[Bug 2240584] perl-Time-ParseDate-2015.103-24.fc40 FTBFS: tests fail without tzdata package
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2240584 --- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2023-2570b87e97 has been pushed to the Fedora 39 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2023-2570b87e97` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-2570b87e97 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=2240584 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202240584%23c3 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2244960] New: perl-Devel-NYTProf-6.14 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244960 Bug ID: 2244960 Summary: perl-Devel-NYTProf-6.14 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-Devel-NYTProf Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged Assignee: jples...@redhat.com Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: iarn...@gmail.com, jples...@redhat.com, perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Releases retrieved: 6.14 Upstream release that is considered latest: 6.14 Current version/release in rawhide: 6.13-1.fc40 URL: https://metacpan.org/dist/Devel-NYTProf/ 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/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/5897/ To change the monitoring settings for the project, please visit: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Devel-NYTProf -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244960 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202244960%23c0 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: ELN build order (was: Re: OCaml 5.1 rebuild)
On Fri, Oct 6, 2023 at 11:16 AM Stephen Gallagher wrote: ... > So, as we all know, build ordering is hard (and, despite intuitive > belief, not actually deterministic). > > ELN actually "cheats" somewhat when we do our builds. When we process > a batch of builds (triggered by a set of tag events that come in all > at the same time, such as when a side-tag is merged), we create a new > ELN side-tag, tag all of the new *Rawhide* builds into this side tag, > then trigger a rebuild of all of those builds for ELN. The result here > is that we use the Fedora build in the buildroot to avoid > bootstrapping issues. Now, there are some special-case packages for > which we do *NOT* automatically tag in the Fedora builds because they > have known incompatibilities. All OCAML packages fall into this > category, since we discovered about 9 months ago that we absolutely > cannot mix Fedora's OCAML builds with ELN's (I don't recall the exact > reason). > > Our other "cheat" when we rebuild a batch is that we automatically do > rebuilds at least once for any failure, to account for things like > build ordering and test flakes. In the case you're describing, > unforunately, we had a situation where 1) it was OCAML, and therefore > the Fedora packages weren't in the buildroot and 2) ocaml built > successfully against the older version of the macros. If the > BuildRequires: had been in play there, it would have failed, the batch > would have finished building whatever else was able to succeed (such > as the macros) and then the second pass would have succeeded. > > I'm sorry you got hit by this, Richard. It's an unfortunate confluence > of limitations in our rebuild approach. I thought I'd responded here the other day with the link, but I forgot: https://sgallagh.wordpress.com/2023/10/13/sausage-factory-fedora-eln-rebuild-strategy/ I've put together a blog post describing our ELN rebuild strategy, which I'll copy below (but clarifications or additional content may be added later, so consider that link the most up-to-date version). --- # Fedora ELN Rebuild Strategy: The Rebuild Algorithm (2023 Edition) ## Slow and Steady Wins the Race The Fedora ELN SIG maintains a tool called ELNBuildSync[1] (or EBS) which is responsible for monitoring traffic on the Fedora Messaging Bus and listening for Koji tagging events. When a package is tagged into Rawhide (meaning it has passed Fedora QA Gating and is headed to the official repositories), EBS checks whether it’s on the list of packages targeted for Fedora ELN or ELN Extras and enqueues it for the next batch of builds. A batch begins when there are one or more enqueued builds and at least five wallclock seconds have passed since a build has been enqueued. This allows EBS to capture events such as a complete side-tag being merged into Rawhide at once; it will always rebuild those together in a batch. Once a batch begins, all other messages are enqueued for the following batch. When the