[Bug 1399581] CVE-2016-1251 perl-DBD-MySQL: Use after free when using prepared statements [fedora-all]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1399581 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System --- perl-DBD-MySQL-4.039-2.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See

Re: failure of f24 to f25 upgrade: SOLVED

On Fri, 2016-12-02 at 03:05 +0200, Alexander Ploumistos wrote: > I think you might be missing Google's key: > https://www.google.com/linuxrepositories/ > > > > Thanks, got it. Regards, Les H___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To

[389-devel] Re: Build failed in Jenkins: 389-DS-NIGHTLY #149

On Thu, 2016-12-01 at 09:16 +1000, William Brown wrote: > > CRITICAL:stress_tests:DeleteUsers: failed to delete > > (uid=person3,dc=example,dc=com) error: Can'\''t contact LDAP server > > CRITICAL:stress_tests:DeleteUsers: failed to delete > > (uid=employee4,dc=example,dc=com) error: Can'\''t

[Bug 1178357] mojomojo-1.11 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1178357 Filipe Rosset changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED

[Bug 1400755] perl-Pod-Simple-3.35 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1400755 --- Comment #1 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- Patching or scratch build for perl-Pod-Simple-3.32 failed. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

[Bug 1400755] perl-Pod-Simple-3.35 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1400755 --- Comment #3 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- Patches were not touched. All were applied properly -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

[Bug 1400755] perl-Pod-Simple-3.35 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1400755 --- Comment #2 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- Created attachment 1227123 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1227123=edit Rebase-helper rebase-helper-debug.log log file.

[Bug 1400755] New: perl-Pod-Simple-3.35 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1400755 Bug ID: 1400755 Summary: perl-Pod-Simple-3.35 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: perl-Pod-Simple Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged Assignee:

[Bug 1400750] New: perl-Test-Strict-0.38 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1400750 Bug ID: 1400750 Summary: perl-Test-Strict-0.38 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: perl-Test-Strict Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged Assignee:

Re: failure of f24 to f25 upgrade: SOLVED

On Thu, 01 Dec 2016 16:43:13 -0800 Howard Howell wrote:   > warning: /var/cache/dnf/google-earth-17f28a61f303b7a2/packages/google- > earth-stable-6.0.3.2197-0.x86_64.rpm: Header V4 DSA/SHA1 Signature, > key ID 7fac5991: NOKEY > The downloaded packages were saved in cache

Re: failure of f24 to f25 upgrade: SOLVED

I think you might be missing Google's key: https://www.google.com/linuxrepositories/ ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[EPEL-devel] Fedora EPEL 5 updates-testing report

The following Fedora EPEL 5 Security updates need testing: Age URL 753 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2014-3849 sblim-sfcb-1.3.8-2.el5 396 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-edbea40516 mcollective-2.8.4-1.el5 368

Re: failure of f24 to f25 upgrade: SOLVED

On Thu, 2016-12-01 at 14:52 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Thu, 2016-12-01 at 17:03 -0500, Przemek Klosowski wrote: > > This got me thinking if there's a common root cause that could be  > > checked automatically? I didn't quite understand what exactly > > happened  > > in the affected

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

The following Fedora EPEL 7 Security updates need testing: Age URL 634 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-1087 dokuwiki-0-0.24.20140929c.el7 396 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-dac7ed832f mcollective-2.8.4-1.el7 114

[Bug 1400735] New: perl-Locale-Codes-3.42 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1400735 Bug ID: 1400735 Summary: perl-Locale-Codes-3.42 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: perl-Locale-Codes Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged Assignee:

[Bug 1393364] perl-Inline-Python-0.52 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1393364 --- Comment #6 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- Created attachment 1227088 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1227088=edit Rebase-helper rebase-helper-debug.log log file.

[Bug 1393364] perl-Inline-Python-0.52 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1393364 --- Comment #7 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- Patches were not touched. All were applied properly -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

[Bug 1395138] stompclt-1.5 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1395138 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|stompclt-1.5-1.fc25

[Bug 1393364] perl-Inline-Python-0.52 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1393364 --- Comment #5 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- Patching or scratch build for perl-Inline-Python-0.50 failed. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

[Bug 1393364] perl-Inline-Python-0.52 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1393364 Upstream Release Monitoring changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug 1400728] New: perl-Date-Manip-6.57 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1400728 Bug ID: 1400728 Summary: perl-Date-Manip-6.57 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: perl-Date-Manip Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged Assignee:

[Bug 1395591] CVE-2016-1249 perl-DBD-MySQL: Out-of-bounds read when using server-side prepared statement support

