Re: How to handle ABI breakage in Rawhide
On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 12:49 PM Bernie Innocenti wrote: > > Hello David, > > This spirv-tools-libs build changed the ABI of libSPIRV-Tools.so in > Rawhide on Nov 23: > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1858749 > > The shared lib has no soversion, and other libs in Fedora depend on it: > > mpv: symbol lookup error: /lib64/libshaderc_shared.so.1: undefined > symbol: _ZN8spvtools23CreateAggressiveDCEPassEv > > On Dec 2nd, libshaderc was also rebuilt, and now it agrees with the new > ABI of spirv-tools-libs: > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1862359 > > However, libplacebo would also need rebuilding: > >undefined symbol: _ZN8spvtools23CreateAggressiveDCEPassEv > (/lib64/libplacebo.so.157) > > I rebuilt it locally, but there are more packages using the old ABI: > >% mpv >mpv: symbol lookup error: /lib64/libavfilter.so.7: undefined symbol: > _ZN8spvtools23CreateAggressiveDCEPassEv > > I would like to request that we revert the ABI of libSPIRV-Tools.so or, > at least bump the soversion to avoid silently breaking all dependencies. > > What are the current Fedora packaging guideline regarding ABI stability > of shared libraries? This library has no ABI guarantees upstream, which is painful to deal with. I've figured out what they messed up and hopefully put things back like they should be with the correct ABI. Thanks for the headsup, sorry it took a bit longer to get to it, I've filed an upstream MR to restore the ABI there, to avoid it in future. Dave. > > Are there no automated checks to prevent this common accident? This > happens frequently, and discourages Rawhide testing. > > Thanks, > > -- > _ // Bernie Innocenti > \X/ https://codewiz.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
Next Open NeuroFedora Meeting: 1300 UTC on Monday, 06 November (Today)
Hello everyone, Please join us at the next Open NeuroFedora team meeting on Monday 06th December (today!) at 1300UTC in #fedora-neuro on IRC (Libera.chat) or Matrix. The meeting is a public meeting, and open for everyone to attend. You can join us over: Matrix: https://matrix.to/#/#neuro:fedoraproject.org IRC: https://webchat.libera.chat/?channels=#fedora-neuro You can convert the meeting time to your local time using this command in a terminal: $ date --date='TZ="UTC" 1300 today' or you can use this link: https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Open+NeuroFedora+Meeting&iso=20211206T13&p1=%3A&ah=1 The meeting will be chaired by @hafsat. The agenda for the meeting is: - New introductions and roll call. - Tasks from last meeting: https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/teams/neurofedora/neurofedora.2021-11-22-13.00.html - Open Pagure tickets: https://pagure.io/neuro-sig/NeuroFedora/issues?status=Open&tags=S%3A+Next+meeting - Package health check: https://packager-dashboard.fedoraproject.org/neuro-sig - Open package reviews check: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=fedora-neuro - Koschei packages check: https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/groups/neuro-sig - CompNeuro lab compose status check for F36: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=30691 - Neuroscience query of the week - Next meeting day, and chair. - Open floor. We hope to see you there! You can learn more about NeuroFedora here: https://neuro.fedoraproject.org -- Thanks, Regards, Ankur Sinha "FranciscoD" (He / Him / His) | https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Ankursinha Time zone: Europe/London 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: New openssh in Rawhide can't connect to RHEL 6 servers
On 12/5/21 05:15, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: openssh 8.8p1 (just released in Rawhide) cannot connect to older servers. ... or the equivalent on the command line: ssh -o HostKeyAlgorithms=+ssh-rsa -o PubkeyAcceptedAlgorithms=+ssh-rsa rhel6 That's also documented in the release notes for 8.8, under "Potentially-incompatible changes": https://www.openssh.com/txt/release-8.8 Though I'm surprised that's new; I'd have thought it would have stopped working in Fedora 33 with https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/StrongCryptoSettings2 The change proposal says that Fedora disabled SHA-1 hashes, which seems like the same change that's documented in OpenSSH 8.8. Had this host opted out of the Fedora strong crypto policy? ___ 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: New openssh in Rawhide can't connect to RHEL 6 servers
