Re: Stale packages in Fedora 30
On Tue, Jun 4, 2019, 15:59 Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > > > On Sun, 2 Jun 2019 at 15:14, Miro Hrončok wrote: > >> On 31. 05. 19 16:10, Fabio Valentini wrote: >> > On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 8:19 PM Adam Jackson wrote: >> >> >> >> Since I was looking at a copy of the F30 repo for amd64, here's a list >> >> of a bunch of packages whose dist tag suggests they haven't rebuilt >> >> successfully in any currently-supported Fedora release. I'm sure some >> >> of these are incompletely retired or there's otherwise some good reason >> >> for it, this is just to raise visibility. >> > >> > AFAICT, a lot of these packages should have been retired ages ago. >> > >> > Is the retirement procedure for long-standing FTBFS packages being done >> at all? >> >> Not at all. See https://pagure.io/releng/issue/7718 >> >> > This has been deployed and should start sending out weekly reminders soon. > Great! Thank you :) > > >> -- >> 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://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html >> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines >> List Archives: >> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org >> > > > -- > Stephen J Smoogen. > > ___ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Stale packages in Fedora 30
On Sun, 2 Jun 2019 at 15:14, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 31. 05. 19 16:10, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 8:19 PM Adam Jackson wrote: > >> > >> Since I was looking at a copy of the F30 repo for amd64, here's a list > >> of a bunch of packages whose dist tag suggests they haven't rebuilt > >> successfully in any currently-supported Fedora release. I'm sure some > >> of these are incompletely retired or there's otherwise some good reason > >> for it, this is just to raise visibility. > > > > AFAICT, a lot of these packages should have been retired ages ago. > > > > Is the retirement procedure for long-standing FTBFS packages being done > at all? > > Not at all. See https://pagure.io/releng/issue/7718 > > This has been deployed and should start sending out weekly reminders soon. > -- > 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://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > -- Stephen J Smoogen. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Stale packages in Fedora 30
On Mon, 3 Jun 2019 at 15:28, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Mon, 2019-06-03 at 20:06 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > On 6/3/19 7:05 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > > Some people don't see any problem with this, personally it drives me > > > crazy and I wish it were policy that *every* retired package must be > > > obsoleted. But it isn't. > > I am quite shocked to hear this from you. I wouldn't have expected this > > attitude from you. > > > > You seem have forgotten about the problems, such obsoletes cause, e.g. > > when packages are being reintroduced or move to 3rd party repos or when > > 3rd party packages depend upon them. > > Version the obsoletes correctly and this doesn't need to be a problem > at all. > Write code correctly and we wouldn't need to ever do updates either :) That never seems to happen so how do you deal with it when it doesn't.. tell the user they should have had better backups? > -- > Adam Williamson > Fedora QA Community Monkey > IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net > http://www.happyassassin.net > ___ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > -- Stephen J Smoogen. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Stale packages in Fedora 30
On Mon, 2019-06-03 at 20:06 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On 6/3/19 7:05 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > Some people don't see any problem with this, personally it drives me > > crazy and I wish it were policy that *every* retired package must be > > obsoleted. But it isn't. > I am quite shocked to hear this from you. I wouldn't have expected this > attitude from you. > > You seem have forgotten about the problems, such obsoletes cause, e.g. > when packages are being reintroduced or move to 3rd party repos or when > 3rd party packages depend upon them. Version the obsoletes correctly and this doesn't need to be a problem at all. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Stale packages in Fedora 30
On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 12:47:53 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: I once maintained this, it seems that Bruno, who took it over, no longer has time to maintain this. Yeah, but leave me as a co-maintainer as things might get better. I did some CI work for squashfs-tools a couple of weeks ago, so I'm starting to get a little done again. But getting zstd support in squashfs-tools (which involves a few other changes as a prerequisite) is what I want to get done next. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Stale packages in Fedora 30
