Review swaps

[Jerry James]

Happy New Year!

I am in need of some package reviews to update parts of the OCaml stack:

- ocaml-bos: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2031160
- ocaml-odoc-parser: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036395
- ocaml-mdx: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036396
- ocaml-stdcompat: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036398
- ocaml-pyml: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036399

Let me know what I can review for you.  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

[Bug 2033063] [RFE:EPEL9] EPEL9 branch for perl-Test-Kwalitee

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2033063

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version||perl-Test-Kwalitee-1.28-3.e
   ||l9
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
Last Closed||2022-01-02 01:38:06



--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2021-9ebca3d40d has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 9 stable
repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2033063
___
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 2033569] Please branch and build perl-Test-FailWarnings for EPEL-9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2033569

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
   Fixed In Version||perl-Test-FailWarnings-0.00
   ||8-25.el9
Last Closed||2022-01-02 01:38:03



--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2021-48c291efe9 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 9 stable
repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2033569
___
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 2033967] Add perl-JSON-Any to EPEL 9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2033967
Bug 2033967 depends on bug 2034013, which changed state.

Bug 2034013 Summary: Please branch and build perl-Test-Without-Module for EPEL-9
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2034013

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2033967
___
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 2033063] [RFE:EPEL9] EPEL9 branch for perl-Test-Kwalitee

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2033063
Bug 2033063 depends on bug 2033569, which changed state.

Bug 2033569 Summary: Please branch and build perl-Test-FailWarnings for EPEL-9
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2033569

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2033063
___
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 2032425] perl-Moose for EPEL 9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2032425
Bug 2032425 depends on bug 2034013, which changed state.

Bug 2034013 Summary: Please branch and build perl-Test-Without-Module for EPEL-9
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2034013

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2032425
___
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 2034013] Please branch and build perl-Test-Without-Module for EPEL-9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2034013

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
   Fixed In Version||perl-Test-Without-Module-0.
   ||20-17.el9
Last Closed||2022-01-02 01:37:59



--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2021-0196fc3169 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 9 stable
repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2034013
___
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

Mic recording issues from browsers

[Pawel Veselov]

Greetings!

I've been banging my head against this wall for a while now, and would
really appreciate some pointers.

I can no longer record Google Meet meetings using RecordRTC
(https://www.webrtc-experiment.com/RecordRTC/). This promptly became a
problem once I upgraded from F33 to F35. I'm fairly certain this has
therefore something to do with PipeWire. The problem occurs on every
browser I've tried, including Chrome and Firefox. The symptoms is that
though my audio comes through clearly to other meeting participants,
my recording of my own voice is at the minimum chopped off, and at
worst is mostly silence with occasional blips of syllable fragments.
The audio coming from other participants is recorded correctly.

I can see that once RecordRTC starts recording, the browser opens
another recording channel to the Pulse socket (which is serviced by
PW, but all these browsers only speak Pulse). I assume that the data
sent over this second recording channel is mangled.

Now, both PA and PW support parallel recording from the same source.
I've observed:
* Recording a stream by another application (parec, vokoscreenNG)
during an ongoing meeting is fine
* Simply recording two streams in parallel from the same application
works fine, the recorded data is identical. This is with both using
"simple" API (https://pastebin.com/vTVzQgpX), or multiple connections
per context (https://pastebin.com/EEX99VDJ).

I'd like to understand how to dig deeper into this. There are a couple
of things that would help:
1. What's an "easy" way to trace an application, and save the output
of any data that passes through a FD? Besides using strace, and then
converting the relevant lines into binaries using some script.
2. What is a good way to get details about connections between an app
and PA socket? I've been relying on 'pactl list` and whatever KDE
settings show about the connections. But 'pactl' shows clients, not
streams, and I can't see any streams or their characteristics. There
are a lot of configuration options on PA streams.
3. Has anybody else seen this? I'd like to find out if it's a known
problem, before I bury myself in Chromium/FF sources to see if I can
get a better handle on where this turns south.
4. Any clues what can this be related to? Considering that
multi-channel recording generally works fine, are there flags/settings
that maybe meddle with the priority, forces buffers being shared or
cleaned up, attempts to acquire an exclusive recording?

Thank you!
___
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

[updates]

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

icewm-2.9.4-1.el8
mbedtls-2.16.12-1.el8

Details about builds:



 icewm-2.9.4-1.el8 (FEDORA-EPEL-2022-e97eb82632)
 Window manager designed for speed, usability, and consistency

Update Information:

Update to 2.9.4

ChangeLog:

* Sat Jan  1 2022 Artem Polishchuk  - 2.9.4-1
- chore(update): 2.9.4




 mbedtls-2.16.12-1.el8 (FEDORA-EPEL-2022-b61ec76a69)
 Light-weight cryptographic and SSL/TLS library

Update Information:

- Update to 2.16.12  Release notes:
https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbedtls/releases/tag/v2.16.12

ChangeLog:

* Sat Jan  1 2022 Morten Stevens  - 2.16.12-1
- Update to 2.16.12


___
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

Fedora-IoT-35-20220101.0 compose check report

[Fedora compose checker]

No missing expected images.

