Re: Copr success but no packages?

[Miroslav Suchý]

Dne 03. 01. 22 v 22:57 Steven A. Falco napsal(a):

On 1/3/22 04:38 PM, Elliott Sales de Andrade wrote:

Here are direct links to the chroots:


https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/stevenfalco/kicad/fedora-34-x86_64/03123050-kicad/

https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/stevenfalco/kicad/fedora-35-x86_64/03123050-kicad/

But then I tried a different link:

https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/stevenfalco/kicad/fedora-35-x86_64/03123050-kicad/

and there I see the files.  So they must really be there, but the link is not working for me.  And no, I'm not running 
some sort of caching firewall.


The download.copr.f.o are cnames to CDN all around the world (provided by AWS).

copr-be.cloud.f.o is the real name of the server.

So I guess it is may be some CDN issue. Which is pain to investigate/replicate.

Miroslav

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

[Bug 2032430] perl-Type-Tiny for EPEL 9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2032430



--- Comment #8 from Paul Howarth  ---
(In reply to Xavier Bachelot from comment #6)
> Also depends on the following packages which don't have a bug filed yet:
> perl-Class-ISA
> perl-Devel-Hide
> perl-Devel-Refcount
> perl-Function-Parameters
> perl-MooseX-Getopt
> perl-MooseX-Types
> perl-MooseX-Types-Common
> perl-MouseX-Types
> perl-Return-Type
> perl-Sub-Exporter-Lexical
> perl-Type-Tie
> perl-Validation-Class
> 
> There is a circular dependency on perl-Types-Path-Tiny (RHBZ#2033633) and
> several others.

I've a plan and build order for everything needed to get to perl-Type-Tiny
including the bootstrapping. I've done them all locally but didn't want to get
too far ahead in the dependency chain with the tickets yet. Moose and Mouse
need to be done first too.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2032430
___
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: Default To Noto Fonts (System-Wide Change proposal)

[Akira TAGOH]

On Thu, Dec 30, 2021 at 1:28 AM Igor Raits  wrote:
> Will all of them be installed by default or depending on langpacks selection?

Yes. Basically upgrading will be done by langpacks package update.

> Is it safe to delete DejaVu fonts assuming they are not used by any known app?

It would be supposed to be so.

> I think this paragraph explains how to test already applied change,
> but not really how to "test it before it lands"… Do you think it is
> possible to describe it here?

The result you get would be the same to something in f35 cells if you
try to test it before landing.

> Also some instructions / automation to revert the change?

As said, all the upgrade process will be done by langpacks. Even if
you already upgraded and installed this change, reverted changes will
also be delivered through langpacks.

HTH,
-- 
Akira TAGOH
___
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 2032430] perl-Type-Tiny for EPEL 9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2032430



--- Comment #7 from Ralf Corsepius  ---
(In reply to Xavier Bachelot from comment #6)
> There is a circular dependency on perl-Types-Path-Tiny (RHBZ#2033633) and
> several others.

You probably need to apply the %{perl_bootstrap} magic. I.e. 1st build with
%{perl_bootstrap} enabled, then a 2nd time with %{perl_bootstrap} disabled.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2032430
___
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 2035606] perl-File-Slurper-0.013 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2035606

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2022-a0f187e1b9 has been pushed to the Fedora 35 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
--advisory=FEDORA-2022-a0f187e1b9`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-a0f187e1b9

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information
on how to test updates.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2035606
___
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 2035274] CVE-2020-16156 perl-CPAN: allows Signature Verification Bypass [fedora-all]

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2035274



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2022-21e8372c42 has been pushed to the Fedora 35 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
--advisory=FEDORA-2022-21e8372c42`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-21e8372c42

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information
on how to test updates.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2035274
___
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 2035274] CVE-2020-16156 perl-CPAN: allows Signature Verification Bypass [fedora-all]

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2035274

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2022-84fd87f7eb has been pushed to the Fedora 34 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
--advisory=FEDORA-2022-84fd87f7eb`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-84fd87f7eb

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information
on how to test updates.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2035274
___
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 2031809] perl-Net-OpenID-Server for EPEL 9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2031809

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-a25a6208a1 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 9 testing
repository.

You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-a25a6208a1

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information
on how to test updates.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2031809
___
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 2032231] perl-Net-OpenID-Common for EPEL 9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2032231

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-56805e003a has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 9 testing
repository.

You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-56805e003a

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information
on how to test updates.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2032231
___
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 2032232] perl-Crypt-DH-GMP for EPEL 9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2032232

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-43376ed831 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 9 testing
repository.

You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-43376ed831

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information
on how to test updates.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2032232
___
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 2031808] perl-Net-OpenID-Consumer for EPEL 9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2031808

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-b88f39e70d has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 9 testing
repository.

You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-b88f39e70d

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information
on how to test updates.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2031808
___
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: Heads-up: lxqt libraries soname bump

[Zamir Sun]

On Tue, Jan 4, 2022 at 2:44 AM Ian McInerney via devel
 wrote:
>>
>> Did you run the build for lxqt-wallet? I see that there is a commit in 
>> distgit that bumps the version to 1.0.0, but I can't find an associated 
>> build in Koji for that version. I actually think that commit to lxqt-wallet 
>> needs to be reverted though, and instead just a rebuild for lxqt-wallet is 
>> needed. The upstream release still has version 3.2.2 as its most recent 
>> version (which is the current version we package), and does not appear to 
>> follow the standard lxqt release schedule/versioning system.
>>
>
> I have reverted this commit in rawhide now, so lxqt-wallet is back to version 
> 3.2.2.
>

Thanks for catching this. That might because of my bulk updating
script did not exclude it when pushing. I'll be more careful on this.

> I suggest that you modify every lxqt spec file to not glob the soname version 
> for their exported libraries in the files section and instead have the 
> version defined in the spec file as a global. That would fail then build when 
> an soname bump occurs and the packager isn't aware of it, preventing these 
> types of unannounced bump problems in the future when updating a lot of 
> packages at once.

Sure, I will take a look at all those spec files in my earliest convenience.

Thanks again for looking into these!


-- 
Ziqian SUN (Zamir)
z...@fedoraproject.org
GPG : 1D86 6D4A 49CE 4BBD 72CF FCF5 D856 6E11 F2A0 525E
Want to know more about Fedora?
Visit https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/
___
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 Fedora EPEL 8 Security updates need testing:
 Age  URL
   1  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-b61ec76a69   
mbedtls-2.16.12-1.el8


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

barman-2.17-1.el8
notcurses-3.0.3-6.el8
pgbouncer-1.16.1-2.el8
python-colcon-ed-0.2.2-1.el8

Details about builds:



 barman-2.17-1.el8 (FEDORA-EPEL-2022-669e0e3744)
 Backup and Recovery Manager for PostgreSQL

Update Information:

Bug fixes and improvements.

ChangeLog:

* Fri Dec 31 2021 Simone Caronni  - 2.17-1
- Update to 2.17.

References:

  [ 1 ] Bug #1985936 - barman-2.17 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1985936




 notcurses-3.0.3-6.el8 (FEDORA-EPEL-2022-cb2f1c37fb)
 Character graphics and TUI library

Update Information:

New upstream 3.0.3:
https://github.com/dankamongmen/notcurses/releases/tag/v3.0.3

ChangeLog:

* Mon Jan  3 2022 Nick Black  3.0.3-6
- RPMAUTOSPEC: unresolvable merge




 pgbouncer-1.16.1-2.el8 (FEDORA-EPEL-2022-771af857c2)
 Lightweight connection pooler for PostgreSQL

Update Information:

Update to 1.16.1, per changes decribed at:
http://www.pgbouncer.org/changelog.html#pgbouncer-116x  Fixes multiple security
vulnerabilities related to PostgreSQL:
https://www.postgresql.org/support/security/CVE-2021-23214/
https://www.postgresql.org/support/security/CVE-2021-23222/  Remove useless
sysconfig file.

ChangeLog:

* Mon Jan  3 2022 Simone Caronni  - 1.16.1-2
- Update SPEC file.
* Tue Dec 21 2021 Devrim Gunduz  - 1.16.1-1
- Update to 1.16.1, per changes described at:
  http://www.pgbouncer.org/changelog.html#pgbouncer-116x
- Add c-ares support.
- Remove RHEL 6 support from spec file.




 python-colcon-ed-0.2.2-1.el8 (FEDORA-EPEL-2022-9020546591)
 Extension for colcon to edit a file within a package

Update Information:

Update to `colcon-ed` 0.2.2

ChangeLog:

* Mon Jan  3 2022 Scott K Logan  - 0.2.2-1
- Update to 0.2.2 (rhbz#2026254)

References:

  [ 1 ] Bug #2026254 - python-colcon-ed-0.2.2 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2026254


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

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

[Chris Murphy]

On Mon, Jan 3, 2022 at 1:55 PM Chris Murphy  wrote:
>
> Does anyone know what /var/lib/rpm-state/gconf is used for? Owning
> package is GConf2-3.2.6-31.fc35.x86_64
>

OK nevermind. GConf2 is dead upstream, and the only thing I have
dragging it in is pdfmod.



-- 
Chris Murphy
___
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 2036779] New: perl-Term-Table-0.016 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036779

Bug ID: 2036779
   Summary: perl-Term-Table-0.016 is available
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-Term-Table
  Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
  Assignee: mspa...@redhat.com
  Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: mspa...@redhat.com,
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org, ppi...@redhat.com
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Latest upstream release: 0.016
Current version/release in rawhide: 0.015-8.fc35
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Term-Table/

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/12715/


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036779
___
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: glibc-2.34.9000-33.fc36 untagged causing lots of dependency breakage

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Mon, Jan 03, 2022 at 11:37:53AM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Kevin Fenzi:
> 
> > On Tue, Dec 28, 2021 at 10:07:25PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> >> * Kevin Fenzi:
> >> 
> >> > On Tue, Dec 28, 2021 at 09:54:39AM +0900, Mamoru TASAKA wrote:
> >> >> Hello:
> >> >> 
> >> >> Looks like glibc-2.34.9000-33.fc36 was tagged into f36 buildroot on 
> >> >> 2021-12-18,
> >> >> but very recently untagged from f36 buildroot.
> >> >> Many binary rpms rebuilt recently have "Requires: glibc >= 
> >> >> 2.34.9000-33.fc36"
> >> >> ( for example firefox has: 
> >> >> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/rpminfo?rpmID=28655956 )
> >> >> and not looks like lots of packages cause dependency breakage, e.g.
> >> >> 
> >> >> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=80543777
> >> >> 
> >> >> Is this intentional?
> >> >
> >> > Yes, I untagged it. I am trying to get a rawhide comppose to work. ;( 
> >> >
> >> > I guess I can tag it back... that requires is... unfortunate. 
> >> 
> >> I've added it based on feedback that partial rawhide upgrades are
> >> supposed to work.  It's a conservative approximation because we do not
> >> have per-symbol RPM version information.
> >
> > Can you expand on how that works? 
> > Every new glibc makes everything built against it require that version
> > or newer?
> 
> No, we do a bit better than that.  We look at the built binaries.  If
> any of them use the symbol version under development (GLIBC_2.35 in case
> of current rawhide), we add a >= dependency on the glibc version used
> for building.  During the Fedora 36 cycle, fewer GLIBC_2.35 symbols have
> been added, so I don't expect many packages receiving this versioned
> dependency that makes downgrades harder.

ok. That seems completely reasonable. 