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1395591 Bug 1395591 depends on bug 1395592, which changed state. Bug 1395592 Summary: CVE-2016-1249 perl-DBD-MySQL: Out-of-bounds read when using server-side prepared statement support [fedora-all] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1395592

[Bug 1399581] CVE-2016-1251 perl-DBD-MySQL: Use after free when using prepared statements [fedora-all]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1399581 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA

[Bug 1395592] CVE-2016-1249 perl-DBD-MySQL: Out-of-bounds read when using server-side prepared statement support [ fedora-all]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1395592 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|CLOSED |ON_QA

[Bug 1398478] perl-Perl-Critic-Pulp-91 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1398478 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA

[Bug 1400224] perl-Perl-Critic-Pulp-92 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1400224 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA

spot pushed to perl-Config-IniFiles (master). "2.94"

From 6c32cd5a45785158792d9c0b20d5cda2b13a17e6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Tom Callaway Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2016 13:49:21 -0500 Subject: 2.94 --- .gitignore| 1 + perl-Config-IniFiles.spec | 5 - sources | 2 +- 3 files changed, 6

spot uploaded Config-IniFiles-2.94.tar.gz for perl-Config-IniFiles

0828508c1c7663760c8a1bd6d1b2ff94 Config-IniFiles-2.94.tar.gz http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/lookaside/pkgs/perl-Config-IniFiles/Config-IniFiles-2.94.tar.gz/md5/0828508c1c7663760c8a1bd6d1b2ff94/Config-IniFiles-2.94.tar.gz ___ perl-devel mailing

Re: failure of f24 to f25 upgrade

On Thu, 2016-12-01 at 17:03 -0500, Przemek Klosowski wrote: > This got me thinking if there's a common root cause that could be > checked automatically? I didn't quite understand what exactly happened > in the affected packages to cause it. No, they're usually all different little awkward

Re: Rawhide aarch64: gcc bus error

On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 4:37 PM, Justin Forbes wrote: > On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 10:45 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote: >> On 11/30/2016 04:20 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >>> >>> On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 10:08:55PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: On

Re: Rawhide aarch64: gcc bus error

On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 10:45 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote: > On 11/30/2016 04:20 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >> >> On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 10:08:55PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >>> >>> On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 02:07:13PM -0700, Jerry James wrote: I'm trying to

Re: failure of f24 to f25 upgrade

On Thu, 1 Dec 2016 17:03:30 -0500 Przemek Klosowski wrote: > On 12/01/2016 04:39 PM, Howard Howell wrote: > > It looks like probably Dominik's suggestion of the -e cleared the > > program. So somehow, rpm -e packagename seemed to be the magic > > bullet. I will start

[Bug 1396860] perl-Module-CoreList-5.20161120 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396860 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-Module-CoreList-5.2016

Re: failure of f24 to f25 upgrade

On 12/01/2016 04:39 PM, Howard Howell wrote: It looks like probably Dominik's suggestion of the -e cleared the program. So somehow, rpm -e packagename seemed to be the magic bullet. I will start overwith the update to make sure all the packages downloaded, and let you know if success happens.

Re: failure of f24 to f25 upgrade

On Thu, 2016-12-01 at 13:32 -0800, Howard Howell wrote: On Thu, 2016-12-01 at 21:25 +, John Florian wrote: On Thu, 2016-12-01 at 12:55 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: On Thu, 2016-12-01 at 12:35 -0800, Josh Stone wrote: Perhaps dnf thinks google-earth is now the authority on %{_bindir} ? So

Re: failure of f24 to f25 upgrade

On Thu, 2016-12-01 at 14:32 -0700, stan wrote: > On Thu, 01 Dec 2016 11:32:33 -0800 > Howard Howell wrote: > > > > > Hi, everyone, > > I have been trying to upgrade my system from f24 to f25 using > > the cli in the terminal. > > > >   814  dnf system-upgrade download

Re: failure of f24 to f25 upgrade

On Thu, 2016-12-01 at 21:25 +, John Florian wrote: > > On Thu, 2016-12-01 at 12:55 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > > > On Thu, 2016-12-01 at 12:35 -0800, Josh Stone wrote: > > > > > > > > > Perhaps dnf thinks google-earth is now the authority on %{_bindir} ? > > > > > > So removing it is

Re: failure of f24 to f25 upgrade

On Thu, 01 Dec 2016 11:32:33 -0800 Howard Howell wrote: > Hi, everyone, > I have been trying to upgrade my system from f24 to f25 using > the cli in the terminal. > >   814  dnf system-upgrade download --releasever=25 >   815  dnf system-upgrade download

