Dne 4.12.2015 v 08:25 James Hogarth napsal(a):
> The question on my mind is how useful is that when you reach that number of
> things blocking it? Who in their right mind
> is going to check one of the thousand or so packages marked blocking that as
> a place to start packaging? That's not even
>
On Mon, Dec 07, 2015 at 11:29:32AM +0600, Dmitrij S. Kryzhevich wrote:
> I just want to know what happened to direct messages about issues with
> packages.
>
> When builds fail i.e. during mass rebuilds I have a message about it.
> If for some reasons dependencies tree was broken (in rawhide, i.e.
python-pyo-0.7.7-1.fc24 changes license from GPLv3 to LGPLv3+.
Eduardo
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
I just want to know what happened to direct messages about issues with
packages.
When builds fail i.e. during mass rebuilds I have a message about it.
If for some reasons dependencies tree was broken (in rawhide, i.e., it
is occurs) I have a message about it.
If one of dependencies was retire
On Mon, 2015-12-07 at 02:07 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Sun, 06 Dec 2015 16:02:42 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 2015-12-06 at 19:52 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > > On Sun, 6 Dec 2015 15:50:10 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
> > >
> > > > but what is the reason for maintai
Review request submitted:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1288930
Thanks,
Richard
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Sun, Dec 6, 2015 at 12:59 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> Perhaps someone would care to write a checker script here?
>
> Check each package in comps, make sure it is no
> retired/orphaned/missing and of those look for packages that now
> provide that name?
It would be good to also check for dangling
On 12/06/2015 02:13 PM, Robert Buchholz wrote:
I'm joining in to help maintain letsencrypt, with a focus on
EPEL. jhogarth, who maintains letsencrypt and python-acme,
is mentoring me on these packages. kevin has been so kind
as to sponsor my joining of the packagers group.
I've been a developer
Adam Williamson wrote:
> I've never understood why the idea of a 'last push of security fixes'
> for an EOL release makes any sense. It's *EOL*. It doesn't matter if
> there's a last-day push or not: everyone should stop using it the next
> day, end of story. That's what EOL means.
Realistically,
On Sun, 06 Dec 2015 16:02:42 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Sun, 2015-12-06 at 19:52 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > On Sun, 6 Dec 2015 15:50:10 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
> >
> > > but what is the reason for maintainers building updates without the
> > > intention to push them?
> >
On Sun, 2015-12-06 at 19:52 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Sun, 6 Dec 2015 15:50:10 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
> > but what is the reason for maintainers building updates without the
> > intention to push them?
>
> There are maintainers, who dislike a lot of things related to the release
On Mon, 7 Dec 2015 00:08:37 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
> yes i expect that someone is able just read his mails and push a button
> on a list in a webinterface
The productivity loss that's caused by people wading through email folders
every day is subject to studies.
Plus, by the time the first
Am 06.12.2015 um 23:50 schrieb Michael Schwendt:
You expect packagers to review all their bodhi tickets everytime they
receive a nagmail from bodhi, and then to decide again whether to wait for
testers or whether to push manually without any prior feedback. That doesn't
scale for everyone. The
On Sun, 6 Dec 2015 21:47:24 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
> > And as you are not a package maintainer at Fedora, it could be that you
> > underestimate the amount of burden/bureaucracy that's considered
> > unnecessary by many packagers
>
> explain me the burden/bureaucracy in the countless cases
On Sun, 6 Dec 2015 22:37:57 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
> i have seen more than once a -1 from somebody because *his* bug was not
> fixed by the update but others where - in that case *it is not* a
> regression and there is no point for -1
The Fedora Updates System is a place where to let out o
Am 06.12.2015 um 22:29 schrieb Michael Schwendt:
What's needed is software developers and policy makers to agree that some
areas are problematic, and to agree on ideas and an agenda. To agree that
the karma system is flawed and things like testers ignoring past votes and
overriding another's -1
Hello,
Some of you may have noticed that the service for analysis of ABI changes in
Linux libraries is not available any more: http://upstream-tracker.org/
The archive from 21 July 2015 is still available and supported by ROSA team:
http://upstream.rosalinux.ru/
But ... Good news everyone! I'v
On Sun, 6 Dec 2015 12:40:45 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> Perhaps. But you are speculating that this is the case here.
> Unless you have talked to the maintainer and thats what they told you?
I'm not speculating as I didn't claim I know the reason why this
particular Yum update is stuck.