I can't seem to get dnf repoquery to show me this, but I'll poke around
with it. (ie, it either gets everything that is satisfied with the glibc
version by the >, or nothing at all). 

kevin


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

Re: Copr success but no packages?

[Steven A. Falco]

On 1/3/22 04:38 PM, Elliott Sales de Andrade wrote:

On Mon, 3 Jan 2022 at 16:25, Steven A. Falco  wrote:


I ran the following build on Copr:

https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/stevenfalco/kicad/build/3123050/

There are three chroots, one for F34, F35, and rawhide (all x86_64).

All report "success", but there are no resulting rpm packages in the F35 area.  
The F34 and rawhide areas look correct and have rpm packages.



Do you need to force-refresh the page?


Here are direct links to the chroots:

https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/stevenfalco/kicad/fedora-34-x86_64/03123050-kicad/

https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/stevenfalco/kicad/fedora-35-x86_64/03123050-kicad/



I see:
kicad-6.0.0-2.fc35.src.rpm 2022-Jan-03 19:16:50 719.50M RPM File
kicad-6.0.0-2.fc35.x86_64.rpm 2022-Jan-03 19:16:52 50.74M RPM File
kicad-debuginfo-6.0.0-2.fc35.x86_64.rpm 2022-Jan-03 19:16:43 283.27M RPM File
kicad-debugsource-6.0.0-2.fc35.x86_64.rpm 2022-Jan-03 19:16:59 5.85M RPM File
kicad-doc-6.0.0-2.fc35.noarch.rpm 2022-Jan-03 19:16:58 109.90M RPM File
kicad-packages3d-6.0.0-2.fc35.noarch.rpm 2022-Jan-03 19:16:56 385.23M RPM File


That is very strange.  I tried that link with three different browsers: 
Firefox, Konqueror, and Chrome, and I don't see the files on any of them.  I 
even tried using my smart phone, and all I see are three log files: 
backend.log, build.log, and builder-live.log.

But then I tried a different link:

https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/stevenfalco/kicad/fedora-35-x86_64/03123050-kicad/

and there I see the files.  So they must really be there, but the link is not 
working for me.  And no, I'm not running some sort of caching firewall.

I don't see how the problem can be on my end if all those separate browsers 
show the same bad result.  But I guess it could be a caching issue somewhere 
else.

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

Re: Copr success but no packages?

[Elliott Sales de Andrade]

On Mon, 3 Jan 2022 at 16:25, Steven A. Falco  wrote:
>
> I ran the following build on Copr:
>
> https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/stevenfalco/kicad/build/3123050/
>
> There are three chroots, one for F34, F35, and rawhide (all x86_64).
>
> All report "success", but there are no resulting rpm packages in the F35 
> area.  The F34 and rawhide areas look correct and have rpm packages.
>

Do you need to force-refresh the page?

> Here are direct links to the chroots:
>
> https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/stevenfalco/kicad/fedora-34-x86_64/03123050-kicad/
>
> https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/stevenfalco/kicad/fedora-35-x86_64/03123050-kicad/
>

I see:
kicad-6.0.0-2.fc35.src.rpm 2022-Jan-03 19:16:50 719.50M RPM File
kicad-6.0.0-2.fc35.x86_64.rpm 2022-Jan-03 19:16:52 50.74M RPM File
kicad-debuginfo-6.0.0-2.fc35.x86_64.rpm 2022-Jan-03 19:16:43 283.27M RPM File
kicad-debugsource-6.0.0-2.fc35.x86_64.rpm 2022-Jan-03 19:16:59 5.85M RPM File
kicad-doc-6.0.0-2.fc35.noarch.rpm 2022-Jan-03 19:16:58 109.90M RPM File
kicad-packages3d-6.0.0-2.fc35.noarch.rpm 2022-Jan-03 19:16:56 385.23M RPM File

> https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/stevenfalco/kicad/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/03123050-kicad/
>
> The builder-live.log in the F35 dir shows that the rpms were written, but 
> they are missing from the dir.
>
> Can someone with root access to the copr infra please take a look?
>
> Thanks,
> Steve

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

Re: Copr success but no packages?

[Alexander Ploumistos]

Hi Steve,

It looks like you had some (browser?) caching issue, all the rpms in
all the chroots are there.


Best regards,
A.
___
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?

[Petr Menšík]

Hello,

I still think smaller changes might be better propagated using bodhi
system. I know severity is used usually for security updates. But can we
make more user-friendly summaries of enhancement updates? I think it
might be sorted by severity and list only enhancement or newpackage type
updates. Then we could make a nicer summary page with smaller, but still
important changes. I think not only new packages are interesting. But a
good place describing improvements in existing package in compact enough
format is something I miss.

What if we make summary for all enhancement updates, putting first
high-severity updates. That might be rebases including new functionality
for example, which might be useful to users. If only small feature would
be added, maintainer may choose medium or low severity.

It may generate monthly summaries without much additional work for
maintainers. If upstream has a good documentation or blog, it might be
sufficient just few bullets with hyperlink to upstream article
introducing that features. I think often separate Fedora article would
not be required. But do we have any better overview of changes targeted
to end-users? I am not aware of anything good myself.

I think bodhi enhancement is already not bad [1]. Could we propagate it
a bit? Should those updates also include links to Fedora Changes
explicit articles? Could we highlight those referencing them with higher
'importance'? If we would be able to hide minor improvements, I think it
could pretty interesting for checking upcoming releases.

Cheers,
Petr

1. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/?releases=F36=enhancement

On 12/26/21 21:09, 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.
>
-- 
Petr Menšík
Software Engineer
Red Hat, http://www.redhat.com/
email: pemen...@redhat.com
PGP: DFCF908DB7C87E8E529925BC4931CA5B6C9FC5CB
___
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

Copr success but no packages?

[Steven A. Falco]

I ran the following build on Copr:

https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/stevenfalco/kicad/build/3123050/

There are three chroots, one for F34, F35, and rawhide (all x86_64).

All report "success", but there are no resulting rpm packages in the F35 area.  
The F34 and rawhide areas look correct and have rpm packages.

Here are direct links to the chroots:

https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/stevenfalco/kicad/fedora-34-x86_64/03123050-kicad/

https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/stevenfalco/kicad/fedora-35-x86_64/03123050-kicad/

https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/stevenfalco/kicad/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/03123050-kicad/

The builder-live.log in the F35 dir shows that the rpms were written, but they 
are missing from the dir.

Can someone with root access to the copr infra please take a look?

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

[Bug 2032430] perl-Type-Tiny for EPEL 9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2032430

Xavier Bachelot  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Depends On||2032425, 2031806, 2036501,
   ||2034419



--- Comment #6 from Xavier Bachelot  ---
Also depends on the following packages which don't have a bug filed yet:
perl-Class-ISA
perl-Devel-Hide
perl-Devel-Refcount
perl-Function-Parameters
perl-MooseX-Getopt
perl-MooseX-Types
perl-MooseX-Types-Common
perl-MouseX-Types
perl-Return-Type
perl-Sub-Exporter-Lexical
perl-Type-Tie
perl-Validation-Class

There is a circular dependency on perl-Types-Path-Tiny (RHBZ#2033633) and
several others.



Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2031806
[Bug 2031806] perl-Mouse for EPEL 9
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2032425
[Bug 2032425] perl-Moose for EPEL 9
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2034419
[Bug 2034419] perl-match-simple for EPEL 9
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036501
[Bug 2036501] Please branch and build perl-Object-Accessor for EPEL-9
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2032430
___
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 2031806] perl-Mouse for EPEL 9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2031806

Xavier Bachelot  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||2032430





Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2032430
[Bug 2032430] perl-Type-Tiny for EPEL 9
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2031806
___
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

Xavier Bachelot  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||2032430





Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2032430
[Bug 2032430] perl-Type-Tiny for EPEL 9
-- 
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

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

[Chris Murphy]

Does anyone know what /var/lib/rpm-state/gconf is used for? Owning
package is GConf2-3.2.6-31.fc35.x86_64

On my Fedora 35 Workstation installation, it's empty. So no obvious
conflict with the change proposal, but I'd like to make sure it's not
something that if used is going to get mad if there's an rpmdb state
change that this location isn't privy to.

--
Chris Murphy
___
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 2036663] Please branch and build perl-IO-CaptureOutput for EPEL-9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036663

Tom "spot" Callaway  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value



--- Comment #1 from Tom "spot" Callaway  ---
You are now a committer on perl-IO-CaptureOutput. Go forth and branch. :)


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036663
___
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: DIGLIM (System-Wide Change proposal)

[Roberto Sassu via devel]

> From: Lennart Poettering [mailto:mzerq...@0pointer.de]
> Sent: Monday, January 3, 2022 1:33 PM
> On Do, 30.12.21 13:04, Fedora Development ML (devel@lists.fedoraproject.org)
> wrote:
> 
> > > From: Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek [mailto:zbys...@in.waw.pl]
> > > Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2021 1:02 PM
> > > The gist of the proposal is described thus:
> > > > The new feature behaves as follows. A modified kernel with the DIGLIM
> > > > patches will expose to user space an interface to add/remove file
> > > > digests from the kernel hash table. A user space parser, executed by
> > > > the kernel during early boot, parses RPM headers found in /etc/diglim
> > > > in the initial ram disk (included with a custom dracut script) and
> > > > uploads them to the kernel. When a file is accessed, IMA calculates
> > > > the file digest and queries it with DIGLIM. If the digest is found,
> > > > measurement is skipped and appraisal is successful. If the digest is
> > > > not found, a measurement of the file is performed and appraisal fails.
> > > > When packages are installed or removed, the kernel hash table is kept
> > > > synchronized with a new rpm plugin.
> > >
> > > This description is … short.
> >
> > I saw you asked more questions below. I will answer there.
> >
> > > > A user space parser, executed by the kernel during early boot
> > >
> > > Is it really executed by the kernel? This description makes it sound
> > > like a special old-hotplug-helper-style program that is spawned directly
> > > by the kernel.
> >
> > Yes, it must be executed before init, otherwise the kernel
> > would refuse to execute it. And probably, it must be executed
> > earlier than now, as I'm seeing that the kmod binary is being
> > executed (with the same mechanism, user-mode helper) before
> > the digest lists are uploaded to the kernel.
> 
> Wouldn't it make more sense to push the digest lists into the kernel
> by simpler means, before any userspace runs? e.g. just pick it up from
> some fixed path in the file system, directly from the kernel, like the
> firmware is picked up, or the ACPI DSDT tables are picked up. That way
> you can just compile the digest lists trivially into a cpio you pass as extra
> initrd to the kernel, and things will just work without "uploading",
> without happing any intermediary userspace process around that needs
> to run to upload anything... They'd be available from the first moment
> on, from kernel code, without any userspace interfering.

