greenisland license change

Hi, greenisland changed license from 'BSD and LGPLv2.1' to 'LGPLv3 or GPLv2 or GPLv3' Coming to a Fedora near you. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Large number of packages to be orphaned on Feb 26

I can take lilypond, linode-cli, jwm, mopac7, and mscore John. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: More prominent link to verification hashes

Am Mon, 22 Feb 2016 09:29:37 -0700 schrieb Kevin Fenzi : > On Sun, 21 Feb 2016 23:21:58 +0100 > Jens Lody wrote: > > > This can also be done before clicking the link-button, or the > > download splash is also shown without javascript. This should not > > be

Re: More prominent link to verification hashes

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 07:47:51PM +, Gregory Maxwell wrote: > On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 7:42 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > My point was that you can get the signatures off the key from the > > keyserver and see if any of them are someone you trust. If not, are > > they connected

[EPEL-devel] Re: related question / off topic - EPEL Proposal #1: Rechartering

On 02/22/2016 09:06 PM, Peter wrote: > On 19/02/16 15:16, ~Stack~ wrote: >> Thanks for replying. Makes sense. But what would the harm be to move a >> package into a separate "retired" repo? Community would know that it >> isn't maintained and yet the package wouldn't just disappear completely. >>

Re: More prominent link to verification hashes

For what it is worth, not signing the key is bug 1043276: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1043276 > Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2016 19:47:51 + > From: Gregory Maxwell > Subject: Re: More prominent link to verification hashes > To: Development discussions related to

[EPEL-devel] Re: related question / off topic - EPEL Proposal #1: Rechartering

On 19/02/16 15:16, ~Stack~ wrote: > Thanks for replying. Makes sense. But what would the harm be to move a > package into a separate "retired" repo? Community would know that it > isn't maintained and yet the package wouldn't just disappear completely. > I guess the difficult question would then

[Bug 1310412] perl-Module-CoreList-5.20160121 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1310412 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA

[Bug 1310479] perl-MooseX-App-1.34 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1310479 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA

[EPEL-devel] Fedora EPEL 7 updates-testing report

The following Fedora EPEL 7 Security updates need testing: Age URL 351 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-1087 dokuwiki-0-0.24.20140929c.el7 113 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-dac7ed832f mcollective-2.8.4-1.el7 12

[389-devel] Please Review: Nunc Stans fix abstraction increment with gcc 6.0

https://fedorahosted.org/nunc-stans/ticket/46 https://fedorahosted.org/nunc-stans/attachment/ticket/46/0001-Ticket-46-undefined -reference-to-abstraction-increme.patch -- Sincerely, William Brown Software Engineer Red Hat, Brisbane signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed

[Bug 1306245] perl-Business-CreditCard-0.35 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1306245 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Business-CreditCard-0.35-1.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You

[Bug 1305186] perl-Business-CreditCard-0.34 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1305186 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Business-CreditCard-0.35-1.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You

[Bug 1308272] perl-Text-Levenshtein-Damerau-XS: additional builds

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1308272 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-Text-Levenshtein-Damer

[Bug 1308272] perl-Text-Levenshtein-Damerau-XS: additional builds

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1308272 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Text-Levenshtein-Damerau-XS-3.1-2.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. --

[Bug 1310917] perl-RPM2-1.2 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1310917 --- Comment #2 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- Scratch build failed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=13099978 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC

[Bug 1310917] perl-RPM2-1.2 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1310917 --- Comment #1 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- Created attachment 1129573 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1129573=edit [patch] Update to 1.2 (#1310917) -- You are

[Bug 1310917] New: perl-RPM2-1.2 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1310917 Bug ID: 1310917 Summary: perl-RPM2-1.2 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: perl-RPM2 Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged Assignee: jples...@redhat.com

[Bug 1305293] perl-Path-Tiny: please update package in epel7, f22, f23 branches

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1305293 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Path-Tiny-0.076-1.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are

[Bug 1305293] perl-Path-Tiny: please update package in epel7, f22, f23 branches

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1305293 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-Path-Tiny-0.076-1.fc23

Re: More prominent link to verification hashes

On 22 February 2016 at 13:00, Ralf Senderek wrote: > >> The Fedora team could get a profile and verify the key(s) through >> github, the Fedora and Red Hat web sites, the Fedora magazine twitter >> account, and by having the Fedora team all sign publicly. > > Every little

Re: Koschei false positives?