current batch is complete, a new batch will begin. The first thing that is done when processing a batch is to create a new side-tag derived from the ELN buildroot. Into this new target, EBS will tag most of the Rawhide builds. It will then wait until Koji has regenerated the buildroot for the batch tag before triggering the rebuild of the batched packages. This strategy avoids most of the ordering issues (particularly bootstrap loops) inherent in rebuilding a side-tag, because we can rely on the Rawhide builds having already succeeded. Once the rebuild is ready to begin, EBS interrogates Koji for the original git commit used to build each Rawhide package (in case git has seen subsequent, unbuilt changes). The builds are then triggered in the side tag concurrently. EBS monitors these builds for completion. If one or more builds in a batch fails, EBS will re-queue it for another rebuild attempt. This repeats until the same set of failures occurs twice in a row. Once all of the rebuild attempts have concluded, EBS tags all successful builds back to ELN and removes the side tag. Then it moves on to preparing another batch, if there are packages waiting. ## History In its first incarnation, ELNBuildSync (at the time known as DistroBuildSync) was very simplistic. It listened for tag events on Rawhide, checked them against its list and then triggered a build in the ELN target. Very quickly, the ELN SIG realized that this had significant limitations, particularly in the case of packages building in side-tags (which was becoming more common as the era of on-demand side-tags began). One of the main benefits of side-tags is the ability to rebuild packages that depend on one another in the proper order; this was lost in the BuildSync process and many times builds were happening out of order, resulting in packages with the same NVR as Rawhide but incorrectly built against older versions of their dependencies. Initially, the ELN SIG tried to design a way to exactly mirror the build process in the
[rpms/perl] PR #1: Make builds for inclusion in an application Flatpak work
yselkowitz closed without merging a pull-request against the project: `perl` that you are following. Closed pull-request: `` Make builds for inclusion in an application Flatpak work `` https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl/pull-request/1 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Fedora CoreOS Community Meeting Minutes 2023-10-18
Minutes: https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2023-10-18/fedora_coreos_meeting.2023-10-18-16.30.html Minutes (text): https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2023-10-18/fedora_coreos_meeting.2023-10-18-16.30.txt Log: https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2023-10-18/fedora_coreos_meeting.2023-10-18-16.30.log.html #fedora-meeting-1: fedora_coreos_meeting Meeting started by spresti at 16:30:52 UTC. The full logs are available athttps://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2023-10-18/fedora_coreos_meeting.2023-10-18-16.30.log.html . Meeting summary --- * roll call (spresti, 16:31:01) * Action items from last meeting (spresti, 16:35:06) * ACTION: travier to create a change proposal for F40 for switching away from nss-altfiles for OSTree based systems (spresti, 16:39:51) * Open Floor (spresti, 16:40:24) Meeting ended at 16:45:58 UTC. Action Items * travier to create a change proposal for F40 for switching away from nss-altfiles for OSTree based systems Action Items, by person --- * **UNASSIGNED** * travier to create a change proposal for F40 for switching away from nss-altfiles for OSTree based systems People Present (lines said) --- * spresti (24) * jlebon (15) * zodbot (13) * marmijo (8) * aaradhak (2) * davdunc (1) Generated by `MeetBot`_ 0.4 .. _`MeetBot`: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Zodbot#Meeting_Functions ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Renaming python-jsonschema-spec to python-jsonschema-path
Because of upstream name changed, I'm announcing the rename of python-jsonschema-spec to python-jsonschema-path in Rawhide and F39. Currently the consumers of python-jsonschema-spec are: python-openapi-core python-openapi-spec-validator The change should be transparent to other packages, as the new package will provide proper Provides and Obsoletes tags. The former package will be retired. Currently waiting for package review of the new package: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244182 Mattia ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Packaging web extension native part and shared directory ownership