On 12/5/21, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: openssh 8.8p1 (just released in Rawhide) cannot connect to older servers. The error is: Unable to negotiate with [server] port 22: no matching host key type found. Their offer: ssh-rsa,ssh-dss It seems like the cut-off point is RHEL <= 6 broken, RHEL >= 7 is OK. I eventually found a workaround/solution to this deep in an Arch thread: https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?pid=2006291#p2006291 or the equivalent on the command line: ssh -o HostKeyAlgorithms=+ssh-rsa -o PubkeyAcceptedAlgorithms=+ssh-rsa rhel6 Both config options seem to be necessary. Thank you for concisely documenting the problem and workaround. ___ 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
How to handle ABI breakage in Rawhide
Hello David, This spirv-tools-libs build changed the ABI of libSPIRV-Tools.so in Rawhide on Nov 23: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1858749 The shared lib has no soversion, and other libs in Fedora depend on it: mpv: symbol lookup error: /lib64/libshaderc_shared.so.1: undefined symbol: _ZN8spvtools23CreateAggressiveDCEPassEv On Dec 2nd, libshaderc was also rebuilt, and now it agrees with the new ABI of spirv-tools-libs: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1862359 However, libplacebo would also need rebuilding: undefined symbol: _ZN8spvtools23CreateAggressiveDCEPassEv (/lib64/libplacebo.so.157) I rebuilt it locally, but there are more packages using the old ABI: % mpv mpv: symbol lookup error: /lib64/libavfilter.so.7: undefined symbol: _ZN8spvtools23CreateAggressiveDCEPassEv I would like to request that we revert the ABI of libSPIRV-Tools.so or, at least bump the soversion to avoid silently breaking all dependencies. What are the current Fedora packaging guideline regarding ABI stability of shared libraries? Are there no automated checks to prevent this common accident? This happens frequently, and discourages Rawhide testing. Thanks, -- _ // Bernie Innocenti \X/ https://codewiz.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: New openssh in Rawhide can't connect to RHEL 6 servers
On Sun, Dec 5, 2021 at 8:15 AM Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > openssh 8.8p1 (just released in Rawhide) cannot connect to older > servers. The error is: > > Unable to negotiate with [server] port 22: no matching host key type found. > Their offer: ssh-rsa,ssh-dss > > It seems like the cut-off point is RHEL <= 6 broken, RHEL >= 7 is OK. RHEL 6 is obsolete for more than the last year: retaining compatibility with obsolete distributions of an operating system is work that likely no one is pursuing. I used to do that sort of thing, but no one is paying me for it right now. That sort of thing used to be available at repoforge, but that repo stopped getting updates some time ago. > I eventually found a workaround/solution to this deep in an Arch > thread: > > https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?pid=2006291#p2006291 > > or the equivalent on the command line: > > ssh -o HostKeyAlgorithms=+ssh-rsa -o PubkeyAcceptedAlgorithms=+ssh-rsa rhel6 So. you can set it up in ~/.ssh/config for specific remote hosts as needed? > Both config options seem to be necessary. > > Rich. > > > -- > Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones > Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com > virt-builder quickly builds VMs from scratch > http://libguestfs.org/virt-builder.1.html > ___ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure ___ 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 fs-verity in RPM (System-Wide Change proposal)
On Thu, Dec 02, 2021 at 02:36:51PM -0500, Ben Cotton wrote: > Enable the use of fsverity for installed RPM files validation. Can we use this to validate the install media at runtime rather than as a separate boot step? -- Matthew Miller Fedora Project Leader ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: rpm bug for multiple README.md or LICENSE.md in EPEL 8 and Fedora
On Sun, Dec 5, 2021 at 10:51 AM Michael Catanzaro wrote: > > The webkit2gtk3 package has a %add_to_license_files macro that you can > copy as a workaround, but you might not be satisfied because it > requires listing each affected file individually I have no moral issue with listing them individually. Listing them in a single long line breaks rpm very thoroughly, due to the resulting %doc line of over 20,000 characters. It's another confusing consequence of the more than 100 ansible galaxy modules in the same python tarball. ___ 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
Mock config for epel-next-9-x86_64, No march for argument: fedpkg-minimal
Is this a known issue or is there a package I need to update? I'm on F35. Thanks, Richard ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Fedora EPEL 9 test instance?
