Fedora rawhide compose report: 20240109.n.0 changes

2024-01-09 Thread Fedora Rawhide Report 
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20240108.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20240109.n.0

= SUMMARY =
Added images:8
Dropped images:  1
Added packages:  13
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages:   160
Downgraded packages: 1

Size of added packages:  26.29 MiB
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Size of upgraded packages:   3.08 GiB
Size of downgraded packages: 11.82 MiB

Size change of upgraded packages:   58.64 MiB
Size change of downgraded packages: -102.74 KiB

= ADDED IMAGES =
Image: Kinoite dvd-ostree x86_64
Path: Kinoite/x86_64/iso/Fedora-Kinoite-ostree-x86_64-Rawhide-20240109.n.0.iso
Image: Onyx dvd-ostree x86_64
Path: Onyx/x86_64/iso/Fedora-Onyx-ostree-x86_64-Rawhide-20240109.n.0.iso
Image: Silverblue dvd-ostree aarch64
Path: 
Silverblue/aarch64/iso/Fedora-Silverblue-ostree-aarch64-Rawhide-20240109.n.0.iso
Image: Workstation live aarch64
Path: 
Workstation/aarch64/iso/Fedora-Workstation-Live-aarch64-Rawhide-20240109.n.0.iso
Image: Sericea dvd-ostree x86_64
Path: Sericea/x86_64/iso/Fedora-Sericea-ostree-x86_64-Rawhide-20240109.n.0.iso
Image: Kinoite dvd-ostree ppc64le
Path: Kinoite/ppc64le/iso/Fedora-Kinoite-ostree-ppc64le-Rawhide-20240109.n.0.iso
Image: Silverblue dvd-ostree x86_64
Path: 
Silverblue/x86_64/iso/Fedora-Silverblue-ostree-x86_64-Rawhide-20240109.n.0.iso
Image: Silverblue dvd-ostree ppc64le
Path: 
Silverblue/ppc64le/iso/Fedora-Silverblue-ostree-ppc64le-Rawhide-20240109.n.0.iso

= DROPPED IMAGES =
Image: KDE live aarch64
Path: Spins/aarch64/iso/Fedora-KDE-Live-aarch64-Rawhide-20240108.n.0.iso

= ADDED PACKAGES =
Package: host-spawn-1.5.1-1.fc40
Summary: Run commands on your host from inside your toolbox or flatpak sandbox
RPMs:host-spawn
Size:3.72 MiB

Package: pam-ssh-auth-info-1.8.20230906-1.fc40
Summary: PAM SSH Authentication Information Module
RPMs:pam-ssh-auth-info
Size:134.84 KiB

Package: python-chalice-1.30.0-1.fc40
Summary: Python Serverless Microframework for AWS
RPMs:python3-chalice
Size:491.04 KiB

Package: python-inquirer-3.1.3-1.fc40
Summary: Collection of common interactive command line user interfaces
RPMs:python3-inquirer
Size:58.34 KiB

Package: python-platformio-6.1.11-1.fc40
Summary: Professional collaborative platform for embedded development
RPMs:platformio python3-platformio
Size:854.18 KiB

Package: python-xdfile-1.9.0~20240101git3349ddc-1.fc40
Summary: Python parser for .xd crossword format
RPMs:python3-xdfile
Size:110.25 KiB

Package: ruff-0.1.11-1.fc40
Summary: Extremely fast Python linter
RPMs:ruff
Size:20.61 MiB

Package: rust-editdistancek-1.0.2-1.fc40
Summary: Fast algorithm for computing edit distance
RPMs:rust-editdistancek+default-devel rust-editdistancek-devel
Size:23.92 KiB

Package: rust-loopdev-3-0.5.0-1.fc40
Summary: Setup and control loop devices
RPMs:rust-loopdev-3+default-devel rust-loopdev-3+direct_io-devel 
rust-loopdev-3-devel
Size:31.05 KiB

Package: rust-reference-counted-singleton-0.1.2-1.fc40
Summary: Reference-counted singleton whose protected data can be recreated as 
needed
RPMs:rust-reference-counted-singleton+default-devel 
rust-reference-counted-singleton-devel
Size:19.96 KiB

Package: rust-selinux-sys-0.6.7-1.fc40
Summary: Flexible Mandatory Access Control (MAC) for Linux
RPMs:rust-selinux-sys+default-devel rust-selinux-sys-devel
Size:23.99 KiB

Package: rust-sha256-1.5.0-1.fc40
Summary: SHA256 crypto digest
RPMs:rust-sha256+async-devel rust-sha256+default-devel 
rust-sha256+native_openssl-devel rust-sha256+openssl-devel 
rust-sha256+tokio-devel rust-sha256-devel
Size:52.36 KiB

Package: ssh-audit-3.1.0-1.fc40
Summary: An SSH server & client configuration security auditing tool
RPMs:ssh-audit
Size:200.50 KiB