Definitely yes. It partially works that way: there is a loader in
the kernel, called when rootfs becomes available, which
get a fixed path from the kernel configuration and loads any
digest list that is in the directory.

That would work if all digest lists are supported by the kernel.
The first version worked that way, I developed a simple parser
of RPM headers, so that the kernel could process then without
having an additional user space process. Much better in term
of protection: no interference with other user space processes
that should be handled with an ad-hoc LSM, no time to measure
time to use race condition.

However, it was pointed out by Matthew Garrett that this
approach is not scalable. Whenever a new digest list format is
introduced, a new parser should be added to the kernel, with
the risks associated.

Before proposing this fine-tuned protection you saw in the
last iteration of the patches, we considered to generate a
digest list in the native format for each package we build
(currently openEuler works that way), and to inject it in the
package (without changing existing spec files).

That approach worked at the cost of modifying the rpm
source code to pass the list of files being built and their
digest to an external digest list generator, which returned
the digest list. The RPM header was then modified to
include the generated digest list. That removed the need
for an additional user space parser, as everything could
be handled by the kernel, but the complexity of the solution
and the fact that it requires a mass rebuild suggested that
we should abandon this approach in favor of more
complexity at digest list loading time.

I kept the current proposal simple for easier understanding,
but a possible application of this user space loading could
be that digest lists could be used for metadata protection
too (including the SELinux labels). EVM would query digest
lists in the same way IMA does (there is still the problem
of unpredictable UIDs/GIDs that need to be solved). The role
of the user space parser would be to calculate metadata
digests (by querying libselinux, which would read file contexts),
and to upload them to the kernel.

> Static linking is a mess. User-mode helper is an atrocity: no new
> kernel callouts should be introduced these days, that bypass userspace
> service management, that are not properly sorted into a cgroup and so
> on. It all sounds to me as if this *really* isn't thought to the end,
> and should not be adopted this 

Re: Heads-up: lxqt libraries soname bump

[Ian McInerney via devel]

On Tue, Dec 28, 2021 at 11:37 AM Ian McInerney 
wrote:

> On Mon, Dec 27, 2021 at 10:39 AM Zamir SUN  wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm updating the whole LXQt desktop to 1.0.0 in rawhide, and I've built
>> the packages in the side tag f36-build-side-49104.
>
>
> Did you run the build for lxqt-wallet? I see that there is a commit in
> distgit that bumps the version to 1.0.0, but I can't find an associated
> build in Koji for that version. I actually think that commit to lxqt-wallet
> needs to be reverted though, and instead just a rebuild for lxqt-wallet is
> needed. The upstream release still has version 3.2.2 as its most recent
> version (which is the current version we package), and does not appear to
> follow the standard lxqt release schedule/versioning system.
>
>
I have reverted this commit in rawhide now, so lxqt-wallet is back to
version 3.2.2.

-Ian


> -Ian
>
>
>> The following package
>> contains library with a soname bump
>>
>> liblxqt (liblxqt.so.1)
>> liblxqt-globalkeys (liblxqt-globalkeys.so.1,liblxqt-globalkeys-ui.so.1)
>>
>
>> I hope I did not miss anything. IIRC there are no packages outside of
>> the LXQt SIG depends on those, but I'd like to still make people aware
>> of the change and possible other packages I missed.
>>
>
>> I'll merge the side tag by the last day of the year.
>>
>> HTH.
>>
>> --
>> Zamir SUN
>> GPG : 1D86 6D4A 49CE 4BBD 72CF FCF5 D856 6E11 F2A0 525E
>> Want to know more about Fedora?
>> Visit https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/
>> Ready to contribute? See https://whatcanidoforfedora.org/
>> 想了解更多中文资讯，访问 https://zh.fedoracommunity.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
>>
>
___
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: Heads-up: lxqt libraries soname bump

[Ian McInerney via devel]

Apparently there were soname bumps in other lxqt packages that were updated
other than just those two. The qtermwidget package appears to have had an
soname bump from libqtermwidget5.so.0 to libqtermwidget5.so.1, breaking at
least TexStudio in Rawhide. I did a build for it, and it has been pushed to
rawhide now.

I suggest that you modify every lxqt spec file to not glob the soname
version for their exported libraries in the files section and instead have
the version defined in the spec file as a global. That would fail then
build when an soname bump occurs and the packager isn't aware of it,
preventing these types of unannounced bump problems in the future when
updating a lot of packages at once.

-Ian

On Mon, Dec 27, 2021 at 10:39 AM Zamir SUN  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I'm updating the whole LXQt desktop to 1.0.0 in rawhide, and I've built
> the packages in the side tag f36-build-side-49104. The following package
> contains library with a soname bump
>
> liblxqt (liblxqt.so.1)
> liblxqt-globalkeys (liblxqt-globalkeys.so.1,liblxqt-globalkeys-ui.so.1)
>
> I hope I did not miss anything. IIRC there are no packages outside of
> the LXQt SIG depends on those, but I'd like to still make people aware
> of the change and possible other packages I missed.
>
> I'll merge the side tag by the last day of the year.
>
> HTH.
>
> --
> Zamir SUN
> GPG : 1D86 6D4A 49CE 4BBD 72CF FCF5 D856 6E11 F2A0 525E
> Want to know more about Fedora?
> Visit https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/
> Ready to contribute? See https://whatcanidoforfedora.org/
> 想了解更多中文资讯，访问 https://zh.fedoracommunity.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
>
___
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

[Miro Hrončok]

On 03. 01. 22 19:16, Sérgio Basto wrote:

Testing rpm-specs/hibernate-jpa-2.0-api.spec
No terminal defined for 'E' at line 1 col 2

  EPL and BSD

What is the problem with this one ?


There is no EPL in https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main#Good_Licenses 
-- just EPL-1.0 and EPL-2.0.


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

Re: List of packages with problematic license

[Sérgio Basto]

On Sat, 2022-01-01 at 11:11 +0100, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> 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 

Testing rpm-specs/hibernate-jpa-2.0-api.spec
No terminal defined for 'E' at line 1 col 2

 EPL and BSD

What is the problem with this one ? 


>  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
> ___
> 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

-- 
Sérgio M. B.
___
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: 

Re: Self-introduction: Christopher Crouse (amz)

[Christopher Crouse]

Hi Matthew. Thanks for the warm welcome!
___
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

A handful of orphaned packages looking for new maintainers

[Miro Hrončok]

The following packages are orphaned and will be retired when they
are orphaned for six weeks, unless someone adopts them. If you know for sure
that the package should be retired, please do so now with a proper reason:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_remove_a_package_at_end_of_life

Note: If you received this mail directly you (co)maintain one of the affected
packages or a package that depends on one. Please adopt the affected package or
retire your depending package to avoid broken dependencies, otherwise your
package will fail to install and/or build when the affected package gets 
retired.

Request package ownership via the *Take* button in he left column on
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/

Full report available at:
https://churchyard.fedorapeople.org/orphans-2022-01-03.txt
grep it for your FAS username and follow the dependency chain.

For human readable dependency chains,
see https://packager-dashboard.fedoraproject.org/
For all orphaned packages,
see https://packager-dashboard.fedoraproject.org/orphan

 Package   (co)maintainers Status Change

apache-rat   mizdebsk, orphan  0 weeks ago
cptutils orphan2 weeks ago
dans-gdal-scriptsorphan2 weeks ago
direvent orphan5 weeks ago
e00compr orphan2 weeks ago
esniper  orphan2 weeks ago
fkill-cliorphan1 weeks ago
fx   orphan1 weeks ago
fx-completionorphan1 weeks ago
icedtea-web  jvanek, omajid, orphan4 weeks ago
jakarta-saaj orphan0 weeks ago
jakarta-xml-ws   orphan0 weeks ago
jmockorphan0 weeks ago
js-termynal  orphan4 weeks ago
nodejs-svgo  nodejs-sig, orphan1 weeks ago
npm-name-cli orphan1 weeks ago
perl-Net-HL7 orphan1 weeks ago
python-jenkins-job-builder   ignatenkobrain, ktdreyer, orphan, 2 weeks ago
 pabelanger
python-productivity  orphan5 weeks ago
ravada   orphan3 weeks ago
rubygem-rsolrorphan1 weeks ago
rust-biscuit orphan3 weeks ago
rust-signature   orphan5 weeks ago
sirilastro-sig, lkundrak, lupinix, 1 weeks ago
 orphan
topojson-client  orphan1 weeks ago
topojson-server  orphan1 weeks ago
topojson-simplifyorphan1 weeks ago
uddi4j   galileo, orphan   4 weeks ago
uml_utilitieschkr, orphan  0 weeks ago
wsil4j   galileo, orphan   4 weeks ago
xcf-pixbuf-loaderorphan3 weeks ago

The following packages require above mentioned packages:
Depending on: e00compr (1), status change: 2021-12-13 (2 weeks ago)
saga (maintained by: volter)
saga-7.6.1-10.fc36.src requires e00compr-devel = 1.0.1-25.fc35

Depending on: fx (1), status change: 2021-12-22 (1 weeks ago)
fx-completion (maintained by: orphan)
fx-completion-1.0.5-5.fc36.noarch requires npm(fx) = 20.0.2
fx-completion-1.0.5-5.fc36.src requires npm(fx) = 20.0.2

Depending on: jakarta-saaj (2), status change: 2022-01-02 (0 weeks ago)
jakarta-xml-ws (maintained by: orphan)
jakarta-xml-ws-2.3.1-3.fc35.noarch requires 
mvn(javax.xml.soap:saaj-api) = 1.4.2
jakarta-xml-ws-2.3.1-3.fc35.src requires 
mvn(javax.xml.soap:saaj-api) = 1.4.2

jmock (maintained by: orphan)
jmock-2.12.0-4.fc35.src requires mvn(javax.xml.ws:jaxws-api) = 
2.3.1

Depending on: jakarta-xml-ws (1), status change: 2022-01-02 (0 weeks ago)
jmock (maintained by: orphan)
jmock-2.12.0-4.fc35.src requires mvn(javax.xml.ws:jaxws-api) = 
2.3.1

Depending on: uddi4j (1), status change: 2021-12-02 (4 weeks ago)
wsil4j (maintained by: galileo, orphan)
		

Re: Self-introduction: Christopher Crouse (amz)

[Matthew Miller]

On Mon, Jan 03, 2022 at 07:11:24PM +0200, Christopher Crouse wrote:
> I’m Christopher, everyone just calls me Chris. I’m a 25 year old, Full Stack 
> Developer from Cape Town, South Africa. I have made a few minor open-source 
> contributions over the years, and will continue to do so in the future.
> I started using Fedora Linux three years ago. I switched from Arch Linux, and 
> I was astonished with the quality and stability of Fedora, while still being 
> a cutting-edge distro. I use the Pantheon DE on Fedora as my daily driver, 
> for work and also for gaming.
> The only packaging experience I have is the COPR repository, my own personal 
> "extras", that I maintain, which includes some additional rpms for the 
> Pantheon DE.
> I've decided I want to help with Pantheon DE related packaging, and keep 
> Fedora a top tier Linux distro, therefore I opened the following review 
> requests:


Hi Chris! Welcome, and thanks for working on this!


