Re: replace memtest86+ with pcmemtest, needs maintainer
Hi, On 8/29/21 11:46 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote: > On 8/1/21 3:54 PM, Neal Gompa wrote: >> But that doesn't stop anyone from maintaining an unsigned version. > > > The documentation suggests that the UEFI binary can be loaded directly (which > I've done), or through the EFI handover protocol. I haven't done the latter > successfully yet. If I work out the correct GRUB invocation, I'll add > another helper and submit this for review. > > https://fedorapeople.org/cgit/gordonmessmer/public_git/pcmemtest-unsigned-x64.git/ > https://gordonmessmer.fedorapeople.org/pcmemtest-unsigned-x64/ Thank you for working on this. For the grub bit I think you just need a menu entry with a chainloader line in there, similar to how booting Windows in a multi-boot setup works. 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Fedora-Cloud-33-20210830.0 compose check report
No missing expected images. Soft failed openQA tests: 1/8 (x86_64), 1/8 (aarch64) (Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug) Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-33-20210829.0): ID: 962292 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/962292 ID: 962298 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/962298 Passed openQA tests: 7/8 (x86_64), 7/8 (aarch64) -- Mail generated by check-compose: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Fedora 35 Change: Autoconf-2.71 (Self-Contained Change proposal)
On Mon, 2021-08-30 at 07:55 +0200, Ondrej Dubaj wrote: > Hi, > > Thank you for the update Ian. It was not meant the way every packager > is ignoring the opened issues, we appreciate your work on this > autoconf-2.71 issue. Sorry for generalizing this. And my comment was not meant to sound negative, getting an update like this done is very challenging, to say the least, hopefully everything will go well, ;) Truth is I would have liked to get it done earlier but was unable to, at least I have managed to get it done now. > > Glad to hear that it will build OK today. > > HEADS-UP: > > Starting with merging autoconf-2.71 changes. This week a scratch- > build for all dependent packages will be executed. If you want to > test your packages by yourself, you can execute your own scratch- > build and see if it works properly. I will write here when autoconf- > 2.71 will be stable. > > Thanks for your cooperation and hope to see very few failures this > week :) > > Regards, > Ondrej > > On Fri, Aug 27, 2021 at 2:36 PM Ian Kent wrote: > > On Tue, 2021-08-24 at 10:53 +0200, Ondrej Dubaj wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > > > In the near future, there is a plan to merge autoconf-2.71 to > > > rawhide. Due to the size of the change and possible breakage of > > > multiple packages going FTBFS. The number of these packages > > > should > > > not be many, currently we have ~32 opened FTBFS trackers > > > according > > to > > > autoconf-2.71, where the majority of them are just ignored by > > > maintainers [1]. This can also be a possibility to remove > > unnecessary > > > packages from Fedora. After merging the change, there should be a > > > mechanism for validating. From my perspective, it is effective to > > > rebuild dependent packages (~1700 packages). After the rebuild, > > there > > > should not be many FTBFS packages, but according to the change > > there > > > will be some. There was enough time (~6 months) for the > > > maintainers > > > to prepare for this change. > > > > Not everyone is ignoring the bugs I have been working on the am- > > utils > > package for this. > > > > The package is very old and it utilizes autoconf very heavily. > > Most of the autoconf noise is use of obsolete macros and I have > > updated > > this were I can but there are some things I simply can't fix and > > some > > things that shouldn't be changed. > > > > I'll keep coming back to it over time since the changes I have made > > or > > (rather will be committing over the weekend) do allow the package > > to > > build and function on F33 and build in the Copr updated autoconf > > environment. > > > > I expect it will build ok on Monday. > > > > > > > > If there are any concerns or other opinions about the steps after > > > merging the change, please share your thoughts and we can discuss > > > them here. > > > > > > Thanks very much! > > > > > > Regards, > > > Ondrej > > > > > > [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1942967 > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 7:52 AM Ondrej Dubaj > > > wrote: > > > > Hello, according to the size of this change and the possible > > > > breakage of multiple packages before f35 mass rebuild, we > > > > decided > > > > (team working on this change) to postpone this change to early > > > > lifecycle of f36, where we will have enough time to resolve any > > > > problems until f36 mass rebuild. > > > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 2, 2021 at 5:18 PM Kevin Fenzi > > wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 05:28:07PM +0100, Ondrej Dubaj wrote: > > > > > > Currently, we are trying to stay away from the compat > > > > > > package > > > > > > and > > > > > with the > > > > > > help of other package maintainers trying to fix the > > > > > > failures. > > > > > > We > > > > > will give > > > > > > time to react accordingly and see other possible steps in a > > few > > > > > weeks time. > > > > > > > > > > > > Currently multiple FTBFS bugs in bugzilla were created > > > > > > according > > > > > to > > > > > > autoconf-2.71. More information available here: > > > > > > > > > > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Autoconf_271 > > > > > > > > > > Whats the current status of this Change? > > > > > > > > > > It didn't land before mass rebuild. Is it still planned for > > f35? > > > > > > > > > > kevin > > > > > ___ > > > > > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > > > > > To unsubscribe send an email to > > > > > devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > > > > > Fedora Code of Conduct: > > > > > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > > > > > List Guidelines: > > > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > > > > > List Archives: > > > > > > > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > > > > > Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: > > > > > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure > > > ___ > > > devel
Re: replace memtest86+ with pcmemtest, needs maintainer
On 8/30/21 12:08 PM, Hans de Goede wrote: I checked the entry on a Windows multiboot system and it does not have the "insmod chain" line, maybe droppint that helps? Same result. GRUB returns immediately to its menu. I'm certain the path is correct, because GRUB will report an error if it is wrong. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Fedora 35 Change: Autoconf-2.71 (Self-Contained Change proposal)