= DROPPED PACKAGES =

= UPGRADED PACKAGES =
Package:  OpenIPMI-2.0.32-11.fc40
Old package:  OpenIPMI-2.0.32-10.fc39
Summary:  IPMI (Intelligent Platform Management Interface) library and tools
RPMs: OpenIPMI OpenIPMI-devel OpenIPMI-lanserv OpenIPMI-libs 
OpenIPMI-perl python3-openipmi
Size: 5.82 MiB
Size change:  -52.29 KiB
Changelog:
  * Mon Jan 08 2024 Florian Weimer  - 2.0.32-11
  - Fix C compatibility issues


Package:  PyDrive2-1.19.0-1.fc40
Old package:  PyDrive2-1.18.1-1.fc40
Summary:  Google Drive API Python wrapper library, maintained fork of 
PyDrive
RPMs: python3-PyDrive2
Size: 128.10 KiB
Size change:  3.40 KiB
Changelog:
  * Tue Jan 09 2024 Mikel Olasagasti Uranga  - 1.19.0-1
  - Update to 1.19.0 - Closes rhbz#2256707


Package:  Xaw3d-1.6.4-4.fc40
Old package:  Xaw3d-1.6.4-3.fc39
Summary:  A version of the MIT Athena widget set for X
RPMs: Xaw3d Xaw3d-devel
Size: 1.23 MiB
Size change:  -7.89 KiB
Changelog:
  * Tue Jan 09 2024 Florian Weimer  - 1.6.4-4
  - Backport upstream patches to fix C type errors


Package:  ahven-2.8-7.fc40
Old package:  ahven-2.8-6.fc38
Summary:  A unit tes

[Bug 2257491] New: perl-Date-Manip-6.94 is available

2024-01-09 Thread bugzilla 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2257491

Bug ID: 2257491
   Summary: perl-Date-Manip-6.94 is available
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-Date-Manip
  Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
  Assignee: jples...@redhat.com
  Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: huzai...@redhat.com, jpazdzi...@redhat.com,
jples...@redhat.com, ka...@ucw.cz, mspa...@redhat.com,
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Releases retrieved: 6.94
Upstream release that is considered latest: 6.94
Current version/release in rawhide: 6.93-2.fc40
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Date-Manip/

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/2785/


To change the monitoring settings for the project, please visit:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Date-Manip


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2257491

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202257491%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: Obsoleting zlib in Fedora Rawhide

2024-01-09 Thread Yaakov Selkowitz 
On Tue, 2024-01-09 at 18:53 +, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 04, 2023 at 04:10:18PM -0300, Tulio Magno Quites Machado
> Filho wrote:
> > Following the recent approval from Fesco, I'm planning to
> > distribute
> > zlib-ng-compat packages for Rawhide later this week. 
> > I hope this will give us enough time to work on the issues before
> > Fedora 40 is released. 爛
> > 
> > So, keep in mind this will *obsolete zlib in Rawhide*.
> 
> snip
> 
> > If you have any questions or need help with these issues, let me
> > know.
> 
> I've just tried to build latest QEMU in rawhide. We have
> 
>   BuildRequires: zlib-devel
>   BuildRequires: zlib-ng-static
> 
> and when building koji fails to install the build root deps
> 
> DEBUG util.py:446:  Error: 
> DEBUG util.py:446:   Problem: problem with installed package zlib-ng-
> compat-2.1.5-1.fc40.x86_64
> DEBUG util.py:446:    - package zlib-ng-compat-2.1.5-1.fc40.x86_64
> from @System conflicts with zlib(x86-64) provided by zlib-1.2.13-
> 5.fc40.x86_64 from build
> DEBUG util.py:446:    - installed package zlib-ng-compat-2.1.5-
> 1.fc40.x86_64 obsoletes zlib < 1.3 provided by zlib-1.2.13-
> 5.fc40.x86_64 from build
> DEBUG util.py:446:    - package zlib-ng-compat-2.1.5-1.fc40.x86_64
> from build conflicts with zlib(x86-64) provided by zlib-1.2.13-
> 5.fc40.x86_64 from build
> DEBUG util.py:446:    - package zlib-ng-compat-2.1.5-1.fc40.x86_64
> from build obsoletes zlib < 1.3 provided by zlib-1.2.13-5.fc40.x86_64
> from build
> DEBUG util.py:446:    - package zlib-devel-1.2.13-5.fc40.x86_64 from
> build requires zlib(x86-64) = 1.2.13-5.fc40, but none of the
> providers can be installed
> DEBUG util.py:446:    - package zlib-static-1.2.13-5.fc40.x86_64 from
> build requires zlib-devel(x86-64) = 1.2.13-5.fc40, but none of the
> providers can be installed
> DEBUG util.py:446:    - conflicting requests
> DEBUG util.py:448:  (try to add '--allowerasing' to command line to
> replace conflicting packages or '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable
> packages)
> 
> It appears that the zlib-ng replacement is not providing a
> zlib-static replacement. So rpm ends up trying to install
> bot zlib (for zlib-static) and zlib-ng (for zlib-devel) and
> this all fails.
> 
> AFAICT, this will only work if zlib-ng provides a -static
> package.
> 
> We can't build QEMU without zlib static, as it is a mandatory
> dependancy of the QEMU userspace emulators which are static
> linked in order to work as linux binary translators in chroots.