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 4:28 PM, Ralph Bean wrote: > Good idea! Can you open a ticket on the koschei issue tracker about it? > https://github.com/msimacek/koschei/issues Done, and thanks: https://github.com/msimacek/koschei/issues/73 -- devel mailing list

Re: Large number of packages to be orphaned on Feb 26

2016-02-19 19:09 GMT+01:00 Josh Boyer : [cut] As a heads up to the greater community, the packages are listed below. > In the event that we have to go through with the orphaning, please > review them for packages you may wish to take over as the primary > point of

Re: Koschei false positives?

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 08:59:24PM +, Christopher wrote: > I occasionally get notifications from Koschei about my packages failing to > build. When I look ( > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=13071213), I see a > python stack trace which looks like it has nothing to do with

[EPEL-devel] Fedora EPEL 6 updates-testing report

The following Fedora EPEL 6 Security updates need testing: Age URL 247 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-6828 chicken-4.9.0.1-4.el6 229 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-7031 python-virtualenv-12.0.7-1.el6 223

Koschei false positives?

I occasionally get notifications from Koschei about my packages failing to build. When I look ( http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=13071213), I see a python stack trace which looks like it has nothing to do with my package's build. Rather, it looks like Koschei itself failed.

[Bug 1304359] perl-Lingua-Stem-Ru-0.02 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1304359 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Lingua-Stem-Ru-0.03-1.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are

[Bug 1305186] perl-Business-CreditCard-0.34 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1305186 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Business-CreditCard-0.35-1.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You

[Bug 1304913] perl-Lingua-Stem-Ru-0.03 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1304913 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Lingua-Stem-Ru-0.03-1.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are

[Bug 1306245] perl-Business-CreditCard-0.35 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1306245 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Business-CreditCard-0.35-1.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You

[Bug 1308272] perl-Text-Levenshtein-Damerau-XS: additional builds

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1308272 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Text-Levenshtein-Damerau-XS-3.1-2.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. --

[Bug 1308272] perl-Text-Levenshtein-Damerau-XS: additional builds

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1308272 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA

Re: Declining package maintenance requests? (Was Re: Large number of packages to be orphaned on Feb 26)

> "FAL" == Fabio Alessandro Locati writes: FAL> If a person is not able to make a click in 7 days (maybe vacation FAL> periods could be excluded from the count), why should he be able to FAL> do so in the following 21 days? I think that a better question is: If a

Re: Fedora mass rebuild 2016

On 02/22/2016 04:55 AM, Marek Polacek wrote: In the past few days and weeks we did a mass rebuild of Fedora rawhide packages in mock with GCC 6 (and corresponding libtool) and for those packages that failed also rebuilt the same package with gcc-5.3.1-2.fc23.x86_64 to quickly remove from the

Re: More prominent link to verification hashes

> The Fedora team could get a profile and verify the key(s) through > github, the Fedora and Red Hat web sites, the Fedora magazine twitter > account, and by having the Fedora team all sign publicly. Every little helps. The important step would be if the Fedora devs state the fingerprints in a

Re: More prominent link to verification hashes

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 7:42 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > My point was that you can get the signatures off the key from the > keyserver and see if any of them are someone you trust. If not, are > they connected to someone you trust (hey, look, web of trust). I think > expanding the

Re: More prominent link to verification hashes

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 6:35 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > Well, I agree the instructions could do better, but how would that help > if the site was compromised? The attackers would write their own > instructions. > > In addition to the verify link, the