Re: failure of f24 to f25 upgrade

On Thu, 2016-12-01 at 13:21 -0800, Josh Stone wrote: > On 12/01/2016 12:40 PM, Howard Howell wrote: > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Josh Stone > > To: hlhow...@pacbell.net, Development discussions related to Fedora > > > v...@lists.fedoraproject.org>, Adam

Re: failure of f24 to f25 upgrade

On Thu, 2016-12-01 at 12:55 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: On Thu, 2016-12-01 at 12:35 -0800, Josh Stone wrote: Perhaps dnf thinks google-earth is now the authority on %{_bindir} ? So removing it is tearing the rug out from under all those others? Well, I don't think so, as I'd expect that

Re: failure of f24 to f25 upgrade

On 12/01/2016 12:40 PM, Howard Howell wrote: > -Original Message- > From: Josh Stone > To: hlhow...@pacbell.net, Development discussions related to Fedora v...@lists.fedoraproject.org>, Adam Williamson rg> > Subject: Re: failure of f24 to

Re: F24 GStreamer zero day

On 30 November 2016 at 23:19, Ahmad Samir wrote: > On 29 November 2016 at 16:24, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 09:39:03AM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: >>> On 11/23/2016 02:15 AM, Sérgio Basto wrote: >>> >On Ter, 2016-11-22 at

Re: failure of f24 to f25 upgrade

On Thu, 2016-12-01 at 21:54 +0100, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: > On Thursday, 01 December 2016 at 21:40, Howard Howell wrote: > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Josh Stone > > To: hlhow...@pacbell.net, Development discussions related to Fedora > > >

Re: failure of f24 to f25 upgrade

-Original Message- From: Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski Reply-to: Development discussions related to Fedora To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Subject: Re: failure of f24 to f25 upgrade Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2016 21:54:13 +0100 On

Re: failure of f24 to f25 upgrade

-Original Message- From: Adam Williamson To: hlhow...@pacbell.net, Josh Stone , Development discussions related to Fedora Subject: Re: failure of f24 to f25 upgrade Date: Thu, 01 Dec 2016 12:54:44 -0800 On

Re: failure of f24 to f25 upgrade

On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 3:55 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Thu, 2016-12-01 at 12:35 -0800, Josh Stone wrote: >> >> Perhaps dnf thinks google-earth is now the authority on %{_bindir} ? >> So removing it is tearing the rug out from under all those others? > > Well, I

Re: failure of f24 to f25 upgrade

On Thu, 2016-12-01 at 12:35 -0800, Josh Stone wrote: > > Perhaps dnf thinks google-earth is now the authority on %{_bindir} ? > So removing it is tearing the rug out from under all those others? Well, I don't think so, as I'd expect that to rip out much *more* stuff. I think it must be something

Re: failure of f24 to f25 upgrade

On Thu, 2016-12-01 at 12:40 -0800, Howard Howell wrote: > -Original Message- > From: Josh Stone > To: hlhow...@pacbell.net, Development discussions related to Fedora v...@lists.fedoraproject.org>, Adam Williamson rg> > Subject: Re: failure

Re: failure of f24 to f25 upgrade

On Thursday, 01 December 2016 at 21:40, Howard Howell wrote: > -Original Message- > From: Josh Stone > To: hlhow...@pacbell.net, Development discussions related to Fedora v...@lists.fedoraproject.org>, Adam Williamson rg> > Subject: Re:

Re: failure of f24 to f25 upgrade

-Original Message- From: Josh Stone To: hlhow...@pacbell.net, Development discussions related to Fedora , Adam Williamson Subject: Re: failure of f24 to f25 upgrade Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2016 12:37:04 -0800 On 12/01/2016 12:26 PM, Howard

Re: failure of f24 to f25 upgrade

On 12/01/2016 12:26 PM, Howard Howell wrote: > Now it gets really weird... > # rpm -q --provides google-earth > package google-earth is not installed Should be google-earth-stable, no? ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To

Re: failure of f24 to f25 upgrade

On 12/01/2016 12:22 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Thu, 2016-12-01 at 12:15 -0800, Howard Howell wrote: >> -Original Message- >> From: Adam Williamson >> To: hlhow...@pacbell.net, Development discussions related to Fedora > v...@lists.fedoraproject.org> >>

Re: failure of f24 to f25 upgrade

-Original Message- From: Adam Williamson To: hlhow...@pacbell.net, Development discussions related to Fedora Subject: Re: failure of f24 to f25 upgrade Date: Thu, 01 Dec 2016 12:22:31 -0800 On Thu, 2016-12-01 at 12:15 -0800, Howard Howell wrote: > >