On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 01:32:41PM -0400, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > On Mon, 3 Jun 2019 at 13:17, Chris Murphy wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 11:07 AM Adam Williamson > > wrote: > > > > > > On Sun, 2019-06-02 at 21:35 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: > > > > Perhaps related, on an upgraded Fedora 30 system I see > > > > ghostscript-fonts-5.50-37.fc27.noarch, which does not appear on any > > > > clean installed systems, and also can't be installed (Error: Unable to > > > > find a match ). That tells me it's been dropped or is obsolete, so is > > > > it normal for such packages to persist through upgrades? > > > > > > Sure, very common. Packages are frequently retired and not formally > > > obsoleted by anything else: in this case, if you have them installed, > > > they'll stay installed until some dependency issue crops up and you > > > have to remove them manually (or use --allowerasing) to clear it up. > > > > And does gnome-software do --allowerasing, or equivalent? Or other > > behavior? > > > > > > > > Some people don't see any problem with this, personally it drives me > > > crazy and I wish it were policy that *every* retired package must be > > > obsoleted. But it isn't. > > > > Not obsoleting retired packages is arguably inconsistent with the > > Workstation PRD: > > > > "Upgrading the system multiple times through the upgrade process > > should give a result that is the same as an original install of Fedora > > Workstation." > > > > I understand that is a goal, not a policy or release criterion. > > > > > I expect it is an impossible goal as it is making the installer guess that > you didn't want to keep that version of wumpus from RHL6.2 which works > still but isn't in the repository. And forcing an obsolete has knock-on > effects. At best I can obsolete the version of emacs-freebird which came > from Fedora up until release N, but if the person has a version they > compile themselves.. then a centralized obsoletes has a good chance of > removing it unless the packager did exactly the right things in the > obsoletes and the other version of emacs-freebird also did the right > things. I expect that instead you end up with a lot of pissed off people... > which no one has the emotional labour to deal with. It's possible that this used to be true, i.e. that the number of people who compiled *their own versions* of packages that are already in the distro was non-trivial. Nowadays, I'm pretty sure this happens very very rarely. People install external and self-compiled packages mostly when they cannot get something from the distro. I don't have any formal numbers for this, but based on the bug reports that come in before and around every release, it's quite obvious that the number of users negatively impacted by non-obsoleted distro packages (*) dwarves the number of people who have an external package, and that in turn is still higher than those that have an external package with a lower nevra. (*) Fedora removes many many packages and subpackages on every release. So every non-minimal installation of Fedora will have such stale-but-not-obsoleted package after *every* upgrade. It's only a question of time until some so-version changes and such packages cause upgrades to break. Normal users are (correctly) wary of --allowerasing which is risky and requires a good understanding of packaging and recovery methods. I understand why this policy drives adamw crazy. I think we're shooting our users in the foot. Zbyszek ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Stale packages in Fedora 30
On 5/30/19 1:18 PM, Adam Jackson wrote: Fedora 26 ... mingw-wine-gecko-2.47-2.fc26.src.rpm I would welcome eyes on this. Upstream has been informed about it, but they have not issued any new release. This package is basically a mini-Firefox and usually breaks from Mingw-w64 updates. I haven't had any time to patch it myself. Thanks, Michael ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Stale packages in Fedora 30
On 6/3/19 7:05 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: Some people don't see any problem with this, personally it drives me crazy and I wish it were policy that *every* retired package must be obsoleted. But it isn't. I am quite shocked to hear this from you. I wouldn't have expected this attitude from you. You seem have forgotten about the problems, such obsoletes cause, e.g. when packages are being reintroduced or move to 3rd party repos or when 3rd party packages depend upon them. Ralf ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Stale packages in Fedora 30
On 6/3/19 1:16 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 11:07 AM Adam Williamson wrote: Some people don't see any problem with this, personally it drives me crazy and I wish it were policy that *every* retired package must be obsoleted. But it isn't. Not obsoleting retired packages is arguably inconsistent with the Workstation PRD: "Upgrading the system multiple times through the upgrade process should give a result that is the same as an original install of Fedora Workstation." I understand that is a goal, not a policy or release criterion. It leads to situations like https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1490074 where the package doesn't work, and there's not even any possibility for fixing it (the package was abandoned and it's successor was abandoned as well). Situations like these just embarrass Fedora, so I agree with Adam that something should be done, but as the comments in #1490074 show, people aren't sure what exactly should happen. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Stale packages in Fedora 30