On 10/18/23 11:36 AM, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: Robert Marcano via devel writes: I seriously don't know how gnome-browser-connector [1] has ownership of: /usr/lib64/mozilla/native-messaging-hosts and not have conflict problems with mozilla-filesystem at install time, maybe because they usually get installed at the same time with the system installer. As long as the directories have the same ownership and permissions, there is no conflict. Multiple packages owning a single directory is not uncommon, and the case is covered in the packaging guidelines: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_file_and_directory_ownership " To be specific, you do not need to require a package for the sole fact that it happens to own a directory that your package places files in. If your package already requires that package for other reasons, then your package should not also own that directory. Thanks for the reply, the problem was solved after reading: When co-owning directories, you must ensure that the ownership and permissions on the directory match in all packages that own it. The install script was setting a slightly different permission. " (Yes, the grammar there isn't the best.) - J< ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Packaging web extension native part and shared directory ownership
> Robert Marcano via devel writes: > I seriously don't know how gnome-browser-connector [1] has ownership > of: > /usr/lib64/mozilla/native-messaging-hosts > and not have conflict problems with mozilla-filesystem at install > time, maybe because they usually get installed at the same time with > the system installer. As long as the directories have the same ownership and permissions, there is no conflict. Multiple packages owning a single directory is not uncommon, and the case is covered in the packaging guidelines: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_file_and_directory_ownership " To be specific, you do not need to require a package for the sole fact that it happens to own a directory that your package places files in. If your package already requires that package for other reasons, then your package should not also own that directory. " (Yes, the grammar there isn't the best.) - J< ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Packaging web extension native part and shared directory ownership
In order to install the native side of a web extension, It is needed to place a JSON manifest on predefined directories for each supported browser: /usr/lib64/mozilla/native-messaging-hosts /etc/chromium/native-messaging-hosts /etc/opt/chrome/native-messaging-hosts Creating a package that support each browser without having to create one subpackage for each one has the problem of having to set the ownership for each of these directories to my package, but that generates conflicts with the real owners at install time. I can maybe use an ugly workaround, not having ownership and removing empty directories by hand on uninstall. I seriously don't know how gnome-browser-connector [1] has ownership of: /usr/lib64/mozilla/native-messaging-hosts and not have conflict problems with mozilla-filesystem at install time, maybe because they usually get installed at the same time with the system installer. Any recommendations? This is not a Fedora package but want it to be Fedora compatible, I just want the single package give support for any browser like gnome-browser-connector do, without leaving leftover directories at uninstall if the user doesn't have that browser installed. [1] https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/gnome-browser-connector/blob/f38/f/gnome-browser-connector.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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: How to deal with COPR and RPMAutoSpec
On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 11:18 AM Miroslav Suchý wrote: > > Dne 18. 10. 23 v 16:12 Diego Herrera napsal(a): > > What I usually do when I need for COPR to handle rpmautospec is to set > > the source type to "Custom", and use the following script: > > > > #! /bin/sh -x > > git clone > > cd > > spectool -g > > rpmautospec process-distgit > > > > Set the Buildroot dependencies to "git rpmdevtools rpmautospec" and > > the Result directory to the same string used in the > > script. > > This is great. I added this to our FAQ > > https://github.com/fedora-copr/copr/pull/2958 > Note that you can use git-core instead to make the buildroot smaller. -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: How to deal with COPR and RPMAutoSpec
