
Old package:  borgmatic-1.5.18-1.fc36
Summary:  Simple Python wrapper script for borgbackup
RPMs: borgmatic
Size: 137.25 KiB
Size change:  -73 B
Changelog:
  * Mon Oct 11 2021 Felix Kaechele  - 1.5.20-1
  - update to 1.5.20


Package:  checkpolicy-3.3-0.rc3.1.fc36
Old package:  checkpolicy-3.3-0.rc2.1.fc36
Summary:  SELinux policy compiler
RPMs: checkpolicy
Size: 1.63 MiB
Size change:  1.68 KiB
Changelog:
  * Mon Oct 11 2021 Petr Lautrbach  - 3.3-0.rc3.1
  - SELinux userspace 3.3-rc3 release


Package:  cocoalib-0.99716-1.fc36
Old package:  cocoalib-0.99715-1.fc36
Summary:  C++ library for computations in commutative algebra
RPMs: cocoalib cocoalib-devel cocoalib-doc
Size: 10.76 MiB
Size change:  -2.17 KiB
Changelog:
  * Mon Oct 11 2021 Jerry James  - 0.99716-1
  - Version 0.99716
  - Drop upstreamed -apply and -32bit patches


Package:  copr-rpmbuild-0.54-1.fc36
Old package:  copr-rpmbuild-0.53-1.fc36
Summary:  Run COPR build tasks
RPMs: copr-builder copr-distgit-client copr-rpmbuild
Size: 549.90 KiB
Size change:  5.01 KiB
Changelog:
  * Mon Oct 11 2021 Pavel Raiskup  0.54-1
  - %auto{spec,changelog} support

Fedora-35-20211012.n.0 compose check report

No missing expected images.

Failed openQA tests: 9/204 (x86_64), 6/141 (aarch64)

New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-35-20211011.n.0):

ID: 1024569 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_freeipa_replication_master
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1024569
ID: 1024578 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_role_deploy_database_server
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1024578
ID: 1024582 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_freeipa_replication_replica
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1024582
ID: 1024586 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_freeipa_replication_client
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1024586
ID: 1024592 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_database_client
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1024592
ID: 1024603 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso gedit
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1024603
ID: 1024616 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso desktop_login
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1024616
ID: 1024675 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso anaconda_help@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1024675
ID: 1024678 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso 
install_blivet_btrfs_preserve_home_uefi@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1024678
ID: 1024680 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso 
install_repository_hd_variation@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1024680
ID: 1024718 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso server_cockpit_basic@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1024718

Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-35-20211011.n.0):

ID: 1024629 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso apps_startstop
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1024629
ID: 1024645 Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso evince
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1024645
ID: 1024741 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz gedit@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1024741
ID: 1024847 Test: aarch64 universal install_asian_language@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1024847

Soft failed openQA tests: 2/204 (x86_64), 2/141 (aarch64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)

Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-35-20211011.n.0):

ID: 1024646 Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso gedit
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1024646
ID: 1024657 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1024657
ID: 1024730 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz 
install_arm_image_deployment_upload@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1024730
ID: 1024748 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1024748

Passed openQA tests: 193/204 (x86_64), 133/141 (aarch64)

New passes (same test not passed in Fedora-35-20211011.n.0):

ID: 1024812 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_2_minimal_uefi@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1024812
ID: 1024827 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_minimal_uefi@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1024827

Installed system changes in test x86_64 Everything-boot-iso install_default: 
System load changed from 0.07 to 0.26
Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1023674#downloads
Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1024596#downloads

Installed system changes in test x86_64 Workstation-live-iso 
install_default@uefi: 
Mount /run/user/983 disappeared since previous compose
Used swap changed from 5 MiB to 4 MiB
2 services(s) removed since previous compose: user-runtime-dir@983.service, 
user@983.service
System load changed from 1.15 to 0.40
Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1023676#downloads
Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1024598#downloads

Installed system changes in test x86_64 Workstation-live-iso 
install_default_upload: 
Used swap changed from 4 MiB to 6 MiB
1 services(s) removed since previous compose: geoclue.service
System load changed from 0.45 to 1.01
Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1023678#downloads
Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1024600#downloads

Installed system changes in test x86_64 KDE-live-iso install_default_upload: 
System load changed from 0.85 to 1.01
Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1023703#downloads
Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1024625#downloads

Installed system changes in test x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso 
install_default@uefi: 
Used swap changed from 5 MiB to 6 MiB
System load changed from 0.52 to 0.78
Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1023720#downloads
Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1024642#downloads

Installed system changes in test x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso 
install_default_upload: 
System load changed from 0.90 to 0.66
Previous

[EPEL-devel] [Fedocal] Reminder meeting : EPEL Steering Committee

2021-10-12 Thread tdawson

Dear all,

You are kindly invited to the meeting:
   EPEL Steering Committee on 2021-10-13 from 16:00:00 to 17:00:00 US/Eastern
   At fedora-meet...@irc.libera.chat

The meeting will be about:
This is the weekly EPEL Steering Committee Meeting.