Re: More prominent link to verification hashes

On Mon, 22 Feb 2016 19:22:24 - "Ralf Senderek" wrote: > > If the site is compromised, most bets are off sadly. > > Yes, for people who look only in one place, the manipulated web > server. But that is the reason why the fingerprint has to pop up in > different places

Re: More prominent link to verification hashes

On 02/22/2016 02:22 PM, Ralf Senderek wrote: If the site is compromised, most bets are off sadly. Yes, for people who look only in one place, the manipulated web server. But that is the reason why the fingerprint has to pop up in different places where it is hard to fake. Even if this one

pghmcfc pushed to perl-YAML-LibYAML (perl-YAML-LibYAML-0.62-1.fc24). "Update to 0.62 (..more)"

From c0847ec58b84136f59317be2fcd8db476fe229bf Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Paul Howarth Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2016 18:36:54 + Subject: Update to 0.62 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit - New upstream release 0.62 - Fix

Re: More prominent link to verification hashes

> If the site is compromised, most bets are off sadly. Yes, for people who look only in one place, the manipulated web server. But that is the reason why the fingerprint has to pop up in different places where it is hard to fake. Even if this one user can be tricked, others can discover that

Re: More prominent link to verification hashes

On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 11:31:05AM -0700, Chris Murphy wrote: > On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 7:32 AM, Sam Varshavchik > wrote: > > So, I see that someone hacked Linux Mint, and slipped in some trojaned ISO > > download images. > > > > Since Fedora looks to be moving to Live

pghmcfc pushed to perl-YAML-LibYAML (master). "Update to 0.62 (..more)"

From c0847ec58b84136f59317be2fcd8db476fe229bf Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Paul Howarth Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2016 18:36:54 + Subject: Update to 0.62 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit - New upstream release 0.62 - Fix

pghmcfc uploaded YAML-LibYAML-0.62.tar.gz for perl-YAML-LibYAML

e8e0ba8c9f589c809ee04bb526ae03d7 YAML-LibYAML-0.62.tar.gz http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/lookaside/pkgs/perl-YAML-LibYAML/YAML-LibYAML-0.62.tar.gz/md5/e8e0ba8c9f589c809ee04bb526ae03d7/YAML-LibYAML-0.62.tar.gz -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl

Re: [Guidelines change] Changes to the packaging guidelines

On 22 February 2016 at 17:38, Corey Sheldon wrote: > > Kevin, et al. > > I am willing to help with the re-write but admittedly some of it will require a crash course for me. > > > On 02/22/2016 11:31 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > On Mon, 22 Feb 2016 15:02:45 + > Mat

Re: More prominent link to verification hashes

On Mon, 22 Feb 2016 18:21:04 - "Ralf Senderek" wrote: > While signing new keys with old release keys would certainly help to > make the attacker's job harder, it doesn't solve the trust problem. I don't think it even makes their job harder. > The one thing people

Re: [Guidelines change] Changes to the packaging guidelines

On 22 February 2016 at 16:31, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Mon, 22 Feb 2016 15:02:45 + > Mat Booth wrote: > > > Wow, that "HOWTO" is a really old page -- not changed since being > > imported from the old moin moin wiki. My feeling is that page should > >

Re: More prominent link to verification hashes

On Mon, 22 Feb 2016 16:48:29 + Gregory Maxwell wrote: > On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 2:32 PM, Sam Varshavchik > wrote: > > One has to jump into the installation guide, in order to find a > > buried link to https://getfedora.org/verify > > The

Re: More prominent link to verification hashes

> On Sun, Feb 21, Gregory Maxwell wrote: > The Fedora 24 key inside it is not signed by any other key. ... > Authenticating keys is hard in general; but existing fedora users > should at least be able to trust-on-first-use chain from earlier keys > to later ones-- assuming the fedora keys are