Failed openQA tests: 3/15 (aarch64)

New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-IoT-35-20211225.0):

ID: 1093952 Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso podman@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1093952
ID: 1093956 Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso podman_client@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1093956

Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-IoT-35-20211225.0):

ID: 1093943 Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_clevis@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1093943

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-35-20211225.0):

ID: 1093927 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_clevis
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1093927

Passed openQA tests: 15/16 (x86_64), 12/15 (aarch64)
-- 
Mail generated by check-compose:
https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 2036215] perl-TheSchwartz-1.17 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036215

Emmanuel Seyman  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
 Status|NEW |CLOSED
   Fixed In Version||perl-TheSchwartz-1.17-1.fc3
   ||6
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
Last Closed||2022-01-01 21:27:16



--- Comment #1 from Emmanuel Seyman  ---
Built for rawhide:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1871803


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036215
___
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: Relocate RPM database to /usr (System-Wide Change proposal)

[Matthew Miller]

On Sat, Jan 01, 2022 at 12:52:57PM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > Given that the "shared-memory file contains no persistent content",
> > it seems like "rpmdb.sqlite-shm" could be a symlink to
> > /dev/shm/rpmdb.sqlite-shm", or to some other tmpfs location.
> It does seem like maybe it could. I'd definitely like someone who is an
> expert in area this to figure out if that's right before we try any such
> thing.

That said, from https://sqlite.org/walformat.html#the_wal_index_or_shm_file:

   Since the content of the shm file does not need to be preserved across a
   crash, the shm file is never fsync()-ed to disk. In fact, if there were a
   mechanism by which SQLite could tell the operating system to never
   persist the shm file to disk but always hold it in cache memory, SQLite
   would use that mechanism to avoid any unnecessary disk I/O associated
   with the shm file. However, no such mechanism exists in standard posix.

... sounds promising.

_However_, I'm not sure if this is something best done at the filesystem
level (what recreates it at as a symlink if the file is removed?) or in rpm
or DNF — or in SQLite itself, if they'd accept something that isn't
"standard posix".

-- 
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: F36 Change: Relocate RPM database to /usr (System-Wide Change proposal)

[Matthew Miller]

On Thu, Dec 30, 2021 at 01:41:01PM -0800, Gordon Messmer wrote:
> Given that the "shared-memory file contains no persistent content",
> it seems like "rpmdb.sqlite-shm" could be a symlink to
> /dev/shm/rpmdb.sqlite-shm", or to some other tmpfs location.

It does seem like maybe it could. I'd definitely like someone who is an
expert in area this to figure out if that's right before we try any such
thing.

-- 
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: F36 Change: DIGLIM (System-Wide Change proposal)

[Neal Gompa]

On Sat, Jan 1, 2022 at 5:51 AM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
 wrote:
>
> On 31/12/2021 20:03, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> > Sounds like, if this is enabled, they'll need a GPG key associated
> > with their personal repository.
>
> Locally built packages are always unsigned.
>

They don't have to be, but yes, by default they are.

And note, you can already configure DNF to require GPG validation of
local packages by setting localpkg_gpgcheck=1 in dnf.conf.


-- 
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

Fedora-Rawhide-20220101.n.0 compose check report

[Fedora compose checker]

No missing expected images.

Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check!
24 of 43 required tests failed, 17 results missing
openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING** 
below

Failed openQA tests: 103/228 (x86_64), 68/159 (aarch64)

New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20211231.n.0):