-- 
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: List of packages with problematic license

[Matthew Miller]

On Mon, Jan 03, 2022 at 01:26:33PM +0100, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> The License tag was never formally defined. If we agree that there can be
> anything, then let it be.

The Pending PR here updates that to: SPDX License identifier or expression
(from our "Good" list).

https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/pull-request/1142#_1__38

Although given the context here, I note that that's ambiguous about whether
the _whole expression_ must be on the list — I don't think that's the
intention!

[CC'ing this to the legal list, btw.]


-- 
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

Self-introduction: Christopher Crouse (amz)

[Christopher Crouse]

Hi everyone,

I would like to introduce myself.
I’m Christopher, everyone just calls me Chris. I’m a 25 year old, Full Stack 
Developer from Cape Town, South Africa. I have made a few minor open-source 
contributions over the years, and will continue to do so in the future.
I started using Fedora Linux three years ago. I switched from Arch Linux, and I 
was astonished with the quality and stability of Fedora, while still being a 
cutting-edge distro. I use the Pantheon DE on Fedora as my daily driver, for 
work and also for gaming.
The only packaging experience I have is the COPR repository, my own personal 
"extras", that I maintain, which includes some additional rpms for the Pantheon 
DE.
I've decided I want to help with Pantheon DE related packaging, and keep Fedora 
a top tier Linux distro, therefore I opened the following review requests:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2033757
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2034532

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2035369

Lastly, I would like to thank Fabio for all of his hard work that he's done in 
making the desktop environment a viable option for everyone using Fedora.___
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 2035898] perl-bignum-0.64 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2035898

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
   Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
 CC|jples...@redhat.com,|
   |mspa...@redhat.com, |
   |ppi...@redhat.com   |




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2035898
___
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 2036499] Please branch and build perl-Browser-Open for EPEL-9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036499



--- Comment #1 from Michal Josef Spacek  ---
Request for branch: https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/40377


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036499
___
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 2036500] Please branch and build perl-B-Debug for EPEL-9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036500



--- Comment #1 from Michal Josef Spacek  ---
Request for branch: https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/40376


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036500
___
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 2035606] perl-File-Slurper-0.013 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2035606



--- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2022-a0f187e1b9 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 35.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-a0f187e1b9


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2035606
___
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 2035606] perl-File-Slurper-0.013 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2035606

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
 Status|NEW |MODIFIED
 CC|jples...@redhat.com,|
   |mspa...@redhat.com  |
   Fixed In Version||perl-File-Slurper-0.013-1.f
   ||c36




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2035606
___
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 2032232] perl-Crypt-DH-GMP for EPEL 9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2032232

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-43376ed831 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 9.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-43376ed831


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2032232
___
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 2036665] Please branch and build perl-Digest-SHA3 for EPEL-9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036665

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC|jples...@redhat.com |



--- Comment #1 from Jitka Plesnikova  ---
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/40400


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036665
___
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 2036661] Please branch and build perl-Scope-Upper for EPEL-9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036661

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED



--- Comment #1 from Jitka Plesnikova  ---
//pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/40399


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036661
___
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 2036506] Please branch and build perl-XML-Dumper for EPEL-9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036506

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

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



--- Comment #1 from Jitka Plesnikova  ---
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/40398


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036506
___
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 2036504] Please branch and build perl-Exporter-Tidy for EPEL-9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036504

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
   Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value



--- Comment #1 from Jitka Plesnikova  ---
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/40397


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036504
___
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: [Test-Announce] 2022-01-03 @ 16:00 UTC - Fedora QA Meeting

[Luna Jernberg]

Hey!

Will be attending today

On Mon, Jan 3, 2022 at 5:18 AM Adam Williamson 
wrote:

> # Fedora Quality Assurance Meeting
> # Date: 2022-01-03
> # Time: 16:00 UTC
> (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto)
> # Location: #fedora-meeting on irc.libera.chat
>
> Greetings testers, and happy new solar year!
>
> Apologies for the late notice (I sort of only just remembered I have to
> go back to this whole *work* thing), but since the holiday break is
> about over, let's meet up tomorrow, see where things stand (or lean),
> and get set for the coming year.
>
> If anyone has any other items for the agenda, please reply to this
> email and suggest them! Thanks.
>
> == Proposed Agenda Topics ==
>
> 1. Previous meeting follow-up
> 2. Fedora 36 status
> 3. Current criteria / test case proposals
> 4. Test Day / community event status
> 5. Open floor
> --
> Adam Williamson
> Fedora QA
> IRC: adamw | Twitter: adamw_ha
> https://www.happyassassin.net
>
> ___
> test-announce mailing list -- test-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to
> test-announce-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
>
___
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)

[Steve Grubb]

On Wednesday, December 29, 2021 12:47:43 PM EST Gordon Messmer wrote:
> On 12/29/21 07:26, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> > On 29/12/2021 16:01, Ben Cotton wrote:
> >> Currently, the RPM databases is located in `/var`. Let's move it to
> >> `/usr`. The move is already under way in rpm-ostree-based
> >> installations, and in (open)SUSE.
> > 
> > It will break FHS compatibility. /usr must contain read-only data.
> 
> If /usr really is read-only, then it probably doesn't matter where the
> rpmdb is, since packages can't be installed (generally).

Not only cases where /usr is readonly, what about the case where /usr is on a 
SSD because it should not be changing much? I have /var on a spinning disk 
because by definition it is where things live that change frequently.

-Steve

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

[Bug 2036498] Please branch and build perl-Parallel-Iterator for EPEL-9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036498

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED



--- Comment #1 from Jitka Plesnikova  ---
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/40395


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036498
___
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 2036497] Please branch and build perl-Dir-Self for EPEL-9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036497

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED



--- Comment #1 from Jitka Plesnikova  ---
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/40394


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036497
___
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 2036225] Please branch and build perl-Test-Portability-Files for EPEL-9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036225

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
   Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value



--- Comment #1 from Jitka Plesnikova  ---
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/40393


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036225
___
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 2031809] perl-Net-OpenID-Server for EPEL 9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2031809

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-a25a6208a1 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 9.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-a25a6208a1


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2031809
___
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 2031808] perl-Net-OpenID-Consumer for EPEL 9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2031808

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED



--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-b88f39e70d has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 9.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-b88f39e70d


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2031808
___
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 2032231] perl-Net-OpenID-Common for EPEL 9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2032231

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-56805e003a has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 9.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-56805e003a


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2032231
___
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)

[Panu Matilainen]

On 1/3/22 15:36, Lennart Poettering wrote:

On Mo, 03.01.22 14:15, Florian Weimer (fwei...@redhat.com) wrote:


* Lennart Poettering:


Can you provide an example for such feature requests? i.e. where the
rpmdb should be writable even though /usr is assumed to be immutable?


Maybe if RPM is used to install software under /opt?


I'd argue that conceptually /opt and /usr should be seen as the same
thing for RPM: i.e. during update time both are writable and outside
of updates they are both to be considered read-only from RPM's
PoV. Hence it should be fine too put the rpmdb in /usr/ too in that
case.

Or with other words: if RPM is used to install something in /opt, it
should be fine to require that both /usr and /opt are writable then.


It does seem a bit controversial to require /usr of all things to be 
writable to be install into /opt, /etc, /boot and whatnot.


- Panu -
___
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-20220103.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: 104/228 (x86_64), 71/159 (aarch64)

New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20220102.n.0):

ID: 1094864 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 base_selinux@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1094864
ID: 1094937 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz desktop_printing@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1094937
ID: 1094953 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 
base_service_manipulation@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1094953
ID: 1094974 Test: x86_64 Workstation-upgrade desktop_update_graphical
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1094974

Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20220102.n.0):

ID: 1094736 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso anaconda_help
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1094736
ID: 1094747 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_repository_hd_variation
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1094747
ID: 1094753 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_vncconnect_client
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1094753
ID: 1094759 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_vnc_server
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1094759
ID: 1094777 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_vncconnect_server
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1094777
ID: 1094779 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_vnc_client
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1094779
ID: 1094792 Test: x86_64 Everything-boot-iso memory_check
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1094792
ID: 1094793 Test: x86_64 Everything-boot-iso memory_check@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1094793
ID: 1094796 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso install_default@uefi 
**GATING**
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1094796
ID: 1094797 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso install_default_upload 
**GATING**
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1094797
ID: 1094820 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso install_default_upload **GATING**
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1094820
ID: 1094821 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso install_no_user **GATING**
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1094821
ID: 1094840 Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso anaconda_help
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1094840
ID: 1094875 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso anaconda_help@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1094875
ID: 1094878 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso install_vnc_server@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1094878
ID: 1094892 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso install_vnc_client@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1094892
ID: 1094893 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso install_vncconnect_client@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1094893
ID: 1094904 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso 
install_repository_hd_variation@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1094904
ID: 1094917 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso install_vncconnect_server@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1094917
ID: 1094938 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz gedit@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1094938
ID: 1094943 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz eog@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1094943
ID: 1094954 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 base_services_start@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1094954
ID: 1094956 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1094956
ID: 1094965 Test: x86_64 Workstation-upgrade desktop_fprint
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1094965
ID: 1094977 Test: x86_64 Workstation-upgrade desktop_login
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1094977
ID: 1094979 Test: aarch64 Workstation-upgrade desktop_browser@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1094979
ID: 1094982 Test: aarch64 Workstation-upgrade desktop_printing@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1094982
ID: 1094983 Test: aarch64 Workstation-upgrade evince@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1094983
ID: 1094991 Test: aarch64 Workstation-upgrade desktop_update_graphical@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1094991
ID: 1094994 Test: aarch64 Workstation-upgrade gedit@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1094994
ID: 1094995 Test: aarch64 Workstation-upgrade eog@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1094995
ID: 1095011 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_2_server_domain_controller
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1095011
ID: 1095067 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_2_realmd_client
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1095067
ID: 1095068 Test: x86_64 universal 

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

[Colin Walters]

For the record, I obviously support this change.  Responding to a few threads:

On Wed, Dec 29, 2021, at 10:16 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:

> How does this work on RO /usr files systems? I thought data in /usr
> was supposed to be static/ It works for rpm-ostree because it's
> updated at tree creation time.