On Mon, 3 Jun 2019 at 13:17, Chris Murphy wrote: > On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 11:07 AM Adam Williamson > wrote: > > > > On Sun, 2019-06-02 at 21:35 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: > > > Perhaps related, on an upgraded Fedora 30 system I see > > > ghostscript-fonts-5.50-37.fc27.noarch, which does not appear on any > > > clean installed systems, and also can't be installed (Error: Unable to > > > find a match ). That tells me it's been dropped or is obsolete, so is > > > it normal for such packages to persist through upgrades? > > > > Sure, very common. Packages are frequently retired and not formally > > obsoleted by anything else: in this case, if you have them installed, > > they'll stay installed until some dependency issue crops up and you > > have to remove them manually (or use --allowerasing) to clear it up. > > And does gnome-software do --allowerasing, or equivalent? Or other > behavior? > > > > > Some people don't see any problem with this, personally it drives me > > crazy and I wish it were policy that *every* retired package must be > > obsoleted. But it isn't. > > Not obsoleting retired packages is arguably inconsistent with the > Workstation PRD: > > "Upgrading the system multiple times through the upgrade process > should give a result that is the same as an original install of Fedora > Workstation." > > I understand that is a goal, not a policy or release criterion. > > I expect it is an impossible goal as it is making the installer guess that you didn't want to keep that version of wumpus from RHL6.2 which works still but isn't in the repository. And forcing an obsolete has knock-on effects. At best I can obsolete the version of emacs-freebird which came from Fedora up until release N, but if the person has a version they compile themselves.. then a centralized obsoletes has a good chance of removing it unless the packager did exactly the right things in the obsoletes and the other version of emacs-freebird also did the right things. I expect that instead you end up with a lot of pissed off people... which no one has the emotional labour to deal with. > > -- > Chris Murphy > ___ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > -- Stephen J Smoogen. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Stale packages in Fedora 30
On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 11:07 AM Adam Williamson wrote: > > On Sun, 2019-06-02 at 21:35 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: > > Perhaps related, on an upgraded Fedora 30 system I see > > ghostscript-fonts-5.50-37.fc27.noarch, which does not appear on any > > clean installed systems, and also can't be installed (Error: Unable to > > find a match ). That tells me it's been dropped or is obsolete, so is > > it normal for such packages to persist through upgrades? > > Sure, very common. Packages are frequently retired and not formally > obsoleted by anything else: in this case, if you have them installed, > they'll stay installed until some dependency issue crops up and you > have to remove them manually (or use --allowerasing) to clear it up. And does gnome-software do --allowerasing, or equivalent? Or other behavior? > > Some people don't see any problem with this, personally it drives me > crazy and I wish it were policy that *every* retired package must be > obsoleted. But it isn't. Not obsoleting retired packages is arguably inconsistent with the Workstation PRD: "Upgrading the system multiple times through the upgrade process should give a result that is the same as an original install of Fedora Workstation." I understand that is a goal, not a policy or release criterion. -- Chris Murphy ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Stale packages in Fedora 30
On Sun, 2019-06-02 at 21:35 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: > Perhaps related, on an upgraded Fedora 30 system I see > ghostscript-fonts-5.50-37.fc27.noarch, which does not appear on any > clean installed systems, and also can't be installed (Error: Unable to > find a match ). That tells me it's been dropped or is obsolete, so is > it normal for such packages to persist through upgrades? Sure, very common. Packages are frequently retired and not formally obsoleted by anything else: in this case, if you have them installed, they'll stay installed until some dependency issue crops up and you have to remove them manually (or use --allowerasing) to clear it up. Some people don't see any problem with this, personally it drives me crazy and I wish it were policy that *every* retired package must be obsoleted. But it isn't. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Stale packages in Fedora 30
Dne 03. 06. 19 v 5:47 Samuel Sieb napsal(a): > On 6/2/19 8:35 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: >> Perhaps related, on an upgraded Fedora 30 system I see >> ghostscript-fonts-5.50-37.fc27.noarch, which does not appear on any >> clean installed systems, and also can't be installed (Error: Unable to >> find a match ). That tells me it's been dropped or is obsolete, so is >> it normal for such packages to persist through upgrades? > > Yes, normally there's nothing to cause it to be removed. At some > point you will probably get a conflict when a required library soname > is bumped and then --allowerasing will remove it. `dnf autoremove` could help as well. Vít ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Stale packages in Fedora 30
Dne 30. 05. 19 v 20:18 Adam Jackson napsal(a): > Since I was looking at a copy of the F30 repo for amd64, here's a list > of a bunch of packages whose dist tag suggests they haven't rebuilt > successfully in any currently-supported Fedora release. I'm sure some > of these are incompletely retired or there's otherwise some good reason > for it, this is just to raise visibility. > > > rubygem-connection_pool-2.2.0-2.fc24.src.rpm This one ^^ is fun story: https://pagure.io/releng/issue/7523 Vít ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Stale packages in Fedora 30