A general agenda is the following:

#meetingname EPEL
#topic Intros
#topic Old Business
#topic EPEL-7
#topic EPEL-8
#topic EPEL-9
#topic Openfloor
#endmeeting




Source: https://calendar.fedoraproject.org//meeting/9854/

___
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: F36 Change: Make Authselect Mandatory (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 11:33 AM Ben Cotton  wrote:
>
> === 1. It is difficult to deliver updates to configurations ===
> FIles /etc/nsswitch.conf and /etc/pam.d/* are distributed as
> %config(noreplace) which means that they are configuration files and
> are only installed if they are not yet present. If they are present
> then they are never overwritten with package updates, instead an
> *.rpmnew file is created and the update responsibility is left
> completely to the user.
>
> It is done this way to prevent overwriting user changes
> configurations. But at the same time it means that even configurations
> that are not modified by the users can not be changed so we can not
> deliver fixes and changes efficiently.
>
> It is only possible through difficult scriptlets. As an example, we
> can show this bugzilla where a change in Gnome required an update to
> PAM otherwise the user could not authenticate. Delivering the change
> was easy with authselect, but difficult for non-authselect systems.
>
> Authselect already knows how the resulting configuration should look
> and does not risk overriding user configuration. Making it mandatory
> will help distribute important updates to nsswitch and PAM
> configuration.
>

PAM gained support for systemd-style overlay configuration some time
ago. Actually a number of core system components did, if the libeconf
dependency is turned on. Instead of forcing authselect, we should
probably make sure base functional configuration is shipped in
something like /usr/share/pam/pam.d or something like that.

Not that I think authselect is bad, but I think it's a bad hammer to
solve this problem.




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

F36 Change: Make Authselect Mandatory (System-Wide Change proposal)

2021-10-12 Thread Ben Cotton

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Make_Authselect_Mandatory

== Summary ==
This change wants to make authselect required to configure
authentication and identity sources and forcefully update
non-authselect configuration to the sssd authselect profile to
eliminate any existing non-authselect setups.

Even though it will still be possible to manually modify the
configuration, users that require special configuration should create
and use custom authselect profile.

''Authselect is available in Fedora since Fedora 27 and enabled by
default on new installations since Fedora 28. Authconfig compatibility
tool was removed from Fedora 35 as a
[[Changes/RemoveAuthselectCompatPackage|system wide change page]]. It
is now well accepted by the community as well as the package
maintainers. The package maintainers have repeatedly requested to make
authselect mandatory for the users which lead to creation of
[https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2000936 this bugzilla].''

== Owner ==
* Name: [[User:pbrezina|Pavel Březina]]
* Email: pbrez...@redhat.com


== Detailed Description ==
The following components must be updated to make authselect mandatory:
* authselect
* pam
* glibc
* packages that use it: systemd, ecryptfs, nss-mdns and fingerprint.


Required changes:
# Remove user-nsswitch.conf functionality from authselect
# Move ownership of /etc/nsswitch.conf and /etc/pam.d/{system-auth,
password-auth, smartcard-auth, fingerprint-auth, postlogin} to
authselect from glibc and pam
# Require authselect in pam
# Remove non-authselect support from systemd, ecryptfs, nss-mdns and fingerprint
# Select default profile when authselect is installed
# Select default profile when authselect is upgraded

=== Remove user-nsswitch.conf functionality ===
File /etc/authselect/user-nsswitch.conf was introduced in authselect
to allow partial user modifications of nsswitch.conf without the need
to create a custom authselect profile. The main driver was to enable
modules that are not included in authselect such as systemd-resolved
and nss-mdns.

This however made the situation more confusing to users and it is not
desirable any more if authselect is mandatory.

'''Authselect will drop user-nsswitch.conf functionality and instead
add more nsswitch modules to existing profiles and be more open about
future inclusion requests.'''

=== Own /etc/nsswitch.conf and /etc/pam.d/{system-auth, password-auth,
smartcard-auth, fingerprint-auth, postlogin} instead of glibc and pam
===
File /etc/nsswitch.conf is currently owned by glibc. It will be now
owned by authselect and removed from glibc.

PAM configuration generated by authselect is currently owned by pam.
It will be now owned by authselect and removed from pam.

''Note: that config-util and other will still be owned by pam since
these files are not generated by authselect.''

'''All files that are generated by authselect are now owned by authselect.'''

=== Require authselect in pam ===
The pam package will require authselect. This will tie pam and
authselect together and it will be impossible to uninstall authselect
without uninstalling pam which fundamentally makes authselect a hard
dependency on each system.

'''This step will make it impossible to uninstall authselect, making
it always available to RPM packages.'''

=== Remove non-authselect support from systemd, ecryptfs, nss-mdns and
fingerprint ===
'''Non-authselect configuration support will be dropped in these packages.'''

=== Select default profile when authselect is installed ===
If authselect configuration is not detected and this is a new
installation of authselect it will automatically select the
distribution default authselect profile by calling authselect select
--force with distribution specific parameters.

If existing authselect configuration is detected (perhaps from
previous installation), it will be updated (current behavior).

This makes sure that if authselect is installed (which is always) a
configuration is created.
Select default profile when authselect is upgraded
If authselect is upgraded from an older version and non-authselect
configuration is detected, it will forcefully overwrite it with
distribution defaults by calling authselect select --force with
distribution specific parameters.

This is a one time event so if someone does not want to use
authselect, it remains possible. However, non-authselect
configurations will not be supported by RPM packages mentioned above.

If authselect is upgraded on a system that already is configured by
it, the update process remains the same as it is now.

'''This step will forcefully update existing installations to
authselect configuration. It is a one time event and opt-out is still
possible but no longer supported.
'''

== Benefit to Fedora ==
'''Making authselect mandatory will provide better user and
maintainers experience and significantly reduce risk of breaking
system configuration.'''

The use of authselect-generated configuration is currently optional.
This

F36 Change: Make Authselect Mandatory (System-Wide Change proposal)

2021-10-12 Thread Ben Cotton

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Make_Authselect_Mandatory

== Summary ==
This change wants to make authselect required to configure
authentication and identity sources and forcefully update
non-authselect configuration to the sssd authselect profile to
eliminate any existing non-authselect setups.