Re: failure of f24 to f25 upgrade

-Original Message- From: Adam Williamson To: hlhow...@pacbell.net, Development discussions related to Fedora Subject: Re: failure of f24 to f25 upgrade Date: Thu, 01 Dec 2016 12:22:31 -0800 On Thu, 2016-12-01 at 12:15 -0800, Howard Howell wrote: > >

Re: failure of f24 to f25 upgrade

On Thu, 2016-12-01 at 12:15 -0800, Howard Howell wrote: > -Original Message- > From: Adam Williamson > To: hlhow...@pacbell.net, Development discussions related to Fedora v...@lists.fedoraproject.org> > Subject: Re: failure of f24 to f25 upgrade > Date: Thu,

Re: failure of f24 to f25 upgrade

-Original Message- From: Adam Williamson To: hlhow...@pacbell.net, Development discussions related to Fedora Subject: Re: failure of f24 to f25 upgrade Date: Thu, 01 Dec 2016 12:11:29 -0800 On Thu, 2016-12-01 at 12:05 -0800, Howard Howell wrote: > > > Since

Re: failure of f24 to f25 upgrade

On Thu, 2016-12-01 at 12:05 -0800, Howard Howell wrote: > > Since the dnf erase command doesn't work, or tries to remove over 211M > of files, do you mean just to remove the directory tree for the > offending package using the rm command? Sorry, I missed that part. I use 'dnf remove', but I

Re: failure of f24 to f25 upgrade

-Original Message- From: Adam Williamson To: hlhow...@pacbell.net, Development discussions related to Fedora Subject: Re: failure of f24 to f25 upgrade Date: Thu, 01 Dec 2016 11:41:23 -0800 On Thu, 2016-12-01 at 11:32 -0800, Howard Howell wrote: > > Hi,

Re: failure of f24 to f25 upgrade

On Thu, 2016-12-01 at 11:32 -0800, Howard Howell wrote: > Hi, everyone, > I have been trying to upgrade my system from f24 to f25 using > the cli in the terminal. > >   814  dnf system-upgrade download --releasever=25 >   815  dnf system-upgrade download --releasever=25 --allowerasing >  

ppisar uploaded Clownfish-CFC-0.6.0.5.tar.gz for perl-Clownfish-CFC

bbce2160894b0f29b79f351e29452f02 Clownfish-CFC-0.6.0.5.tar.gz http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/lookaside/pkgs/perl-Clownfish-CFC/Clownfish-CFC-0.6.0.5.tar.gz/md5/bbce2160894b0f29b79f351e29452f02/Clownfish-CFC-0.6.0.5.tar.gz ___ perl-devel mailing

ppisar pushed to perl-Clownfish-CFC (master). "0.6.0.5 bump"

From 70c6407e1bba55df1fb0e0f361348fc2607ad195 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: =?UTF-8?q?Petr=20P=C3=ADsa=C5=99?= Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2016 18:01:06 +0100 Subject: 0.6.0.5 bump --- .gitignore | 1 + perl-Clownfish-CFC.spec | 5 - sources | 2 +- 3

failure of f24 to f25 upgrade

Hi, everyone, I have been trying to upgrade my system from f24 to f25 using the cli in the terminal.   814  dnf system-upgrade download --releasever=25   815  dnf system-upgrade download --releasever=25 --allowerasing   816  dnf system-upgrade download --releasever=25 --allowerasing --

[Bug 1400119] perl-Config-IniFiles-2.94 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1400119 Tom "spot" Callaway changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED

[Bug 1400119] perl-Config-IniFiles-2.94 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1400119 --- Comment #4 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- spot's perl-Config-IniFiles-2.94-1.fc26 completed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=821806 -- You are receiving this mail

[Bug 1396854] perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-3.00 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396854 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-3.0

[Bug 1397379] perl-Test-PostgreSQL-1.21 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397379 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-Test-PostgreSQL-1.21-1

[Bug 1396684] perl-Locale-Codes-3.41 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396684 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-Locale-Codes-3.41-1.fc

[Bug 1396860] perl-Module-CoreList-5.20161120 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396860 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-Module-CoreList-5.2016

f25+: vala 0.34.x+ bug causing .vapi file generation for ALL CURRENT PACKAGE BUILDS to be possibly faulty

I has come to my attention that - since the update to vala from the 0.34.x series has made it into the fedora 25(+) repositories - every package that generates .vapi files during build might have done so incorrectly, because of the following bug, which is present in vala releases up to 0.34.3

[Bug 1400359] perl-Clownfish-CFC-0.6.0.5 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1400359 Petr Pisar changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Fixed In