Please try with
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/zlib-ng/pull-request/8

-- 
Yaakov Selkowitz
Principal Software Engineer - Emerging RHEL
Red Hat, Inc.
--
___
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: Removing deprecated %patch syntax from go-sig's packages

2024-01-09 Thread Miro Hrončok 

On 09. 01. 24 18:30, Maxwell G wrote:

but support for this syntax has been removed completely on the
rpm master branch [2].


There are 2124 packages in rawhide affected by this change. Sigh.

--
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: Obsoleting zlib in Fedora Rawhide

2024-01-09 Thread Daniel P . Berrangé 
On Mon, Dec 04, 2023 at 04:10:18PM -0300, Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho 
wrote:
> Following the recent approval from Fesco, I'm planning to distribute
> zlib-ng-compat packages for Rawhide later this week. 
> I hope this will give us enough time to work on the issues before
> Fedora 40 is released. 爛
> 
> So, keep in mind this will *obsolete zlib in Rawhide*.

snip

> If you have any questions or need help with these issues, let me know.

I've just tried to build latest QEMU in rawhide. We have

  BuildRequires: zlib-devel
  BuildRequires: zlib-ng-static

and when building koji fails to install the build root deps

DEBUG util.py:446:  Error: 
DEBUG util.py:446:   Problem: problem with installed package 
zlib-ng-compat-2.1.5-1.fc40.x86_64
DEBUG util.py:446:- package zlib-ng-compat-2.1.5-1.fc40.x86_64 from @System 
conflicts with zlib(x86-64) provided by zlib-1.2.13-5.fc40.x86_64 from build
DEBUG util.py:446:- installed package zlib-ng-compat-2.1.5-1.fc40.x86_64 
obsoletes zlib < 1.3 provided by zlib-1.2.13-5.fc40.x86_64 from build
DEBUG util.py:446:- package zlib-ng-compat-2.1.5-1.fc40.x86_64 from build 
conflicts with zlib(x86-64) provided by zlib-1.2.13-5.fc40.x86_64 from build
DEBUG util.py:446:- package zlib-ng-compat-2.1.5-1.fc40.x86_64 from build 
obsoletes zlib < 1.3 provided by zlib-1.2.13-5.fc40.x86_64 from build
DEBUG util.py:446:- package zlib-devel-1.2.13-5.fc40.x86_64 from build 
requires zlib(x86-64) = 1.2.13-5.fc40, but none of the providers can be 
installed
DEBUG util.py:446:- package zlib-static-1.2.13-5.fc40.x86_64 from build 
requires zlib-devel(x86-64) = 1.2.13-5.fc40, but none of the providers can be 
installed
DEBUG util.py:446:- conflicting requests
DEBUG util.py:448:  (try to add '--allowerasing' to command line to replace 
conflicting packages or '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages)

It appears that the zlib-ng replacement is not providing a
zlib-static replacement. So rpm ends up trying to install
bot zlib (for zlib-static) and zlib-ng (for zlib-devel) and
this all fails.

AFAICT, this will only work if zlib-ng provides a -static
package.

We can't build QEMU without zlib static, as it is a mandatory
dependancy of the QEMU userspace emulators which are static
linked in order to work as linux binary translators in chroots.

With regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: https://berrange.com  -o-https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org -o-https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org-o-https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
--
___
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: Removing deprecated %patch syntax from go-sig's packages

2024-01-09 Thread kevin 
On Tue, Jan 09, 2024 at 05:30:51PM +, Maxwell G wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> 
> RPM has deprecated the `%patchN` syntax in favor of `%patch -PN` where
> `N` is the patch number. See the RPM documentation for more information
> [1]. In current RPM versions, this syntax only emits a deprecation
> warning, but support for this syntax has been removed completely on the
> rpm master branch [2]. Around 100 packages maintained by the go-sig
> still use this syntax.
> 
> Later this week/early next week, I will run this script [3] over the
> affected go-sig packages [4] to update them to the modern patch syntax.
> For example, the script will change:
> 
> %patch0 -p1 -> %patch -P0 -p1
> %patch0005 -p2 -> %patch -P0005 -p2
> 
> If anyone has any objections or would like to exclude a package, please
> let me know.