HEADS-UP: autoconf-2.71 is merged and built in Fedora rawhide together with the rest of autotools: automake-1.16-4.1 and libtool-2.4.6-43. In the next few days, scratch-build for each dependent package will be executed and failed packages F36FTBFS trackers will be created. Thank you all for your cooperation! Hopefully we will manage to bring this change to the end. Ondrej On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 10:45 AM Ian Kent wrote: > On Mon, 2021-08-30 at 07:55 +0200, Ondrej Dubaj wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Thank you for the update Ian. It was not meant the way every packager > > is ignoring the opened issues, we appreciate your work on this > > autoconf-2.71 issue. Sorry for generalizing this. > > And my comment was not meant to sound negative, getting an update > like this done is very challenging, to say the least, hopefully > everything will go well, ;) > > Truth is I would have liked to get it done earlier but was unable > to, at least I have managed to get it done now. > > > > > Glad to hear that it will build OK today. > > > > HEADS-UP: > > > > Starting with merging autoconf-2.71 changes. This week a scratch- > > build for all dependent packages will be executed. If you want to > > test your packages by yourself, you can execute your own scratch- > > build and see if it works properly. I will write here when autoconf- > > 2.71 will be stable. > > > > Thanks for your cooperation and hope to see very few failures this > > week :) > > > > Regards, > > Ondrej > > > > On Fri, Aug 27, 2021 at 2:36 PM Ian Kent wrote: > > > On Tue, 2021-08-24 at 10:53 +0200, Ondrej Dubaj wrote: > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > In the near future, there is a plan to merge autoconf-2.71 to > > > > rawhide. Due to the size of the change and possible breakage of > > > > multiple packages going FTBFS. The number of these packages > > > > should > > > > not be many, currently we have ~32 opened FTBFS trackers > > > > according > > > to > > > > autoconf-2.71, where the majority of them are just ignored by > > > > maintainers [1]. This can also be a possibility to remove > > > unnecessary > > > > packages from Fedora. After merging the change, there should be a > > > > mechanism for validating. From my perspective, it is effective to > > > > rebuild dependent packages (~1700 packages). After the rebuild, > > > there > > > > should not be many FTBFS packages, but according to the change > > > there > > > > will be some. There was enough time (~6 months) for the > > > > maintainers > > > > to prepare for this change. > > > > > > Not everyone is ignoring the bugs I have been working on the am- > > > utils > > > package for this. > > > > > > The package is very old and it utilizes autoconf very heavily. > > > Most of the autoconf noise is use of obsolete macros and I have > > > updated > > > this were I can but there are some things I simply can't fix and > > > some > > > things that shouldn't be changed. > > > > > > I'll keep coming back to it over time since the changes I have made > > > or > > > (rather will be committing over the weekend) do allow the package > > > to > > > build and function on F33 and build in the Copr updated autoconf > > > environment. > > > > > > I expect it will build ok on Monday. > > > > > > > > > > > If there are any concerns or other opinions about the steps after > > > > merging the change, please share your thoughts and we can discuss > > > > them here. > > > > > > > > Thanks very much! > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Ondrej > > > > > > > > [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1942967 > > > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 7:52 AM Ondrej Dubaj > > > > wrote: > > > > > Hello, according to the size of this change and the possible > > > > > breakage of multiple packages before f35 mass rebuild, we > > > > > decided > > > > > (team working on this change) to postpone this change to early > > > > > lifecycle of f36, where we will have enough time to resolve any > > > > > problems until f36 mass rebuild. > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 2, 2021 at 5:18 PM Kevin Fenzi > > > wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 05:28:07PM +0100, Ondrej Dubaj wrote: > > > > > > > Currently, we are trying to stay away from the compat > > > > > > > package > > > > > > > and > > > > > > with the > > > > > > > help of other package maintainers trying to fix the > > > > > > > failures. > > > > > > > We > > > > > > will give > > > > > > > time to react accordingly and see other possible steps in a > > > few > > > > > > weeks time. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Currently multiple FTBFS bugs in bugzilla were created > > > > > > > according > > > > > > to > > > > > > > autoconf-2.71. More information available here: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Autoconf_271 > > > > > > > > > > > > Whats the current status of this Change? > > > > > > > > > > > > It didn't land before mass rebuild. Is it still planned for > > > f35? > > > > > > > > > > > > kevin > > > > > >
Re: [Scitech] orphaning openbabel
On Monday, 23 August 2021 at 13:53, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: > Hi! > Last year, I announced my intention to orphan openbabel. Several folks > replied, but nobody said they wanted to take over as primary maintainer. > In the end, I didn't actually orphan the package, but I didn't do any > maintenance on it, either. So, this time I'm actually orphaning it > in a week. It's pending an update to the next major version and I > haven't looked at that at all. If anyone wants to take it before I hit > the 'orphan' button, let me know this week. As requested, I gave the main admin permission to Antonio Trande (sagitter). I've added our SciTech group as admin, too. Regards, Dominik -- Fedora https://getfedora.org | RPM Fusion http://rpmfusion.org There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and oppression to develop psychic muscles. -- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Intent to retire python-typer and python-typer-cli
Thanks for pointing this out. I’ll unretire typer and typer-cli, then, and give it another chance. It’s been less than eight weeks (only a few days!) so unretirement will be quick and will not require re-review. A little communication from the upstream maintainer would have really helped! - Ben On 8/30/21 6:22 AM, Chandan Kumar wrote: Hello Ben, On Sat, Aug 21, 2021 at 12:36 AM Ben Beasley wrote: Unless someone convinces me of another plan, I intend to retire python-typer and python-typer-cli in F35 and Rawhide in one week (2021-08-27). I myself introduced these two packages to Fedora quite recently (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1964742, https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1974118). No other packages currently depend on them. Upstream was in a period of inactivity that was not too worrisome at the time, but has become much more concerning as they have not responded at all to issues or PR’s on this project and have not made the necessary (nontrivial) changes to work with the new major release (8.x) of python-click. Please see https://github.com/tiangolo/typer/issues/313 for an overview of the situation and links to additional relevant issues. It might be possible to sustain these two packages in Fedora 35 by introducing a click 7.x compatibility package, but this is not a long-term solution, and I have no confidence that these projects will be sustainably maintained in the future. typer-0.4.0 got released today. https://github.com/tiangolo/typer/releases/tag/0.4.0 I think it addresses the above issue related to click 7.x compatibility package, As per https://github.com/tiangolo/typer/issues/313#issuecomment-908181587 ``` I just released Typer 0.4.0, which is compatible with both Click 7 and Click 8. ``` I hope it helps. Thank you for maintaining it. Thanks, Chandan Kumar ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