On Thursday, 30 May 2019 20:18:35 CEST Adam Jackson wrote: > Since I was looking at a copy of the F30 repo for amd64, here's a list > of a bunch of packages whose dist tag suggests they haven't rebuilt > successfully in any currently-supported Fedora release. I'm sure some > of these are incompletely retired or there's otherwise some good reason > for it, this is just to raise visibility. > All the golang-* packages will be updated as part of moving to new macros. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Stale packages in Fedora 30
Hi, On 30-05-19 20:18, Adam Jackson wrote: Since I was looking at a copy of the F30 repo for amd64, here's a list of a bunch of packages whose dist tag suggests they haven't rebuilt successfully in any currently-supported Fedora release. I'm sure some of these are incompletely retired or there's otherwise some good reason for it, this is just to raise visibility. blobwars-1.19-13.fc24.src.rpm I once maintained this, it seems that Bruno, who took it over, no longer has time to maintain this. I'll pick this up again and fix its FTBFS problems. Regards, Hans ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Stale packages in Fedora 30
On Sun, Jun 02, 2019 at 08:47:34PM -0700, Samuel Sieb wrote: > On 6/2/19 8:35 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: > >Perhaps related, on an upgraded Fedora 30 system I see > >ghostscript-fonts-5.50-37.fc27.noarch, which does not appear on any > >clean installed systems, and also can't be installed (Error: Unable to > >find a match ). That tells me it's been dropped or is obsolete, so is > >it normal for such packages to persist through upgrades? > > Yes, normally there's nothing to cause it to be removed. At some > point you will probably get a conflict when a required library > soname is bumped and then --allowerasing will remove it. Exactly. We have fedora-obsolete-packages to gather Obsoletes which don't fit anywhere else, but there's no policy to require all packages which have become obsolete to be added there. Zbyszek ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Stale packages in Fedora 30
On 6/2/19 8:35 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: Perhaps related, on an upgraded Fedora 30 system I see ghostscript-fonts-5.50-37.fc27.noarch, which does not appear on any clean installed systems, and also can't be installed (Error: Unable to find a match ). That tells me it's been dropped or is obsolete, so is it normal for such packages to persist through upgrades? Yes, normally there's nothing to cause it to be removed. At some point you will probably get a conflict when a required library soname is bumped and then --allowerasing will remove it. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Stale packages in Fedora 30
Perhaps related, on an upgraded Fedora 30 system I see ghostscript-fonts-5.50-37.fc27.noarch, which does not appear on any clean installed systems, and also can't be installed (Error: Unable to find a match ). That tells me it's been dropped or is obsolete, so is it normal for such packages to persist through upgrades? Chris Murphy ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Stale packages in Fedora 30
On Sun, Jun 2, 2019, 21:14 Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 31. 05. 19 16:10, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 8:19 PM Adam Jackson wrote: > >> > >> Since I was looking at a copy of the F30 repo for amd64, here's a list > >> of a bunch of packages whose dist tag suggests they haven't rebuilt > >> successfully in any currently-supported Fedora release. I'm sure some > >> of these are incompletely retired or there's otherwise some good reason > >> for it, this is just to raise visibility. > > > > AFAICT, a lot of these packages should have been retired ages ago. > > > > Is the retirement procedure for long-standing FTBFS packages being done > at all? > > Not at all. See https://pagure.io/releng/issue/7718 Literally OOF'ed out loud when I read the comments on the ticket. Thank you, Miro, for working on this. Fabio > > -- > 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://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Stale packages in Fedora 30
On 31. 05. 19 16:10, Fabio Valentini wrote: On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 8:19 PM Adam Jackson wrote: Since I was looking at a copy of the F30 repo for amd64, here's a list of a bunch of packages whose dist tag suggests they haven't rebuilt successfully in any currently-supported Fedora release. I'm sure some of these are incompletely retired or there's otherwise some good reason for it, this is just to raise visibility. AFAICT, a lot of these packages should have been retired ages ago. Is the retirement procedure for long-standing FTBFS packages being done at all? Not at all. See https://pagure.io/releng/issue/7718 -- 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://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Stale packages in Fedora 30