Even though it will still be possible to manually modify the
configuration, users that require special configuration should create
and use custom authselect profile.

''Authselect is available in Fedora since Fedora 27 and enabled by
default on new installations since Fedora 28. Authconfig compatibility
tool was removed from Fedora 35 as a
[[Changes/RemoveAuthselectCompatPackage|system wide change page]]. It
is now well accepted by the community as well as the package
maintainers. The package maintainers have repeatedly requested to make
authselect mandatory for the users which lead to creation of
[https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2000936 this bugzilla].''

== Owner ==
* Name: [[User:pbrezina|Pavel Březina]]
* Email: pbrez...@redhat.com


== Detailed Description ==
The following components must be updated to make authselect mandatory:
* authselect
* pam
* glibc
* packages that use it: systemd, ecryptfs, nss-mdns and fingerprint.


Required changes:
# Remove user-nsswitch.conf functionality from authselect
# Move ownership of /etc/nsswitch.conf and /etc/pam.d/{system-auth,
password-auth, smartcard-auth, fingerprint-auth, postlogin} to
authselect from glibc and pam
# Require authselect in pam
# Remove non-authselect support from systemd, ecryptfs, nss-mdns and fingerprint
# Select default profile when authselect is installed
# Select default profile when authselect is upgraded

=== Remove user-nsswitch.conf functionality ===
File /etc/authselect/user-nsswitch.conf was introduced in authselect
to allow partial user modifications of nsswitch.conf without the need
to create a custom authselect profile. The main driver was to enable
modules that are not included in authselect such as systemd-resolved
and nss-mdns.

This however made the situation more confusing to users and it is not
desirable any more if authselect is mandatory.

'''Authselect will drop user-nsswitch.conf functionality and instead
add more nsswitch modules to existing profiles and be more open about
future inclusion requests.'''

=== Own /etc/nsswitch.conf and /etc/pam.d/{system-auth, password-auth,
smartcard-auth, fingerprint-auth, postlogin} instead of glibc and pam
===
File /etc/nsswitch.conf is currently owned by glibc. It will be now
owned by authselect and removed from glibc.

PAM configuration generated by authselect is currently owned by pam.
It will be now owned by authselect and removed from pam.

''Note: that config-util and other will still be owned by pam since
these files are not generated by authselect.''

'''All files that are generated by authselect are now owned by authselect.'''

=== Require authselect in pam ===
The pam package will require authselect. This will tie pam and
authselect together and it will be impossible to uninstall authselect
without uninstalling pam which fundamentally makes authselect a hard
dependency on each system.

'''This step will make it impossible to uninstall authselect, making
it always available to RPM packages.'''

=== Remove non-authselect support from systemd, ecryptfs, nss-mdns and
fingerprint ===
'''Non-authselect configuration support will be dropped in these packages.'''

=== Select default profile when authselect is installed ===
If authselect configuration is not detected and this is a new
installation of authselect it will automatically select the
distribution default authselect profile by calling authselect select
--force with distribution specific parameters.

If existing authselect configuration is detected (perhaps from
previous installation), it will be updated (current behavior).

This makes sure that if authselect is installed (which is always) a
configuration is created.
Select default profile when authselect is upgraded
If authselect is upgraded from an older version and non-authselect
configuration is detected, it will forcefully overwrite it with
distribution defaults by calling authselect select --force with
distribution specific parameters.

This is a one time event so if someone does not want to use
authselect, it remains possible. However, non-authselect
configurations will not be supported by RPM packages mentioned above.

If authselect is upgraded on a system that already is configured by
it, the update process remains the same as it is now.

'''This step will forcefully update existing installations to
authselect configuration. It is a one time event and opt-out is still
possible but no longer supported.
'''

== Benefit to Fedora ==
'''Making authselect mandatory will provide better user and
maintainers experience and significantly reduce risk of breaking
system configuration.'''

The use of authselect-generated configuration is currently optional.
This

Fedora-Cloud-34-20211012.0 compose check report

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-34-20211011.0):

ID: 1024966 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1024966
ID: 1024974 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1024974

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: Woah! [Thanks, Nest sponsors]

2021-10-12 Thread Stephen Snow

Got mine the other day. It is really a lot of cool things Fedora.

Thanks to the Sponsors of this years Nest.

Looking forward to the release party in November!

Stephen

On Tue, 2021-10-12 at 13:29 +, Michael J Gruber wrote:
> Today that special package for Nest participants arrived here.
> Back then I thought: "Nice, a few stickers." Today, after opening the
> package, I thought: "Woah!". [ No spoilers here ;) ]
> 
> So, thanks to anyone who made possible Nest as well as this form of
> community appreciation!
> 
> [posting it here where I learned about Nest; feel free to redirect]
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

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

[Fedocal] Reminder meeting : Fedora Source-git SIG

2021-10-12 Thread csomh

Dear all,

You are kindly invited to the meeting:
   Fedora Source-git SIG on 2021-10-13 from 14:30:00 to 15:30:00 GMT
   At meet.google.com/mic-otnv-kse

The meeting will be about:
Bi-weekly meeting of the Fedora source-git SIG

Agenda:
https://pagure.io/fedora-source-git/sig/issues?tags=meeting=Open

SIG Info:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Source-git


Source: https://calendar.fedoraproject.org//meeting/10090/

___
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: llvm 13.0.0-final ABI Change

2021-10-12 Thread Tom Stellard


On 10/1/21 12:57 AM, Kalev Lember wrote:

On Fri, Oct 1, 2021 at 9:43 AM Richard W.M. Jones mailto:rjo...@redhat.com>> wrote:

On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 08:03:07PM -0700, Tom Stellard wrote:
 > Hi,
 >
 > I'm going to start packaging LLVM 13.0.0-final for rawhide and f35.  The
 > 13.0.0-final release has a different ABI than 13.0.0-rc1, so I will be
 > rebuilding the following packages as part of the update:
 >
 > castxml
 > doxygen
 > gnome-builder
 > mesa
 > openshadinglanguage
 > qt-creator
 > qt6-qttools
 > zig

american-fuzzy-lop (maybe?)