I think you know this but it's worth elaborating on here; rpm-ostree supports 
client-side layering (and overrides too) and even live updates - and those all 
operate by default while maintaining `/usr` read-only from the perspective of 
the rest of the system.

The way this works ultimately is quite simple; the underlying filesystem is 
writable, we just remount it writable *in a private mount namespace*.  So even 
when you do e.g. `rpm-ostree install -A usbguard`, there is no point where 
*other* processes can write.  

People are focusing a bit too much on "read-only" in this thread - it's more 
about "lifecycle binding" and versioning the binaries together with metadata 
about the binaries.

On Thu, Dec 30, 2021, at 1:57 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:

>> What happens if /var/lib is read-only? Changing (fixing?) this would
>> be a pre-requisite to this proposal, we don't want 'dnf list' to break.

Why would /var/lib be read-only, but /usr be writable?

> Why should it be a prerequisite? In all Fedora editions and spins with
> dnf, /usr and /var are read-write. In the case of rpm-ostree based
> editions and spins, they don't include dnf. 

Remember rpm-ostree links to libdnf, and significant code is hence shared.
That's part of the ASCII-art architecture diagram in the docs
https://coreos.github.io/rpm-ostree/

The way I'd say this is it aligns "traditional" dnf systems with what 
rpm-ostree has been doing for many years now, and that will help share *even 
more* code and logic in the future.
___
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)

[Panu Matilainen]

On 12/29/21 17:01, Ben Cotton wrote:


Upstream RPM accept the change, but institutionally don't like the
loss or weakening of a
[http://lists.rpm.org/pipermail/rpm-ecosystem/2021-December/000781.html
very well known location] for the database, and
[http://lists.rpm.org/pipermail/rpm-ecosystem/2021-December/000781.html
anticipate complaints].


Just noticed this in the change text...

To clarify the upstream position: there are no plans to change the 
upstream default, the level of acceptance is merely that if Fedora wants 
to change it I'm not going to stand in front of the Change truck.


- Panu -
___
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 2036665] New: Please branch and build perl-Digest-SHA3 for EPEL-9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036665

Bug ID: 2036665
   Summary: Please branch and build perl-Digest-SHA3 for EPEL-9
   Product: Fedora EPEL
   Version: epel9
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-Digest-SHA3
  Assignee: jples...@redhat.com
  Reporter: p...@city-fan.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: jples...@redhat.com,
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Could you please branch and build perl-Digest-SHA3 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=2036665
___
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 2036663] New: Please branch and build perl-IO-CaptureOutput for EPEL-9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036663

Bug ID: 2036663
   Summary: Please branch and build perl-IO-CaptureOutput for
EPEL-9
   Product: Fedora EPEL
   Version: epel9
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-IO-CaptureOutput
  Assignee: spo...@gmail.com
  Reporter: p...@city-fan.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org, spo...@gmail.com
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Could you please branch and build perl-IO-CaptureOutput 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=2036663
___
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 2035274] CVE-2020-16156 perl-CPAN: allows Signature Verification Bypass [fedora-all]

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2035274



--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2022-84fd87f7eb has been submitted as an update to Fedora 34.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-84fd87f7eb


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2035274
___
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 2035274] CVE-2020-16156 perl-CPAN: allows Signature Verification Bypass [fedora-all]

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2035274

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |MODIFIED



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2022-21e8372c42 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 35.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-21e8372c42


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2035274
___
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 2036661] New: Please branch and build perl-Scope-Upper for EPEL-9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036661

Bug ID: 2036661
   Summary: Please branch and build perl-Scope-Upper for EPEL-9
   Product: Fedora EPEL
   Version: epel9
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-Scope-Upper
  Assignee: jples...@redhat.com
  Reporter: p...@city-fan.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: iarn...@gmail.com, jples...@redhat.com,
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Could you please branch and build perl-Scope-Upper 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=2036661
___
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

Schedule for Monday's FESCo Meeting (2022-01-03)

[Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek]

Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the
FESCo meeting Monday at 19:00UTC in #fedora-meeting on
irc.libera.chat.

To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at
  http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto

or run:
  date -d '2021-02-03 19:00 UTC'


Links to all issues to be discussed can be found at: 
https://pagure.io/fesco/report/meeting_agenda

= Discussed and Voted in the Ticket =

#2712 F36 Change: Switch GnuTLS to allowlisting 
https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2712
APPROVED (+5,0,-0)


= Followups =

New meeting time

#2711 F36 Change: Enable fs-verity in RPM
https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2711

#2713 F36 Change: Make Rescue Mode Work With Locked Root
https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2713


= New business =

#2717 Blender 3.0.0 on Fedora 35 
https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2717


= Open Floor = 

For more complete details, please visit each individual
issue.  The report of the agenda items can be found at
https://pagure.io/fesco/report/meeting_agenda

If you would like to add something to this agenda, you can
reply to this e-mail, file a new issue at
https://pagure.io/fesco, e-mail me directly, or bring it
up at the end of the meeting, during the open floor topic. Note
that added topics may be deferred until the following meeting. 


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: Please add me to packager group

[Miroslav Suchý]

Dne 03. 01. 22 v 14:21 Konrad Kleine napsal(a):
Right now I do all my work in a fork of the official LLVM repos (e.g. clang, lld, etc.). That is a bit annoying and 
now that the snapshots have evolved quite a bit I'd like to be able to integrate my "snapshot-build" branches as a 
branches in official repos for LLVM (e.g. https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/clang/blob/rawhide/f/clang.spec).


For that and to finally be able to clone my repos more easily (without consulting the wiki every time) I need to be in 
the "packager" group (https://accounts.fedoraproject.org/group/packager/).


Can someone please add me to this group?


I am already in touch with Konrad.

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

[Bug 2036123] Please branch and build perl-HTML-Selector-XPath for EPEL-8

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036123



--- Comment #2 from Paul Howarth  ---
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/40389


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036123
___
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 2034172] EPEL9 branch of perl-File-Find-Rule-Perl

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2034172



--- Comment #3 from Paul Howarth  ---
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/40388


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2034172
___
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: List of packages with problematic license

[Richard W.M. Jones]

On Mon, Jan 03, 2022 at 01:26:33PM +0100, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> Dne 02. 01. 22 v 17:19 Richard W.M. Jones napsal(a):
> 
> Testing rpm-specs/ipxe.spec
> No terminal defined for 'w' at line 1 col 8
> 
>  GPLv2 with additional permissions and BSD
>^
> 
> Expecting: {'AND', 'OR'}
> 
> The license does appear to be accurate in the sense that it reflects
> the somewhat unusual license of iPXE.
> 
> The problem is that
> 
>   GPLv2 with additional permissions
> 
> is not valid short name from
> 
>   https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main#Software_License_List

Oh I see, I thought that the OCaml license ("LGPLv2+ with exceptions")
was somehow composed of  + "with exceptions".  But I see from
the list that the whole thing is a permitted license.

> The License tag was never formally defined. If we agree that there can be
> anything, then let it be.
> 
> Just most of our strings are in the form:
> 
>   license: "(" license ")" | license operator license | short_name
>   operator: "and" | "or"
> 
> where short_name is the identifier from Licensing:main.
> 
> If we fix few exceptions like "license, license" then we will benefit from
> 
> * unified syntax
> 
> * machine readable string
> 
> * automatic validation
> 
> I recommend to track such exceptions in comments. E.g.
> 
>     # the actual license have additional permission allowing to 
>     License: GPLv2 and BSD

Well I'm not so sure since the license for OCaml software is certainly
not just LGPLv2+, and the way OCaml is linked makes it impossible for
distributors to meaningfully comply with the problematic subclause of
clause 2 of the LGPL, hence the need for a permissive exception.  This
sounds like something we would need to record for automation.

Rich.

> Miroslav
> 

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


-- 
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

Re: Copr - look back at 2021

[Pavel Raiskup]

On Monday, January 3, 2022 11:30:42 AM CET Tomas Tomecek wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 30, 2021 at 3:35 PM Miroslav Suchý  wrote:
> 
> >
> >-
> >
> >Statistics:
> >-
> >
> >   Copr run 2,900,000 builds.
> >   -
> >
> >   People created 15 731 new projects.
> >
> >
> Whaaat! The whole list of things you have achieved is mega impressive but
> this one totally caught my eye: doing millions of builds per year.
> 
> I'm wondering how many of those projects were created by packit.

Frontend footer links this: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/db_dumps/
In case anyone wanted to do more analysis ...

coprdb=# select count(*) from copr where created_on > 1609459200 and created_on 
< 1640995200;
┌───┐
│ count │
├───┤
│ 15760 │
└───┘
(1 row)

coprdb=# select count(*) from copr where created_on > 1609459200 and created_on 
< 1640995200 and user_id = 5576;
┌───┐
│ count │
├───┤
│ 10037 │
└───┘
(1 row)

Most of the projects is from Packit.  Packit has though quite unusual use-case;
those projects are used for a short period of time (usually new project for
every PR), and contain only a few builds.

Builds statistics for Packit are not easy to get..  The old removed
projects (deleted=true, temporary projects...) have all the related Build
instances removed from DB.  But due to the nature of the CI builds I
suppose it will be somewhere below 100k.

Pavel


___
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)

[Roberto Sassu via devel]

> From: Lennart Poettering [mailto:mzerq...@0pointer.de]
> Sent: Monday, January 3, 2022 2:34 PM
> On Mo, 03.01.22 13:07, Roberto Sassu (roberto.sa...@huawei.com) wrote:
> 
> > That would work if all digest lists are supported by the kernel.
> > The first version worked that way, I developed a simple parser
> > of RPM headers, so that the kernel could process then without
> > having an additional user space process. Much better in term
> > of protection: no interference with other user space processes
> > that should be handled with an ad-hoc LSM, no time to measure
> > time to use race condition.
> 
> Why would you need to convert the digests on-the-fly? Can't you
> instead convert in an "offline" fashion, i.e. convert the RPM data
> into a kernel-understood digest list, and then wrap that in a cpio for
> use in an initrd? I mean, given the digests are only updated whenever
> RPM updates are done it sound like something perfectly doable in an
> "offline" fashion, i.e. convert at the moment of RPM update, and then
> just stick the covnerted format?

IMA appraisal would fail. Currently, it succeeds because
the GPG keys used to sign RPM headers are in the kernel
keyring, and each RPM header has a PGP appended signature
(similar to the PKCS#7 of kernel modules).