Thanks for doing this... I assume you plan to get it all done before the
mass rebuild starts? (2024-01-17)

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, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Heads up: libmutter soname bump in rawhide

2024-01-09 Thread Kalev Lember 
A quick heads up that mutter 46.alpha (par of gnome-shell 46.alpha,
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-d7b40ac758) bumped its
soname from libmutter-13.so.0 to libmutter-14.so.0. GNOME packages
depending on mutter (gnome-shell, gnome-kiosk) are all rebuilt as part of
the same bodhi update.

This sadly breaks gala and wingpanel that are going to need adjusting for
new mutter. Fabio and I discussed this on Matrix and we thought that they
can temporarily stay broken and avoid mutter compat package for now. Fabio
is going to file tickets upstream so that gala and wingpanel upstream can
start working on new libmutter support.

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

[Bug 2257451] New: perl-CGI-Ex-2.55 is available

2024-01-09 Thread bugzilla 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2257451

Bug ID: 2257451
   Summary: perl-CGI-Ex-2.55 is available
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-CGI-Ex
  Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
  Assignee: emman...@seyman.fr
  Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: emman...@seyman.fr, perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Releases retrieved: 2.55
Upstream release that is considered latest: 2.55
Current version/release in rawhide: 2.54-5.fc39
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/CGI-Ex/

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/7682/


To change the monitoring settings for the project, please visit:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-CGI-Ex


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2257451

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202257451%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: F40 Change Proposal: F40 Change Proposal: Unify /usr/bin and /usr/sbin (System-Wide)

2024-01-09 Thread Gary Buhrmaster 
On Tue, Jan 9, 2024 at 5:51 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
 wrote:

> $ dnf5 repoquery --whatprovides '/usr/sbin/exabpg-*'
> (no answer)
>

If you spell exabgp correctly (not exabpg) it works somewhat better.
--
___
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: Re: [heads-up] evolution-data-server libecal-2.0 soname version bump in rawhide

2024-01-09 Thread Kalev Lember 
On Tue, Jan 9, 2024 at 6:42 PM Milan Crha  wrote:

> On Tue, 2024-01-09 at 18:36 +0100, Kalev Lember wrote:
> > Looks like this has a bit of a mid air collision with gnome-shell
> > 46.alpha that's in a different bodhi update:
> > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-d7b40ac758
>
> Hi,
> that's a pita. Let me know if I can help with anything. I can rebuild
> gnome-shell 46.alpha in the eds side tag and refresh the update.
>

Yes, that would be good if you could do it. The gnome-shell update just
landed in rawhide, so it needs a few minutes before the build roots are
regenerated. If you can do 'koji wait-repo f40-build-side-80962 --build
mutter-46~alpha-2.fc40' first to make sure new mutter is available in the
build roots, then it should be fine to rebuild.

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

[Bug 2257445] nagios-plugins-disk_smb cannot be installed

2024-01-09 Thread bugzilla 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2257445

Petr Pisar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|--- |WORKSFORME
 Status|NEW |CLOSED
Last Closed||2024-01-09 17:55:26



--- Comment #3 from Petr Pisar  ---
# dnf --enablerepo=epel --enablerepo=epel-testing --disablerepo='*buildroot'
install perl-utf8-all
Last metadata expiration check: 0:00:51 ago on Tue 09 Jan 2024 06:50:47 PM CET.
Dependencies resolved.
=
 PackageArchitecture  Version  Repository  
Size
=
Installing:
 perl-utf8-all  noarch0.024-14.el9 epel
26 k
Installing dependencies:
 perl-PerlIO-utf8_strictx86_640.008-4.el9  pulp-crb
30 k

Transaction Summary
=

EPEL prerequisite is enabled CodeReady Builder repository. See
.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2257445

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202257445%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: F40 Change Proposal: F40 Change Proposal: Unify /usr/bin and /usr/sbin (System-Wide)

2024-01-09 Thread Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek 
On Tue, Jan 09, 2024 at 03:51:26PM +0100, Sjoerd Mullender wrote:
> On 08/01/2024 14.41, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 08, 2024 at 10:02:55AM +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 7:54 PM Aoife Moloney  
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > Wiki -> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Unify_bin_and_sbin
> > > > > 
> > > 
> > > I agree unifying the *programs* to a single directory makes sense. But I
> > > fail to see anything good come out of bringing all those system daemon
> > > executables into every users path.
> > 
> > To clarify: they already *are* in every user's path, see
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Unify_bin_and_sbin#Detailed_Description,
> > third para.
> 
> Not quite true: If you're using lightdm as display manager, the PATH is
> initialized to /usr/local/bin:/usr/bin:/bin, at least on Fedora 39.