On Sat, Jun 01, 2019 at 08:37:08AM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 11:23:14AM -0400, Scott Talbert wrote: > > On Fri, 31 May 2019, Przemek Klosowski wrote: > > > > >On 5/30/19 2:18 PM, Adam Jackson wrote: > > >>Since I was looking at a copy of the F30 repo for amd64, here's a list > > >>of a bunch of packages whose dist tag suggests they haven't rebuilt > > >>successfully in any currently-supported Fedora release. I'm sure some > > >>of these are incompletely retired or there's otherwise some good reason > > >>for it, this is just to raise visibility. > > > > > >Almost half of these are noarch packages (178 out of 441---see > > >list at the bottom). > > > > > >For instance, dia-gnomeDIAicons is a noarch package, specifically > > >data for 'dia' diagram editor. It actually works, and even > > >contains reasonable and useful network diagram icons. > > > > > >Its packaging _is_ confusing because the actual icon collection is > > >called RIB-network. > > > > > >What could be the reason that a noarch package was not rebuilt for > > >newer release? It's just a bunch of files... > > > > dia-gnomeDIAicons specifically appears to be in some sort of weird > > state. No builds appear to have been *attempted* since F21. > > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=13728 > It seems nothing is intrinsically wrong with the package. > I rebuilt it in rawhide, to reduce the list of stale packages. https://pagure.io/releng/issue/8403 > > Also it has a source rpm checked into dist-git. :P > Most likely because the sources were not in the cache, so somebody > committed them to dist-git instead. Zbyszek ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Stale packages in Fedora 30
On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 11:23:14AM -0400, Scott Talbert wrote: > On Fri, 31 May 2019, Przemek Klosowski wrote: > > >On 5/30/19 2:18 PM, Adam Jackson wrote: > >>Since I was looking at a copy of the F30 repo for amd64, here's a list > >>of a bunch of packages whose dist tag suggests they haven't rebuilt > >>successfully in any currently-supported Fedora release. I'm sure some > >>of these are incompletely retired or there's otherwise some good reason > >>for it, this is just to raise visibility. > > > >Almost half of these are noarch packages (178 out of 441---see > >list at the bottom). > > > >For instance, dia-gnomeDIAicons is a noarch package, specifically > >data for 'dia' diagram editor. It actually works, and even > >contains reasonable and useful network diagram icons. > > > >Its packaging _is_ confusing because the actual icon collection is > >called RIB-network. > > > >What could be the reason that a noarch package was not rebuilt for > >newer release? It's just a bunch of files... > > dia-gnomeDIAicons specifically appears to be in some sort of weird > state. No builds appear to have been *attempted* since F21. > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=13728 It seems nothing is intrinsically wrong with the package. I rebuilt it in rawhide, to reduce the list of stale packages. > Also it has a source rpm checked into dist-git. :P Most likely because the sources were not in the cache, so somebody committed them to dist-git instead. Zbyszek ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Stale packages in Fedora 30
On 5/31/19 11:16 AM, Chris Murphy wrote: > Przemek's emails go to spam, on gmail. I thought after the recent > thread about dmarc stuff that this wouldn't happen anymore, at least > on devel@ The DMARC mitigation is enabled for devel list. I am not sure why it's not matching his emails. Can you open a infrastructure ticket and we can look into it? >but I continue to see half dozen Fedora users' emails go to > spam on mostly test@ but also sometimes devel@ too. I don't know if the mitigation is enabled on test list. You would need to mail test-owners and ask them. kevin 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://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Stale packages in Fedora 30
Przemek's emails go to spam, on gmail. I thought after the recent thread about dmarc stuff that this wouldn't happen anymore, at least on devel@ but I continue to see half dozen Fedora users' emails go to spam on mostly test@ but also sometimes devel@ too. ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of devel-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org designates 209.132.181.2 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=devel-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org; dmarc=fail (p=REJECT sp=REJECT dis=QUARANTINE) header.from=nist.gov On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 9:18 AM Przemek Klosowski wrote: > > On 5/30/19 2:18 PM, Adam Jackson wrote: > > Since I was looking at a copy of the F30 repo for amd64, here's a list > > of a bunch of packages whose dist tag suggests they haven't rebuilt > > successfully in any currently-supported Fedora release. I'm sure some > > of these are incompletely retired or there's otherwise some good reason > > for it, this is just to raise visibility. > > Almost half of these are noarch packages (178 out of 441---see list at > the bottom). > > For instance, dia-gnomeDIAicons is a noarch package, specifically data > for 'dia' diagram editor. It actually works, and even contains > reasonable and useful network diagram icons. > > Its packaging _is_ confusing because the actual icon collection is > called RIB-network. > > What could be the reason that a noarch package was not rebuilt for newer > release? It's just a bunch of files... > > > > activeio.noarch 3.1.4-15.fc26 fedora > activemq.noarch 5.6.0-18.fc26 fedora > activemq-protobuf.noarch 1.1-14.fc26 fedora > ailurus.noarch 10.10.3-12.fc27 fedora > aries-util.noarch 1.1.1-3.fc27fedora > audio-convert-mod.noarch 3.46.0b-12.fc27 fedora > avro.noarch 1.7.6-2.fc26@@commandline > boost-gdb-printers.noarch 6-1.fc26fedora > cachedir.noarch 1.4-1.fc27 fedora > cas.noarch 1.0-12.fc27 fedora > clojure.noarch 1:1.7.0-1.fc24 fedora > cookcc.noarch 0.3.3-16.fc27 fedora > createrepo.noarch 0.10.3-12.fc27 @fedora > crudini.noarch 0.9-2.fc27 @fedora > cxf.noarch 1:3.1.6-7.fc27 fedora > dia-gnomeDIAicons.noarch 0.1-5.fc21 @fedora > dumbster.noarch 1.6-20.fc24 fedora > ehcache2.noarch 2.10.2.2.21-3.fc27 fedora > elasticsearch.noarch 1.7.1-3.fc24fedora > emacs-auto-complete.noarch 1.3.1-11.fc27 fedora > emacs-php-mode.noarch 1.18.2-1.fc27 updates > emacs-pymacs.noarch 0.25-8.fc25 fedora > encuentro.noarch 