Re: Minimizing the fedora docker base image footprint

On Mon, 2016-02-22 at 11:26 -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote: > Courtney Pacheco (cpach...@redhat.com) said:  > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > I've spent some time trying to minimize the footprint of the Fedora > > docker > > base image. Overall, I managed to reduce its size by 39.9%. > > > > A summary

Self Introduction: Paulo Henrique Rodrigues Pinheiro

Hi! My name is Paulo, I am a developer and administrator of Linux systems. Ago many years I worked (for a short time) in a Brazilian Linux distribution (Conectiva Linux), and after that I did not contribute more with open source projects. Finally I found a project that encouraged me, and

Re: [Guidelines change] Changes to the packaging guidelines

Kevin, et al. I am willing to help with the re-write but admittedly some of it will require a crash course for me. On 02/22/2016 11:31 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Mon, 22 Feb 2016 15:02:45 + > Mat Booth wrote: > >> Wow, that "HOWTO" is a really old page -- not changed

orion pushed to perl-PDL (master). "Rebuild for gsl 2.1"

From db17ae3f21d738a41ab2ac74672e8025a0ff7f89 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Orion Poplawski Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2016 10:07:03 -0700 Subject: Rebuild for gsl 2.1 --- perl-PDL.spec | 5 - 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/perl-PDL.spec

Re: More prominent link to verification hashes

On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 2:32 PM, Sam Varshavchik wrote: > One has to jump into the installation guide, in order to find a buried link > to https://getfedora.org/verify The instructions here have you download a set of PGP keys from the same https webserver which could have

[Bug 1169647] perl-OpenOffice-UNO-0.07-15.fc22 FTBFS: No Package found for libreoffice-headless

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1169647 Bug 1169647 depends on bug 1303619, which changed state. Bug 1303619 Summary: Cannot install libreoffice-sdk: nothing provides java-devel(x86-64) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1303619 What|Removed

[Bug 1305212] perl-OpenOffice-UNO: FTBFS in rawhide

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1305212 Bug 1305212 depends on bug 1303619, which changed state. Bug 1303619 Summary: Cannot install libreoffice-sdk: nothing provides java-devel(x86-64) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1303619 What|Removed

Re: Minimizing the fedora docker base image footprint

On 02/22/2016 11:26 AM, Bill Nottingham wrote: Courtney Pacheco (cpach...@redhat.com) said: Hi everyone, I've spent some time trying to minimize the footprint of the Fedora docker base image. Overall, I managed to reduce its size by 39.9%. A summary of the work I did can be found here:

Re: [Guidelines change] Changes to the packaging guidelines

On Mon, 22 Feb 2016 15:02:45 + Mat Booth wrote: > Wow, that "HOWTO" is a really old page -- not changed since being > imported from the old moin moin wiki. My feeling is that page should > be deleted and the "How to create an RPM package" page should be > updated. > >

Re: More prominent link to verification hashes

On Sun, 21 Feb 2016 23:21:58 +0100 Jens Lody wrote: > This can also be done before clicking the link-button, or the download > splash is also shown without javascript. This should not be too hard > to implement. https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-websites awaits your ticket.

Re: Minimizing the fedora docker base image footprint

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 11:04:40AM -0500, Adam Jackson wrote: > On Mon, 2016-02-22 at 09:54 -0500, Courtney Pacheco wrote: > > > If possible, I'd like some feedback on the work I did. Comments and  > > criticism are more than welcomed! I realize there may be some  > > controversy in terms of what

Re: Minimizing the fedora docker base image footprint

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 9:54 AM, Courtney Pacheco wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I've spent some time trying to minimize the footprint of the Fedora docker > base image. Overall, I managed to reduce its size by 39.9%. Thanks for doing this. It is great to see someone working on

Re: Minimizing the fedora docker base image footprint

Courtney Pacheco (cpach...@redhat.com) said: > Hi everyone, > > I've spent some time trying to minimize the footprint of the Fedora docker > base image. Overall, I managed to reduce its size by 39.9%. > > A summary of the work I did can be found here: >