And qt5-qttools as well, please.



I've added both of these to my list and will do the rawhide rebuilds today.

-Tom


Also, could you try to get it in Bodhi for F35 today or so, if possible? The 
final freeze starts next week so it would be good to get it through Bodhi and 
into stable repos before that.

--
Kalev

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


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

Re: Removal of quagga from Fedora

On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 7:54 AM Michal Ruprich  wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I am planning to start a retirement process for quagga in Fedora. The
> package is very outdated since the upstream is dead for a couple of
> years. There is a replacement in the form of FRR that can be used in a
> very similar fashion and it has active upstream with a lot of
> development going on.
>
> This is more of an FYI message to let you know and to see if anyone
> would miss quagga.
>

Only tears shed for the funny name. Alas, FRR is just too boring!



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

2021-10-12 Thread Luna Jernberg

Getting mine on Thursday or Friday this week

On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 3:29 PM Michael J Gruber 
wrote:

> Today that special package for Nest participants arrived here.
> Back then I thought: "Nice, a few stickers." Today, after opening the
> package, I thought: "Woah!". [ No spoilers here ;) ]
>
> So, thanks to anyone who made possible Nest as well as this form of
> community appreciation!
>
> [posting it here where I learned about Nest; feel free to redirect]
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
>
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Fedora 35 compose report: 20211012.n.0 changes

2021-10-12 Thread Fedora Rawhide Report

OLD: Fedora-35-20211011.n.0
NEW: Fedora-35-20211012.n.0

= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images:  0
Added packages:  0
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages:   8
Downgraded packages: 0

Size of added packages:  0 B
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Size of upgraded packages:   154.73 MiB
Size of downgraded packages: 0 B

Size change of upgraded packages:   -1.13 MiB
Size change of downgraded packages: 0 B

= ADDED IMAGES =

= DROPPED IMAGES =

= ADDED PACKAGES =

= DROPPED PACKAGES =

= UPGRADED PACKAGES =
Package:  anaconda-35.22.2-2.fc35
Old package:  anaconda-35.22.2-1.fc35
Summary:  Graphical system installer
RPMs: anaconda anaconda-core anaconda-dracut anaconda-gui 
anaconda-install-env-deps anaconda-install-img-deps anaconda-live anaconda-tui 
anaconda-widgets anaconda-widgets-devel
Size: 20.33 MiB
Size change:  -61.56 KiB
Changelog:
  * Fri Oct 08 2021 Martin Kolman  - 35.22.2-2
  - Revert "Install kbd-legacy if keyboard layout is "fi" (#1955793) (vponcova)


Package:  bcm283x-firmware-20210930-1.b5257da.fc35
Old package:  bcm283x-firmware-20210819-1.25e2b59.fc35
Summary:  Firmware for the Broadcom bcm283x/bcm2711 used in the Raspberry Pi
RPMs: bcm2711-firmware bcm2835-firmware bcm283x-firmware 
bcm283x-overlays
Size: 13.71 MiB
Size change:  20.71 KiB
Changelog:
  * Tue Sep 21 2021 Peter Robinson  
20210921-1.f9bc224
  - Update to latest firmware

  * Sun Oct 03 2021 Peter Robinson  
20210930-1.b5257da
  - Update to latest firmware


Package:  gnome-shell-41.0-3.fc35
Old package:  gnome-shell-41.0-1.fc35
Summary:  Window management and application launching for GNOME
RPMs: gnome-shell
Size: 7.98 MiB
Size change:  -1.72 KiB
Changelog:
  * Tue Oct 05 2021 Kalev Lember  - 41.0-2
  - Backport upstream patch to fix scrolling to incorrect positions

  * Thu Oct 07 2021 Adam Williamson  - 41.0-3
  - Backport MR #1983 to fix wrong OSD icons (#2011872)


Package:  gnome-software-41.0-5.fc35
Old package:  gnome-software-41.0-3.fc35
Summary:  A software center for GNOME
RPMs: gnome-software gnome-software-devel gnome-software-rpm-ostree
Size: 10.62 MiB
Size change:  6.23 KiB
Changelog:
  * Fri Oct 08 2021 Milan Crha  - 41.0-4
  - Resolves: #2011176 (flathub repo can't be added through gnome-software)
  - Resolves: #2010660 (gs-repos-dialog: Can show also desktop applications)
  - Resolves: #2010353 (Optional repos cannot be disabled)

  * Mon Oct 11 2021 Milan Crha  - 41.0-5
  - Add patch to mark compulsory only repos, not apps from it


Package:  kbd-2.4.0-7.fc35
Old package:  kbd-2.4.0-6.fc35
Summary:  Tools for configuring the console (keyboard, virtual terminals, 
etc.)
RPMs: kbd kbd-legacy kbd-misc
Size: 3.81 MiB
Size change:  -3.39 KiB
Changelog:
  * Mon Oct 04 2021 Vitezslav Crhonek  - 2.4.0-7
  - Use default Finnish xkb-converted layout
Resolves: #2001787


