Re: package review requests

hi Il 05/03/2016 21:40, Mukundan Ragavan ha scritto: Hello all, I have submitted two packages for review. I trust both these reviews are fairly straightforward. 1/ python-nmrglue This is a python module for processing nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) data. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bu

Re: OCaml plans on POWER7/POWER8 (ppc64, ppc64le) in Rawhide

On Ter, 2015-09-08 at 20:02 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > Any comments? I'd like change some ideas about packaging google-drive-ocamlfuse, but can't send messages to ocaml-devel Mailing list :  : host mailman01.vpn.fedoraproject.org[192.168.1.118] said: 550 5.1.1 : Recipient address

Re: glibc in Fedora rawhide now split by langpacks.

On Sunday, 28 February 2016 at 23:31, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > > On Feb 28, 2016, at 5:08 PM, Lars Seipel wrote: > > > >> On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 08:56:27AM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > >> Yeah, I think the best approach would be to have all the langpacks offer a > >> virtual Provides:

Re: Fedora 24-20160304.n.1 compose check report

On Sat, 2016-03-05 at 21:24 +, Fedora compose checker wrote: > Missing expected images: > > Cloud raw-xz i386 > Atomic raw-xz x86_64 > Cloud raw-xz x86_64 > > Images in this compose but not 24-20160304.n.0: > > Design_suite live i386 > Design_suite live x86_64 > > No images in 24-20160304.n

Fedora 24-20160304.n.1 compose check report

Missing expected images: Cloud raw-xz i386 Atomic raw-xz x86_64 Cloud raw-xz x86_64 Images in this compose but not 24-20160304.n.0: Design_suite live i386 Design_suite live x86_64 No images in 24-20160304.n.0 but not this. Failed openQA tests: 61 of 78 ID: 7557Test: i386 universal pac

Fedora Rawhide-20160305.n.0 compose check report

Missing expected images: Cloud raw-xz i386 Atomic raw-xz x86_64 Cloud raw-xz x86_64 Kde raw-xz armhfp No images in this compose but not Rawhide-20160304.n.0 No images in Rawhide-20160304.n.0 but not this. Failed openQA tests: 64 of 78 ID: 7654Test: i386 universal package_set_kde URL: h

Fedora 24-20160305.n.0 compose check report

Missing expected images: Cloud raw-xz i386 Atomic raw-xz x86_64 Cloud raw-xz x86_64 No images in this compose but not 24-20160304.n.1 No images in 24-20160304.n.1 but not this. Failed openQA tests: 64 of 78 ID: 7732Test: i386 universal package_set_kde URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.

package review requests

Hello all, I have submitted two packages for review. I trust both these reviews are fairly straightforward. 1/ python-nmrglue This is a python module for processing nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) data. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315020 2/ xfpanel-switch This is a simple

Re: HEADS UP: systemd package split

2016-03-04 23:36 GMT+01:00 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek : > Hi, > > I finally pushed the split of the systemd package to Rawhide and F24 today > [https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Changes/systemd_package_split]. > If you upgrade with dnf you should see something like this: > Installing: >

Re: More prominent link to verification hashes

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 09:29:26PM +0100, Ralf Senderek wrote: > PS: if you had a long-term signing key it would be its fingerprint. How would an ordinary user use a long-term singing key? Kind regards Till -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/

Re: More prominent link to verification hashes

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 08:05:59PM +0100, Ralf Senderek wrote: > Thank you for providing this valuable information about the handling > of the private key that enables Fedora ISO signing. This information > should be shared and highlighted as it is helping to create trust in > the use of this key.

Re: HEADS UP: systemd package split

On Fri, Mar 04, 2016 at 10:36:01PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > I finally pushed the split of the systemd package to Rawhide and F24 today Exciting — thanks! -- Matthew Miller Fedora Project Leader -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.or

Re: ghost compat-gcc-296/32 debuginfo and source packages in rawhide

On Sat, Mar 5, 2016 at 4:41 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > On Sat, Mar 05, 2016 at 04:09:55PM +0200, Ville Skyttä wrote: > > Rawhide repos have currently compat-gcc-296 and compat-gcc-32 -debuginfo > > and source packages but the corresponding main binary packages are not > > there. Shouldn't all or

Re: HEADS UP: systemd package split

On Sat, Mar 05, 2016 at 01:29:46PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote: > The %_udevrulesdir macro stays in the main systemd package. Is that > on purpose? Maybe not on purpose ;), but I think it's OK, and things would break otherwise. Packages that have BuildRequires:systemd get the macro. OTOH, systemd-ud

Re: ghost compat-gcc-296/32 debuginfo and source packages in rawhide

On Sat, Mar 05, 2016 at 04:09:55PM +0200, Ville Skyttä wrote: > Rawhide repos have currently compat-gcc-296 and compat-gcc-32 -debuginfo > and source packages but the corresponding main binary packages are not > there. Shouldn't all or none of them be there, something wrong with the > compose? com

ghost compat-gcc-296/32 debuginfo and source packages in rawhide

Rawhide repos have currently compat-gcc-296 and compat-gcc-32 -debuginfo and source packages but the corresponding main binary packages are not there. Shouldn't all or none of them be there, something wrong with the compose? -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedorapro

Re: HEADS UP: systemd package split

On 4.3.2016 23:36, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: Hi, I finally pushed the split of the systemd package to Rawhide and F24 today [https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Changes/systemd_package_split]. If you upgrade with dnf you should see something like this: Installing: systemd-cont