ID: 1093344 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso anaconda_help
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1093344
ID: 1093355 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_repository_hd_variation
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1093355
ID: 1093361 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_vncconnect_client
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1093361
ID: 1093367 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_vnc_server
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1093367
ID: 1093385 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_vncconnect_server
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1093385
ID: 1093387 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_vnc_client
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1093387
ID: 1093400 Test: x86_64 Everything-boot-iso memory_check
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1093400
ID: 1093448 Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso anaconda_help
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1093448
ID: 1093483 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso anaconda_help@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1093483
ID: 1093486 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso install_vnc_server@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1093486
ID: 1093500 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso install_vnc_client@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1093500
ID: 1093501 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso install_vncconnect_client@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1093501
ID: 1093512 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso 
install_repository_hd_variation@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1093512
ID: 1093525 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso install_vncconnect_server@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1093525
ID: 1093575 Test: x86_64 Workstation-upgrade desktop_browser
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1093575
ID: 1093599 Test: aarch64 Workstation-upgrade desktop_update_graphical@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1093599
ID: 1093720 Test: aarch64 universal install_package_set_minimal@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1093720
ID: 1093729 Test: x86_64 Server-boot-iso install_default **GATING**
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1093729
ID: 1093730 Test: x86_64 Server-boot-iso install_default@uefi **GATING**
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1093730
ID: 1093731 Test: x86_64 Everything-boot-iso install_default **GATING**
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1093731
ID: 1093732 Test: x86_64 Everything-boot-iso install_default@uefi **GATING**
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1093732
ID: 1093733 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_default_upload **GATING**
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1093733
ID: 1093759 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_btrfs_preserve_home
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1093759
ID: 1093760 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_default@uefi **GATING**
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1093760
ID: 1093761 Test: x86_64 universal install_sata **GATING**
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1093761
ID: 1093762 Test: x86_64 universal install_delete_pata **GATING**
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1093762
ID: 1093763 Test: aarch64 Server-boot-iso install_default@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1093763
ID: 1093764 Test: x86_64 universal install_repository_http_graphical 
**GATING**
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1093764
ID: 1093765 Test: aarch64 universal install_multi@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1093765
ID: 1093766 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso install_btrfs_preserve_home@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1093766
ID: 1093767 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso install_default_upload@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1093767
ID: 1093792 Test: aarch64 universal install_scsi_updates_img@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1093792
ID: 1093793 Test: x86_64 universal install_scsi_updates_img **GATING**
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1093793
ID: 1093794 Test: x86_64 universal install_repository_http_variation 
**GATING**
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1093794
ID: 1093795 Test: aarch64 universal install_repository_http_graphical@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1093795
ID: 1093796 Test: aarch64 universal install_mirrorlist_graphical@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1093796
ID: 1093797 Test: aarch64 universal install_repository_http_variation@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1093797
ID: 1093798 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso 

Re: Missing ownership /usr/share/locale/ directories

[Arthur Bols]

On 01/01/2022 13:09, Tom Hughes via devel wrote:

Surely a symlink from mo to ro would be better so that people
can set LANG=ro (the correct code) and get all the translations
for Moldovan regardless of whether packages use the old or new
code for it.


I think this would create problems since packages would try to place 
files in /ro and /mo at the same time.
ro isn't exactly new, mo was removed [0] for reasons. It seems it was 
just an alias for Romanian [1] (although this is probably very short 
sighted). The Romanian language is much more in use than Moldovan ever 
is/was, so packages which would ship translations for mo would most 
probably also have translations for ro.

So the symlink would probably not be useful.

Arthur

[0] https://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/php/code_changes.php
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldovan_language
___
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 2036427] perl-DBD-CSV-0.59 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036427

Paul Howarth  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version||perl-DBD-CSV-0.59-1.fc36
 Status|NEW |CLOSED
   Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
Last Closed||2022-01-01 13:34:22



--- Comment #1 from Paul Howarth  ---
Build done:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=80715192


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036427
___
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 2036432] New: perl-System-Info-0.062 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036432

Bug ID: 2036432
   Summary: perl-System-Info-0.062 is available
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-System-Info
  Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
  Assignee: jples...@redhat.com
  Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: jples...@redhat.com,
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Latest upstream release: 0.062
Current version/release in rawhide: 0.061-1.fc36
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/System-Info/

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


More information about the service that created this bug can be found at:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upstream_release_monitoring


Please keep in mind that with any upstream change, there may also be packaging
changes that need to be made. Specifically, please remember that it is your
responsibility to review the new version to ensure that the licensing is still
correct and that no non-free or legally problematic items have been added
upstream.


Based on the information from Anitya:
https://release-monitoring.org/project/15552/


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036432
___
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 2036429] New: Please branch and build perl-Want for EPEL-9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036429

Bug ID: 2036429
   Summary: Please branch and build perl-Want for EPEL-9
   Product: Fedora EPEL
   Version: epel9
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-Want
  Assignee: lkund...@v3.sk
  Reporter: p...@city-fan.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: lkund...@v3.sk, lxt...@gmail.com,
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org,
rc040...@freenet.de
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Could you please branch and build perl-Want for EPEL-9 ?

If you prefer, you could add me (FAS: pghmcfc) as a committer and I'll do it
myself.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036429
___
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 2036426] New: perl-Data-Peek-0.51 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036426

Bug ID: 2036426
   Summary: perl-Data-Peek-0.51 is available
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-Data-Peek
  Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
  Assignee: jples...@redhat.com
  Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: jples...@redhat.com, mmasl...@redhat.com,
mspa...@redhat.com, perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Latest upstream release: 0.51
Current version/release in rawhide: 0.50-4.fc35
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Data-Peek/

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


More information about the service that created this bug can be found at:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upstream_release_monitoring


Please keep in mind that with any upstream change, there may also be packaging
changes that need to be made. Specifically, please remember that it is your
responsibility to review the new version to ensure that the licensing is still
correct and that no non-free or legally problematic items have been added
upstream.