It could be possible to use HMAC to protect digest lists
locally generated. However, it adds a dependency on EVM
and require very strong measures to avoid that the whole
mechanism is circumvented: the HMAC key should be stored
in hardware in the TPM, should be sealed to a system that
does not let the user calculate HMACs of arbitrary files.

Roberto

HUAWEI TECHNOLOGIES Duesseldorf GmbH, HRB 56063
Managing Director: Li Peng, Zhong Ronghua
___
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)

[Panu Matilainen]

On 1/3/22 14:57, Lennart Poettering wrote:

On Mo, 03.01.22 11:57, Panu Matilainen (pmati...@redhat.com) wrote:


On 12/30/21 09:02, Chris Murphy wrote:

On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 8:19 AM Tom Hughes via devel
 wrote:


I don't see how this is FHS compliant, which in turn would make
it non-compliant with Fedora Packaging Guidelines, namely:


https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_filesystem_layout

The FHS describes /usr here:

 https://refspecs.linuxfoundation.org/FHS_3.0/fhs/ch04.html#purpose18

as "/usr is shareable, read-only data" which clearly does not
apply to a database that changes.


In practice it is read-only data, except when software is being
installed or updated. The FHS is a PITA sometimes, but it's not
advocating for systems that can't be updated or changed..



The rpmdb has traditionally been like that, but it doesn't mean it will stay
that way forever more. There are all manner of currently unimplemented
use-cases which would require changing the database outside a direct
install/update/erase context. Many of those use-cases are related to files
and would fall under "but you need writable fs for that anyway" but not all.
Of course it'll always be *mostly* read-only data because of the nature of
the data, compared to a general purpose db in /var.


Can you provide an example for such feature requests? i.e. where the
rpmdb should be writable even though /usr is assumed to be immutable?


There seems to be this strange underlying assumption that all packaged 
content lives in /usr when that's not at all the case. To install a 
kernel, or a config-only package (under etc), or 3rd party software 
putting stuff under /opt, or... you need a writable rpmdb. Ditto for 
'rpm --import'.


But the kind of thing I had in mind when making that comment initially 
is eg ability to update file states in the rpmdb to reflect local 
changes from eg network mounting .. well, the typical example would be 
/usr but in this case that gets a little strange.


In general, "data set by users" is the common case, whether a policy to 
flag a given package as unremovable or non-updatable, or add a "reason" 
(dependency or user-installed), or other annotations.


- Panu -
___
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)

[Lennart Poettering]

On Mo, 03.01.22 14:15, Florian Weimer (fwei...@redhat.com) wrote:

> * Lennart Poettering:
>
> > Can you provide an example for such feature requests? i.e. where the
> > rpmdb should be writable even though /usr is assumed to be immutable?
>
> Maybe if RPM is used to install software under /opt?

I'd argue that conceptually /opt and /usr should be seen as the same
thing for RPM: i.e. during update time both are writable and outside
of updates they are both to be considered read-only from RPM's
PoV. Hence it should be fine too put the rpmdb in /usr/ too in that
case.

Or with other words: if RPM is used to install something in /opt, it
should be fine to require that both /usr and /opt are writable then.

Lennart

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

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

[Lennart Poettering]

On Mo, 03.01.22 13:07, Roberto Sassu (roberto.sa...@huawei.com) wrote:

> That would work if all digest lists are supported by the kernel.
> The first version worked that way, I developed a simple parser
> of RPM headers, so that the kernel could process then without
> having an additional user space process. Much better in term
> of protection: no interference with other user space processes
> that should be handled with an ad-hoc LSM, no time to measure
> time to use race condition.

Why would you need to convert the digests on-the-fly? Can't you
instead convert in an "offline" fashion, i.e. convert the RPM data
into a kernel-understood digest list, and then wrap that in a cpio for
use in an initrd? I mean, given the digests are only updated whenever
RPM updates are done it sound like something perfectly doable in an
"offline" fashion, i.e. convert at the moment of RPM update, and then
just stick the covnerted format?

Lennart

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

Please add me to packager group

[Konrad Kleine]

Hi there and Happy New Year!

I'm working on the daily snapshot builds of LLVM for Fedora (I'm the
maintainer of them):

https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/g/fedora-llvm-team/llvm-snapshots/monitor/

I'm also part of the fedora-llvm-team group (
https://accounts.fedoraproject.org/group/fedora-llvm-team/).

Right now I do all my work in a fork of the official LLVM repos (e.g.
clang, lld, etc.). That is a bit annoying and now that the snapshots have
evolved quite a bit I'd like to be able to integrate my "snapshot-build"
branches as a branches in official repos for LLVM (e.g.
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/clang/blob/rawhide/f/clang.spec).

For that and to finally be able to clone my repos more easily (without
consulting the wiki every time) I need to be in the "packager" group (
https://accounts.fedoraproject.org/group/packager/).

Can someone please add me to this group?

I understand that my request goes a bit against the usual workflow since
I'm not adding a new package to Fedora but instead maintaining a copr
project that is built from sources here:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/clang . In total I'm building >10
packages of the LLVM ecosystem. I want to offload some of the maintenance
work but for that my colleagues need to have access to my repos. That is
unnecessary when there could be a special branch that feeds the snapshot
builds in the official repos. I hope this makes things a bit clearer.

Konrad Kleine

Senior Software Engineer, Platform Tools

Red Hat 

kkle...@redhat.com
M: +49(0)151/21000244

D87A 77F4 2A58 C72D 12A7 203B C0A0 2C32 BCB7 3099

___
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)

[Florian Weimer]

* Lennart Poettering:

> Can you provide an example for such feature requests? i.e. where the
> rpmdb should be writable even though /usr is assumed to be immutable?

Maybe if RPM is used to install software under /opt?

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

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

[Lennart Poettering]

On Mo, 03.01.22 11:57, Panu Matilainen (pmati...@redhat.com) wrote:

> On 12/30/21 09:02, Chris Murphy wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 8:19 AM Tom Hughes via devel
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > I don't see how this is FHS compliant, which in turn would make
> > > it non-compliant with Fedora Packaging Guidelines, namely:
> > >
> > >
> > > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_filesystem_layout
> > >
> > > The FHS describes /usr here:
> > >
> > > https://refspecs.linuxfoundation.org/FHS_3.0/fhs/ch04.html#purpose18
> > >
> > > as "/usr is shareable, read-only data" which clearly does not
> > > apply to a database that changes.
> >
> > In practice it is read-only data, except when software is being
> > installed or updated. The FHS is a PITA sometimes, but it's not
> > advocating for systems that can't be updated or changed..
> >
>
> The rpmdb has traditionally been like that, but it doesn't mean it will stay
> that way forever more. There are all manner of currently unimplemented
> use-cases which would require changing the database outside a direct
> install/update/erase context. Many of those use-cases are related to files
> and would fall under "but you need writable fs for that anyway" but not all.
> Of course it'll always be *mostly* read-only data because of the nature of
> the data, compared to a general purpose db in /var.

Can you provide an example for such feature requests? i.e. where the
rpmdb should be writable even though /usr is assumed to be immutable?

Lennart

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

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

[Lennart Poettering]

On Do, 30.12.21 07:05, Fedora Development ML (devel@lists.fedoraproject.org) 
wrote:

> As I demonstrated later in my email the contents of /var/lib/rpm
> do change at other times though.

Note that there are other things in /usr that are similar to the RPM
db in the "mostly-read-only-but-not-quite" sense, i.e. files that are
generated locally during updates, but are static outside of updates.

The kernel modules databases for example, i.e. /lib/modules/`uname
-r`/*.dep. Or fontconfig for mime db stuff iirc. ldconfig creates
so symlinks. And there's more.

I think having that is even fine. Key must be though that the stuff
that is generated locally and stored in /usr is:

a) never updated outside of the update operations
b) operates on input that is exclusively from the vendor, too (and not
   dependent on local admin's config choices)

As long as these rules apply the /usr/ tree remains sharable between
multiple systems, and hence it should be fine if some files stored
there are not written by RPM itself but by tools invoked by it that
operate on data also installed by it.

I think one of those days we should make the first rule explicit btw,
and by default overmount /usr/ with a read-only bind mount of itself,
that RPM then remounts writable immediately before doing an update and
remounts back afterwards. (or alternatively, rpm toggles the r/o bit
on the btrfs subvolume if /usr/ is one).

Key point I am trying to make here: having stuff in /usr that is not
directly RPM payload is not a new thing, it's a common thing we
already have been doing since a long time, and it's OK. I welcome if
RPM would put its database in /usr/ as well.

Lennart

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

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

[Lennart Poettering]

On Do, 30.12.21 13:04, Fedora Development ML (devel@lists.fedoraproject.org) 
wrote:

> > From: Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek [mailto:zbys...@in.waw.pl]
> > Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2021 1:02 PM
> > The gist of the proposal is described thus:
> > > The new feature behaves as follows. A modified kernel with the DIGLIM
> > > patches will expose to user space an interface to add/remove file
> > > digests from the kernel hash table. A user space parser, executed by
> > > the kernel during early boot, parses RPM headers found in /etc/diglim
> > > in the initial ram disk (included with a custom dracut script) and
> > > uploads them to the kernel. When a file is accessed, IMA calculates
> > > the file digest and queries it with DIGLIM. If the digest is found,
> > > measurement is skipped and appraisal is successful. If the digest is
> > > not found, a measurement of the file is performed and appraisal fails.
> > > When packages are installed or removed, the kernel hash table is kept
> > > synchronized with a new rpm plugin.
> >
> > This description is … short.
>
> I saw you asked more questions below. I will answer there.
>
> > > A user space parser, executed by the kernel during early boot
> >
> > Is it really executed by the kernel? This description makes it sound
> > like a special old-hotplug-helper-style program that is spawned directly
> > by the kernel.
>
> Yes, it must be executed before init, otherwise the kernel
> would refuse to execute it. And probably, it must be executed
> earlier than now, as I'm seeing that the kmod binary is being
> executed (with the same mechanism, user-mode helper) before
> the digest lists are uploaded to the kernel.

Wouldn't it make more sense to push the digest lists into the kernel
by simpler means, before any userspace runs? e.g. just pick it up from
some fixed path in the file system, directly from the kernel, like the
firmware is picked up, or the ACPI DSDT tables are picked up. That way
you can just compile the digest lists trivially into a cpio you pass as extra
initrd to the kernel, and things will just work without "uploading",
without happing any intermediary userspace process around that needs
to run to upload anything... They'd be available from the first moment
on, from kernel code, without any userspace interfering.

Static linking is a mess. User-mode helper is an atrocity: no new
kernel callouts should be introduced these days, that bypass userspace
service management, that are not properly sorted into a cgroup and so
on. It all sounds to me as if this *really* isn't thought to the end,
and should not be adopted this way...