Re: Large number of packages to be orphaned on Feb 26

On 02/22/2016 10:02 AM, Paul Howarth wrote: On 21/02/16 11:34, Emmanuel Seyman wrote: Hi, folks. It's been announced that Christoper Mang's packages will be orphaned next Friday unless he speaks up. A number of Perl packages are involved and I figured it would be nice to figure who's

Fedora Rawhide 20160222 compose check report

No missing expected images. Images in this compose but not Rawhide 20160221: Cloud_atomic disk raw x86_64 Games live x86_64 Design_suite live x86_64 Games live i386 Kde disk raw armhfp Kde live i386 Scientific_kde live x86_64 Cloud_atomic disk qcow x86_64 Scientific_kde live i386 Design_suite

Re: Minimizing the fedora docker base image footprint

On Mon, 2016-02-22 at 09:54 -0500, Courtney Pacheco wrote: > If possible, I'd like some feedback on the work I did. Comments and  > criticism are more than welcomed! I realize there may be some  > controversy in terms of what I chose to remove and what I chose to turn  > into weak dependencies,

Re: Fedora mass rebuild 2016

On 22/02/16 08:35 -0700, Jerry James wrote: polymake-2.14r1-4.fc24.src.rpm.log I already added -std=gnu++98 to this package, but the build still fails. I don't understand the gcc error. GCC appears to be producing non-const temporaries, and then complaining that the temporaries are

Re: Fedora mass rebuild 2016

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 4:55 AM, Marek Polacek wrote: > Macaulay2-1.6-22.fc24.src.rpm > bogus errors with static data member template > http://gcc.gnu.org/PR69098 > fixed upstream and in gcc-6.0.0-0.11.fc24 I don't think this has been fixed. I updated

Re: Fedora mass rebuild 2016

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 08:35:34AM -0700, Jerry James wrote: > I don't think this has been fixed. I updated ntl over the weekend, > and rebuilt Macaulay2 as part of that work. Macaulay2 still failed > with this same error, using gcc-6.0.0-0.11.fc24, so I added a patch to > workaround the issue,

Re: kmods and Fedora

Bastien Nocera writes: >> > If you are creating a cert to sign the out-of-tree modules and expect >> > it to be accepted by the kernel, it cannot be ephemeral. A user would >> > need someway to import it into their kernel or have it passed from >> > grub. [...] >> >> That

Re: Fedora mass rebuild 2016

On Mon, 22 Feb 2016 12:55:56 +0100, Marek Polacek wrote: > audiofile-0.3.6-9.fc24.src.rpm This one was left-shifting a negative integer and also triggered narrowing-conversion errors. Fixed in Rawhide already. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

[POC-change] Fedora packages point of contact updates

Change in package status over the last 168 hours 22 packages were orphaned - backintime [el6, epel7] was orphaned by kevin Simple backup tool inspired from the Flyback project and TimeVault

Re: bash completion dirs

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 10:16 AM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: > > On Feb 22, 2016 7:14 AM, "Neal Gompa" wrote: >> >> On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 10:11 AM, Ondřej Vašík wrote: >> > Ville Skyttä píše v Po 22. 02. 2016 v 14:12 +0200: >> >> On Mon, Feb

Re: Fedora mass rebuild 2016

On Mon, 2016-02-22 at 12:55 +0100, Marek Polacek wrote: > blktap-3.0.0-4.fc24.git0.9.2.src.rpm > crda-3.18_2015.10.22-1.fc24.src.rpm > dahdi-tools-2.10.0-6.fc24.src.rpm > gmqcc-0.3.5-8.fc23.src.rpm > gstreamer1-plugins-good-1.7.1-1.fc24.src.rpm > ipv6calc-0.99.1-13.fc24.src.rpm >

Re: kmods and Fedora

On Feb 22, 2016 6:33 AM, "Bastien Nocera" wrote: > > > > - Original Message - > > Josh Boyer wrote: > > > If you are creating a cert to sign the out-of-tree modules and expect > > > it to be accepted by the kernel, it cannot be ephemeral. A user would > > > need