Based on the information from Anitya:
https://release-monitoring.org/project/2770/


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036426
___
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 2036427] New: perl-DBD-CSV-0.59 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036427

Bug ID: 2036427
   Summary: perl-DBD-CSV-0.59 is available
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-DBD-CSV
  Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
  Assignee: p...@city-fan.org
  Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: jose.p.oliveira@gmail.com, ka...@ucw.cz,
mspa...@redhat.com, p...@city-fan.org,
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org, st...@silug.org
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Latest upstream release: 0.59
Current version/release in rawhide: 0.58-3.fc35
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/DBD-CSV/

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


More information about the service that created this bug can be found at:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upstream_release_monitoring


Please keep in mind that with any upstream change, there may also be packaging
changes that need to be made. Specifically, please remember that it is your
responsibility to review the new version to ensure that the licensing is still
correct and that no non-free or legally problematic items have been added
upstream.


Based on the information from Anitya:
https://release-monitoring.org/project/2804/


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036427
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20220101.n.0 changes

[Fedora Rawhide Report]

OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20211231.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20220101.n.0

= SUMMARY =
Added images:2
Dropped images:  0
Added packages:  0
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages:   35
Downgraded packages: 0

Size of added packages:  0 B
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Size of upgraded packages:   3.28 GiB
Size of downgraded packages: 0 B

Size change of upgraded packages:   703.77 KiB
Size change of downgraded packages: 0 B

= ADDED IMAGES =
Image: Comp_Neuro live x86_64
Path: Labs/x86_64/iso/Fedora-Comp_Neuro-Live-x86_64-Rawhide-20220101.n.0.iso
Image: KDE raw-xz armhfp
Path: Spins/armhfp/images/Fedora-KDE-Rawhide-20220101.n.0.armhfp.raw.xz

= DROPPED IMAGES =

= ADDED PACKAGES =

= DROPPED PACKAGES =

= UPGRADED PACKAGES =
Package:  barman-2.17-1.fc36
Old package:  barman-2.16-1.fc36
Summary:  Backup and Recovery Manager for PostgreSQL
RPMs: barman barman-cli python3-barman
Size: 431.89 KiB
Size change:  -49 B
Changelog:
  * Fri Dec 31 2021 Simone Caronni  - 2.17-1
  - Update to 2.17.


Package:  bgpq3-0.1.36.1-1.fc36
Old package:  bgpq3-0.1.35-1.fc35
Summary:  Automate BGP filter generation based on routing database 
information
RPMs: bgpq3
Size: 255.62 KiB
Size change:  9.28 KiB
Changelog:
  * Thu Dec 30 2021 Bennie Joubert  - 0.1.36.1-1
  - Upate to latest upstream release v 0.1.36.1
  - Update makefile patch to bgpq3-fix-makefile-v2.patch


Package:  chromium-96.0.4664.110-4.fc36
Old package:  chromium-96.0.4664.110-3.fc36
Summary:  A WebKit (Blink) powered web browser that Google doesn't want you 
to use
RPMs: chrome-remote-desktop chromedriver chromium chromium-common 
chromium-headless
Size: 443.36 MiB
Size change:  6.79 MiB
Changelog:
  * Thu Dec 30 2021 Tom Callaway  - 96.0.4664.110-4
  - package up more swiftshader/angle stuff
  - move swiftshader files to -common so headless can use them


Package:  dummy-test-package-gloster-0-6509.fc36
Old package:  dummy-test-package-gloster-0-6503.fc36
Summary:  Dummy Test Package called Gloster
RPMs: dummy-test-package-gloster
Size: 396.59 KiB
Size change:  316 B
Changelog:
  * Fri Dec 31 2021 packagerbot  - 0-6504
  - rebuilt

  * Fri Dec 31 2021 packagerbot  - 0-6505
  - rebuilt

  * Fri Dec 31 2021 packagerbot  - 0-6506
  - rebuilt

  * Fri Dec 31 2021 packagerbot  - 0-6507
  - rebuilt

  * Fri Dec 31 2021 packagerbot  - 0-6508
  - rebuilt

  * Sat Jan 01 2022 packagerbot  - 0-6509
  - rebuilt


Package:  gh-2.4.0-2.fc36
Old package:  gh-2.3.0-2.fc36
Summary:  GitHub???s official command line tool
RPMs: gh golang-github-cli-devel
Size: 29.46 MiB
Size change:  132.98 KiB
Changelog:
  * Thu Dec 30 2021 Mikel Olasagasti Uranga  2.4.0-1
  - Update to 2.4.0. Closes rhbz#2034689