0.5-15.fc27 fedora > expresso.noarch 0.9.2-10.fc27 fedora > fedorainfinity-screensaver-theme.noarch > fedora-motd.noarch 0.1.2-4.fc27fedora > fedora-screensaver-theme.noarch 1.0.0-12.fc23 fedora > felix-fileinstall.noarch 3.5.0-4.fc27fedora > fwfstab.noarch 0.04-0.14.rc1.fc27 fedora > generic-jms-ra.noarch 1.0.7-3.fc27fedora > gnome-activity-journal.noarch 0.8.0-11.fc27 fedora > gnue-common.noarch 0.6.9-16.fc23 fedora > gogui.noarch 1.4.9-7.fc26fedora > google-oauth-java-client.noarch 1.22.0-3.fc27 fedora > googsystray.noarch 1.3.1-11.fc27 fedora > gourmet.noarch 0.17.4-10.fc27 @fedora > hibernate3.noarch 3.6.10-22.fc27 @fedora > hibernate-hql.noarch 1.3.0-0.2.Alpha2.fc26 @@commandline > hibernate-search.noarch 5.5.4-2.fc26@@commandline > httpcomponents-asyncclient.noarch 4.1.2-3.fc27fedora > idlj-maven-plugin.noarch 1.2.1-9.fc27fedora > igor.noarch 0.4.1-9.fc27fedora > infinispan.noarch 8.2.4-4.fc27@fedora > jabref.noarch 2.10-3.fc26 fedora > jacorb.noarch 2.3.2-3.jbossorg.5.fc27 fedora > jam-control.noarch 1.03-4.fc21 fedora > jarbundler.noarch 2.2.0-12.fc26 fedora > jasperreports.noarch 6.2.2-3.fc26fedora > jboss-dmr.noarch 1.3.0-3.fc27fedora > jboss-jaxb-intros.noarch 1.0.2-10.fc24 fedora > jboss-web.noarch 8.0.0-0.6.Alpha1.fc24 fedora > jclouds.noarch 1.9.2-4.fc27fedora > jenkins-antisamy-markup-formatter-plugin.noarch > jenkins-ant-plugin.noarch 1.2-6.fc24 fedora > jenkins-commons-jelly.noarch 1.1.20120928-10.fc24fedora > jenkins-credentials-plugin.noarch 1.27-1.fc25 fedora > jenkins-crypto-util.noarch 1.4-6.fc24 fedora > jenkins-external-monitor-job-plugin.noarch > jenkins-extras-memory-monitor.noarch 1.9-3.fc24 fedora > jenkins-icon-shim.noarch 1.0.4-4.fc24fedora > jenkins-instance-identity.noarch 1.4-5.fc24
Re: Stale packages in Fedora 30
On Fri, 31 May 2019, Przemek Klosowski wrote: On 5/30/19 2:18 PM, Adam Jackson wrote: Since I was looking at a copy of the F30 repo for amd64, here's a list of a bunch of packages whose dist tag suggests they haven't rebuilt successfully in any currently-supported Fedora release. I'm sure some of these are incompletely retired or there's otherwise some good reason for it, this is just to raise visibility. Almost half of these are noarch packages (178 out of 441---see list at the bottom). For instance, dia-gnomeDIAicons is a noarch package, specifically data for 'dia' diagram editor. It actually works, and even contains reasonable and useful network diagram icons. Its packaging _is_ confusing because the actual icon collection is called RIB-network. What could be the reason that a noarch package was not rebuilt for newer release? It's just a bunch of files... dia-gnomeDIAicons specifically appears to be in some sort of weird state. No builds appear to have been *attempted* since F21. https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=13728 Also it has a source rpm checked into dist-git. :P ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Stale packages in Fedora 30
On 5/30/19 2:18 PM, Adam Jackson wrote: Since I was looking at a copy of the F30 repo for amd64, here's a list of a bunch of packages whose dist tag suggests they haven't rebuilt successfully in any currently-supported Fedora release. I'm sure some of these are incompletely retired or there's otherwise some good reason for it, this is just to raise visibility. Almost half of these are noarch packages (178 out of 441---see list at the bottom). For instance, dia-gnomeDIAicons is a noarch package, specifically data for 'dia' diagram editor. It actually works, and even contains reasonable and useful network diagram icons. Its packaging _is_ confusing because the actual icon collection is called RIB-network. What could be the reason that a noarch package was not rebuilt for newer release? It's just a bunch of files... activeio.noarch 3.1.4-15.fc26 fedora activemq.noarch 5.6.0-18.fc26 fedora activemq-protobuf.noarch 1.1-14.fc26 fedora ailurus.noarch 10.10.3-12.fc27 fedora aries-util.noarch 1.1.1-3.fc27 fedora audio-convert-mod.noarch 3.46.0b-12.fc27 fedora avro.noarch 1.7.6-2.fc26 @@commandline boost-gdb-printers.noarch 6-1.fc26 fedora cachedir.noarch 1.4-1.fc27 fedora cas.noarch 1.0-12.fc27 fedora clojure.noarch 1:1.7.0-1.fc24 fedora cookcc.noarch 0.3.3-16.fc27 fedora createrepo.noarch 0.10.3-12.fc27 @fedora crudini.noarch 0.9-2.fc27 @fedora cxf.noarch 1:3.1.6-7.fc27 fedora dia-gnomeDIAicons.noarch 0.1-5.fc21 @fedora dumbster.noarch 1.6-20.fc24 fedora ehcache2.noarch 2.10.2.2.21-3.fc27 fedora elasticsearch.noarch 1.7.1-3.fc24 fedora emacs-auto-complete.noarch 1.3.1-11.fc27 fedora emacs-php-mode.noarch 1.18.2-1.fc27 updates emacs-pymacs.noarch 0.25-8.fc25 fedora encuentro.noarch 0.5-15.fc27 fedora expresso.noarch 0.9.2-10.fc27 fedora fedorainfinity-screensaver-theme.noarch fedora-motd.noarch 0.1.2-4.fc27 fedora fedora-screensaver-theme.noarch 1.0.0-12.fc23 fedora felix-fileinstall.noarch 3.5.0-4.fc27 fedora fwfstab.noarch 0.04-0.14.rc1.fc27 fedora generic-jms-ra.noarch 1.0.7-3.fc27 fedora gnome-activity-journal.noarch 0.8.0-11.fc27 fedora gnue-common.noarch 0.6.9-16.fc23 fedora gogui.noarch 1.4.9-7.fc26 fedora google-oauth-java-client.noarch 1.22.0-3.fc27 fedora googsystray.noarch 1.3.1-11.fc27 fedora gourmet.noarch 0.17.4-10.fc27 @fedora hibernate3.noarch 3.6.10-22.fc27 @fedora hibernate-hql.noarch 1.3.0-0.2.Alpha2.fc26 @@commandline hibernate-search.noarch 5.5.4-2.fc26 @@commandline httpcomponents-asyncclient.noarch 4.1.2-3.fc27 fedora idlj-maven-plugin.noarch 1.2.1-9.fc27 fedora igor.noarch 0.4.1-9.fc27 fedora infinispan.noarch 8.2.4-4.fc27 @fedora jabref.noarch 2.10-3.fc26 fedora jacorb.noarch 2.3.2-3.jbossorg.5.fc27 fedora jam-control.noarch 1.03-4.fc21 