On Sun, 5 Dec 2021 at 14:05, Richard Shaw wrote: > > Any plans to add EL 9 to the list of test instances? > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Machine_Resources_For_Package_Maintainers > Could you please put in a ticket to https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue so it can be worked on? > Thanks, > Richard > ___ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure -- Stephen J Smoogen. Let us be kind to one another, for most of us are fighting a hard battle. -- Ian MacClaren ___ 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 EPEL 9 test instance?
Any plans to add EL 9 to the list of test instances? https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Machine_Resources_For_Package_Maintainers Thanks, Richard ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: rpm bug for multiple README.md or LICENSE.md in EPEL 8 and Fedora
The webkit2gtk3 package has a %add_to_license_files macro that you can copy as a workaround, but you might not be satisfied because it requires listing each affected file individually ___ 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-20211205.n.0 compose check report
No missing expected images. Compose PASSES proposed Rawhide gating check! All required tests passed Failed openQA tests: 6/208 (x86_64), 12/142 (aarch64) New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20211204.n.1): ID: 1077470 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso desktop_login URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1077470 ID: 1077510 Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso gedit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1077510 ID: 1077517 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 base_services_start URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1077517 ID: 1077533 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso install_standard_partition_ext4@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1077533 ID: 1077536 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso support_server@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1077536 ID: 1077561 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso server_role_deploy_domain_controller@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1077561 ID: 1077576 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso server_realmd_join_kickstart@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1077576 ID: 1077590 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz desktop_printing@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1077590 ID: 1077682 Test: x86_64 universal install_simple_encrypted@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1077682 ID: 1077693 Test: aarch64 universal install_arabic_language@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1077693 Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20211204.n.1): ID: 1077486 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso apps_startstop URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1077486 ID: 1077506 Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso release_identification URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1077506 ID: 1077532 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso anaconda_help@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1077532 ID: 1077570 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso server_cockpit_basic@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1077570 ID: 1077571 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso realmd_join_cockpit@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1077571 ID: 1077599 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz gedit@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1077599 ID: 1077604 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz eog@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1077604 ID: 1077694 Test: aarch64 universal install_asian_language@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1077694 Soft failed openQA tests: 4/142 (aarch64), 6/208 (x86_64) (Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug) New soft failures (same test not soft failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20211204.n.1): ID: 1077598 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz evince@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1077598 ID: 1077605 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz desktop_update_graphical@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1077605 Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20211204.n.1): ID: 1077460 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso eog URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1077460 ID: 1077475 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso gedit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1077475 ID: 1077509 Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso evince URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1077509 ID: 1077511 Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso eog URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1077511 ID: 1077521 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1077521 ID: 1077613 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1077613 ID: 1077660 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_server_domain_controller URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1077660 ID: 1077709 Test: aarch64 universal upgrade_server_domain_controller@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1077709 Passed openQA tests: 195/208 (x86_64), 123/142 (aarch64) New passes (same test not passed in Fedora-Rawhide-20211204.n.1): ID: 1077393 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso anaconda_help URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1077393 ID: 1077398 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso support_server URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1077398 ID: 1077409 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_updates_nfs URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1077409 ID: 1077543 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso install_vncconnect_client@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1077543 ID: 1077544 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso install_vncconnect_server@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1077544 ID: 1077565 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso base_selinux@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1077565 ID: 1077575 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso realmd_join_sssd@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1077575 ID: 1077588 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz install_arm_image
Re: EPEL 9 branch?
On Sun, Dec 5, 2021 at 4:09 AM Kevin Fenzi wrote: > yes, yesterday. > > See the announcement: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/5UJSW3FBGQMLXWWV7BGHWZTOFLH4NH3G/ *sigh*. Sorry, I missed it (I think I need to add yet another mail list to the firehouse about Fedora that I get email from). Sorry for the noise. ___ 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: EPEL 9 branch?