Package:  ghc9.0-9.0.2-3.fc36
Old package:  ghc9.0-9.0.2-2.fc36
Summary:  Glasgow Haskell Compiler
RPMs: ghc9.0 ghc9.0-Cabal ghc9.0-Cabal-devel ghc9.0-Cabal-doc 
ghc9.0-Cabal-prof ghc9.0-array ghc9.0-array-devel ghc9.0-array-doc 
ghc9.0-array-prof ghc9.0-base ghc9.0-base-devel ghc9.0-base-doc 
ghc9.0-base-prof ghc9.0-binary ghc9.0-binary-devel ghc9.0-binary-doc 
ghc9.0-binary-prof ghc9.0-bytestring ghc9.0-bytestring-devel 
ghc9.0-bytestring-doc ghc9.0-bytestring-prof ghc9.0-compiler 
ghc9.0-compiler-default ghc9.0-containers ghc9.0-containers-devel 
ghc9.0-containers-doc ghc9.0-containers-prof ghc9.0-deepseq 
ghc9.0-deepseq-devel ghc9.0-deepseq-doc ghc9.0-deepseq-prof ghc9.0-devel 
ghc9.0-directory ghc9.0-directory-devel ghc9.0-directory-doc 
ghc9.0-directory-prof ghc9.0-doc ghc9.0-doc-index ghc9.0-exceptions 
ghc9.0-exceptions-devel ghc9.0-exceptions-doc ghc9.0-exceptions-prof 
ghc9.0-filepath ghc9.0-filepath-devel ghc9.0-filepath-doc ghc9.0-filepath-prof 
ghc9.0-ghc ghc9.0-ghc-boot ghc9.0-ghc-boot-devel ghc9.0-ghc-boot-doc 
ghc9.0-ghc-boot-prof ghc9.0-ghc-boot-th ghc9.0-ghc-boot-th-devel 
ghc9.0-ghc-boot-th-doc ghc9.0-ghc-boot-th-prof ghc9.0-ghc-compact 
ghc9.0-ghc-compact-devel ghc9.0-ghc-compact-doc ghc9.0-ghc-compact-prof 
ghc9.0-ghc-devel ghc9.0-ghc-doc ghc9.0-ghc-heap ghc9.0-ghc-heap-devel 
ghc9.0-ghc-heap-doc ghc9.0-ghc-heap-prof ghc9.0-ghc-prof ghc9.0-ghci 
ghc9.0-ghci-devel ghc9.0-ghci-doc ghc9.0-ghci-prof ghc9.0-haskeline 
ghc9.0-haskeline-devel ghc9.0-haskeline-doc ghc9.0-haskeline-prof ghc9.0-hpc 
ghc9.0-hpc-devel ghc9.0-hpc-doc ghc9.0-hpc-prof ghc9.0-libiserv 
ghc9.0-libiserv-devel ghc9.0-libiserv-doc ghc9.0-libiserv-prof ghc9.0-manual 
ghc9.0-mtl ghc9.0-mtl-devel ghc9.0-mtl-doc ghc9.0-mtl-prof ghc9.0-parsec 
ghc9.0-parsec-devel ghc9.0-parsec-doc ghc9.0-parsec-prof ghc9.0-pretty 
ghc9.0-pretty-devel ghc9.0-pretty-doc ghc9.0-pretty-prof ghc9.0-process 
ghc9.0-process-devel ghc9.0-process-doc ghc9.0-process-prof ghc9.0-prof 
ghc9.0-stm ghc9.0-stm-devel ghc9.0-stm-doc ghc9.0-stm-prof 
ghc9.0-template-haskell ghc9.0-template-haskell-devel 
ghc9.0-template-haskell-doc ghc9.0

Re: Missing ownership /usr/share/locale/ directories

[Tom Hughes via devel]

On 01/01/2022 12:01, Fabio Valentini wrote:


I'm pretty sure I won't add ownership of /usr/share/locale/mo to
literally dozens of packages just so this minor issue is "fixed". I
think the filesystem package should create and own it.


Surely a symlink from mo to ro would be better so that people
can set LANG=ro (the correct code) and get all the translations
for Moldovan regardless of whether packages use the old or new
code for it.

Ideally of course upstreams should be poked to fix their packages
to use the correct code.

Tom

--
Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu)
http://compton.nu/
___
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: Missing ownership /usr/share/locale/ directories

[Fabio Valentini]

On Sat, Jan 1, 2022 at 12:46 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
 wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 31, 2021 at 02:41:56PM +0100, Arthur Bols wrote:
> > The origin of /usr/share/locale/mo/LC_MESSAGES/[iso_3166.mo|iso_3166-1.mo]
> > is [1]. This file provides translation of ISO 3166-1 to Moldovan. The file
> > names seems to be created using iso-639 codes, but the problem is that the
> > "mo" ISO 639-1 code is deprecated. This is why filesystem doesn't create/own
> > the /usr/share/locale/mo directory.
>
> > I'm not familiar with this stuff, so I'm not sure how to solve this issue. I
> > would like to complete my review of switchboard-plug-onlineaccounts, but
> > this issue blocks it. I see multiple solutions:
> > - Ignore it and approve switchboard-plug-onlineaccounts (this is against the
> > packaging guidelines)
> > - Add an entry to lang-exceptions [2] in filesystem to include "mo"
> > - Suggest upstream iso-codes to look into this issue
>
> Yet another solution is to make the package own the 'mo' directory,
> i.e. list it in %files. (If a different package does the same, they will
> co-own the directory, which is OK.)