Re: bash completion dirs

On Feb 22, 2016 7:14 AM, "Neal Gompa" wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 10:11 AM, Ondřej Vašík wrote: > > Ville Skyttä píše v Po 22. 02. 2016 v 14:12 +0200: > >> On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 2:04 PM, Thomas Moschny > >> wrote: > >> >

Re: bash completion dirs

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 10:11 AM, Ondřej Vašík wrote: > Ville Skyttä píše v Po 22. 02. 2016 v 14:12 +0200: >> On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 2:04 PM, Thomas Moschny >> wrote: >> > However, for the same reasons, shouldn't the filesystem package also >> > own

Re: bash completion dirs

Ville Skyttä píše v Po 22. 02. 2016 v 14:12 +0200: > On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 2:04 PM, Thomas Moschny > wrote: > > However, for the same reasons, shouldn't the filesystem package also > > own the "new" /usr/share/bash-completion/completions location? > > Why not. Note

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Fedora support for Vulkan

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 8:52 AM, Adam Jackson wrote: > On Wed, 2016-02-17 at 14:30 -0600, Richard Shaw wrote: > > I read the readme in the Vulkan branch on the mesa git but how do you > > tell if your chipset is specifically supported? > > The driver emits a warning chirp if the

Re: [Guidelines change] Changes to the packaging guidelines

On 22 February 2016 at 10:54, Kamil Paral wrote: > > RWMJ> Is that new? > > > > Not really. The change relating to what's in the buildroot was made > > about nine months ago: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/497 > > I created my first COPR over this weekend. I worked

Minimizing the fedora docker base image footprint

Hi everyone, I've spent some time trying to minimize the footprint of the Fedora docker base image. Overall, I managed to reduce its size by 39.9%. A summary of the work I did can be found here: https://gist.github.com/iamcourtney/1a4af7c4289014f57080 If you're interested, you can find a

Re: Proposal: spins-kickstarts workflow changes

On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 1:37 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > Greetings. > > I am sending this to the devel and spins lists. Feel free to forward to > other places people who might be affected by it should see it. > > Some history: > > We setup the spin-kickstart project on fedorahosted

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Fedora support for Vulkan

On Wed, 2016-02-17 at 14:30 -0600, Richard Shaw wrote: > I read the readme in the Vulkan branch on the mesa git but how do you > tell if your chipset is specifically supported? The driver emits a warning chirp if the chipset isn't fully supported, and will refuse to initialize on devices that are

Re: kmods and Fedora

- Original Message - > Josh Boyer wrote: > > If you are creating a cert to sign the out-of-tree modules and expect > > it to be accepted by the kernel, it cannot be ephemeral. A user would > > need someway to import it into their kernel or have it passed from > > grub. The only way to

[Bug 1310479] perl-MooseX-App-1.34 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1310479 --- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System --- perl-MooseX-App-1.34-1.fc22 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 22. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-0cdd85b0db --- Comment #4 from Fedora

[Bug 1310479] perl-MooseX-App-1.34 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1310479 --- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System --- perl-MooseX-App-1.34-1.fc22 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 22. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-0cdd85b0db -- You are receiving this mail

psabata pushed to perl-MooseX-App (f22). "1.34 bump"

From d5ef0deac03fc4455f59261ba3fcd1a52364a337 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: =?UTF-8?q?Petr=20=C5=A0abata?= Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2016 14:49:53 +0100 Subject: 1.34 bump --- .gitignore | 1 + perl-MooseX-App.spec | 8 ++-- sources | 2 +- 3 files

psabata pushed to perl-MooseX-App (f22). "- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_24_Mass_Rebuild"

From e9f94ae5d6c13c021ca4939642351802e79a454e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Fedora Release Engineering Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2016 14:46:38 + Subject: - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_24_Mass_Rebuild --- perl-MooseX-App.spec | 5 - 1 file changed,

psabata pushed to perl-MooseX-App (f22). "Perl 5.22 rebuild"