Please open a bug against lightdm ;)

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, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F40 Change Proposal: F40 Change Proposal: Unify /usr/bin and /usr/sbin (System-Wide)

2024-01-09 Thread Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek 
On Tue, Jan 09, 2024 at 02:34:05PM +0100, Petr Pisar wrote:
> V Mon, Jan 08, 2024 at 09:42:41PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek 
> napsal(a):
> > On Mon, Jan 08, 2024 at 03:26:45PM +, Gary Buhrmaster wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jan 8, 2024 at 1:37 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> > >  wrote:
> > > > $ dnf5 repoquery -l $(dnf5 repoquery --whatprovides '/usr/sbin/*' --qf 
> > > > '%{name}\n') | rg '/usr/s?bin/' | sed -r 's|(.*)/([^/]*)$|\2|' | sort | 
> > > > uniq -c | rg -w 2
> > > >
> > > > says that /usr/sbin/{makemap,rpcinfo,rpcbind,sestatus,udevadm}
> > > > "shadow" files in /usr/bin. But those are all symlinks, i.e. they will
> > > > need just to be dropped to prevent a FTBFS. I added this list with
> > > > four packages to the Scope section.
> > > 
> > > Thanks, but I think the query does not produce
> > > all possible results, as I know for a fact that there is
> > > a package (exabgp) that has both a /usr/sbin/exabgp-healthcheck
> > > and a (different) /usr/bin/exabgp-healthcheck file
> > > (which is why I prompted my query, as I expect
> > > there might be others (I plan to fix exabgp)).
> > 
> > Indeed. With both dnf-5 and dnf5, the inner repoquery doesn't list exabgp.
(That was supposed to be dnf-4 and dnf5.)

> > Either a bug or I'm doing something wrong.
> > 
> Thanks for testing DNF5. I notified DNF5 maintainers
> .

$ dnf5 repoquery --whatprovides /usr/sbin/exabgp-healthcheck  
exabgp-0:4.2.21-7.fc39.noarch
exabgp-0:4.2.21-8.fc39.noarch

$ dnf5 repoquery --whatprovides '/usr/sbin/exabpg-*'
(no answer)

But
$ dnf5 repoquery --whatprovides '/usr/sbin/mkfs*'
dosfstools-0:4.2-7.fc39.x86_64
e2fsprogs-0:1.47.0-2.fc39.x86_64
xfsprogs-0:6.4.0-1.fc39.i686
xfsprogs-0:6.4.0-1.fc39.x86_64

So a glob works in some cases but not others? I'm confused.

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, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Re: [heads-up] evolution-data-server libecal-2.0 soname version bump in rawhide

2024-01-09 Thread Milan Crha 
On Tue, 2024-01-09 at 18:36 +0100, Kalev Lember wrote:
> Looks like this has a bit of a mid air collision with gnome-shell
> 46.alpha that's in a different bodhi update:
> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-d7b40ac758

Hi,
that's a pita. Let me know if I can help with anything. I can rebuild
gnome-shell 46.alpha in the eds side tag and refresh the update.
Bye,
Milan


--
___
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: Re: [heads-up] evolution-data-server libecal-2.0 soname version bump in rawhide

2024-01-09 Thread Kalev Lember 
On Tue, Jan 9, 2024 at 6:25 PM Milan Crha  wrote:

> On Mon, 2024-01-08 at 18:40 -0800, kevin wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 08, 2024 at 11:05:33AM +0100, Milan Crha wrote:
> > >elementary-calendar
> > >evolution-chime (which is part of pidgin-chime)
> > >gnome-panel
> > >phosh
>
>
> Hi,
> thank you all for the promptly rebuild of the left dependencies. As
> they all are done now, I filled the update:
> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-d3219fb3da


Looks like this has a bit of a mid air collision with gnome-shell 46.alpha
that's in a different bodhi update:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-d7b40ac758

I think we'll need to rebuild gnome-shell once more because of this - I can
keep an eye on the two bodhi updates and rebuild it one more time depending
on which one lands first.

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

Removing deprecated %patch syntax from go-sig's packages

2024-01-09 Thread Maxwell G 
Hi everyone,

RPM has deprecated the `%patchN` syntax in favor of `%patch -PN` where
`N` is the patch number. See the RPM documentation for more information
[1]. In current RPM versions, this syntax only emits a deprecation
warning, but support for this syntax has been removed completely on the
rpm master branch [2]. Around 100 packages maintained by the go-sig
still use this syntax.

Later this week/early next week, I will run this script [3] over the
affected go-sig packages [4] to update them to the modern patch syntax.
For example, the script will change:

%patch0 -p1 -> %patch -P0 -p1
%patch0005 -p2 -> %patch -P0005 -p2

If anyone has any objections or would like to exclude a package, please
let me know.