Note that people have been encountering issues like this for almost a
decade, as far as I can tell:

First mention of unowned / unrecognised languages I could find /
remember is here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103545

The "mo" locale also came up in my first package review (that's a trip
down memory lane!):
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1398433

And it seems that just nobody cares (literally for almost ten years
now) whether those directories are unowned, or whether rpmlint
recognises those languages, etc. ...

There's also *lots* of packages that ship translations for "mo". It
seems that launchpad.net's translation functionality had this in the
default set of languages or something, as almost every project
originating in the launchpad.net ecosystem (most ubuntu stuff and most
elementary OS stuff) has translations for "mo".

I'm pretty sure I won't add ownership of /usr/share/locale/mo to
literally dozens of packages just so this minor issue is "fixed". I
think the filesystem package should create and own it.

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: Missing ownership /usr/share/locale/ directories

[Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek]

On Fri, Dec 31, 2021 at 02:41:56PM +0100, Arthur Bols wrote:
> The origin of /usr/share/locale/mo/LC_MESSAGES/[iso_3166.mo|iso_3166-1.mo]
> is [1]. This file provides translation of ISO 3166-1 to Moldovan. The file
> names seems to be created using iso-639 codes, but the problem is that the
> "mo" ISO 639-1 code is deprecated. This is why filesystem doesn't create/own
> the /usr/share/locale/mo directory.

> I'm not familiar with this stuff, so I'm not sure how to solve this issue. I
> would like to complete my review of switchboard-plug-onlineaccounts, but
> this issue blocks it. I see multiple solutions:
> - Ignore it and approve switchboard-plug-onlineaccounts (this is against the
> packaging guidelines)
> - Add an entry to lang-exceptions [2] in filesystem to include "mo"
> - Suggest upstream iso-codes to look into this issue

Yet another solution is to make the package own the 'mo' directory,
i.e. list it in %files. (If a different package does the same, they will
co-own the directory, which is OK.)

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

Re: How do we announce new packages?

[Dan Čermák]

Fabio Valentini  writes:

> On Sun, Dec 26, 2021 at 9:09 PM Matthew Miller  
> wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Dec 25, 2021 at 09:15:38PM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote:
>> > So ... maybe we could have a mailing list for this?
>> >
>> > Maybe "awesome-announce" or "the-new-shinyness" (I'm kidding! I'm bad
>> > with names!) at lists.fedoraproject.org, where all Fedora contributors
>> > could post the fancy new thing that they just made? Because we
>> > definitely don't have a good place for announcements like that right
>> > now (the community blog might be the right place for some of those,
>> > but it is a higher barrier to actually write a blog post that gets
>> > edited etc. instead of writing an e-mail to a mailing list).
>>
>> Hmmm.
>>
>> The Community Blog should have a pretty low barrier to entry. Are
>> people feeling blocked by that? We should try to adjust if so.
>>
>> As it is, the bar is basically "is this appropriate for this site" and "is
>> the categorization right", with the editorial pass mostly being for
>> egregious problems. In other words, I don't think it's actually much more
>> heavyweight than a moderated announce mailing list would be.
>>
>> But I also am not sure Community Blog is the right audience — that's
>> intended to be contributor-facing, and this seems like something aimed to e
>> more user-facing.
>
> Those are exactly my thoughts. I don't think there's a way for Fedora
> contributors to "market" the cool new thing they've been working on to
> *users* (or tech publications)?
>
> I mean, submitting a Change Proposal results in things getting
> announced pretty publicly, but that does not fit for smaller changes,
> or changes that are not specific to the next Fedora release.
>
> I know that some tech news websites follow discussions on the devel
> list (and probably the announcement lists), but those are mostly not
> really of interest to *users*, and there's no mailing list for "here's
> a cool new feature!" that they can subscribe to. That might skew
> newsworthy items more towards the "negative news" side of things, like
> "this package is orphaned / retired" / "Is this maintainer still
> responsive" etc., having more *positive* news to report on would be
> nice for Fedora.

So how about we just create such a list, make it moderated, ensure that
every post gets at least *some* proofreading and see how it works out?


Cheers,

Dan
___
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: Copr - look back at 2021

[Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek]

On Thu, Dec 30, 2021 at 03:33:05PM +0100, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> Let me sum up what the Copr team did during 2021:

Lots of great stuff, thanks!