On Sun, Dec 05, 2021 at 03:27:49AM +, Gary Buhrmaster wrote: > Now that CentOS Stream 9 is announced as > available, is there a schedule for when EPEL-9 > branches can be made, and when one can > (start to) ask others to build for EPEL-9 > (it would be nice if a number of the EPEL-9 > packages were preliminarily ready at the time > of the EL-9 formal release (just, perhaps, > needing a (mass) rebuild to be sure)). EPEL 9 was announced here a few days ago: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/5UJSW3FBGQMLXWWV7BGHWZTOFLH4NH3G/ From a quick read it seems as if you can just create branches in the normal way, but maybe check the FAQ linked there. Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com Fedora Windows cross-compiler. Compile Windows programs, test, and build Windows installers. Over 100 libraries supported. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MinGW ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
New openssh in Rawhide can't connect to RHEL 6 servers
openssh 8.8p1 (just released in Rawhide) cannot connect to older servers. The error is: Unable to negotiate with [server] port 22: no matching host key type found. Their offer: ssh-rsa,ssh-dss It seems like the cut-off point is RHEL <= 6 broken, RHEL >= 7 is OK. I eventually found a workaround/solution to this deep in an Arch thread: https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?pid=2006291#p2006291 or the equivalent on the command line: ssh -o HostKeyAlgorithms=+ssh-rsa -o PubkeyAcceptedAlgorithms=+ssh-rsa rhel6 Both config options seem to be necessary. Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com virt-builder quickly builds VMs from scratch http://libguestfs.org/virt-builder.1.html ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Fedora rawhide compose report: 20211205.n.0 changes
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20211204.n.1 NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20211205.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:0 Dropped images: 0 Added packages: 2 Dropped packages:9 Upgraded packages: 39 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 802.12 KiB Size of dropped packages:1.12 MiB Size of upgraded packages: 5.29 GiB Size of downgraded packages: 0 B Size change of upgraded packages: 7.67 MiB Size change of downgraded packages: 0 B = ADDED IMAGES = = DROPPED IMAGES = = ADDED PACKAGES = Package: ocaml-mtime-1.3.0-1.fc36 Summary: Monotonic wall-clock time for OCaml RPMs:ocaml-mtime ocaml-mtime-devel Size:736.42 KiB Package: rust-tiny_http0.6-0.6.4-1.fc36 Summary: Low level HTTP server library RPMs:rust-tiny_http0.6+default-devel rust-tiny_http0.6+openssl-devel rust-tiny_http0.6+ssl-devel rust-tiny_http0.6-devel Size:65.70 KiB = DROPPED PACKAGES = Package: erlang-certifi-2.5.2-3.fc35 Summary: Dummy certifi (certificate bundle) package for erlang RPMs:erlang-certifi Size:370.52 KiB Package: erlang-cf-0.3.1-8.fc35 Summary: Terminal color helper RPMs:erlang-cf Size:24.36 KiB Package: erlang-cth_readable-1.4.9-3.fc35 Summary: Common test hooks for more readable erlang logs RPMs:erlang-cth_readable Size:56.30 KiB Package: erlang-erlware_commons-1.3.1-6.fc34 Summary: Extension to Erlang's standard library RPMs:erlang-erlware_commons Size:118.98 KiB Package: erlang-eunit_formatters-0.5.0-8.fc35 Summary: Better output format for eunit test suites RPMs:erlang-eunit_formatters Size:35.91 KiB Package: erlang-hex_core-0.7.1-3.fc35 Summary: Reference implementation of Hex specifications RPMs:erlang-hex_core Size:281.93 KiB Package: erlang-providers-1.8.1-8.fc35 Summary: An Erlang providers library RPMs:erlang-providers Size:27.80 KiB Package: erlang-relx-4.1.0-3.fc35 Summary: Release assembler for Erlang/OTP Releases RPMs:erlang-relx Size:165.69 KiB Package: erlang-ssl_verify_fun-1.1.6-3.fc35 Summary: Collection of ssl verification functions for Erlang RPMs:erlang-ssl_verify_fun Size:67.55 KiB = UPGRADED PACKAGES = Package: NLopt-2.7.1-1.fc36 Old package: NLopt-2.6.2-11.fc36 Summary: Open-Source library for nonlinear optimization RPMs: NLopt NLopt-devel