---Maxwell

[1] https://rpm-software-management.github.io/rpm/manual/spec.html#patch-1
[2] 
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/commit/afd352481bacea521ce5ba01e989866478278532
[3] 
https://git.sr.ht/~gotmax23/fedora-scripts/tree/main/item/new_patch_syntax.sh
[4] 
https://git.sr.ht/~gotmax23/fedora-scripts/tree/main/item/go-sig/new_patch_syntax/packages

-- 
Maxwell G (@gotmax23)
Pronouns: He/They
--
___
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 2257445] nagios-plugins-disk_smb cannot be installed

2024-01-09 Thread bugzilla 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2257445



--- Comment #2 from Christoph Karl  ---
Seems like "perl-Import-Into" is not Part of EPEL 9 (only EPEL 7):
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Import-Into

Same for:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-PerlIO-utf8_strict


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2257445

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202257445%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: Re: [heads-up] evolution-data-server libecal-2.0 soname version bump in rawhide

2024-01-09 Thread Milan Crha 
On Mon, 2024-01-08 at 18:40 -0800, kevin wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 08, 2024 at 11:05:33AM +0100, Milan Crha wrote:
> >    elementary-calendar
> >    evolution-chime (which is part of pidgin-chime)
> >    gnome-panel
> >    phosh


Hi,
thank you all for the promptly rebuild of the left dependencies. As
they all are done now, I filled the update:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-d3219fb3da

Bye,
Milan
--
___
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 2257445] nagios-plugins-disk_smb cannot be installed

2024-01-09 Thread bugzilla 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2257445



--- Comment #1 from Christoph Karl  ---
Problem more likely with perl-utf8-all:
sudo dnf install perl-utf8-all
Updating Subscription Management repositories.
Last metadata expiration check: 0:13:15 ago on Tue Jan  9 18:04:46 2024.
Error: 
 Problem: conflicting requests
  - nothing provides perl(Import::Into) needed by
perl-utf8-all-0.024-14.el9.noarch from epel
  - nothing provides perl(PerlIO::utf8_strict) needed by
perl-utf8-all-0.024-14.el9.noarch from epel


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2257445

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202257445%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

[Bug 2257445] nagios-plugins-disk_smb cannot be installed

2024-01-09 Thread bugzilla 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2257445

Christoph Karl  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
   Assignee|guido.aul...@gmail.com  |p...@city-fan.org
  Component|nagios-plugins  |perl-utf8-all
 CC||mspa...@redhat.com,
   ||p...@city-fan.org,
   ||perl-devel@lists.fedoraproj
   ||ect.org, 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=2257445
--
___
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

License of perl metapackage should be LicenseRef-Not-Copyrightable

2024-01-09 Thread Petr Pisar 
V Fri, Dec 08, 2023 at 07:11:09AM +0100, Miroslav Suchý napsal(a):
> We added new license LicenseRef-Not-Copyrightable that should be used for
> packages like foo-filesystem that e.g., create just directories and does not
> have copyrightable code nor content.
> 
I believe all metapackages, i.e. packages without files which only require
another packages, fall into this category.

Therefore I believe that a binary "perl" package should:

-License:GPL-1.0-or-later OR Artistic-1.0-Perl
+License:LicenseRef-Not-Copyrightable

First, I wanted to write to legal list, to ask them whether
LicenseRef-Not-Copyrightable also applies to metapackages with a proper
upstream. But when I tried to formulate what binary "perl" means, I realized
that because of dual-lived modules, it is not all libraries, tools,
documentation and features you get by compiling perl sources. We transitively
install software built from different sources.  Also we cannot predict
dual-lived packages to comes with a new license. And we even do not want to
track the changes in perl package. Those are the reasons why we do not list
licenses of all 190 dependent packages in "perl".

Therefore I believe that "GPL-1.0-or-later OR Artistic-1.0-Perl" at "perl" is
an overly simplified statement that it's a lie.

By the way, if you want to list all the licenses used in the perl sources, RPM
has a new "SourceLicense" tag for that.

-- Petr



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
--
___
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

Updating wcslib in rawhide to 8.2.2 (with sidetag)

2024-01-09 Thread Sergio Pascual 
Hello, I have created the side tag f40-build-side-81054 to build
packages depending on wcslib

Build your package with:
fedpkg build --target=f40-build-side-81054

Affected:
astrometry
cpl
kstars
python3-astrometry
python3-astropy
siril
sourcextractor++
stellarsolver

I have already built cpl and I'm building python-astropy now

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, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

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

2024-01-09 Thread tdawson 
Dear all,

You are kindly invited to the meeting:
   EPEL Steering Committee on 2024-01-10 from 16:00:00 to 17:00:00 US/Eastern
   At fedora-meet...@chat.fedoraproject.org

The meeting will be about:
https://chat.fedoraproject.org/#/room/#meeting:fedoraproject.org

This is the weekly EPEL Steering Committee Meeting.

A general agenda is the following:

#topic aloha

#topic EPEL Issues https://pagure.io/epel/issues
* https://pagure.io/epel/issues?tags=meeting=Open

#topic Old Business (if needed)

#topic General Issues / Open Floor




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

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

orphans.txt and orphans.json URL change

2024-01-09 Thread Miro Hrončok 

Hello.

In case you used any of the following URLs:

https://churchyard.fedorapeople.org/orphans.txt
https://churchyard.fedorapeople.org/orphans.json

Please update them to:

https://a.gtmx.me/orphans/orphans.txt
https://a.gtmx.me/orphans/orphans.json

I replaced the old files with a single-line text file with the new URL.
Since this was on fedorapeople.org, I have no way to create a real redirect.