ARM 32-bit failure for wine
Hi, I've had some life events keep me from pushing package updates for about a month. My attempt at pushing the latest wine update resulted in an ARM build failure that seems to indicate either a toolchain changes or compiler error. I couldn't find any Fedora 36 changes to match. Any ideas? Build error: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=74819672=DEFAULT=build.log=-4000 Full build page: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=74819487 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: ARM 32-bit failure for wine
On 8/30/21 8:37 PM, Michael Cronenworth wrote: I've had some life events keep me from pushing package updates for about a month. My attempt at pushing the latest wine update resulted in an ARM build failure that seems to indicate either a toolchain changes or compiler error. I couldn't find any Fedora 36 changes to match. Any ideas? It appears to be Wine. F34/F35 also exhibit the error. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Fedora-IoT-35-20210830.0 compose check report
No missing expected images. Failed openQA tests: 2/16 (x86_64), 1/15 (aarch64) New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-IoT-35-20210825.0): ID: 962802 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_zezere_server URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/962802 ID: 962803 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_zezere_ignition URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/962803 Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-IoT-35-20210825.0): ID: 962807 Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_clevis@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/962807 Soft failed openQA tests: 1/16 (x86_64) (Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug) Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-IoT-35-20210825.0): ID: 962795 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_clevis URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/962795 Passed openQA tests: 13/16 (x86_64), 14/15 (aarch64) New passes (same test not passed in Fedora-IoT-35-20210825.0): ID: 962788 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso install_default_upload URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/962788 ID: 962789 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso install_default@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/962789 ID: 962804 Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso install_default_upload@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/962804 Installed system changes in test x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso install_default_upload: 3 services(s) removed since previous compose: auditd.service, getty@tty6.service, import-state.service Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/957965#downloads Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/962788#downloads Installed system changes in test x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso install_default@uefi: 3 services(s) removed since previous compose: auditd.service, getty@tty6.service, import-state.service System load changed from 0.04 to 0.27 Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/957966#downloads Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/962789#downloads Installed system changes in test aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso install_default_upload@uefi: 3 services(s) removed since previous compose: auditd.service, getty@tty6.service, import-state.service Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/957981#downloads Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/962804#downloads -- Mail generated by check-compose: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Next Open NeuroFedora Meeting: 1300 UTC on Monday, 30th August (today)
Hello everyone! We had to reschedule the meeting due to lack of participants today (really sorry for the late reminder :( ). The next meeting would be held on 13th September 2021, at 1300 UTC. If the time is not suitable, please let us know on our messaging channels and we can have a vote to reschedule the time. The next meeting would be chaired by @major Below are the logs for the topics discussed: Minutes: https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-neuro/2021/fedora-neuro.2021-08-30-13.01.html Logs: https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-neuro/2021/fedora-neuro.2021-08-30-13.01.log.html The minutes in raw form are pasted below for ease of reference. === #fedora-neuro: NeuroFedora - 2021-08-30 === Meeting started by MeWjOr at 13:01:18 UTC. The full logs are available at fedora-neuro/2021/fedora-neuro.2021-08-30-13.01.log.html . Meeting summary --- * Agenda (MeWjOr, 13:02:29) * New introductions and roll call (MeWjOr, 13:02:41) * Tasks from last meeting (MeWjOr, 13:02:49) * Open pagure tickets (MeWjOr, 13:02:55) * Package health check (MeWjOr, 13:03:02) * Open package reviews check (MeWjOr, 13:03:24) * CompNeuro lab compose status check for Fedora 35 and rawhide (MeWjOr, 13:03:58) * Neuroscience query of the week! (MeWjOr, 13:04:07) * Next meeting day, time and chair (MeWjOr, 13:04:20) * Open Floor (MeWjOr, 13:04:24) * Introductions and roll call (MeWjOr, 13:04:35) * Tasks from last meeting (MeWjOr, 13:14:56) * FranciscoD continue packaging SALib deps and update it to its new release --- WIP (MeWjOr, 13:15:26) * ACTION: FranciscoD[m] FranciscoD continue packaging SALib deps and update it to its new release (MeWjOr, 13:16:51) * FranciscoD investigate pyscaffold FTBFS --- Done (MeWjOr, 13:17:48) * Also, an important bug to reference: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1914344 (MeWjOr, 13:18:33) * FranciscoD make fixes to catch22 based on reviews --- Done (MeWjOr, 13:19:08) * Catch22 is now available in the source repos (MeWjOr, 13:19:39) * shaane[m] look at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1977151 --- Done (MeWjOr, 13:19:55) * FranciscoD sponsor shaane[m] to packager group --- Done :D (MeWjOr, 13:22:45) Meeting ended at 13:38:46 UTC. Action Items * FranciscoD[m] FranciscoD continue packaging SALib deps and update it to its new release Action Items, by person --- * FranciscoD[m] * FranciscoD[m] FranciscoD continue packaging SALib deps and update it to its new release * **UNASSIGNED** * (none) People Present (lines said) --- * MeWjOr (43) * zodbot (12) * achilleas (0) * FranciscoD[m] (0) * jnsamyak (0) * omnidapps[m] (0) * principis (0) * shaane[m] (0) * thunderbirdtr (0) * VivekSharma[m] (0) * nb (0) * coremodule (0) * music (0) * kamdard (0) Generated by `MeetBot`_ 0.3 .. _`MeetBot`: http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 6:28 PM Aniket Pradhan wrote: > > Hello everyone! > > Sorry for the really short notice, but please join us at the next Open > NeuroFedora team meeting on Monday 30th August (today!) at 1300UTC in > #fedora-neuro on IRC (Libera.chat). The meeting is a public meeting, > and open for everyone to attend. You can join us over: > > IRC: > https://webchat.libera.chat/?channels=#fedora-neuro > > Matrix: https://tinyurl.com/matrix-neurofedora > > You can convert the meeting time to your local time using this command > in a terminal: > $ date --date='TZ="UTC" 1300 today' > > The meeting will be chaired by @major. The agenda for the > meeting is: > > - New introductions and roll call. > - Tasks from last week's meeting: > https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-neuro/2021-08-16/neurofedora.2021-08-16-13.01.html > - Open Pagure tickets: > https://pagure.io/neuro-sig/NeuroFedora/issues?status=Open=S%3A+Next+meeting > - Package health check: https://packager-dashboard.fedoraproject.org/neuro-sig > - Open package reviews check: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=fedora-neuro > - Koschei packages check: https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/groups/neuro-sig > - CompNeuro lab compose status check for F35: > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=30691 > - Neuroscience query of the week > - Next meeting day, and chair. > - Open floor. > > We hope to see you there! > > You can learn more about NeuroFedora here: > https://neuro.fedoraproject.org > > -- > Thanks > Regards > > Aniket Pradhan > http://home.iiitd.edu.in/~aniket17133/ > Aliases: MeWjOr/major > > () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail > /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments -- Thanks Regards Aniket Pradhan http://home.iiitd.edu.in/~aniket17133/ Aliases: MeWjOr/major () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments
Next Open NeuroFedora Meeting: 1300 UTC on Monday, 30th August (today)
Hello everyone! Sorry for the really short notice, but please join us at the next Open NeuroFedora team meeting on Monday 30th August (today!) at 1300UTC in #fedora-neuro on IRC (Libera.chat). The meeting is a public meeting, and open for everyone to attend. You can join us over: IRC: https://webchat.libera.chat/?channels=#fedora-neuro Matrix: https://tinyurl.com/matrix-neurofedora You can convert the meeting time to your local time using this command in a terminal: $ date --date='TZ="UTC" 1300 today' The meeting will be chaired by @major. The agenda for the meeting is: - New introductions and roll call. - Tasks from last week's meeting: https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-neuro/2021-08-16/neurofedora.2021-08-16-13.01.html - Open Pagure tickets: https://pagure.io/neuro-sig/NeuroFedora/issues?status=Open=S%3A+Next+meeting - Package health check: https://packager-dashboard.fedoraproject.org/neuro-sig - Open package reviews check: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=fedora-neuro - Koschei packages check: https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/groups/neuro-sig - CompNeuro lab compose status check for F35: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=30691 - Neuroscience query of the week - Next meeting day, and chair. - Open floor. We hope to see you there! You can learn more about NeuroFedora here: https://neuro.fedoraproject.org -- Thanks Regards Aniket Pradhan http://home.iiitd.edu.in/~aniket17133/ Aliases: MeWjOr/major () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Package Maintainer Docs published
Greetings, Some months ago, I announced [0] that I will move the package maintainer docs from wiki to docs.fedoraproject.org. I am happy to announce that this task is complete and the docs are public in their new location now [1]. Hopefully, this will allow existing and new packagers to find relevant documentation more easily, and foster more concentrated efforts to make it better. Let me explain how the docs are set up now. I worked mainly alone to get the actual move done. From this point on, I hope that maintenance is done by all package maintainers collectively, similarly to how the wiki documentation was under shared ownership. This also means that everything here is a draft, open for changes based on your feedback. Comments are welcome! The imported content was selected by going through wiki category Package Maintainers [2] and choosing the pages that seemed useful. In general, the pages were imported without modification, however in some cases there were such serious issues that I did some editing. Going forward, documentation for package maintainers should be added to this repo, instead of wiki. There is an issue for replacing the imported wiki pages with pointers to the new urls [3] which will be done soon. Policies, guidelines and other material owned by FESCo or the Packaging Committee is excluded from this repository and is handled like before. One change that moving from wiki to a Git repository at pagure.io brings is access control. I would like to allow all members of the 'packager' group, but unfortunately that group is not visible at pagure.io. So instead I wrote this in the README, to serve as a basis for iterating a good solution: All changes to the documentation is intended to happen through pull requests. However, following the spirit of earlier wiki based documentation, the documentation is intended to be maintainer collectively by all Fedora packagers. Due to technical issues, the packager group from Fedora Account System cannot be granted access, so there is a separate group package-maintainer-docs with commit access. Membership is granted to any packager requesting it. Please file an issue in the repository if you want to join. If you have any interest in the docs at all, I hope you file an issue for membership, or just reply to this mail and I will add you. Currently, I am the maintainer of the repository. There are four other people listed as admins: pingou, mattdm, kevin, codeblock. This list of a leftover from an older, unpublished iteration of the docs. To my understanding, none of these people have expressed interest in maintaining the repository, for whatever tasks there may be that cannot be handled by the committer group. So, I plan to remove everybody but myself. Naturally, to avoid non-responsive admins situation, there should be more than one admin. If you are interested, please let me know an I will add you. Otto [0]: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/4UPDUFVHULLELBKSOYJ233WU3E4BCGYI/ [1]: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/ [2]: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Package_Maintainers [3]: https://pagure.io/fedora-docs/package-maintainer-docs/issue/20 ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Where has the kernel-doc package gone?