NLopt-doc guile-NLopt octave-NLopt python3-NLopt Size: 3.83 MiB Size change: 22.23 KiB Changelog: * Sat Dec 04 2021 Bj??rn Esser - 2.7.1-1 - Update to 2.7.1 Fixes rhbz#1899511 Package: NsCDE-1.4-1.fc36 Old package: NsCDE-1.3-1.fc36 Summary: Modern and functional CDE desktop based on FVWM RPMs: NsCDE NsCDE-data NsCDE-doc Size: 30.71 MiB Size change: 65.92 KiB Changelog: * Sat Dec 04 2021 Davide Cavalca 1.4-1 - Update to 1.4; Fixes: RHBZ#2027079 Package: airnef-1.1-18.fc36 Old package: airnef-1.1-16.fc35 Summary: Wireless download from your Nikon/Canon Camera RPMs: airnef Size: 180.29 KiB Size change: -141 B Changelog: * Sat Dec 04 2021 Pavel Raiskup - 1.1-18 - add missing 're' import, rhbz#1990073 Package: dnstwist-20211204-1.fc36 Old package: dnstwist-20201228-4.fc35 Summary: Domain name permutation engine RPMs: dnstwist Size: 30.68 KiB Size change: 403 B Changelog: * Sat Dec 04 2021 Artur Frenszek-Iwicki - 20211204-1 - Update to v20211204 Package: dummy-test-package-gloster-0-6118.fc36 Old package: dummy-test-package-gloster-0-6110.fc36 Summary: Dummy Test Package called Gloster RPMs: dummy-test-package-gloster Size: 373.36 KiB Size change: 488 B Changelog: * Sat Dec 04 2021 packagerbot - 0-6111 - rebuilt * Sat Dec 04 2021 packagerbot - 0-6112 - rebuilt * Sat Dec 04 2021 packagerbot - 0-6113 - rebuilt * Sat Dec 04 2021 packagerbot - 0-6114 - rebuilt * Sat Dec 04 2021 packagerbot - 0-6115 - rebuilt * Sun Dec 05 2021 packagerbot - 0-6116 - rebuilt * Sun Dec 05 2021 packagerbot - 0-6117 - rebuilt * Sun Dec 05 2021 packagerbot - 0-6118 - rebuilt Package: fcitx5-5.0.11-1.fc36 Old package: fcitx5-5.0.10-1.fc36 Summary: Next generation of fcitx RPMs: fcitx5 fcitx5-autostart fcitx5-data fcitx5-devel Size: 10.63 MiB Size change: 251.49 KiB Changelog: * Sun Dec 05 2021 Qiyu Yan 5.0.11-1 - update to 5.0.11 Package: fcitx5-chewing-5.0.8-2.fc36 Old package: fcitx5-chewing-5.0.7-1.fc36 Summary: Chewing Wrapper for Fcitx RPMs: fcitx5-chewing Size: 276.66 KiB Size change: 27.11 KiB Changelog: * Sun Dec 05 2021 Qiyu Yan 5.0.8-1 - update to 5.0.8 * Sun Dec 05 2021 Qiyu Yan 5.0.8-2 - Change license to LGPLv2+ Package: fcitx5-configtool-5.0.9-1.fc36 Old package: fcitx5-configtool-5.0.8-1.fc36 Summary: Configuration tools used by fcitx5 RPMs: fcitx5-configtool fcitx5-migrator fcitx5-migrator-devel
Re: rust: Request for packaging rust-html-escape and rust-smallbitvec
On Sun, Dec 5, 2021 at 8:10 AM Andreas Schneider wrote: > > On Friday, 3 December 2021 18:40:12 CET Aleksei Bavshin wrote: > > On 12/3/21 03:15, Andreas Schneider wrote: > > > > > On Thursday, December 2, 2021 9:07:06 PM CET Aleksei Bavshin wrote: > > > > > >> `smallbitvec` deps are only needed for benchmark, so the test suite is > > >> actually passing without these. Should be safe to drop with metadata > > >> patch. > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> rust-tiny_http 0.8.2 also has a benchmark-only dependency `fdlimit` > > >> which we can drop. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> The situation with tree-sitter-cli testsuite is complicated: it requires > > >> a few other github repos with a grammar definitions and who knows what > > >> else. I haven't succeeded in running it so far, so we can keep it turned > > >> off. And that would make `rust-spin` update unnecessary. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> The draft packages are available from > > >> https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/alebastr/rust-tree-sitter-cli/; > > >> seems working with available grammar files (with exception of > > >> `build-wasm` and `playground` subcommands which require emscripten). > > > > > > > > > This is great work, thank you very much. I didn't know that the > > > tree-sitter- > cli needs it own package and can't be built in the current > > > tree-sitter package. So I will just continue to take care of tree-sitter > > > and just build the lib. > > > > > > So having tree-sitter-cli in the next fedora version would be awesome. > > > > > > Reviews (and PR for rust-tiny_http update) are sent. > > > > Upstream issue for