The old json file is deliberately not a valid json now, so anything that uses 
it hopefully explodes rather than report old results.


The packaging dashboard uses the new URL already.

--
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: F40 Change Proposal: F40 Change Proposal: Unify /usr/bin and /usr/sbin (System-Wide)

2024-01-09 Thread Sjoerd Mullender 

On 08/01/2024 14.41, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:

On Mon, Jan 08, 2024 at 10:02:55AM +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote:

On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 7:54 PM Aoife Moloney  wrote:


Wiki -> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Unify_bin_and_sbin



I agree unifying the *programs* to a single directory makes sense. But I
fail to see anything good come out of bringing all those system daemon
executables into every users path.


To clarify: they already *are* in every user's path, see
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Unify_bin_and_sbin#Detailed_Description,
third para.


Not quite true: If you're using lightdm as display manager, the PATH is 
initialized to /usr/local/bin:/usr/bin:/bin, at least on Fedora 39.



This would seem like a good opportunity to move stuff that isn't supposed to
be directly run as part of normal usage under /usr/libexec. I'm sure there
are exceptions but as a rule of thumb, if it has a systemd service file then
it should no longer be in %_sbindir.


This was also mentioned by Matthew Miller on discussion.fp.o and I
agree, but I think that that's an orthogonal issue. Individual
maintainers should evaluate this and do the move if they really think
that no one is calling the binary directly. This can be done before
or after the proposed change.

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, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue


--
Sjoerd Mullender
--
___
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: Change of cronie and crontabs CIS compliance

2024-01-09 Thread Tomáš Mráz 
Thank you very much for considering this and dropping this Change.

Regards,

Tomas Mraz
--
___
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: F40 Change Proposal: F40 Change Proposal: Unify /usr/bin and /usr/sbin (System-Wide)

2024-01-09 Thread Petr Pisar 
V Mon, Jan 08, 2024 at 09:42:41PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek napsal(a):
> On Mon, Jan 08, 2024 at 03:26:45PM +, Gary Buhrmaster wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 8, 2024 at 1:37 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> >  wrote:
> > > $ dnf5 repoquery -l $(dnf5 repoquery --whatprovides '/usr/sbin/*' --qf 
> > > '%{name}\n') | rg '/usr/s?bin/' | sed -r 's|(.*)/([^/]*)$|\2|' | sort | 
> > > uniq -c | rg -w 2
> > >
> > > says that /usr/sbin/{makemap,rpcinfo,rpcbind,sestatus,udevadm}
> > > "shadow" files in /usr/bin. But those are all symlinks, i.e. they will
> > > need just to be dropped to prevent a FTBFS. I added this list with
> > > four packages to the Scope section.
> > 
> > Thanks, but I think the query does not produce
> > all possible results, as I know for a fact that there is
> > a package (exabgp) that has both a /usr/sbin/exabgp-healthcheck
> > and a (different) /usr/bin/exabgp-healthcheck file
> > (which is why I prompted my query, as I expect
> > there might be others (I plan to fix exabgp)).
> 
> Indeed. With both dnf-5 and dnf5, the inner repoquery doesn't list exabgp.
> Either a bug or I'm doing something wrong.
> 
Thanks for testing DNF5. I notified DNF5 maintainers
.

-- Petr


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, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[EPEL-devel] Re: VLC via EPEL vs via RPMFUSION

2024-01-09 Thread Leon Fauster via epel-devel 


Hi Dominik, thanks for your reply.


Am 09.01.24 um 10:16 schrieb Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski:

Hello, Leon.

On Monday, 08 January 2024 at 17:18, Leon Fauster via epel-devel wrote:

Hi all,

it seems that VLC is in EPEL9 now. Looks like some license changes
allows packaging some multimedia stuff now. I noticed also the
new epel-cisco-openh264 repo.

Unfortunately, I'm not involved in the upstream/Fedora discussions.
So, I miss some kind of documentation. A look into Fedoras Wiki also
doesn't show any article that explains the current status/motivation
/limitations of such components and their differences to RPMFUSIONs
one.  Also the concept of "freeworld" packages is unclear (at least to
me).


What kind of documentation would you like to see? What exact questions
woud you like to see answered in such documentation?




I used documentation with a lightweight sense. Mainly I had something in 
mind that would help the "user" and/or the foreign developer (non rpm 
dev) to catch up with the current changes in the EL "ecosystem".


For instance, a recent change in the epel-release package [1] could be 
further highlighted with this Wiki entry (albeit more focused on fedora 
linux) https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/OpenH264


There should be no detailed documentation about this, but the wiki
entry gives at least an idea whats going on.