Dne 18. 10. 23 v 16:12 Diego Herrera napsal(a): What I usually do when I need for COPR to handle rpmautospec is to set the source type to "Custom", and use the following script: #! /bin/sh -x git clone cd spectool -g rpmautospec process-distgit Set the Buildroot dependencies to "git rpmdevtools rpmautospec" and the Result directory to the same string used in the script. This is great. I added this to our FAQ https://github.com/fedora-copr/copr/pull/2958 -- Miroslav Suchy, RHCA Red Hat, Manager, Packit and CPT, #brno, #fedora-buildsys ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2242077] perl-DBD-MySQL-5.001 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2242077 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Fixed In Version||perl-DBD-MySQL-5.001-1.fc40 Last Closed||2023-10-18 14:52:12 --- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2023-dd465cde6d has been pushed to the Fedora 40 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2242077 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202242077%23c3 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Execute RPM dependency generators on the .spec file which ships them
The package is in Fedora now. The practical demonstration are these two commits: https://src.fedoraproject.org/fork/vondruch/rpms/ruby/c/6d8ecfca02947b5f1ce48cc51943e5f127d93be2 https://src.fedoraproject.org/fork/vondruch/rpms/ruby/c/865f5b3a896ed1b423add7ffe0601707155828ef from this PR: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ruby/pull-request/159 Vít Dne 16. 10. 23 v 16:39 Vít Ondruch napsal(a): Dne 16. 10. 23 v 16:35 Miroslav Suchý napsal(a): Dne 16. 10. 23 v 16:16 Vít Ondruch napsal(a): Can somebody help me please with a package review? The package can't be simpler. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2244428 Thx in advance Done. You are welcome. Thx a lot 朗 Vít OpenPGP_signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2242077] perl-DBD-MySQL-5.001 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2242077 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED --- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2023-dd465cde6d has been submitted as an update to Fedora 40. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-dd465cde6d -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2242077 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202242077%23c2 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[rpms/perl-DBD-MySQL] PR #2: 5.001 bump; Package tests
jplesnik merged a pull-request against the project: `perl-DBD-MySQL` that you are following. Merged pull-request: `` 5.001 bump; Package tests `` https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-DBD-MySQL/pull-request/2 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2244850] New: EPEL9 request: perl-XML-Generator
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244850 Bug ID: 2244850 Summary: EPEL9 request: perl-XML-Generator Product: Fedora EPEL Version: epel9 Status: NEW Component: perl-XML-Generator Assignee: jples...@redhat.com Reporter: adr...@lisas.de QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: jples...@redhat.com, mspa...@redhat.com, perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Can you please build perl-XML-Generator also for EPEL9? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244850 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202244850%23c0 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: How to deal with COPR and RPMAutoSpec
What I usually do when I need for COPR to handle rpmautospec is to set the source type to "Custom", and use the following script: #! /bin/sh -x git clone cd spectool -g rpmautospec process-distgit Set the Buildroot dependencies to "git rpmdevtools rpmautospec" and the Result directory to the same string used in the script. On Tue, Oct 17, 2023 at 5:47 PM Richard Shaw wrote: > > I'm trying to test build packages before actually creating a side tag and > doing real builds. > > I'm using rpkg to do the test builds but openshading language uses > RPMAutoSpec. I've tried creating empty commits to bump the release but it > does not appear to be working. > > What's the work around? > > Thanks, > Richard > ___ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > Do not reply to spam, report it: > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Fedora 39 compose report: 20231018.n.0 changes