fedora jarbundler.noarch 2.2.0-12.fc26 fedora jasperreports.noarch 6.2.2-3.fc26 fedora jboss-dmr.noarch 1.3.0-3.fc27 fedora jboss-jaxb-intros.noarch 1.0.2-10.fc24 fedora jboss-web.noarch 8.0.0-0.6.Alpha1.fc24 fedora jclouds.noarch 1.9.2-4.fc27 fedora jenkins-antisamy-markup-formatter-plugin.noarch jenkins-ant-plugin.noarch 1.2-6.fc24 fedora jenkins-commons-jelly.noarch 1.1.20120928-10.fc24 fedora jenkins-credentials-plugin.noarch 1.27-1.fc25 fedora jenkins-crypto-util.noarch 1.4-6.fc24 fedora jenkins-external-monitor-job-plugin.noarch jenkins-extras-memory-monitor.noarch 1.9-3.fc24 fedora jenkins-icon-shim.noarch 1.0.4-4.fc24 fedora jenkins-instance-identity.noarch 1.4-5.fc24 fedora jenkins-javadoc-plugin.noarch 1.3-4.fc24 fedora jenkins-jexl.noarch 1.1-5.20111212.fc24 fedora jenkins-junit-plugin.noarch 1.12-1.fc25 fedora jenkins-ldap-plugin.noarch 1.11-3.fc24 fedora jenkins-mailer-plugin.noarch 1.17-1.fc25 fedora jenkins-matrix-auth-plugin.noarch 1.2-3.fc24 fedora jenkins-matrix-project-plugin.noarch 1.6-2.fc24 fedora jenkins-pam-auth-plugin.noarch 1.2-3.fc24 fedora jenkins-remoting.noarch 2.62.3-1.fc26 fedora jenkins-script-security-plugin.noarch 1.18.1-1.fc25 fedora jenkins-ssh-cli-auth.noarch 1.2-8.fc24 fedora jenkins-ssh-credentials-plugin.noarch 1.11-4.fc24
Re: Stale packages in Fedora 30
On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 8:19 PM Adam Jackson wrote: > > Since I was looking at a copy of the F30 repo for amd64, here's a list > of a bunch of packages whose dist tag suggests they haven't rebuilt > successfully in any currently-supported Fedora release. I'm sure some > of these are incompletely retired or there's otherwise some good reason > for it, this is just to raise visibility. AFAICT, a lot of these packages should have been retired ages ago. Is the retirement procedure for long-standing FTBFS packages being done at all? Fabio > Fedora 21 > dia-gnomeDIAicons-0.1-5.fc21.src.rpm > jam-control-1.03-4.fc21.src.rpm > publican-fedora-4.0-2.fc21.src.rpm > rubygem-chunky_png-1.2.7-3.fc21.src.rpm > rubygem-dotenv-0.8.0-3.fc21.src.rpm > rubygem-gruff-0.3.6-8.fc21.src.rpm > rubygem-hydra-0.24.0-6.fc21.src.rpm > rubygem-kwalify-0.7.2-10.fc21.src.rpm > rubygem-rmail-1.0.0-11.fc21.src.rpm > rubygem-rspec-longrun-0.1.2-4.fc21.src.rpm > rubygem-rufus-scheduler-2.0.4-9.fc21.src.rpm > rubygem-xmpp4r-0.5-11.fc21.src.rpm > rubygem-xmpp4r-simple-0.8.8-11.fc21.src.rpm > R-xtable-1.7.1-4.fc21.src.rpm > > Fedora 22 > eurephia-1.1.0-9.fc22.src.rpm > hail-0.8-0.16.gf9c5b967.fc22.src.rpm > kde-plasma-activitymanager-0.5-8.fc22.src.rpm > kguitar-0.5.1-19.926svn.fc22.src.rpm > pam_radius-1.4.0-2.fc22.src.rpm > prozilla-2.0.4-18.fc22.src.rpm > rubygem-authlogic-3.4.2-1.fc22.src.rpm > rubygem-cookiejar-0.3.2-5.fc22.src.rpm > rubygem-text-format-1.0.0-13.fc22.src.rpm > sslogger-0.96-13.fc22.src.rpm > steadyflow-0.2.0-4.fc22.src.rpm > telepathy-haze-0.8.0-3.fc22.src.rpm > udev-browse-0.3-5.fc22.src.rpm > > Fedora 23 > brewtarget-2.1.0-3.fc23.src.rpm > centerim-4.22.10-19.fc23.src.rpm > escape-200912250-12.fc23.src.rpm > fbdesk-1.4.1-19.fc23.src.rpm > fedorainfinity-screensaver-theme-1.0.0-10.fc23.src.rpm > fedora-screensaver-theme-1.0.0-12.fc23.src.rpm > gnue-common-0.6.9-16.fc23.src.rpm > gtkmathview-0.8.0-19.fc23.src.rpm > horst-3.0-6.fc23.src.rpm > kawa-2.0-2.fc23.src.rpm > kmplayer-0.11.3c-10.fc23.src.rpm > libexplain-1.4-4.fc23.src.rpm > manaplus-1.3.10.27.2-8.fc23.src.rpm > python-jabberbot-0.15-4.fc23.src.rpm > qdevelop-0.29-5.fc23.src.rpm > qutim-0.3.2-5.git.6f3a98a.fc23.src.rpm > rubygem-openstack-quantum-client-0.1.5-9.fc23.src.rpm > rubygem-puppet-lint-1.1.0-2.fc23.src.rpm > rubygem-sanitize-2.1.0-5.fc23.src.rpm > taskjuggler-2.4.3-22.fc23.src.rpm > teal-1_40b-14.fc23.src.rpm > > Fedora 24 > ayttm-0.6.3-14.fc24.src.rpm > blobwars-1.19-13.fc24.src.rpm > clojure-1.7.0-1.fc24.src.rpm > dumbster-1.6-20.fc24.src.rpm > elasticsearch-1.7.1-3.fc24.src.rpm > font-manager-0.7.2-4.fc24.src.rpm > free42-1.4.77-1.fc24.src.rpm > gnomint-1.2.1-128.fc24.src.rpm > golang-github-skynetservices-skydns-2.5.3-0.1.a.git8688008.fc24.src.rpm > gyachi-1.2.11-14.fc24.src.rpm > hoard-3.8-12.fc24.src.rpm > homerun-1.2.5-5.fc24.src.rpm > ht-2.0.22-4.fc24.src.rpm > jboss-jaxb-intros-1.0.2-10.fc24.src.rpm > jboss-web-8.0.0-0.6.Alpha1.fc24.src.rpm > jboss-web-native-2.0.10-9.fc24.src.rpm > jenkins-antisamy-markup-formatter-plugin-1.3-2.fc24.src.rpm > jenkins-ant-plugin-1.2-6.fc24.src.rpm > jenkins-commons-jelly-1.1.20120928-10.fc24.src.rpm > jenkins-crypto-util-1.4-6.fc24.src.rpm > jenkins-external-monitor-job-plugin-1.4-4.fc24.src.rpm > jenkins-extras-memory-monitor-1.9-3.fc24.src.rpm > jenkins-icon-shim-1.0.4-4.fc24.src.rpm > jenkins-instance-identity-1.4-5.fc24.src.rpm > jenkins-javadoc-plugin-1.3-4.fc24.src.rpm > jenkins-jexl-1.1-5.20111212.fc24.src.rpm > jenkins-ldap-plugin-1.11-3.fc24.src.rpm > jenkins-matrix-auth-plugin-1.2-3.fc24.src.rpm > jenkins-matrix-project-plugin-1.6-2.fc24.src.rpm > jenkins-pam-auth-plugin-1.2-3.fc24.src.rpm > jenkins-ssh-cli-auth-1.2-8.fc24.src.rpm > jenkins-ssh-credentials-plugin-1.11-4.fc24.src.rpm > jenkins-sshd-1.6-7.fc24.src.rpm > jenkins-ssh-slaves-plugin-1.10-3.fc24.src.rpm > json4s-3.2.7-4.fc24.src.rpm > js-yui2-2.9.0-10.fc24.src.rpm > jutils-1.0.1-13.20110719svn.fc24.src.rpm > kcemirror-0.1.5-16.fc24.src.rpm > libhttpserver-0.9.0-3.fc24.src.rpm > libnasl-2.2.11-18.fc24.src.rpm > lostirc-0.4.6-22.fc24.src.rpm > mahout-collection-codegen-plugin-1.0-4.fc24.src.rpm > maven-changelog-plugin-2.3-2.fc24.src.rpm > maven-ejb-plugin-2.3-14.fc24.src.rpm > maven-help-plugin-2.2-8.fc24.src.rpm > maven-hpi-plugin-1.113-5.fc24.src.rpm > maven-rar-plugin-2.4-2.fc24.src.rpm > maven-repository-plugin-2.3.1-14.fc24.src.rpm > mcollective-2.8.4-2.fc24.src.rpm > mhwaveedit-1.4.22-9.fc24.src.rpm > mingw-llvm-3.0-11.fc24.src.rpm > mycila-licenses-1-4.fc24.src.rpm > ncbi-blast+-2.2.31-4.fc24.src.rpm > openpts-0.2.6-13.fc24.src.rpm > opensaml-java-xmltooling-1.3.4-12.fc24.src.rpm > Pound-2.7-3.fc24.src.rpm > primer3-2.3.6-6.fc24.src.rpm > quake3-1.36-26.svn2102.fc24.src.rpm > racoon2-20100526a-32.fc24.src.rpm > Ray-2.3.1-12.fc24.src.rpm > rescu-1.8.2-0.2.gitbeb9897.fc24.src.rpm > rubygem-compass-1.0.1-3.fc24.src.rpm > rubygem-connection_pool-2.2.0-2.fc24.src.rpm > rubygem-riot-0.12.7-3.fc24.src.rpm > scalaz-7.0.0-6.fc24.src.rpm >