Regarding the VLC restructuring I can't find anything (until today I
wasn't subscribed to rpmfusion lists for some reason , my fault, but
I'm now). And I do not see any change-request for inclusion into Fedora
(maybe I'm not so familiar with such process).

So, IMHO a "Multimedia" Wiki entry that highlights the current efforts
would be a great help in this aspects. Especially, the coming
compartmentation of functionality (codecs) via plugins provided by
both "repos".








Some RPMFUSION packages were in conflict with the new packages in
epel- testing. Currently, the conflicts are resolved but the
epel-testing packages would overwrite the ones installed from
RPMFUSION now (someone stated no assurance for such repo
compatibility).


Perfect coordination is, unfortunately, not possible. Even if we pushed
the packages to testing and to stable repos at the same time in both
Fedora and RPM Fusion, there will still be delays due to mirroring.




Sure, for that reason I take actively a look into the impacts of 
enabling the testing repos. So, its good to have this layer.





Any pointers to sources/docs/threads that explains the new strategies
and activities or any other suggestions to read would be greatly
appreciated.


I did a presentation on this topic at a local conference last year, but
it seems they haven't put it online yet. I'll try to post my slides when
I find them at least.



That would be for sure interesting to read!






BTW, do the RPMFUSION and Fedora Devs coordinate such overlap? Where?


We usually do it over bugzilla[1] and e-mail[2]. Sometimes on IRC[3] and
Matrix[4].

"We" here means the Multimedia SIG:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Multimedia_SIG



Not sure if I could help out in this SIG. Especially or mainly for the 
EL branch.


--
Thanks,
Leon



[1] https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2023-1e3199f53c
--
___
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, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

License correction for python-elephant

2024-01-09 Thread Sandro 

The license for python-elephant has been converted to SPDX and corrected to:

BSD-3-Clause AND MIT

It used to be just 'BSD'.

Cheers,

--
Sandro
FAS: gui1ty
IRC: Penguinpee
Elsewhere: [Pp]enguinpee
--
___
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

[EPEL-devel] Re: VLC via EPEL vs via RPMFUSION

2024-01-09 Thread Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski 
Hello, Leon.

On Monday, 08 January 2024 at 17:18, Leon Fauster via epel-devel wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> it seems that VLC is in EPEL9 now. Looks like some license changes
> allows packaging some multimedia stuff now. I noticed also the
> new epel-cisco-openh264 repo.
> 
> Unfortunately, I'm not involved in the upstream/Fedora discussions.
> So, I miss some kind of documentation. A look into Fedoras Wiki also
> doesn't show any article that explains the current status/motivation
> /limitations of such components and their differences to RPMFUSIONs
> one.  Also the concept of "freeworld" packages is unclear (at least to
> me).

What kind of documentation would you like to see? What exact questions
woud you like to see answered in such documentation?

> Some RPMFUSION packages were in conflict with the new packages in
> epel- testing. Currently, the conflicts are resolved but the
> epel-testing packages would overwrite the ones installed from
> RPMFUSION now (someone stated no assurance for such repo
> compatibility).

Perfect coordination is, unfortunately, not possible. Even if we pushed
the packages to testing and to stable repos at the same time in both
Fedora and RPM Fusion, there will still be delays due to mirroring.

> Any pointers to sources/docs/threads that explains the new strategies
> and activities or any other suggestions to read would be greatly
> appreciated.

I did a presentation on this topic at a local conference last year, but
it seems they haven't put it online yet. I'll try to post my slides when
I find them at least.

> BTW, do the RPMFUSION and Fedora Devs coordinate such overlap? Where?

We usually do it over bugzilla[1] and e-mail[2]. Sometimes on IRC[3] and
Matrix[4].

"We" here means the Multimedia SIG:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Multimedia_SIG

[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org
[2] Direct or 
https://lists.rpmfusion.org/archives/list/rpmfusion-develop...@lists.rpmfusion.org/
[3] irc://#rpmfus...@libera.chat
[4] https://matrix.to/#/#multimedia:fedoraproject.org

Regards,
Dominik
-- 
Fedora   https://fedoraproject.org
Deep in the human unconscious is a pervasive need for a logical universe that
makes sense. But the real universe is always one step beyond logic.
-- from "The Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan
--
___
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, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2257383] New: perl-HTML-TreeBuilder-LibXML-0.27 is available

2024-01-09 Thread bugzilla 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2257383

Bug ID: 2257383
   Summary: perl-HTML-TreeBuilder-LibXML-0.27 is available
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-HTML-TreeBuilder-LibXML
  Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
  Assignee: emman...@seyman.fr
  Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: emman...@seyman.fr, perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Releases retrieved: 0.27
Upstream release that is considered latest: 0.27
Current version/release in rawhide: 0.26-29.fc39
URL: https://metacpan.org/release/HTML-TreeBuilder-LibXML

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/18024/


To change the monitoring settings for the project, please visit:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-HTML-TreeBuilder-LibXML


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2257383

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202257383%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