OLD: Fedora-39-20231017.n.0 NEW: Fedora-39-20231018.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:0 Dropped images: 1 Added packages: 0 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 0 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 0 B Size of dropped packages:0 B Size of upgraded packages: 0 B Size of downgraded packages: 0 B Size change of upgraded packages: 0 B Size change of downgraded packages: 0 B = ADDED IMAGES = = DROPPED IMAGES = Image: Kinoite dvd-ostree x86_64 Path: Kinoite/x86_64/iso/Fedora-Kinoite-ostree-x86_64-39-20231017.n.0.iso = ADDED PACKAGES = = DROPPED PACKAGES = = UPGRADED PACKAGES = = DOWNGRADED PACKAGES = ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2244805] perl-Mail-Message-3.014 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244805 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |ERRATA Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Fixed In Version||perl-Mail-Message-3.014-1.f ||c40 Last Closed||2023-10-18 12:34:10 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2023-4436ef1541 has been pushed to the Fedora 40 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244805 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202244805%23c4 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2244805] perl-Mail-Message-3.014 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244805 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |MODIFIED --- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2023-4436ef1541 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 40. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-4436ef1541 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244805 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202244805%23c3 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
pghmcfc pushed to rpms/perl-Mail-Message (rawhide). "Update to 3.014 (rhbz#2244805)"
Notification time stamped 2023-10-18 12:27:26 UTC
From 51fd9773a9482ede8b95f82578d1cd858de65441 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Paul Howarth
Date: Oct 18 2023 12:23:20 +
Subject: Update to 3.014 (rhbz#2244805)
---
diff --git a/.gitignore b/.gitignore
index d81577b..277cede 100644
--- a/.gitignore
+++ b/.gitignore
@@ -10,3 +10,4 @@
/Mail-Message-3.011.tar.gz
/Mail-Message-3.012.tar.gz
/Mail-Message-3.013.tar.gz
+/Mail-Message-3.014.tar.gz
diff --git a/perl-Mail-Message.spec b/perl-Mail-Message.spec
index 069bd0c..08d74cc 100644
--- a/perl-Mail-Message.spec
+++ b/perl-Mail-Message.spec
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
Name: perl-Mail-Message
-Version: 3.013
-Release: 2%{?dist}
+Version: 3.014
+Release: 1%{?dist}
Summary: MIME message handling
License: GPL-1.0-or-later OR Artistic-1.0-Perl
URL: https://metacpan.org/release/Mail-Message
@@ -124,6 +124,9 @@ make test
%{_mandir}/man3/Mail::*.3*
%changelog
+* Wed Oct 18 2023 Paul Howarth - 3.014-1
+- Update to 3.014 (rhbz#2244805)
+
* Thu Jul 20 2023 Fedora Release Engineering -
3.013-2
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_39_Mass_Rebuild
diff --git a/sources b/sources
index 3b911fa..bbb9401 100644
--- a/sources
+++ b/sources
@@ -1 +1 @@
-SHA512 (Mail-Message-3.013.tar.gz) =
7a15c42e1da549c69eecc20bba6a63a9558e11488d583de117225ae6a66c249ab6ab99108b051cbc476de02e08efbff5319b4ed0b268f7c3267f88bcfb9b2a1d
+SHA512 (Mail-Message-3.014.tar.gz) =
603757e5e6ee61fb128a7647a454bdf5de218774908ad66ff27746d67cb1e643d62963b3486a5bba3135346f3df99b8e6f6d440a450e66d27eca4963e2c1da4c
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Mail-Message/c/51fd9773a9482ede8b95f82578d1cd858de65441?branch=rawhide
___
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, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[rpms/perl] PR #1: Make builds for inclusion in an application Flatpak work
otaylor commented on the pull-request: `Make builds for inclusion in an application Flatpak work` that you are following: `` Closing in favor of #6 `` To reply, visit the link below https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl/pull-request/1 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[rpms/perl] PR #6: Fix flatpak build
yselkowitz opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl` that you are following: `` Fix flatpak build `` To reply, visit the link below https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl/pull-request/6 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Fedora rawhide compose report: 20231018.n.0 changes