I recently had to perform a bit of development/research where I often had to take a look in the kernel documentation. Most of the time was spend offline so I wanted to download the `kernel-doc` package however it does not seem to exist. Some old fedora documentations still refer to it however somewhere in the 2x iteration of fedora it seems to have gone missing. CentOS 8 also still has it. Would it be possible to add this back to the repos? ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: replace memtest86+ with pcmemtest, needs maintainer
On 8/30/21 12:20 AM, Hans de Goede wrote: For the grub bit I think you just need a menu entry with a chainloader line in there, similar to how booting Windows in a multi-boot setup works. Among other things, I've tried insmod chain chainloader //pcmemtest.efi When that menuentry is selected, GRUB2 will immediately return to its list. I've never dual-booted Windows on a UEFI system, so I don't know if there's more to it than that. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Where has the kernel-doc package gone?
On Mon, 30 Aug 2021 at 13:07, Nils K wrote: > > I recently had to perform a bit of development/research where I often had to > take a look in the kernel documentation. > > Most of the time was spend offline so I wanted to download the `kernel-doc` > package however it does not seem to exist. > Some old fedora documentations still refer to it however somewhere in the 2x > iteration of fedora it seems to have gone missing. > CentOS 8 also still has it. > Would it be possible to add this back to the repos? It isn't that we aren't shipping it, it is that the Kernel spec file does not generate any documentation anymore. It looks like Fedora 20 made this change but I don't know why beyond https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1223200 . While EL-8 is based on Fedora-28, the kernel team for RHEL uses a different spec file. It also did not start shipping with the kernel-doc but looks to have been added with https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1659636 At this point I suggest you file a bug against the kernel and cite those two bugs. The current kernel team can work out what work it would be needed and if it could be added. > ___ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure -- Stephen J Smoogen. I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Flame wars in sci.astro.orion. I have seen SPAM filters overload because of Godwin's Law. All those moments will be lost in time... like posts on a BBS... time to shutdown -h now. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Where has the kernel-doc package gone?
On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 1:44 PM Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > > On Mon, 30 Aug 2021 at 13:07, Nils K wrote: > > > > I recently had to perform a bit of development/research where I often had > > to take a look in the kernel documentation. > > > > Most of the time was spend offline so I wanted to download the `kernel-doc` > > package however it does not seem to exist. > > Some old fedora documentations still refer to it however somewhere in the > > 2x iteration of fedora it seems to have gone missing. > > CentOS 8 also still has it. > > Would it be possible to add this back to the repos? > > It isn't that we aren't shipping it, it is that the Kernel spec file > does not generate any documentation anymore. It looks like Fedora 20 > made this change but I don't know why beyond > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1223200 . While EL-8 is It required koji hacks to build at the time, and the Fedora kernel revved daily. The value of producing the docs package when the same docs are available on kernel.org was very low. We removed it. > based on Fedora-28, the kernel team for RHEL uses a different spec > file. It also did not start shipping with the kernel-doc but looks to > have been added with > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1659636 > > At this point I suggest you file a bug against the kernel and cite > those two bugs. The current kernel team can work out what work it > would be needed and if it could be added. The move to ARK changed the dynamics a bit. I think there was a request elsewhere to build it as well. josh ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Fedora 35 Change: Autoconf-2.71 (Self-Contained Change proposal)
On 30. 08. 21 17:02, Fabio Valentini wrote: On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 11:49 AM Ondrej Dubaj wrote: HEADS-UP: autoconf-2.71 is merged and built in Fedora rawhide together with the rest of autotools: automake-1.16-4.1 and libtool-2.4.6-43. In the next few days, scratch-build for each dependent package will be executed and failed packages F36FTBFS trackers will be created. Thank you all for your cooperation! Hopefully we will manage to bring this change to the end. Thanks for working on this! I wonder why you'll only submit test scratch builds of dependent packages, instead of "real" rebuilds for autoconf 2.71? That was my advice to Ondrej. My reasoning was that the real rebuild adds no value here, except it generates meaningless updates for rawhide users. -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 IRC: mhroncok ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: rpkg-3.rc2 built into rawhide
A bit of heads up for anyone who uses custom/user macros with
rpkg(-util):
https://docs.pagure.org/rpkg-util/v3/macro_reference.html#user-defined-macros
With version 2, it was enough to have `rpkg.macros` file in the
directory where rpkg is executed and the custom macros were
automatically loaded from there.