From ccc0c2eeb8d6927eeba51f34e80ced54224642f1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Jitka Plesnikova Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2015 20:22:09 +0200 Subject: Perl 5.22 rebuild --- perl-MooseX-App.spec | 5 - 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git

psabata pushed to perl-MooseX-App (f22). "- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_23_Mass_Rebuild"

From 50574ef712b7357788343b821f337fa191a3e880 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Dennis Gilmore Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2015 04:39:59 + Subject: - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_23_Mass_Rebuild --- perl-MooseX-App.spec | 5 - 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1

psabata pushed to perl-MooseX-App (f23). "- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_24_Mass_Rebuild"

From e9f94ae5d6c13c021ca4939642351802e79a454e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Fedora Release Engineering Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2016 14:46:38 + Subject: - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_24_Mass_Rebuild --- perl-MooseX-App.spec | 5 - 1 file changed,

psabata pushed to perl-MooseX-App (master). "1.34 bump"

From d5ef0deac03fc4455f59261ba3fcd1a52364a337 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: =?UTF-8?q?Petr=20=C5=A0abata?= Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2016 14:49:53 +0100 Subject: 1.34 bump --- .gitignore | 1 + perl-MooseX-App.spec | 8 ++-- sources | 2 +- 3 files

psabata pushed to perl-MooseX-App (f23). "1.34 bump"

From d5ef0deac03fc4455f59261ba3fcd1a52364a337 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: =?UTF-8?q?Petr=20=C5=A0abata?= Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2016 14:49:53 +0100 Subject: 1.34 bump --- .gitignore | 1 + perl-MooseX-App.spec | 8 ++-- sources | 2 +- 3 files

psabata uploaded MooseX-App-1.34.tar.gz for perl-MooseX-App

97ac9c24967fefdbd6bf1311574b9301 MooseX-App-1.34.tar.gz http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/lookaside/pkgs/perl-MooseX-App/MooseX-App-1.34.tar.gz/md5/97ac9c24967fefdbd6bf1311574b9301/MooseX-App-1.34.tar.gz -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl perl-devel

[Bug 1310360] perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-2.58 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1310360 Petr Šabata changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Fixed In

Re: Fedora mass rebuild 2016

I've pretty much addressed all my packages except for cqrlog which I guess wasn't on the list since it will compile with gcc 5. Upstream has stated they will address gcc 6 issues on the next release. My other two packages that I could find in your list, smesh & OCE, have both been addressed and

[Bug 1310646] perl-XML-XPath-1.31 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1310646 Jitka Plesnikova changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Fixed

psabata pushed to perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases (master). "2.58 bump, updated for v5.23.8"

From c9bd08819643a380e16f6dc846399f89d8da3b44 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: =?UTF-8?q?Petr=20=C5=A0abata?= Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2016 14:30:02 +0100 Subject: 2.58 bump, updated for v5.23.8 --- .gitignore | 1 + perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases.spec | 7 +-- sources

psabata uploaded CPAN-Perl-Releases-2.58.tar.gz for perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases

92b48064be4727e40f72be5a7ac0c880 CPAN-Perl-Releases-2.58.tar.gz http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/lookaside/pkgs/perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases/CPAN-Perl-Releases-2.58.tar.gz/md5/92b48064be4727e40f72be5a7ac0c880/CPAN-Perl-Releases-2.58.tar.gz -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG

[Bug 1310475] perl-DateTime-Format-Strptime-1.64 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1310475 Petr Šabata changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Fixed In

jplesnik pushed to perl-XML-XPath (master). "1.31 bump"

From f02eb71d4777d726fb0050a483c32206701773fd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Jitka Plesnikova Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2016 14:14:57 +0100 Subject: 1.31 bump --- .gitignore | 1 + perl-XML-XPath.spec | 5 - sources | 2 +- 3 files changed, 6 insertions(+),

  1   2   >