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20231017.n.0 NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20231018.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:2 Dropped images: 3 Added packages: 8 Dropped packages:1 Upgraded packages: 175 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 12.12 MiB Size of dropped packages:112.57 KiB Size of upgraded packages: 4.41 GiB Size of downgraded packages: 0 B Size change of upgraded packages: -39.12 KiB Size change of downgraded packages: 0 B = ADDED IMAGES = Image: KDE live aarch64 Path: Spins/aarch64/iso/Fedora-KDE-Live-aarch64-Rawhide-20231018.n.0.iso Image: Sericea dvd-ostree x86_64 Path: Sericea/x86_64/iso/Fedora-Sericea-ostree-x86_64-Rawhide-20231018.n.0.iso = DROPPED IMAGES = Image: LXQt live aarch64 Path: Spins/aarch64/iso/Fedora-LXQt-Live-aarch64-Rawhide-20231017.n.0.iso Image: Kinoite dvd-ostree x86_64 Path: Kinoite/x86_64/iso/Fedora-Kinoite-ostree-x86_64-Rawhide-20231017.n.0.iso Image: Cinnamon live x86_64 Path: Spins/x86_64/iso/Fedora-Cinnamon-Live-x86_64-Rawhide-20231017.n.0.iso = ADDED PACKAGES = Package: functionalplus-0.2.20.p0-1.fc40 Summary: Functional Programming Library for C++ RPMs:functionalplus-devel Size:103.76 KiB Package: kf6-plasma5support-5.240.0^20231011.222045.245b3dd-1.fc40 Summary: Support components for porting from KF5/Qt5 to KF6/Qt6 RPMs:kf6-plasma5support kf6-plasma5support-devel Size:1.01 MiB Package: kglobalacceld-5.27.80^20231009.021332.6933aae-1.fc40 Summary: Daemon providing Global Keyboard Shortcut functionality RPMs:kglobalacceld kglobalacceld-devel Size:735.46 KiB Package: rust-ammonia-3.3.0-1.fc40 Summary: HTML Sanitization RPMs:rust-ammonia+default-devel rust-ammonia-devel Size:52.83 KiB Package: rust-codespan-0.11.1-1.fc40 Summary: Data structures for tracking locations in source code RPMs:rust-codespan+default-devel rust-codespan+serde-devel rust-codespan+serialization-devel rust-codespan-devel Size:42.61 KiB Package: rust-nucleo-matcher-0.2.0-1.fc40 Summary: Plug and play high performance fuzzy matcher RPMs:rust-nucleo-matcher+default-devel rust-nucleo-matcher+unicode-casefold-devel rust-nucleo-matcher+unicode-normalization-devel rust-nucleo-matcher+unicode-segmentation-devel rust-nucleo-matcher-devel Size:83.96 KiB Package: rust-unic-normal-0.9.0-1.fc40 Summary: UNIC ??? Unicode Normalization Forms RPMs:rust-unic-normal+default-devel rust-unic-normal-devel Size:129.34 KiB Package: swiftlint-0.53.0-1.fc40 Summary: Tool to enforce Swift style and conventions RPMs:swiftlint Size:9.99 MiB = DROPPED PACKAGES = Package: python-rdflib-jsonld-0.6.0-9.fc39 Summary: Python rdflib extension adding JSON-LD parser and serializer RPMs:python-rdflib-jsonld-doc python3-rdflib-jsonld Size:112.57 KiB = UPGRADED PACKAGES = Package: Agda-2.6.4-41.fc40 Old package: Agda-2.6.3-40.fc39 Summary: A dependently typed functional programming language and proof assistant RPMs: Agda Agda-common ghc-Agda ghc-Agda-devel ghc-Agda-doc ghc-Agda-prof ghc-murmur-hash ghc-murmur-hash-devel ghc-murmur-hash-doc ghc-murmur-hash-prof ghc-peano ghc-peano-devel ghc-peano-doc ghc-peano-prof ghc-vector-hashtables ghc-vector-hashtables-devel ghc-vector-hashtables-doc ghc-vector-hashtables-prof Added RPMs: ghc-peano ghc-peano-devel ghc-peano-doc ghc-peano-prof Size: 344.87 MiB Size change: 11.87 MiB Changelog: * Mon Oct 09 2023 Jens Petersen - 2.6.4-41 - update to 2.6.4 - https://hackage.haskell.org/package/Agda-2.6.4/changelog Package: Agda-stdlib-1.7.3-1.fc40 Old package: Agda-stdlib-1.7.2-1.fc39 Summary: Agda standard libraries RPMs: Agda-stdlib Agda-stdlib-docs Size: 126.15 MiB Size change: -154.37 KiB Changelog: * Mon Oct 16 2023 Jens Petersen - 1.7.3-1 - update to 1.7.3 for Agda 2.6.4 Package: QXlsx-1.4.6-8.fc40 Old package: QXlsx-1.4.6-7.fc40 Summary: Excel/XLSX file reader/writer library for Qt RPMs: QXlsx QXlsx-devel Size: 1.74 MiB Size change: 3.74 KiB Changelog: * Fri Oct 13 2023 Jan Grulich - 1.4.6-8 - Rebuild (qt6) Package: SuperLU-6.0.1-1.fc40 Old package: SuperLU-6.0.0-1.fc39 Summary: Subroutines to solve sparse linear systems RPMs: SuperLU SuperLU-devel SuperLU-doc Size: 2.00 MiB Size change: 13.08 KiB Changelog: * Wed Aug 09 2023 Antonio Trande - 6.0.1-1 - Release 6.0.1 Package: anaconda-40.9-1.fc40 Old package: anaconda-40.8-1.fc40 Summary: Graphical system installer RPMs: anaconda anaconda-core anaconda-dracut anaconda-gui anaconda-install-env-deps anaconda-install-img-deps anaconda-live anaconda-tui anaconda-webui anaconda-widgets anaconda-widgets-devel Size: 24.24 MiB Size change: 21.98 KiB Changelog: * Tue Oct 17 2023 Packit - 40.9-1 - webui: catch exceptions from the backend in all actions (kkoukiou) - Update translations from Weblate for master