Package:  kwin-5.22.5-3.fc35
Old package:  kwin-5.22.5-2.fc35
Summary:  KDE Window manager
RPMs: kwin kwin-common kwin-devel kwin-doc kwin-libs kwin-wayland 
kwin-x11
Size: 31.99 MiB
Size change:  -701 B
Changelog:
  * Wed Oct 06 2021 Adam Williamson  - 5.22.5-3
  - Fix crash on logout with libinput 1.18.901+ (#2001135)


Package:  plasma-discover-5.23.0-1.fc35
Old package:  plasma-discover-5.22.5-1.fc35
Summary:  KDE and Plasma resources management GUI
RPMs: plasma-discover plasma-discover-flatpak plasma-discover-libs 
plasma-discover-notifier plasma-discover-offline-updates 
plasma-discover-packagekit plasma-discover-rpm-ostree plasma-discover-snap
Size: 41.18 MiB
Size change:  -1.09 MiB
Changelog:
  * Thu Sep 02 2021 Jonathan Wakely  - 5.22.5-2
  - Fix typo in restart message (#2000577)

  * Fri Sep 17 2021 Marc Deop  - 5.22.90-1
  - 5.22.90

  * Sat Sep 18 2021 Marc Deop  - 5.22.90-2
  - Remove patch as it's applied upstream already (#2000577)

  * Wed Oct 06 2021 Rex Dieter  - 5.22.90-3
  - backport fixes from 5.23 branch

  * Thu Oct 07 2021 Rex Dieter  - 5.23.0-1
  - 5.23.0


Package:  uboot-tools-2021.10-1.fc35
Old package:  uboot-tools-2021.10-0.6.rc4.fc35
Summary:  U-Boot utilities
RPMs: uboot-images-armv7 uboot-images-armv8 uboot-tools
Size: 25.12 MiB
Size change:  -2.77 KiB
Changelog:
  * Mon Sep 27 2021 Peter Robinson  - 
2021.10-0.7.rc5
  - Update to 2021.10 RC5

  * Mon Oct 04 2021 Peter Robinson  - 2021.10-1
  - Update to 2021.10



= 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/arch

Woah! [Thanks, Nest sponsors]

2021-10-12 Thread Michael J Gruber

Today that special package for Nest participants arrived here.
Back then I thought: "Nice, a few stickers." Today, after opening the package, 
I thought: "Woah!". [ No spoilers here ;) ]

So, thanks to anyone who made possible Nest as well as this form of community 
appreciation!

[posting it here where I learned about Nest; feel free to redirect]
___
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: F36 Change: Enable exclude_from_weak_autodetect by default in LIBDNF (System-Wide Change proposal)

2021-10-12 Thread Jaroslav Mracek

My colleague told me a very nice argument when we discussed the name of the
option. There is no way to name it by the way that everyone will understand
it, therefore let's make it simple. Anyway I will discuss it in the team

Jaroslav

On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 3:15 PM Neal Gompa  wrote:

> On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 9:12 AM Jaroslav Mracek 
> wrote:
> >
> > Correct, it will effect all dnf operations
> >
>
> So then drop the "_on_upgrade" part? "weakexclude_unsatisfied_weakdeps"
>
>
> --
> 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
>
>
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.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: F36 Change: Enable exclude_from_weak_autodetect by default in LIBDNF (System-Wide Change proposal)

2021-10-12 Thread Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek

On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 09:14:21AM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 9:12 AM Jaroslav Mracek  wrote:
> >
> > Correct, it will effect all dnf operations
> >
> 
> So then drop the "_on_upgrade" part? "weakexclude_unsatisfied_weakdeps"

Or maybe "exclude_old_unsatisfied_weak_deps" ?
___
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: F36 Change: Enable exclude_from_weak_autodetect by default in LIBDNF (System-Wide Change proposal)

2021-10-12 Thread Jaroslav Mracek

Yes it is correct. Supplements that are not installed during the first
install, cannot be installed anymore with enabled autodetection. There is
no way to calculate it correctly without storing all provides at the time
of installation for each package.

Jaroslav

On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 8:52 AM Kamil Paral  wrote:

> On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 3:03 PM Miro Hrončok  wrote:
>
>> I've checked the status quo.
>>
>> Package "reproducer_reversed" starts supplementing package "rpm". "rpm"
>> is
>> installed, but "reproducer_reversed" is not.
>>
>> 1. dnf upgarde, no rpm update available: reproducer_reversed is not
>> pulled in
>> 2. dnf reinstall rpm: reproducer_reversed is pulled in
>> 3. dnf downgrade rpm: reproducer_reversed is pulled in
>> 4. dnf upgrade rpm: reproducer_reversed is pulled in
>> 5. dnf upgrade, rpm update avilable: reproducer_reversed is pulled in
>>
>> Would this change proposal actually change the observed behavior? In what
>> way?
>>
>
> Based on Jaroslav's response, I'm afraid the new behavior will be that
> "reproducer_reversed" doesn't get pulled in in any of those cases (or
> perhaps just in case #2). But let's wait for Jaroslav to provide a
> definitive answer.
>
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
>
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: F36 Change: Enable exclude_from_weak_autodetect by default in LIBDNF (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 9:12 AM Jaroslav Mracek  wrote:
>
> Correct, it will effect all dnf operations
>

So then drop the "_on_upgrade" part? "weakexclude_unsatisfied_weakdeps"


-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.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: F36 Change: Enable exclude_from_weak_autodetect by default in LIBDNF (System-Wide Change proposal)

2021-10-12 Thread Jaroslav Mracek

Correct, it will effect all dnf operations

Jaroslav

On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 9:57 PM Miro Hrončok  wrote:

> On 11. 10. 21 21:10, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 2:49 AM Kamil Paral  wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 3:03 PM Miro Hrončok 
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I've checked the status quo.
> >>>
> >>> Package "reproducer_reversed" starts supplementing package "rpm".
> "rpm" is
> >>> installed, but "reproducer_reversed" is not.
> >>>
> >>> 1. dnf upgarde, no rpm update available: reproducer_reversed is not
> pulled in
> >>> 2. dnf reinstall rpm: reproducer_reversed is pulled in
> >>> 3. dnf downgrade rpm: reproducer_reversed is pulled in
> >>> 4. dnf upgrade rpm: reproducer_reversed is pulled in
> >>> 5. dnf upgrade, rpm update avilable: reproducer_reversed is pulled in
> >>>
> >>> Would this change proposal actually change the observed behavior? In
> what way?
> >>
> >>
> >> Based on Jaroslav's response, I'm afraid the new behavior will be that
> "reproducer_reversed" doesn't get pulled in in any of those cases (or
> perhaps just in case #2). But let's wait for Jaroslav to provide a
> definitive answer.
> >>
> >
> > It might be worth renaming the option "exclude_from_weak_autodetect"
> > to imply its actual effect.
> >
> > Strawman idea: "weakexclude_unsatisfied_weakdeps_on_upgrade"?
>
> If I understand this right, it won't be only on upgrade. Also on
> reinstall,
> downgrade, etc.
>
> --
> 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: leap from f22 to f34 fairytale

2021-10-12 Thread Jiri Vanek

You are right. I'm supper wondering it did as great job :)

On 10/11/21 15:32, Ian McInerney via devel wrote:
I think if you jump more than 2 versions at a time the packages obsoleted by fedora-obsolete-packages might not be picked up properly because it only holds packages for about 2 versions before they are removed from it. So jumping from F26
to F33 directly might miss the obsoletes from F27-F31ish.

-Ian

On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 1:49 PM JT mailto:j...@obs-sec.com>>
wrote:

Nice. I did an update from F26-F33 last year doing one version at time
instead of jumping more than one version... and had no major issues. I wonder
how far back its possible to start from and walk through the version updates.

On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 3:55 AM Jiri Vanek mailto:jva...@redhat.com>> wrote:

Hello good people!

I would like to thanx to everybody for amazing work in fedora, for
keeping it alive, and updatable.

In friday I had found an old laptop running f22 and decided to try a leap update
to f34. It was not just default inntall, there was vlc and much more "unknown"
comonents.
Well, transaction failed on python stack, but no surprise here (f31 ahd
python2->python3?).
So random bisetct, leap update to f27. Needed --nogpgcheck[1]. Wou.
Transaction passed. Update passed, and system started and was alive. Although
the system was behaving terribly (there were experiemtnal patches in graphic
drivers
and also
gnomeshell was weird, not speaking about wayalnd), it was stable enough to
make another huge leap. F27->f31 faile dagain on pythn stack, but only because
of four packages.
f27->f30 passed again. UNluckily --nogpg check was no longer
transferable from download to reboot+update. But gpgcheck=1 in active repos fixed
it.[1] in and in the morning a running shining smooth quick and super stbale
system was
there.
f30-> f34 died again on python stack.. (yah, dnf and freinds should
stop using that or keep embedded interpreter)
f30->31 passed again to even more shining and more working system.
f31->f33 (yup, that was typo, but found it to late in trasnaction)
passed again withot issues.

Thanx a lot! II was never expecting such leaps would work so smoothly!

[1] https was a culprint herem causing the keys impossible to downlaod.
in f31, gpgcheck could be enabled again.
--
Jiri Vanek Mgr.

Principal QA Software Engineer
Red Hat Inc.
+420 775 39 01 09
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/

List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

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

___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/

List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

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

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

--
Jiri Vanek Mgr.
Principal QA Software Engineer
Red Hat Inc.
+420 775 39 01 09
___
devel mailing list --

Re: OCaml packages failing in ELN

2021-10-12 Thread Stephen Gallagher

On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 5:54 PM Jerry James  wrote:
>
> The ELN package builds for the recent OCaml 4.13 update have mostly
> been failing, over and over.  I finally took a look at some today;
> they're going to keep failing until a human intervenes.  Rebuilding
> against Rawhide packages was supposed to fix this issue, but it
> doesn't fix the problem we're having this time: package builds that
> succeeded when they should have failed.
>
> The problem is that some packages low in the OCaml dependency tree
> were built successfully, but against packages that hadn't been rebuilt
> yet.  The builds succeeded, so now those builds are sitting in the ELN
> repository, preventing the corresponding Rawhide builds from being
> used, but they have unresolvable dependencies.
>
> If building the packages in the same order they were built for Rawhide
> is infeasible, then we need a backtracking algorithm that detects
> build failures due to uninstallable packages and rebuilds those.
> Right now, at the very least, ocaml-dune needs such a rebuild.

OK, for the short term, I'm just going to tag the Rawhide builds of
ocaml packages into ELN. If you want me to do a mini-mass-rebuild for
ELN after that, let me know.

I'm not sure how things got into the current state, but given that it
looks as if this OCAML build happened pretty much on the same day that
we deployed the new DistroBuildSync that handles the
tag-waitforrepo-build process, I'm guessing we probably just missed a
couple that happened to be problematic.
___
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

Removal of quagga from Fedora

2021-10-12 Thread Michal Ruprich

Hi,

I am planning to start a retirement process for quagga in Fedora. The
package is very outdated since the upstream is dead for a couple of
years. There is a replacement in the form of FRR that can be used in a
very similar fashion and it has active upstream with a lot of
development going on.