missing license file: > > https://github.com/tree-sitter/tree-sitter/issues/1520 > > > > Andreas, do you want to have comaintainer access to the tree-sitter-cli > > packages? > > I can do the co-maintainer if you're interested :-) Please also add any new Rust packages to the @rust-sig group. It makes it much easier for me to maintain the Rust stack when I can see the whole picture when querying dist-git and bugzilla. Administrative things aside, consider this a co-maintainer offer from me on behalf of the Rust SIG as well :-) 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: Seeking maintainers of mathematical packages
Jerry James kirjoitti 19.11.2021 klo 23.49: To help those who may be new to packaging, I have started documenting some of my workflows. I have a set of web pages rooted here: https://jamezone.org/pleasure/software/Fedora/packager/ Those pages contain walk-throughs and examples illustrating how I approach various tasks. I'm willing to donate any of that content to Fedora, so if you see something you think should be on docs.fedoraproject.org, feel free to tell me so. Also feel free to suggest additions or changes to what I have there. That is a great site, with lots of great material that could well be in the Package Maintainer Docs. My comments here: Determine the package license: This page could be imported to the Docs as it is. The only thing I would change it to avoid trying to explaing the correct content of License: or %license. The authoritative source for those rules is elsewhere, better just link there. If the authoritative source is unclear, that should be improved. It is confusing and error prone to try to explain the same thing in multiple places that will inevitably drift apart. Case studies: These would also nicely supplement the current Packaging Tutorial: GNU Hello [1]. Perhaps some duplication could be removed by ordering these tutorials, then being very concise about topics that have already been covered in earlier tutorials. Also, my vision of the Package Maintainer Docs is that as few tools as possible need to be invoked. In particular, this means that everything that can be done with fedpkg, is done with fedpkg. So I would prefer to replace direct calls to rpmbuild, mock and rpmlint with 'fedpkg mockbuild' and 'fedpkg lint', and only resort to lower level tooling when 'fedpkg' cannot handle something. Build packages with mock: Good material I have not seen elsewhere. Mock documentation for Fedora Packagers is not in good shape at the moment [2], it seems that making it good will need quite a bit of work. Import a new package: This link is broken. Update a Fedora Package: ABI Compatibility check instructions look like it would be useful in the Package Maintainer Docs. As for the content, it is not just good manners to announce abi breaks on devel, but according to Updates Policy, something that MUST be done. Use a side tag: Guidance for debugging failing builds locally would be useful in the Package Maintainer Docs, too. Unfortunately multi-build docs are in bad shape [3]. I suppose the new material could first be added somewhere in the docs, then reorganized with all the other material when that eventually happens. [1]: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Packaging_Tutorial_GNU_Hello/ [2]: https://pagure.io/fedora-docs/package-maintainer-docs/issue/44 [3]: https://pagure.io/fedora-docs/package-maintainer-docs/issue/33 Otto ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Fedora-Cloud-34-20211205.0 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-34-20211203.0): ID: 1077382 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1077382 ID: 1077390 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1077390 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
Fedora-Cloud-35-20211205.0 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-35-20211203.0): ID: 1077366 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1077366 ID: 1077374 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1077374 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