Lennart

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

Re: F36 Change: Keylime subpackaging and agent alternatives (Self-Contained Change proposal)

[Sergio Correia]

Hello and apologies for the delayed response; I have been out of
office for a couple of weeks.

On Fri, Dec 17, 2021 at 8:00 AM Neal Gompa  wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 17, 2021 at 5:45 AM Ben Cotton  wrote:
> >
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Keylime_subpackaging_and_agent_alternatives
> >
> > == Summary ==
> > The [https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/keylime keylime] package will
> > be split into subpackages per role (agent, registrar, verifier, and
> > admin components), while allowing the alternative agent implementation
> > in Rust.
> >
> > == Owner ==
> > * Name: [[User:Scorreia| Sergio Correia]]
> > * Email: scorr...@redhat.com
> >
> > * Name: [[User:Ueno| Daiki Ueno]]
> > * Email: du...@redhat.com
> >
> >
> > == Detailed Description ==
> > The current [https://keylime.dev/ Keylime] package available in Fedora
> > provides all the components as a single package. To support the usage
> > scenarios where only agent or management component is deployed on a
> > specific host, we plan to split the package into subpackages per role.
> > This change also enables the alternative Keylime agent implementation
> > in Rust, which will eventually be preferred over the Python
> > implementation.
> >
> >
> > == Benefit to Fedora ==
> > This makes it easier to deploy Keylime agent in IoT or Fedora CoreOS
> > spins and thus enable remote attestation without installing full
> > dependencies of Keylime.
> >
> > == Scope ==
> > * Proposal owners:
> > ** The keylime package will provide subpackages (keylime-agent,
> > keylime-registrar, etc)
> > ** The keylime package will be a meta package that will install all
> > the subpackages
> > ** The Rust based [https://github.com/keylime/rust-keylime agent] will
> > be packaged along with its build dependencies
> > ** Both keylime-agent implementations, one written in Python, the
> > other written in Rust, will be selectively installable through
> > [https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Alternatives/
> > alternatives] or a similar mechanism
> >
>
> Alternatives only make sense if parallel installability is desirable.
> It doesn't sound like that is the case for this situation.
>
> Instead, you probably want to leverage RPM's installable alternatives
> framework, which we use for PipeWire/PulseAudio and
> pipewire-media-session/wireplumber.
>

Yeah, you are right; looking at your pipewire/pulseaudio example, it
looks like what we want to do here.

> For PipeWire/PulseAudio, the pipewire-pulseaudio and pulseaudio
> packages had the following stanzas added:
>
> Provides: pulseaudio-daemon
> Conflicts: pulseaudio-daemon
>
> For pipewire-media-session/wireplumber, those packages had the
> following stanzas added:
>
> Provides: pipewire-session-manager
> Conflicts: pipewire-session-manager
>
> The Provides+Conflicts on a single virtual name makes it so RPM knows
> that those packages are equivalent providers, but only one of them can
> be present on a system at a time. Attempting to install the other
> would trigger a Conflicts, and you'd need to use "dnf swap" to switch
> implementations.
>
> For your case, each Keylime agent package would have the following stanzas:
>
> Provides: keylime-tpm-agent
> Conflicts: keylime-tpm-agent
>
> Those two stanzas tell RPM that keylime-agent-python and
> keylime-agent-rust are equivalent, but conflicting providers of
> "keylime-tpm-agent" and will only allow one or the other.
>

Thanks for the help here, and I will update the proposal to reflect
your suggestion.

Best Regards,
Sergio
___
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

[Miroslav Suchý]

Dne 02. 01. 22 v 17:19 Richard W.M. Jones napsal(a):

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

  GPLv2 with additional permissions and BSD
^

Expecting: {'AND', 'OR'}

The license does appear to be accurate in the sense that it reflects
the somewhat unusual license of iPXE.


The problem is that

  GPLv2 with additional permissions

is not valid short name from

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main#Software_License_List

The License tag was never formally defined. If we agree that there can be 
anything, then let it be.

Just most of our strings are in the form:

  license: "(" license ")" | license operator license | short_name
  operator: "and" | "or"

where short_name is the identifier from Licensing:main.

If we fix few exceptions like "license, license" then we will benefit from

* unified syntax

* machine readable string

* automatic validation

I recommend to track such exceptions in comments. E.g.

    # the actual license have additional permission allowing to 
    License: GPLv2 and BSD

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

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20220103.n.0 changes

[Fedora Rawhide Report]

OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20220102.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20220103.n.0

= SUMMARY =
Added images:1
Dropped images:  1
Added packages:  0
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages:   23
Downgraded packages: 0

Size of added packages:  0 B
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Size of upgraded packages:   781.69 MiB
Size of downgraded packages: 0 B

Size change of upgraded packages:   847.12 KiB
Size change of downgraded packages: 0 B

= ADDED IMAGES =
Image: Workstation raw-xz armhfp
Path: 
Workstation/armhfp/images/Fedora-Workstation-Rawhide-20220103.n.0.armhfp.raw.xz

= DROPPED IMAGES =
Image: SoaS raw-xz armhfp
Path: Spins/armhfp/images/Fedora-SoaS-Rawhide-20220102.n.0.armhfp.raw.xz

= ADDED PACKAGES =

= DROPPED PACKAGES =

= UPGRADED PACKAGES =
Package:  blueberry-1.4.7-1.fc36
Old package:  blueberry-1.4.6-1.fc36
Summary:  Bluetooth configuration tool
RPMs: blueberry
Size: 1.22 MiB
Size change:  1.03 KiB
Changelog:
  * Sun Jan 02 2022 Kevin Fenzi  - 1.4.7-1
  - Update to 1.4.7. Fixes rhbz#2036418


Package:  cgit-1.2.3-8.fc36
Old package:  cgit-1.2.3-6.fc35
Summary:  A fast web interface for git
RPMs: cgit
Size: 3.33 MiB
Size change:  -59.50 KiB
Changelog:
  * Mon Jul 26 2021 Todd Zullinger  - 1.2.3-7
  - update SELinux README
  - simplify install commands
  - improve httpd config file creation
  - explicitly list the cgit cgi-bin script
  - create /var/lib/git to improve SELinux compatibility

  * Sun Jan 02 2022 Todd Zullinger  - 1.2.3-8
  - update to git-2.34.1
  - use %__make to run tests in %check


Package:  copyq-6.0.1-1.fc36
Old package:  copyq-6.0.0-1.fc36
Summary:  Advanced clipboard manager
RPMs: copyq
Size: 11.42 MiB
Size change:  -5.31 KiB
Changelog:
  * Sun Jan 02 2022 Gerald Cox  - 6.0.1-1
  - Upstream release rhbz#2036447


Package:  cura-1:4.12.1-2.fc36
Old package:  cura-1:4.12.1-1.fc36
Summary:  3D printer / slicing GUI
RPMs: cura
Size: 34.21 MiB
Size change:  -425 B
Changelog:
  * Sun Jan 02 2022 Gabriel F??ron  - 1:4.12.1-2
  - Backport fix for Python 3.10


Package:  dummy-test-package-gloster-0-6520.fc36
Old package:  dummy-test-package-gloster-0-6514.fc36
Summary:  Dummy Test Package called Gloster
RPMs: dummy-test-package-gloster
Size: 397.24 KiB
Size change:  316 B
Changelog:
  * Sun Jan 02 2022 packagerbot  - 0-6515
  - rebuilt

  * Sun Jan 02 2022 packagerbot  - 0-6516
  - rebuilt

  * Sun Jan 02 2022 packagerbot  - 0-6517
  - rebuilt

  * Sun Jan 02 2022 packagerbot  - 0-6518
  - rebuilt

  * Sun Jan 02 2022 packagerbot  - 0-6519
  - rebuilt

  * Mon Jan 03 2022 packagerbot  - 0-6520
  - rebuilt


Package:  fcitx5-chinese-addons-5.0.10-1.fc36
Old package:  fcitx5-chinese-addons-5.0.9-2.fc36
Summary:  Chinese related addon for fcitx5
RPMs: fcitx5-chinese-addons fcitx5-chinese-addons-data 
fcitx5-chinese-addons-devel
Size: 3.57 MiB
Size change:  4.79 KiB
Changelog:
  * Sun Jan 02 2022 Qiyu Yan  5.0.10-1
  - update to 5.0.10


Package:  fcitx5-gtk-5.0.11-1.fc36
Old package:  fcitx5-gtk-5.0.10-1.fc36
Summary:  Gtk im module and glib based dbus client library
RPMs: fcitx5-gtk fcitx5-gtk-devel fcitx5-gtk2 fcitx5-gtk3 fcitx5-gtk4
Size: 892.57 KiB
Size change:  1.46 KiB
Changelog:
  * Sun Jan 02 2022 Qiyu Yan  5.0.11-1
  - update to 5.0.11


Package:  fcitx5-m17n-5.0.7-1.fc36
Old package:  fcitx5-m17n-5.0.6-1.fc36
Summary:  m17n Wrapper for Fcitx5
RPMs: fcitx5-m17n
Size: 486.47 KiB
Size change:  212 B
Changelog:
  * Sun Jan 02 2022 Qiyu Yan  5.0.7-1
  - update to 5.0.7


Package:  fcitx5-rime-5.0.10-2.fc36
Old package:  fcitx5-rime-5.0.9-1.fc36
Summary:  RIME support for Fcitx
RPMs: fcitx5-rime
Size: 449.17 KiB
Size change:  19.37 KiB
Changelog:
  * Sun Jan 02 2022 Qiyu Yan  5.0.10-1
  - update to 5.0.10

  * Sun Jan 02 2022 Qiyu Yan  5.0.10-2
  - Add /usr/share/rime-data/fcitx5.yaml


Package:  flat-remix-icon-theme-0.0.20211214-2.fc36
Old package:  flat-remix-icon-theme-0.0.20211214-1.fc36
Summary:  Icon theme inspired on material design
RPMs: flat-remix-icon-theme
Size: 81.06 MiB
Size change:  21.02 KiB
Changelog:
  * Sun Jan 02 2022 Artem Polishchuk  - 0.0.20211214-2
  - build: Workaround for replace directory with symlink which was added in
"20211214" version


Package:  git-2.34.1-1.fc36
Old package:  git-2.33.1-2.fc36
Summary:  Fast Version Control System
RPMs: git git-all git-core git-core-doc git-credential-libsecret 
git-cvs git-daemon git-email git-gui git-instaweb git-p4 git-subtree git-svn 
gitk gitweb perl-Git perl-Git-SVN
Size: 24.72 MiB
Size change:  335.48 KiB
Changelog:
  * Sun Nov 14 2021 Todd Zullinger  - 2.33.1-3
  - add more git-email perl dependencies
  - Resolves: rhbz#2020487