In version 3, the path to file with the custom macros needs to be
specified through rpkg.conf file placed at the git top-level
directory, e.g.
$ cat some-git-repo/rpkg.conf
[rpkg]
user_macros = "${git_props:root}/rpkg.macros"
iff the rpkg.macros file is also placed at the top-level git directory
(i.e. next to rpkg.conf).
This will become relevant (for SCM rpkg srpm build method) with f35
builders in Copr.
---
Also if anyone is using the rpkg command-line tool locally, replacing
/etc/rpkg.conf with /etc/rpkg.conf.rpmnew will be needed.
Best regards
clime
On Thu, 13 May 2021 at 15:28, clime wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I have built rpkg-3.rc2 (package sources:
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rpkg-util) into rawhide yesterday.
> It should be now available for installation.
>
> It is a complete rewrite of version 2. It aims to be a tool with
> minimal deps that allows people to easily transform git repositories
> containing spec files into rpm packages.
>
> Historically, the goal of this tool was to provide a single client to
> all dist-git instances (i.e Fedora, CentOS, maybe something else too).
> This was the idea when I started to work on it still in RedHat under
> the lead of Miroslav Suchý. We wanted to tweak the rpkg script
> provided by python-rpkg lib (https://pagure.io/rpkg) for that purpose.
> However, that script was soon being discontinued. There I created a
> separate project (rpkg-util) which would be providing the script so
> that I can continue in my goal.
>
> Eventually, I realized that some steps rather need to be taken
> server-side (https://github.com/release-engineering/dist-git) for a
> generic client to exist so that I did and then it was about adoption
> of the dist-git package (which provides the unified interface) by
> various dist-git instances.
>
> Meanwhile, I was thinking what to do next with rpkg while being
> heavily influenced by Copr that I primarily worked on at that time and
> also by discussion on devel list about automatically generating
> changelog and release from git. I realized there is an opportunity to
> provide a solution for this in the generic dist-git client (rpkg
> executable) and that it was not a bad place for it.
>
> This problem was then and even today solved by basically sedding spec
> file with regexps which I thought is kind of hacky and that it could
> be useful to have a library for common substitutions anyway so that
> people can reuse it. So a simple spec templating language was born
> (https://docs.pagure.org/rpkg-util/v3/spec_templates_from_scratch.html)
> and also a simple library of macros
> (https://docs.pagure.org/rpkg-util/v3/macro_reference.html) that use git
> content and metadata to render spec file content or parts of it. It
> now allows not only to generate changelog or release but also e.g. to
> generate a source tarball from a git submodule placed next to the spec
> file.
>
> There is also the possibility for users to define their own macros and
> therefore customize git->rpm transform in any way.
>
> You can try this now in rawhide (`dnf install rpkg`) or also in Copr
> (SCM rpkg build method) but note that in Copr, there is still v2 so
> there might be some differences. You might also need to install
> python3-setuptools - that package seems to be required by
> python3-munch but is not being brought in automatically at the moment.
>
> You can use rpkg tool similarly to fedpkg to work with Fedora dist-git
> packages (except that `rpkg build` command builds in Copr and the
> command set is mostly trimmed-down) or you can use it to work with
> those git layouts that contain unpackaged sources together with spec
> file (or rather spec file template) or link to the upstream sources
> through a git submodule.
>
> Best regards
> clime
>
> P.S.: the project is hosted here: https://pagure.io/rpkg-util
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
No FESCo Meeting today (2021-08-30)
There is nothing on the agenda, so I'm canceling this week's meeting. I'll pick this up again next week if we have anything. = Discussed and Voted in the Ticket = #2654 Nonresponsive maintainer: Markus Mayer lotharlutz https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2654 APPROVED (+3, 0, -0) -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Fedora 35 Change: Autoconf-2.71 (Self-Contained Change proposal)
On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 11:49 AM Ondrej Dubaj wrote: > > HEADS-UP: > > autoconf-2.71 is merged and built in Fedora rawhide together with the rest of > autotools: automake-1.16-4.1 and libtool-2.4.6-43. > > In the next few days, scratch-build for each dependent package will be > executed and failed packages F36FTBFS trackers will be created. > > Thank you all for your cooperation! Hopefully we will manage to bring this > change to the end. Thanks for working on this! I wonder why you'll only submit test scratch builds of dependent packages, instead of "real" rebuilds for autoconf 2.71? Fabio ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Fedora 35 Change: Autoconf-2.71 (Self-Contained Change proposal)
On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 5:29 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 30. 08. 21 17:02, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 11:49 AM Ondrej Dubaj wrote: > >> > >> HEADS-UP: > >> > >> autoconf-2.71 is merged and built in Fedora rawhide together with the rest > >> of autotools: automake-1.16-4.1 and libtool-2.4.6-43. > >> > >> In the next few days, scratch-build for each dependent package will be > >> executed and failed packages F36FTBFS trackers will be created. > >> > >> Thank you all for your cooperation! Hopefully we will manage to bring this > >> change to the end. > > > > Thanks for working on this! > > > > I wonder why you'll only submit test scratch builds of dependent > > packages, instead of "real" rebuilds for autoconf 2.71? > > That was my advice to Ondrej. > > My reasoning was that the real rebuild adds no value here, except it generates > meaningless updates for rawhide users. Ah, yeah that makes sense, since this change should only affect the build itself. Thanks for the explanation. Fabio ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: replace memtest86+ with pcmemtest, needs maintainer
Hi, On 8/30/21 7:11 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote: > On 8/30/21 12:20 AM, Hans de Goede wrote: >> For the grub bit I think you just need a menu entry with a chainloader >> line in there, similar to how booting Windows in a multi-boot setup works. > > > Among other things, I've tried > > insmod chain > chainloader //pcmemtest.efi > > When that menuentry is selected, GRUB2 will immediately return to its list. > I've never dual-booted Windows on a UEFI system, so I don't know if there's > more to it than that. I checked the entry on a Windows multiboot system and it does not have the "insmod chain" line, maybe droppint that helps? 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1858048] rt-5.0.1 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1858048 Gordon Messmer changed: What|Removed |Added CC||gordon.mess...@gmail.com --- Comment #6 from Gordon Messmer --- I'm a packager, and I'm interested in this update. If you have time, would you let me know what tasks are outstanding, and where I can help? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1858048] rt-5.0.1 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1858048 --- Comment #7 from Ralf Corsepius --- To put that straight: I am maintaining rt4 in Fedora for many years and I am still interested in packaging rt5. It's just that some non-helpful fanatics have shot down the package dependency chain of rt5 which was stuck unattended/unreviewed for a long time and closed this review. With all due respect, whoever is behind this campaign: You're in error to believe you are helpful. I indent to reopen all of these bogusly closed reviews when time permits. Probably in 2 weeks. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1858048] rt-5.0.1 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1858048 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added CC||emman...@seyman.fr --- Comment #8 from Emmanuel Seyman --- (In reply to Ralf Corsepius from comment #7): > > I indent to reopen all of these bogusly closed reviews when time permits. > Probably in 2 weeks. I'm in the middle of submitting a whole bunch of package reviews and am considering adding the perl modules in RT5's dep chain to the list. This should hopefully let us have them packaged in the distribution in less than 2 weeks. Ralf, can I close bug #1858360 (your submission of perl-HTTP-Headers-ActionPack) so that I can substitute my own? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1999019] perl-Storable-3.25 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1999019 Jitka Plesnikova changed: What|Removed |Added Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value CC|jples...@redhat.com,| |mspa...@redhat.com, | |ppi...@redhat.com | Status|NEW |ASSIGNED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1999019] New: perl-Storable-3.25 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1999019 Bug ID: 1999019 Summary: perl-Storable-3.25 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-Storable Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged Assignee: jples...@redhat.com Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: jples...@redhat.com, mspa...@redhat.com, perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org, ppi...@redhat.com Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Latest upstream release: 3.25 Current version/release in rawhide: 3.23-478.fc35 URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Storable/ Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a stable branch: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/ More information about the service that created this bug can be found at: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upstream_release_monitoring Please keep in mind that with any upstream change, there may also be packaging changes that need to be made. Specifically, please remember that it is your responsibility to review the new version to ensure that the licensing is still correct and that no non-free or legally problematic items have been added upstream. Based on the information from anitya: https://release-monitoring.org/project/3338/ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1999019] perl-Storable-3.25 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1999019 --- Comment #1 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- One or more of the new sources for this package are identical to the old sources. This is most likely caused either by identical source files between releases, for example service files, or the specfile does not use version macro in its source URLs. If this is the second case, then please update the specfile to use version macro in its source URLs. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1994926] perl-Net-Whois-Raw-2.99032 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1994926 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Fixed In Version||perl-Net-Whois-Raw-2.99.032 ||-1.fc36 Last Closed||2021-08-30 11:37:05 --- Comment #1 from Emmanuel Seyman --- Built for rawhide: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1825083 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1999019] perl-Storable-3.25 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1999019 --- Comment #2 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- An unexpected error occurred while creating the scratch build and has been automatically reported. Sorry! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Intent to retire python-typer and python-typer-cli
Thanks for pointing this out. I’ll unretire typer and typer-cli, then, and give it another chance. It’s been less than eight weeks (only a few days!) so unretirement will be quick and will not require re-review. A little communication from the upstream maintainer would have really helped! - Ben On 8/30/21 6:22 AM, Chandan Kumar wrote: Hello Ben, On Sat, Aug 21, 2021 at 12:36 AM Ben Beasley wrote: Unless someone convinces me of another plan, I intend to retire python-typer and python-typer-cli in F35 and Rawhide in one week (2021-08-27). I myself introduced these two packages to Fedora quite recently (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1964742, https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1974118). No other packages currently depend on them. Upstream was in a period of inactivity that was not too worrisome at the time, but has become much more concerning as they have not responded at all to issues or PR’s on this project and have not made the necessary (nontrivial) changes to work with the new major release (8.x) of python-click. Please see https://github.com/tiangolo/typer/issues/313 for an overview of the situation and links to additional relevant issues. It might be possible to sustain these two packages in Fedora 35 by introducing a click 7.x compatibility package, but this is not a long-term solution, and I have no confidence that these projects will be sustainably maintained in the future. typer-0.4.0 got released today. https://github.com/tiangolo/typer/releases/tag/0.4.0 I think it addresses the above issue related to click 7.x compatibility package, As per https://github.com/tiangolo/typer/issues/313#issuecomment-908181587 ``` I just released Typer 0.4.0, which is compatible with both Click 7 and Click 8. ``` I hope it helps. Thank you for maintaining it. Thanks, Chandan Kumar ___ python-devel mailing list -- python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-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/python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1991693] perl-Mojolicious-9.21 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1991693 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Fixed In Version||perl-Mojolicious-9.21-1.fc3 ||6 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Status|NEW |CLOSED Last Closed||2021-08-30 11:38:27 --- Comment #2 from Emmanuel Seyman --- Built for rawhide: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1825080 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1997117] Upgrade perl-MooseX-App to 1.42
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1997117 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version||perl-MooseX-App-1.42-1.fc36 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Status|NEW |CLOSED Last Closed||2021-08-30 11:35:10 --- Comment #1 from Emmanuel Seyman --- Built for rawhide: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1825085 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1997113] Upgrade perl-Data-Validate-Domain to 0.15
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1997113 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Fixed In Version||perl-Data-Validate-Domain-0 ||.15-1.fc36 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2021-08-30 11:36:14 --- Comment #1 from Emmanuel Seyman --- Built for rawhide: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1825081 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Obsoleting extras subpackages
On 21. 08. 21 22:25, Elliott Sales de Andrade wrote:
In Dask, they have some extras that have effectively been removed, but
they kept them in their config for backwards compatibility.