I answer
I'm joining in to help maintain letsencrypt, with a focus on
EPEL. jhogarth, who maintains letsencrypt and python-acme,
is mentoring me on these packages. kevin has been so kind
as to sponsor my joining of the packagers group.
I've been a developer with the Gentoo project a while back
(2006-2011)
Am 06.12.2015 um 21:20 schrieb Michael Schwendt:
And as you are not a package maintainer at Fedora, it could be that you
underestimate the amount of burden/bureaucracy that's considered
unnecessary by many packagers
explain me the burden/bureaucracy in the countless cases where
"fedora-easy-
Hi there:
I'll fill up a ticket to bugzilla in order to get Fritzing into the group.
Thanks in advance,
2015-12-06 15:24 GMT-05:00 Ed Marshall :
> This seems reasonable to me. It looks like a good first step might be to
> open a bugzilla against the comps component?
>
>
> https://fedoraproject.
Am 06.12.2015 um 21:22 schrieb Chris Murphy:
So yeah it's possible, but it's also unintended. And the same problem
could happen whether grubby modifies grub.cfg or grub-mkconfig
replaces it
that's wrong because grubby *clones* the last recent entry with all it's
parameters and don't touch ot
This seems reasonable to me. It looks like a good first step might be to
open a bugzilla against the comps component?
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_use_and_edit_comps.xml_for_package_groups
This was also a good reminder that I've been slow to get the latest
Fritzing release out; rawhide h
On Sun, Dec 6, 2015 at 12:11 PM, drago01 wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 6, 2015 at 7:02 PM, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
>> Can you list specific cases? It sounds awfully theoretical.
>
> I got bitten by it before so its not theoretical ... unfortunately I
> do not remember the exact versions.
I'm willing to b
Am 06.12.2015 um 21:06 schrieb Chris Murphy:
On Sun, Dec 6, 2015 at 8:05 AM, drago01 wrote:
Hypothetically on BIOS systems, a GRUB core.img [1] could become stale
over time, and an upgraded grub-mkconfig could introduce an
incompatible format change, but that's really unlikely and wouldn't be
On Sun, 6 Dec 2015 20:15:20 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
> BUT i have zero understanding for cases where i
> make a distr-upgrade, start as usually "fedora-easy-karma" and find a
> ton of "this package could be pushed to stable if the maintainer wishes"
> candidates
You need to talk to the indi
On Sun, Dec 6, 2015 at 8:05 AM, drago01 wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 4:30 AM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
>> Since the old proposal to have the bootloader automatically enumerate
>> boot options never went anywhere, can we do the next best thing?
>>
>> Specifically, these days grub2-mkconfig appe
Re: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1284183
I have removed a bunch of packages that have been orphaned/retired from
comps, but there's still more to be done there.
There's also a number of packages that have changed name that should
get updated.
Perhaps someone would care to write
On Sun, 6 Dec 2015 20:17:37 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
> "if there is not even a single user to give feedback on them" is a jerk
> reaction - the majority of users don't have updates-testing enabled and
> just wait for stable updates
That only proves that the updates release process is flawed.
On Sun, 6 Dec 2015 20:17:37 +0100
Reindl Harald wrote:
> Am 06.12.2015 um 20:06 schrieb Michael Schwendt:
> > When I log in at https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/ the new web ui
> > greets me with a huge wall of uninteresting statistics, such as
> >
> > * the activity of other update submitters,
On Sun, 6 Dec 2015 19:52:05 +0100
Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Sun, 6 Dec 2015 15:50:10 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
> > but what is the reason for maintainers building updates without the
> > intention to push them?
>
> There are maintainers, who dislike a lot of things related to the
> re
Am 06.12.2015 um 20:06 schrieb Michael Schwendt:
When I log in at https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/ the new web ui
greets me with a huge wall of uninteresting statistics, such as
* the activity of other update submitters,
* this week's top testers
* latest updates in need of testing
Wh
Am 06.12.2015 um 19:52 schrieb Michael Schwendt:
Currently I have two security fixes, which are two months old. Nobody
does the needed testing. The karma isn't reached. Nobody ensures that
they enter the stable updates repo even with 0 karma. Meanwhile, F21
has reached end-of-life without anyon
On Sun, Dec 6, 2015 at 7:02 PM, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 06, 2015 at 06:25:09PM +0100, drago01 wrote:
>> >> Well mkconfig can produce a configuration that does not actually work
>> >> when grub2 itself gets updated (in which case the bootloader does not
>> >> get rewritten).