>We had an initial meeting about rebase-helper automatically opening PR in 
> src.fedoraproject.org. There is even some
>code written (by 
> Michal Konečný), but the code is not
>integrated yet and no user-visible outcome was done yet. ETA is the first 
> half of 2022.

That'd would be super cool.

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

Re: List of packages with problematic license

[Fabio Valentini]

On Sat, Jan 1, 2022 at 11:12 AM Miroslav Suchý  wrote:
>

(snip)

>
> rust-ambient-authority.spec
> rust-base100.spec
> rust-cap-primitives.spec
> rust-cap-rand.spec
> rust-cap-std.spec
> rust-cranelift-bforest.spec
> rust-cranelift-codegen-meta.spec
> rust-cranelift-codegen-shared.spec
> rust-cranelift-codegen.spec
> rust-cranelift-entity.spec
> rust-cranelift-frontend.spec
> rust-cranelift-native.spec
> rust-cranelift-wasm.spec
> rust-file-per-thread-logger.spec
> rust-fs-set-times.spec
> rust-io-lifetimes.spec
> rust-posish.spec
> rust-rav1e.spec
> rust-regalloc.spec
> rust-target-lexicon.spec
> rust-tpm2-policy.spec
> rust-unsafe-io.spec
> rust-wasmparser.spec
> rust-wasmtime-cache.spec
> rust-wasmtime-environ.spec
> rust-wasmtime-fiber.spec
> rust-wasmtime-types.spec
> rust-wast.spec
> rust-wat.spec

Thanks for working on this!

It looks like a lot of the Rust packages in this list are caused by
"ASL 2.0 with exceptions". This was translated from the "Apache-2.0
WITH LLVM-Exception" SPDX identifier, but it was only recently pointed
out to us, that for the purposes of Fedora packages, this is
equivalent to just plain "ASL 2.0" without exceptions. I'll be
cleaning up those if and when I come across them.

I reported this issue upstream (where the SPDX -> Fedora mapping is
maintained for some .spec generators):
https://pagure.io/fedora-rust/rust2rpm/issue/163
Though I hope we will in the future be able to just use the SPDX
identifier from upstream metadata directly instead of doing
conversion.

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: DIGLIM (System-Wide Change proposal)

[Vitaly Zaitsev via devel]

On 31/12/2021 20:03, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:

Sounds like, if this is enabled, they'll need a GPG key associated
with their personal repository.


Locally built packages are always unsigned.

--
Sincerely,
  Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.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

List of packages with problematic license

[Miroslav Suchý]

I am processing results of license-validate audit, but it takes longer...

So I am providing raw results of what I have. If you are maintainer one of these packages you may expect either BZ 
report or Pagure PR for your package in upcoming days/weeks.


In the attachment you will find more details (albeit not super human friendly).

The list likely contains lots of false positives. And it is missing packages I 
already reported.