In Fedora, I would like to remove the meta-subpackages, as they don't
provide any additional Requires. As such, I would like to Obsolete
them from the main package, and as a direct replacement, it should
also Provides the old extra subpackage.
Is there a way to automatically create all the various Provides
aliases that %pyproject_extras_subpkg would normally do?
Unfortunately, not yet. You either keep the packages even though they are
useless or you do something like this:
%package -n python3-dask
...
Provides: python3dist(dask[foo]) = %{version}
Provides: python%{python3_version}dist(dask[foo]) = %{version}
Obsoletes: python3-dask+foo < 1.2.3-4
Note that %{version} is an approximation, the automatic provides do some
version mangling, such as stripping trailing .0s.
I think a pull requests that adds a reasonable macro for this would be
accepted, but I myself won't have time to work on that any time soon.
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
python-devel mailing list -- python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-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/python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Migrating python-graphql-server to new guidelines
On 24. 08. 21 18:47, Mattia Verga wrote:
On Sun, 22 Aug 2021 at 06:06, Mattia Verga
Oh, I've missed that. Thanks.
Longer explanation: I was lazy to introduce the pyproject-srpm-macros
subpackage that is always installed. Hence none of the pyproject macros is
available in the buildroot when the SRPM is being created in Koji.
When the SRPM macro is created, %pyproject_extras_subpkg macro expands to
literal "%pyproject_extras_subpkg ...". And depending on where you put this
macro into the spec, it might tell you "Unknown tag: %pyproject_extras_subpkg ...".
The documentation/README says:
> The macro should be placed after the base package's %description to avoid
> issues in building the SRPM.
It is a trick, because when the SRPM is created without the macros installed,
it will literally put the "%pyproject_extras_subpkg ..." line into the base
package's description.
I guess this is fragile and I should bite the bullet and create
pyproject-srpm-macros.
You need to ensure that tox is installed as well, if it isn't listed
in upstream's requirements to get pulled in by
%pyproject_buildrequires.
I'll try adding the missing BuildReqs (I suppose `%pyproject_buildrequires -t`
should be enough), then I'll have to have a look on how tox works...
Yes, documentation/README for the %tox macro says:
> In case you want to run the tests as specified in tox configuration,
> you must use %pyproject_buildrequires with -t or -e as explained above.
Using %tox without %pyproject_buildrequires -t/-e is not supported.
from a quick look to the tox config file, it seems that there are many
environments specified, some of them are related to code linting. In the
Guidelines I see these should be skipped, I'll need to find out how to do that.
You don't skip environments, you explicitly select them.
When running %pyproject_buildrequires -t, the default environment is
%{default_toxenv}, i.e. py310 on rawhide.
If you want different environment(s), you pass them to %pyproject_buildrequires
-e. E.g.:
%pyproject_buildrequires -e %{default_toxenv}-foo,%{default_toxenv}-bar
And %tox will run those.
If that is not enough and you want to run different environments in %check, you
can also pass -e directly to %tox:
# Install dependencies from pypy310-foo:
%pyproject_buildrequires -e %{default_toxenv}-foo
...
# But run tests from pypy310-bar:
%tox -e %{default_toxenv}-bar
However, graphql-server has one thing in tox.init hat we cannot support: it
calls pip install directly:
https://github.com/graphql-python/graphql-server/blob/1ccebee8c6102f2855bcf64024d84091d8547f08/tox.ini#L24
This will fail in rpmbuild and if you want to run %tox, you need to patch/sed
it out.
I asked a similar question earlier:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/python-devel@lists.fedorapr...
My answer there hopefully provides more info.
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
python-devel mailing list -- python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-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/python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[rpms/perl-Storable] PR #1: Tests
jplesnik opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-Storable` that you are following: `` Tests `` To reply, visit the link below https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Storable/pull-request/1 ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Migrating python-graphql-server to new guidelines
On 30. 08. 21 14:45, Miro Hrončok wrote: When the SRPM macro is created... I've meant "When the SRPM is created..." -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 IRC: mhroncok ___ python-devel mailing list -- python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-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/python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