Stale packages in Fedora 30
Since I was looking at a copy of the F30 repo for amd64, here's a list of a bunch of packages whose dist tag suggests they haven't rebuilt successfully in any currently-supported Fedora release. I'm sure some of these are incompletely retired or there's otherwise some good reason for it, this is just to raise visibility. Fedora 21 dia-gnomeDIAicons-0.1-5.fc21.src.rpm jam-control-1.03-4.fc21.src.rpm publican-fedora-4.0-2.fc21.src.rpm rubygem-chunky_png-1.2.7-3.fc21.src.rpm rubygem-dotenv-0.8.0-3.fc21.src.rpm rubygem-gruff-0.3.6-8.fc21.src.rpm rubygem-hydra-0.24.0-6.fc21.src.rpm rubygem-kwalify-0.7.2-10.fc21.src.rpm rubygem-rmail-1.0.0-11.fc21.src.rpm rubygem-rspec-longrun-0.1.2-4.fc21.src.rpm rubygem-rufus-scheduler-2.0.4-9.fc21.src.rpm rubygem-xmpp4r-0.5-11.fc21.src.rpm rubygem-xmpp4r-simple-0.8.8-11.fc21.src.rpm R-xtable-1.7.1-4.fc21.src.rpm Fedora 22 eurephia-1.1.0-9.fc22.src.rpm hail-0.8-0.16.gf9c5b967.fc22.src.rpm kde-plasma-activitymanager-0.5-8.fc22.src.rpm kguitar-0.5.1-19.926svn.fc22.src.rpm pam_radius-1.4.0-2.fc22.src.rpm prozilla-2.0.4-18.fc22.src.rpm rubygem-authlogic-3.4.2-1.fc22.src.rpm rubygem-cookiejar-0.3.2-5.fc22.src.rpm rubygem-text-format-1.0.0-13.fc22.src.rpm sslogger-0.96-13.fc22.src.rpm steadyflow-0.2.0-4.fc22.src.rpm telepathy-haze-0.8.0-3.fc22.src.rpm udev-browse-0.3-5.fc22.src.rpm Fedora 23 brewtarget-2.1.0-3.fc23.src.rpm centerim-4.22.10-19.fc23.src.rpm escape-200912250-12.fc23.src.rpm fbdesk-1.4.1-19.fc23.src.rpm fedorainfinity-screensaver-theme-1.0.0-10.fc23.src.rpm fedora-screensaver-theme-1.0.0-12.fc23.src.rpm gnue-common-0.6.9-16.fc23.src.rpm gtkmathview-0.8.0-19.fc23.src.rpm horst-3.0-6.fc23.src.rpm kawa-2.0-2.fc23.src.rpm kmplayer-0.11.3c-10.fc23.src.rpm libexplain-1.4-4.fc23.src.rpm manaplus-1.3.10.27.2-8.fc23.src.rpm python-jabberbot-0.15-4.fc23.src.rpm qdevelop-0.29-5.fc23.src.rpm qutim-0.3.2-5.git.6f3a98a.fc23.src.rpm rubygem-openstack-quantum-client-0.1.5-9.fc23.src.rpm rubygem-puppet-lint-1.1.0-2.fc23.src.rpm rubygem-sanitize-2.1.0-5.fc23.src.rpm taskjuggler-2.4.3-22.fc23.src.rpm teal-1_40b-14.fc23.src.rpm Fedora 24 ayttm-0.6.3-14.fc24.src.rpm blobwars-1.19-13.fc24.src.rpm clojure-1.7.0-1.fc24.src.rpm dumbster-1.6-20.fc24.src.rpm elasticsearch-1.7.1-3.fc24.src.rpm font-manager-0.7.2-4.fc24.src.rpm free42-1.4.77-1.fc24.src.rpm gnomint-1.2.1-128.fc24.src.rpm golang-github-skynetservices-skydns-2.5.3-0.1.a.git8688008.fc24.src.rpm gyachi-1.2.11-14.fc24.src.rpm hoard-3.8-12.fc24.src.rpm homerun-1.2.5-5.fc24.src.rpm ht-2.0.22-4.fc24.src.rpm jboss-jaxb-intros-1.0.2-10.fc24.src.rpm jboss-web-8.0.0-0.6.Alpha1.fc24.src.rpm jboss-web-native-2.0.10-9.fc24.src.rpm jenkins-antisamy-markup-formatter-plugin-1.3-2.fc24.src.rpm jenkins-ant-plugin-1.2-6.fc24.src.rpm jenkins-commons-jelly-1.1.20120928-10.fc24.src.rpm jenkins-crypto-util-1.4-6.fc24.src.rpm jenkins-external-monitor-job-plugin-1.4-4.fc24.src.rpm jenkins-extras-memory-monitor-1.9-3.fc24.src.rpm jenkins-icon-shim-1.0.4-4.fc24.src.rpm jenkins-instance-identity-1.4-5.fc24.src.rpm jenkins-javadoc-plugin-1.3-4.fc24.src.rpm jenkins-jexl-1.1-5.20111212.fc24.src.rpm jenkins-ldap-plugin-1.11-3.fc24.src.rpm jenkins-matrix-auth-plugin-1.2-3.fc24.src.rpm jenkins-matrix-project-plugin-1.6-2.fc24.src.rpm jenkins-pam-auth-plugin-1.2-3.fc24.src.rpm jenkins-ssh-cli-auth-1.2-8.fc24.src.rpm jenkins-ssh-credentials-plugin-1.11-4.fc24.src.rpm jenkins-sshd-1.6-7.fc24.src.rpm jenkins-ssh-slaves-plugin-1.10-3.fc24.src.rpm json4s-3.2.7-4.fc24.src.rpm js-yui2-2.9.0-10.fc24.src.rpm jutils-1.0.1-13.20110719svn.fc24.src.rpm kcemirror-0.1.5-16.fc24.src.rpm libhttpserver-0.9.0-3.fc24.src.rpm libnasl-2.2.11-18.fc24.src.rpm lostirc-0.4.6-22.fc24.src.rpm mahout-collection-codegen-plugin-1.0-4.fc24.src.rpm maven-changelog-plugin-2.3-2.fc24.src.rpm maven-ejb-plugin-2.3-14.fc24.src.rpm maven-help-plugin-2.2-8.fc24.src.rpm maven-hpi-plugin-1.113-5.fc24.src.rpm maven-rar-plugin-2.4-2.fc24.src.rpm maven-repository-plugin-2.3.1-14.fc24.src.rpm mcollective-2.8.4-2.fc24.src.rpm mhwaveedit-1.4.22-9.fc24.src.rpm mingw-llvm-3.0-11.fc24.src.rpm mycila-licenses-1-4.fc24.src.rpm ncbi-blast+-2.2.31-4.fc24.src.rpm openpts-0.2.6-13.fc24.src.rpm opensaml-java-xmltooling-1.3.4-12.fc24.src.rpm Pound-2.7-3.fc24.src.rpm primer3-2.3.6-6.fc24.src.rpm quake3-1.36-26.svn2102.fc24.src.rpm racoon2-20100526a-32.fc24.src.rpm Ray-2.3.1-12.fc24.src.rpm rescu-1.8.2-0.2.gitbeb9897.fc24.src.rpm rubygem-compass-1.0.1-3.fc24.src.rpm rubygem-connection_pool-2.2.0-2.fc24.src.rpm rubygem-riot-0.12.7-3.fc24.src.rpm scalaz-7.0.0-6.fc24.src.rpm silvia-0.2.2-0.11.9324db2git.fc24.src.rpm snoopy-2.2.6-3.fc24.src.rpm snownews-1.5.12-14.fc24.src.rpm SocketW-031026-9.fc24.src.rpm sugar-colordeducto-7-7.fc24.src.rpm sugar-xoeditor-13-4.fc24.src.rpm sugar-yupana-17-3.fc24.src.rpm termit-2.9.6-8.fc24.src.rpm tunneler-1.1.1-17.fc24.src.rpm w3c-libwww-5.4.1-0.27.20060206cvs.fc24.src.rpm xar-1.5.2-15.fc24.src.rpm zhu3d-4.2.6-7.fc24.src.rpm Fedora 25 emacs-pymacs-0.25-8.fc25.src.rpm gogoc-1.2-49.fc25.src.rpm