[Bug 2244805] perl-Mail-Message-3.014 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244805 --- Comment #2 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- the-new-hotness/release-monitoring.org's scratch build of perl-Mail-Message-3.014-1.fc38.src.rpm for rawhide completed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=107701256 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244805 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202244805%23c2 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2244805] New: perl-Mail-Message-3.014 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244805 Bug ID: 2244805 Summary: perl-Mail-Message-3.014 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-Mail-Message Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged Assignee: spo...@gmail.com Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: p...@city-fan.org, perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org, spo...@gmail.com Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Releases retrieved: 3.014 Upstream release that is considered latest: 3.014 Current version/release in rawhide: 3.013-2.fc39 URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Mail-Message/ 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/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/13324/ To change the monitoring settings for the project, please visit: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Mail-Message -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244805 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202244805%23c0 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2244805] perl-Mail-Message-3.014 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244805 --- Comment #1 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- Created attachment 1994418 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1994418=edit Update to 3.014 (#2244805) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244805 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202244805%23c1 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Orphaning python-rdflib-jsonld
On 18-10-2023 06:56, Aniket Pradhan wrote: We, at the neuro-sig would be orphaning the package: python-rdflib-jsonld [0]. The package is no longer maintained upstream and is now inherently provided by python-rdflib v6.0.0+. [0]:https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-rdflib-jsonld For the reason given above the package should be retired, not orphaned. It doesn't make sense for someone else to pick it up, since it is conflicting with `python-rdflib`. -- Sandro ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2240584] perl-Time-ParseDate-2015.103-24.fc40 FTBFS: tests fail without tzdata package
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2240584 --- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2023-2570b87e97 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 39. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-2570b87e97 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2240584 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202240584%23c2 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: status openssl1.1
On 18. 10. 23 9:35, Dmitry Belyavskiy wrote: Dear Miro, On Tue, Oct 17, 2023 at 10:33 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: On 16. 10. 23 14:19, Dmitry Belyavskiy wrote: Why is it too late for F-40? Do you mean F-39? Thanks! https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/RemoveOpensslCompat Could you please update the contingency plan section? "Package owners should update their packages to remove the dependency" is not a contingency mechanism. I think we don't have a reason to maintain openssl1.1 anymore. Formally I can suggest turning openssl1.1 back to distro as a contingency plan, but it doesn't look reasonable to me. Well obviously activating a contingency plan is not what the change owners want, but I believe it's something they should be prepared to do in unforeseen circumstances. Having it documented allows *others* to do it in case the change owners walk away. -- 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: status openssl1.1
Dear Miro, On Tue, Oct 17, 2023 at 10:33 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 16. 10. 23 14:19, Dmitry Belyavskiy wrote: > >> Why is it too late for F-40? Do you mean F-39? > > > > Thanks! > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/RemoveOpensslCompat > > Could you please update the contingency plan section? > > "Package owners should update their packages to remove the dependency" is not > a > contingency mechanism. I think we don't have a reason to maintain openssl1.1 anymore. Formally I can suggest turning openssl1.1 back to distro as a contingency plan, but it doesn't look reasonable to me. -- Dmitry Belyavskiy ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