  * Mon Nov 15 2021 Todd Zullinger  - 2.34.0-1

[Bug 886829] RFE: Support "vendor" plugin directory

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=886829

Ralf Corsepius  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
Last Closed||2022-01-03 11:41:25




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=886829
___
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 2011755] Upgrade perl-DBIx-SearchBuilder to 1.71

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2011755

Ralf Corsepius  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE
 Status|NEW |CLOSED
Last Closed||2022-01-03 11:39:36




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2011755
___
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 2036126] Please branch and build perl-Web-Scraper for EPEL-8

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036126

Ralf Corsepius  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Assignee|rc040...@freenet.de |p...@city-fan.org



--- Comment #1 from Ralf Corsepius  ---
I've added you as collaborator and bugzilla-contact for epel*


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036126
___
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 2036123] Please branch and build perl-HTML-Selector-XPath for EPEL-8

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036123

Ralf Corsepius  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Assignee|rc040...@freenet.de |p...@city-fan.org




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036123
___
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 2036123] Please branch and build perl-HTML-Selector-XPath for EPEL-8

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036123



--- Comment #1 from Ralf Corsepius  ---
I've added you as "collaborator" and bugzilla contact for epel*


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036123
___
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 2034172] EPEL9 branch of perl-File-Find-Rule-Perl

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2034172

Ralf Corsepius  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Assignee|rc040...@freenet.de |p...@city-fan.org



--- Comment #2 from Ralf Corsepius  ---
I've added you as collaborator and bugzilla-contact for epel*.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2034172
___
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 1886733] Non-responsive maintainer check for tremble

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1886733

Ralf Corsepius  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|--- |NOTABUG
 Status|NEW |CLOSED
Last Closed||2022-01-03 11:03:39




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1886733
___
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

A handful of orphaned packages looking for new maintainers

[Miro Hrončok]

The following packages are orphaned and will be retired when they
are orphaned for six weeks, unless someone adopts them. If you know for sure
that the package should be retired, please do so now with a proper reason:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_remove_a_package_at_end_of_life

Note: If you received this mail directly you (co)maintain one of the affected
packages or a package that depends on one. Please adopt the affected package or
retire your depending package to avoid broken dependencies, otherwise your
package will fail to install and/or build when the affected package gets 
retired.

Request package ownership via the *Take* button in he left column on
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/

Full report available at:
https://churchyard.fedorapeople.org/orphans-2022-01-03.txt
grep it for your FAS username and follow the dependency chain.

For human readable dependency chains,
see https://packager-dashboard.fedoraproject.org/
For all orphaned packages,
see https://packager-dashboard.fedoraproject.org/orphan

 Package   (co)maintainers Status Change

apache-rat   mizdebsk, orphan  0 weeks ago
cptutils orphan2 weeks ago
dans-gdal-scriptsorphan2 weeks ago
direvent orphan5 weeks ago
e00compr orphan2 weeks ago
esniper  orphan2 weeks ago
fkill-cliorphan1 weeks ago
fx   orphan1 weeks ago
fx-completionorphan1 weeks ago
icedtea-web  jvanek, omajid, orphan4 weeks ago
jakarta-saaj orphan0 weeks ago
jakarta-xml-ws   orphan0 weeks ago
jmockorphan0 weeks ago
js-termynal  orphan4 weeks ago
nodejs-svgo  nodejs-sig, orphan1 weeks ago
npm-name-cli orphan1 weeks ago
perl-Net-HL7 orphan1 weeks ago
python-jenkins-job-builder   ignatenkobrain, ktdreyer, orphan, 2 weeks ago
 pabelanger
python-productivity  orphan5 weeks ago
ravada   orphan3 weeks ago
rubygem-rsolrorphan1 weeks ago
rust-biscuit orphan3 weeks ago
rust-signature   orphan5 weeks ago
sirilastro-sig, lkundrak, lupinix, 1 weeks ago
 orphan
topojson-client  orphan1 weeks ago
topojson-server  orphan1 weeks ago
topojson-simplifyorphan1 weeks ago
uddi4j   galileo, orphan   4 weeks ago
uml_utilitieschkr, orphan  0 weeks ago
wsil4j   galileo, orphan   4 weeks ago
xcf-pixbuf-loaderorphan3 weeks ago

The following packages require above mentioned packages:
Depending on: e00compr (1), status change: 2021-12-13 (2 weeks ago)
saga (maintained by: volter)
saga-7.6.1-10.fc36.src requires e00compr-devel = 1.0.1-25.fc35

Depending on: fx (1), status change: 2021-12-22 (1 weeks ago)
fx-completion (maintained by: orphan)
fx-completion-1.0.5-5.fc36.noarch requires npm(fx) = 20.0.2
fx-completion-1.0.5-5.fc36.src requires npm(fx) = 20.0.2

Depending on: jakarta-saaj (2), status change: 2022-01-02 (0 weeks ago)
jakarta-xml-ws (maintained by: orphan)
jakarta-xml-ws-2.3.1-3.fc35.noarch requires 
mvn(javax.xml.soap:saaj-api) = 1.4.2
jakarta-xml-ws-2.3.1-3.fc35.src requires 
mvn(javax.xml.soap:saaj-api) = 1.4.2

jmock (maintained by: orphan)
jmock-2.12.0-4.fc35.src requires mvn(javax.xml.ws:jaxws-api) = 
2.3.1

Depending on: jakarta-xml-ws (1), status change: 2022-01-02 (0 weeks ago)
jmock (maintained by: orphan)
jmock-2.12.0-4.fc35.src requires mvn(javax.xml.ws:jaxws-api) = 
2.3.1

Depending on: uddi4j (1), status change: 2021-12-02 (4 weeks ago)
wsil4j (maintained by: galileo, orphan)
		

[Bug 2032430] perl-Type-Tiny for EPEL 9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2032430



--- Comment #5 from Ralf Corsepius  ---
Apparently this freaking GUI doesn't set/reset the default-assignee in bugzilla
:(


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2032430
___
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 2032430] perl-Type-Tiny for EPEL 9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2032430



--- Comment #4 from Ralf Corsepius  ---
I've add ppisar as "collaborator" for epel* and made him primary bugzilla
contact
through this nonhelpful GUI on
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Types-Path-Tiny


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2032430
___
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: glibc-2.34.9000-33.fc36 untagged causing lots of dependency breakage

[Florian Weimer]

* Kevin Fenzi:

> On Tue, Dec 28, 2021 at 10:07:25PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> * Kevin Fenzi:
>> 
>> > On Tue, Dec 28, 2021 at 09:54:39AM +0900, Mamoru TASAKA wrote:
>> >> Hello:
>> >> 
>> >> Looks like glibc-2.34.9000-33.fc36 was tagged into f36 buildroot on 
>> >> 2021-12-18,
>> >> but very recently untagged from f36 buildroot.
>> >> Many binary rpms rebuilt recently have "Requires: glibc >= 
>> >> 2.34.9000-33.fc36"
>> >> ( for example firefox has: 
>> >> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/rpminfo?rpmID=28655956 )
>> >> and not looks like lots of packages cause dependency breakage, e.g.
>> >> 
>> >> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=80543777
>> >> 
>> >> Is this intentional?
>> >
>> > Yes, I untagged it. I am trying to get a rawhide comppose to work. ;( 
>> >
>> > I guess I can tag it back... that requires is... unfortunate. 
>> 
>> I've added it based on feedback that partial rawhide upgrades are
>> supposed to work.  It's a conservative approximation because we do not
>> have per-symbol RPM version information.
>
> Can you expand on how that works? 
> Every new glibc makes everything built against it require that version
> or newer?

No, we do a bit better than that.  We look at the built binaries.  If
any of them use the symbol version under development (GLIBC_2.35 in case
of current rawhide), we add a >= dependency on the glibc version used
for building.  During the Fedora 36 cycle, fewer GLIBC_2.35 symbols have
been added, so I don't expect many packages receiving this versioned
dependency that makes downgrades harder.

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

[Bug 2036491] Please branch and build perl-Test-Refcount for EPEL-9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036491

Emmanuel Seyman  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Assignee|kwiz...@gmail.com   |emman...@seyman.fr




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036491
___
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 2036491] Please branch and build perl-Test-Refcount for EPEL-9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036491

Emmanuel Seyman  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
  Flags|needinfo?(emmanuel@seyman.f |needinfo+
   |r)  |



--- Comment #2 from Emmanuel Seyman  ---
(In reply to Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) from comment #1)
>
> @eseyman can you make the change for
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Test-Refcount ?

Done.

https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/40379


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036491
___
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 2032430] perl-Type-Tiny for EPEL 9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2032430

Paul Howarth  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||2033633





Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2033633
[Bug 2033633] Add perl-Types-Path-Tiny to EPEL 9
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2032430
___
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 2033633] Add perl-Types-Path-Tiny to EPEL 9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2033633

Paul Howarth  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||p...@city-fan.org
 Depends On||2032430





Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2032430
[Bug 2032430] perl-Type-Tiny for EPEL 9
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2033633
___
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: Copr - look back at 2021

[Tomas Tomecek]

On Thu, Dec 30, 2021 at 3:35 PM Miroslav Suchý  wrote:

>
>-
>
>Statistics:
>-
>
>   Copr run 2,900,000 builds.
>   -
>
>   People created 15 731 new projects.
>
>
Whaaat! The whole list of things you have achieved is mega impressive but
this one totally caught my eye: doing millions of builds per year.

I'm wondering how many of those projects were created by packit.


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

[EPEL-devel] Re: GIMP future in RHEL-9

[Neal Gompa]

On Mon, Jan 3, 2022 at 4:46 AM Josef Řídký  wrote:
>
> Hi folks,
>
> just want to send some heads up info about the GIMP package in the RHEL-9 
> release.
>
> As some of you might notice, the GIMP package is missing in RHEL-9. The 
> reason for this is it's requirement of Python 2, which isn't supported in 
> RHEL-9 any more.
>
> During the RHEL-9 prep phase, I gave the information that GIMP authors are 
> working on a new GIMP 3 release, which is going to use Python 3 and once the 
> GIMP 3 is released, the GIMP package will appear in RHEL-9 again.
>
> Carrying this in mind I would like to ask you - *don't* create a gimp branch 
> for EPEL9 as it would create additional problems later once the GIMP 3 is 
> available.
>
> Thank you for your understanding and wish you all the best in 2022.
>

Thanks for letting us know, Josef!



-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 2036491] Please branch and build perl-Test-Refcount for EPEL-9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036491

Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart)  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags||needinfo?(emmanuel@seyman.f
   ||r)
   Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value



--- Comment #1 from Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart)  ---
I've added you as an admin to the package (along the perl-sig) but I cannot
change the epel assignee
@eseyman can you make the change for
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Test-Refcount ?

Thanks in advance.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036491
___
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 2036499] Please branch and build perl-Browser-Open for EPEL-9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036499

Michal Josef Spacek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036499
___
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