This is more of an FYI message to let you know and to see if anyone
would miss quagga.

Cheers,

-- 
Michal Ruprich
Software Engineer

Email: mrupr...@redhat.com
Web: www.cz.redhat.com
Red Hat Czech s.r.o., Purkyňova 115, 612 00, Brno, Czech Republic
___
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: OpenSSH 8.7p1 in rawhide

2021-10-12 Thread Arthur G

Hi Dimitry,

Just came across a situation where I can't limit SFTP max connections on a
per user (not per IP) basis without resorting to using wrappers. Not sure
if the old SCP actually logs in (sorry haven't checked) but the SFTP that I
use (latest RHEL7) doesn't honour limits.conf (maxlogins or nproc) because
it doesn't actually log in - it's just a protocol and a subsystem at that.
I currently have a situation where system SSH resources can be exhausted by
overzealous use by a single SFTP user. Do the newer versions of OpenSSH
come with a better way of limiting SFTP sessions on a per user basis just
like the classic FTPs of old?

I already have MaxSessions in sshd_config set high for managing SSHFS
mounts which works fine, but it works on a connection basis and I have full
control of both ends. I have little control over client SFTP volume
requests.

I would appreciate it if you can allay my concerns by letting me know if
switching to using the underlying SFTP protocol for SCP will allow per user
connection limits to be applied which I feel are very important. Hope you
have the answer at hand.

Best regards,
Arthur.

On Mon, 4 Oct 2021 at 19:49, Dmitry Belyavskiy  wrote:

> Dear Richard,
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 10:23 AM Richard W.M. Jones 
> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 04:48:43PM +0200, Dmitry Belyavskiy wrote:
>> > Dear colleagues,
>> >
>> > I recently added OpenSSH 8.7p1 to rawhide.
>> > This version includes implementation of the SFTP protocol as the main
>> transfer
>> > protocol for the scp utility. In upstream, the SCP protocol is used by
>> default
>> > in the scp utility. The upcoming versions 8.9p1+ (version 8.8p1 is
>> mostly a
>> > security release) are expected to use SFTP protocol by default. This
>> behavior
>> > (SFTP as a default transfer protocol for scp utility) is backported to
>> rawhide.
>> >
>> > The same approach is planned for RHEL 9 GA,
>> >
>> > Please let me know if you have any questions/problems.
>>
>> Does this change the quoting of scp paths with spaces etc?  The
>> quoting of scp is insane but at least it's a known quantity, and we
>> baked it into virt-p2v.
>>
>
> Yes. There are changes in the quoting, documented in
> https://www.openssh.com/txt/release-8.7 and
> https://www.openssh.com/txt/release-8.8
>
> If you still need an old quoting, AFAIK, you should explicitly specify the
> scp protocol via -O command-line option.
>
>>
>> --
> Dmitry Belyavskiy
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
>
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: bodhi updates skipping updates-testing entirely

2021-10-12 Thread Artem Tim

Understood. Filed a bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2013168#c1.
___
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: bodhi updates skipping updates-testing entirely

2021-10-12 Thread Peter Robinson

On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 9:48 AM Artem Tim  wrote:
>
> Noticed this a long time ago when in freeze stage and this could a serious 
> issue sometimes. BTW please push flatpak 1.12.1 update to Stable manually 
> since people still complain and stuck with 1.12.0.

This is not a place to request random updates be pushed to stable,
there's a blocker bug process for that.
___
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: bodhi updates skipping updates-testing entirely

2021-10-12 Thread Miro Hrončok


On 12. 10. 21 10:35, Fabio Valentini wrote:

Hi everybody,

There seems to be some inconsistency with how our update workflow
currently works. When an update gets enough positive karma "pre-push"
(still in "pending → testing" state) so that it can be pushed to
stable, bodhi changes its state to ("pending → stable"), making it
skip the "updates-testing" repository entirely.

That isn't that big of a problem most of the time, since "fedora" /
"updates" and "updates-testing" repositories are composed daily, but
during freezes, this leads to the weird problem that possibly
important updates get stuck in a state where they are available from
*no repository at all*.

For example, this now happened to the flatpak 1.12.1 update:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-256d5ee9fe

It got +5 karma before the update was even available from the
updates-testing repository (presumably users tested the builds from
koji directly - I hope?), so it got pushed to "stable" by bodhi. But
now it's been sitting in "pending → stable" state for two days because
of the final freeze, making the update available from *no repository*,
while it's a pretty big update (1.11 → 1.12) and also contains
security fixes and bug fixes for Steam - maybe it should get a freeze
exception now, otherwise it will only become available as a 0day
update.

So, I wonder, should updates always be allowed to skip being in the
"updates-testing" repository entirely? There's probably good reasons
for it sometimes (for example, time-critical security updates, i.e.
firefox, kernel, etc.), but in the general case, not giving regular
"non-koji" update testers any time to test updates before they're
pushed to stable seems suboptimal.

Maybe updates should only be able to be pushed to stable by karma if
they are in the "testing" state, and need a manual "submit to stable"
button push if they're still "pending"? That should be both fairly
straightforward to implement in bodhi, and should allow for both the
"pending → stable fast-track, this is urgent" and the "lets wait and
let it sit in updates-testing for at least one day" scenarios.

What do you think?


This could also be solved by implementing the "pending -> stable" action to 
always behave like "pending -> testing -> stable", rather than waiting an extra 
day, no?