>> >> Until t
When I log in at https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/ the new web ui
greets me with a huge wall of uninteresting statistics, such as
* the activity of other update submitters,
* this week's top testers
* latest updates in need of testing
Why doesn't it greet me with my own updates anymore?
Some
On Sun, 6 Dec 2015 15:50:10 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
> but what is the reason for maintainers building updates without the
> intention to push them?
There are maintainers, who dislike a lot of things related to the release
processes. They consider bodhi a pain to use. They would prefer doing
On Sun, Dec 06, 2015 at 06:25:09PM +0100, drago01 wrote:
> >> Well mkconfig can produce a configuration that does not actually work
> >> when grub2 itself gets updated (in which case the bootloader does not
> >> get rewritten).
> >> Until this is fixed grub2-mkconfig is dangerous and should not be
On Sun, 2015-12-06 at 16:14 +, Fedora compose checker wrote:
> Missing expected images:
>
> Cloud disk raw i386
> Cloud_atomic disk raw x86_64
> Kde disk raw armhfp
> Kde live i386
> Cloud disk raw x86_64
> Kde live x86_64
>
> No images in this compose but not Rawhide 20151205
>
> Images in
On Sun, Dec 6, 2015 at 6:20 PM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 6, 2015 at 7:05 AM, drago01 wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 4:30 AM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
>>> Since the old proposal to have the bootloader automatically enumerate
>>> boot options never went anywhere, can we do the next
On Sun, Dec 6, 2015 at 7:05 AM, drago01 wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 4:30 AM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
>> Since the old proposal to have the bootloader automatically enumerate
>> boot options never went anywhere, can we do the next best thing?
>>
>> Specifically, these days grub2-mkconfig appe
Missing expected images:
Cloud disk raw i386
Cloud_atomic disk raw x86_64
Kde disk raw armhfp
Kde live i386
Cloud disk raw x86_64
Kde live x86_64
No images in this compose but not Rawhide 20151205
Images in Rawhide 20151205 but not this:
Mate live i386
Design_suite live x86_64
Design_suite live
On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 4:30 AM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
> Since the old proposal to have the bootloader automatically enumerate
> boot options never went anywhere, can we do the next best thing?
>
> Specifically, these days grub2-mkconfig appears to produce output
> that's functionally identical
Am 06.12.2015 um 15:30 schrieb Richard Shaw:
Usually I don't dig too deep but I saw a "critical path" update for yum
on F22 (which should be using dnf anyway).
So why is a critical path update with +10 karma still in testing?
(I know how, there's no auto push to stable based on karma for this
Usually I don't dig too deep but I saw a "critical path" update for yum on
F22 (which should be using dnf anyway).
So why is a critical path update with +10 karma still in testing?
(I know how, there's no auto push to stable based on karma for this update)
Thanks,
Richard
--
devel mailing list
d
On Sun, 06 Dec 2015 08:40:27 +, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
> I think I will get the same results... But I will try.
As a last resort, some proof-reading could lead to something. Afterall,
the "Done 3 out of 2" output in build.log asks for an investigation.
The output for "elapsed/finished/remaining
Compose started at Sun Dec 6 05:15:02 UTC 2015
Broken deps for i386
--
[IQmol]
IQmol-2.3.0-9.fc24.i686 requires libboost_serialization.so.1.58.0
IQmol-2.3.0-9.fc24.i686 requires libboost_iostreams.so.1.58.0
IQmol-2.3.0
Hi,
In 2013, I worked very briefly on enabling reproducible builds for Fedora,
https://securityblog.redhat.com/2013/09/18/reproducible-builds-for-fedora/
After attending the "Reproducible Builds World Summit" recently, I am
inspired again to help out in getting this done.
https://reproducible-b
Am 06.12.2015 um 04:26 schrieb Kevin Kofler:
Mathieu Bridon wrote:
Note that packages installed by PackageKit are not marked as installed,
so dnf always thinks it can remove them.
This makes "autoremove" completely unsuitable for end users and totally
inappropriate as a default (and the only
I think I will get the same results... But I will try.
On Sun, Dec 6, 2015, 8:51 AM Dan Horák wrote:
> On Sun, 06 Dec 2015 03:52:56 +
> Igor Gnatenko wrote:
>
> > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12011291
> >
> > I've tried to resubmit build many times, but it stuck on one
49 matches
Mail list logo