Miroslav


hibernate-jpa-2.0-api.spec
hibernate-jpa-2.1-api.spec
hunspell-pt.spec
iptables.spec
ipxe.spec
iucode-tool.spec
jbosscache-support.spec
jboss-jaxrs-2.0-api.spec
jsmath-fonts.spec
kdevelop-pg-qt.spec
knot-resolver.spec
knot.spec
libprelude.spec
librhsm.spec
libva-intel-hybrid-driver.spec
libvarlink.spec
lttng-ust.spec
lumina-desktop.spec
lvm2.spec
man-pages-l10n.spec
Mayavi.spec
midori.spec
mingw-LibRaw.spec
mingw-libunistring.spec
mingw-python-certifi.spec
mlir.spec
mono.spec
mono.spec
mpdecimal.spec
mxml.spec
nodejs-tape.spec
ogre.spec
opencascade.spec
openjfx.spec
openjfx8.spec
pacemaker.spec
paho-c.spec
passwdqc.spec
pcs.spec
perl-BSSolv.spec
perl-Date-HolidayParser.spec
perl-Exporter-Tidy.spec
perl-PDF-API2.spec
perl-PDF-Builder.spec
perl-qooxdoo-compat.spec
perl-Regexp-Pattern-DefHash.spec
perl-Regexp-Pattern.spec
perl-RPC-XML.spec
perl.spec
perl.spec
perl-TermReadKey.spec
perl-Test-Command-Simple.spec
perl-Text-Aligner.spec
php-manual-en.spec
phpMyAdmin.spec
pidgin-sipe.spec
pidgin-sipe.spec
pokerth.spec
ProDy.spec
proj.spec
python-coverage.spec
python-pathspec.spec
python-pyface.spec
python-pygit2.spec
python-resolvelib.spec
python-restfly.spec
python-Traits.spec
python-traitsui.spec
python-userpath.spec
qmmp.spec
qt5-qtfeedback.spec
rachota.spec
rizin.spec
rubygem-webrick.spec
rust-ambient-authority.spec
rust-base100.spec
rust-cap-primitives.spec
rust-cap-rand.spec
rust-cap-std.spec
rust-cranelift-bforest.spec
rust-cranelift-codegen-meta.spec
rust-cranelift-codegen-shared.spec
rust-cranelift-codegen.spec
rust-cranelift-entity.spec
rust-cranelift-frontend.spec
rust-cranelift-native.spec
rust-cranelift-wasm.spec
rust-file-per-thread-logger.spec
rust-fs-set-times.spec
rust-io-lifetimes.spec
rust-posish.spec
rust-rav1e.spec
rust-regalloc.spec
rust-target-lexicon.spec
rust-tpm2-policy.spec
rust-unsafe-io.spec
rust-wasmparser.spec
rust-wasmtime-cache.spec
rust-wasmtime-environ.spec
rust-wasmtime-fiber.spec
rust-wasmtime-types.spec
rust-wast.spec
rust-wat.spec
sblim-cim-client.spec
sblim-cim-client2.spec
sblim-cmpi-devel.spec
sblim-cmpi-devel.spec
sblim-cmpi-fsvol.spec
sblim-cmpi-network.spec
sblim-cmpi-nfsv3.spec
sblim-cmpi-nfsv4.spec
sblim-cmpi-params.spec
sblim-cmpi-sysfs.spec
sblim-cmpi-syslog.spec
sblim-sfcCommon.spec
sblim-smis-hba.spec
sblim-testsuite.spec
scantailor.spec
singularity.spec
smc-tools.spec
spec-version-maven-plugin.spec
star.spec
strace.spec
stun.spec
subscription-manager.spec
subscription-manager.spec
sunpinyin.spec
surgescript.spec
surgescript.spec
surgescript.spec
sympa.spec
tcmu-runner.spec
texlive-base.spec
texlive-base.spec
texlive.spec
texlive.spec
texlive.spec
texlive.spec
texlive.spec
texlive.spec
tlog.spec
uboot-tools.spec
virtualbox-guest-additions.spec
wwl.spec
yakuake.spec
ydotool.spec
zfs-fuse.spec
4diac-forte.spec
Testing rpm-specs/hibernate-jpa-2.0-api.spec
No terminal defined for 'E' at line 1 col 2

 EPL and BSD


Testing rpm-specs/hibernate-jpa-2.1-api.spec
No terminal defined for 'E' at line 1 col 2

 EPL and BSD

Testing rpm-specs/hunspell-pt.spec
No terminal defined for 'M' at line 1 col 14

 ((LGPLv3 or MPL) and LGPLv2) and (GPLv2 or LGPLv2 or
 ^^^

Testing rpm-specs/iptables.spec
No terminal defined for 'A' at line 1 col 12

 GPLv2 and Artistic Licence 2.0 and ISC
   ^

Expecting:

Testing rpm-specs/ipxe.spec
No terminal defined for 'w' at line 1 col 8

 GPLv2 with additional permissions and BSD
   ^

Expecting: {'AND', 'OR'}

Testing rpm-specs/iucode-tool.spec
No terminal defined for 'G' at line 1 col 2

 GPlv2+
 ^

Testing rpm-specs/jbosscache-support.spec
No terminal defined for 'L' at line 1 col 2

 LGPL
 ^

Testing rpm-specs/jboss-jaxrs-2.0-api.spec
No terminal defined for 'C' at line 1 col 3

 (CDDL or GPLv2 with exceptions) and ASL 2
  ^

Testing rpm-specs/jsmath-fonts.spec
No terminal defined for 'P' at line 1 col 2

 Public domain
 ^


Testing rpm-specs/kdevelop-pg-qt.spec
No terminal defined for 'w' at line 1 col 21

 LGPLv2+ and GPLv2+ with exception
^

Expecting: {'AND', 'OR'}


Testing rpm-specs/knot-resolver.spec
No terminal defined for 'G' at line 1 col 2

 GPL-3.0-or-later
 ^


Testing rpm-specs/knot.spec
No terminal defined for 'G' at line 1 col 2

 GPL-3.0-or-later
 ^


Testing rpm-specs/libprelude.spec
No terminal defined for 'L' at line 1 col 2

 LGPL-2.1+
 ^


Testing rpm-specs/librhsm.spec
No terminal defined for '.' at line 1 col 8

 LGPLv2.1+
   ^


Testing rpm-specs/libva-intel-hybrid-driver.spec
No terminal defined for 'N' at line 1 col 18

 MIT and 

Fedora-Cloud-34-20220101.0 compose check report

[Fedora compose checker]

No missing expected images.

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

Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-34-20211231.0):

ID: 1093330 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1093330
ID: 1093341 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1093341

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-35-20220101.0 compose check report

[Fedora compose checker]

No missing expected images.

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

Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-35-20211231.0):

ID: 1093314 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1093314
ID: 1093325 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1093325

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