--
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: bodhi updates skipping updates-testing entirely

2021-10-12 Thread Artem Tim

Noticed this a long time ago when in freeze stage and this could a serious 
issue sometimes. BTW please push flatpak 1.12.1 update to Stable manually since 
people still complain and stuck with 1.12.0.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

bodhi updates skipping updates-testing entirely

2021-10-12 Thread Fabio Valentini

Hi everybody,

There seems to be some inconsistency with how our update workflow
currently works. When an update gets enough positive karma "pre-push"
(still in "pending → testing" state) so that it can be pushed to
stable, bodhi changes its state to ("pending → stable"), making it
skip the "updates-testing" repository entirely.

That isn't that big of a problem most of the time, since "fedora" /
"updates" and "updates-testing" repositories are composed daily, but
during freezes, this leads to the weird problem that possibly
important updates get stuck in a state where they are available from
*no repository at all*.

For example, this now happened to the flatpak 1.12.1 update:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-256d5ee9fe

It got +5 karma before the update was even available from the
updates-testing repository (presumably users tested the builds from
koji directly - I hope?), so it got pushed to "stable" by bodhi. But
now it's been sitting in "pending → stable" state for two days because
of the final freeze, making the update available from *no repository*,
while it's a pretty big update (1.11 → 1.12) and also contains
security fixes and bug fixes for Steam - maybe it should get a freeze
exception now, otherwise it will only become available as a 0day
update.

So, I wonder, should updates always be allowed to skip being in the
"updates-testing" repository entirely? There's probably good reasons
for it sometimes (for example, time-critical security updates, i.e.
firefox, kernel, etc.), but in the general case, not giving regular
"non-koji" update testers any time to test updates before they're
pushed to stable seems suboptimal.

Maybe updates should only be able to be pushed to stable by karma if
they are in the "testing" state, and need a manual "submit to stable"
button push if they're still "pending"? That should be both fairly
straightforward to implement in bodhi, and should allow for both the
"pending → stable fast-track, this is urgent" and the "lets wait and
let it sit in updates-testing for at least one day" scenarios.

What do you think?

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: F36 Change: Retired Packages (Self-Contained Change proposal)

2021-10-12 Thread Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek

On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 09:10:44AM +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> Dne 11. 10. 21 v 20:14 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek napsal(a):
> >>Nothing is broken **now**. But it very often broke N+1 or N+2
> >>upgrade. I remember some package broken N+5 upgrade. And then you
> >>(or some co-maintainer) hesitated to add it to
> >>fedora-obsolete-packages because "it is too old".:)
> >That's why we should keep packages in f-o-p for much longer than we
> >currently do. There was just a thread about Jiri upgrading from F22
> >to a recent release. That procedure would have been made easier if
> >f-o-p had more packages.
> 
> +1, but... It does not solve the problem that users want to have two-speed 
> line for package removal.
> 
> You want to remove *all* packages which are retired and blocks the upgrade. 
> That is what f-o-p does.
> 
> And you *may* want to remove *some* packages that are retired. That is what 
> remove-retired-package does.
> 
> You removes package for which you have replacement or you do not use
> them. But you want to keep packages which you use and there is not
> functional replacement for them. Hopefully for transition period.

Yeah, remove-retired-packages would provide functionality that we
currently don't have.

But for the part where you *need* to remove uninstallable packages,
f-o-p is a better solution (and it's already there, so no need to
reimplement it.)

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

[Bug 2012875] perl-Graphics-TIFF-17 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2012875



--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-ec1a9e7532 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 34.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-ec1a9e7532


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2012875
___
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 2012875] perl-Graphics-TIFF-17 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2012875



--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-3b8d7416ae has been submitted as an update to Fedora 33.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-3b8d7416ae


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2012875
___
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 2012875] perl-Graphics-TIFF-17 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2012875



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-ad9e7cff8b has been submitted as an update to Fedora 35.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-ad9e7cff8b


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2012875
___
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 2013055] perl-Return-MultiLevel-0.06 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2013055

Paul Howarth  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
   Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
   Fixed In Version||perl-Return-MultiLevel-0.06
   ||-1.fc36
Last Closed||2021-10-12 07:41:35



--- Comment #2 from Paul Howarth  ---
Build done:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=7771


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2013055
___
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-Cloud-33-20211012.0 compose check report

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-33-20211011.0):

ID: 1024366 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1024366
ID: 1024374 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1024374

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

[Bug 2012875] perl-Graphics-TIFF-17 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2012875

Petr Pisar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version||perl-Graphics-TIFF-17-1.fc3
   ||6
 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED



--- Comment #1 from Petr Pisar  ---
An enhancement release suitable for all Fedoras.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2012875
___
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: F36 Change: Retired Packages (Self-Contained Change proposal)

2021-10-12 Thread Miroslav Suchý


Dne 11. 10. 21 v 20:14 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek napsal(a):

Nothing is broken **now**. But it very often broke N+1 or N+2
upgrade. I remember some package broken N+5 upgrade. And then you
(or some co-maintainer) hesitated to add it to
fedora-obsolete-packages because "it is too old".:)

That's why we should keep packages in f-o-p for much longer than we
currently do. There was just a thread about Jiri upgrading from F22
to a recent release. That procedure would have been made easier if
f-o-p had more packages.


+1, but... It does not solve the problem that users want to have two-speed line 
for package removal.

You want to remove *all* packages which are retired and blocks the upgrade. 
That is what f-o-p does.

And you *may* want to remove *some* packages that are retired. That is what 
remove-retired-package does.

You removes package for which you have replacement or you do not use them. But you want to keep packages which you use 
and there is not functional replacement for them. Hopefully for transition period.


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

[Bug 2012875] perl-Graphics-TIFF-17 is available