Re: Release validation NG: planning thoughts

On Thu, 2016-12-01 at 14:25 +0100, Josef Skladanka wrote: > On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 6:29 PM, Adam Williamson > wrote: > > On Wed, 2016-11-30 at 18:20 +0100, Josef Skladanka wrote: > > > I would try not to go the third way, because that is really prone to > > > >

Re: clarification of package naming guidelines

On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 8:39 AM, Mattia Verga wrote: > > So, in my opinion, you did it right naming your package "superlu_dist". > For sure, you MUST not use uppercase letters. I believe there is a bit of leeway for the packager here. You SHOULD not use uppercase; it

Re: clarification of package naming guidelines

Il 01/12/2016 13:35, Dave Love ha scritto: Could someone clarify the rules on package naming ? Background: I've packaged something its author calls SuperLU_DIST using the rpm

Re: Bodhi problems?

On Thu, 1 Dec 2016 10:49:28 +0100 Juan Orti Alcaine wrote: > I can't push to stable a couple of updates. Is there any known problem > with Bodhi? > > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-fa485c1c95 >

Re: F25 GNOME Shell notification locked up hard for some time

On Wed, 30 Nov 2016 00:52:10 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > So, I will reinstall first, and if it's still reproducible afterwards, > I will be available for some time to answer questions in a bug report. In a fresh install F25 I cannot experience the same issue so far. I had come from a very

Re: static linking a library

On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 10:44 AM, Neal Becker wrote: > Mercurial upstream is asking about a compression library zstd. > > Specifically: > https://www.mercurial-scm.org/pipermail/mercurial-packaging/2016-November/000178.html > > I believe the proposed solution here: >

[Bug 1398750] The biber and texlive-biblatex versions in F25 are incompatible.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1398750 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA

[Bug 1397128] Upgrade perl-Config-Model to 2.094

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397128 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA

[Bug 1397379] perl-Test-PostgreSQL-1.21 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397379 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA

[Bug 1396684] perl-Locale-Codes-3.41 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396684 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA

[Bug 1394475] perlbrew-0.77 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1394475 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA

[Bug 1396854] perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-3.00 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396854 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA

[Bug 1396853] perlbrew-0.78 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396853 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA

static linking a library

Mercurial upstream is asking about a compression library zstd. Specifically: https://www.mercurial-scm.org/pipermail/mercurial-packaging/2016-November/000178.html I believe the proposed solution here: https://www.mercurial-scm.org/pipermail/mercurial-packaging/2016-December/000182.html which is

[Bug 1395138] stompclt-1.5 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1395138 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|stompclt-1.5-1.fc25

[Bug 1395138] stompclt-1.5 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1395138 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|stompclt-1.5-1.fc25

Re: [RFC] RPM's Python dependency generator

On 12/01/2016 02:42 PM, Neal Gompa wrote: On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 8:36 AM, Igor Gnatenko wrote: On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 2:53 PM, Tomas Orsava wrote: On 11/30/2016 02:44 PM, Neal Gompa wrote: On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 8:41 AM, Tomas Orsava

Re: [RFC] RPM's Python dependency generator

On 12/01/2016 02:36 PM, Igor Gnatenko wrote: We'll see how it will go. we have depgen for pkgconfig, libraries, etc. for many years and people don't go and debug it immediately, but for many of packages it will help a lot. Anyhow, we'll see after couple of releases. Yeah, absolutely. When it's

Re: [RFC] RPM's Python dependency generator

On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 8:36 AM, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 2:53 PM, Tomas Orsava wrote: >> On 11/30/2016 02:44 PM, Neal Gompa wrote: >>> >>> On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 8:41 AM, Tomas Orsava wrote: I don't

Re: Creating an new update is failing

On Thu, 2016-12-01 at 07:23 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > This problem seems gone, but now I am seeing another one: Also, the search form seems broken again. I'm positive it was working just a couple days ago. I see errors in the WebKit web inspector: [Error] Refused to connect to

Re: Release validation NG: planning thoughts

On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 6:29 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Wed, 2016-11-30 at 18:20 +0100, Josef Skladanka wrote: > > I would try not to go the third way, because that is really prone to > erros > > IMO, and I'm not sure that "per context" is always right. So for

msuchy uploaded perl-Satcon-2.6.1.tar.gz for perl-Satcon

2552385284eea0a8922a27e625914a3e perl-Satcon-2.6.1.tar.gz http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/lookaside/pkgs/perl-Satcon/perl-Satcon-2.6.1.tar.gz/md5/2552385284eea0a8922a27e625914a3e/perl-Satcon-2.6.1.tar.gz ___ perl-devel mailing list --

Re: Base Runtime prototype build and numerous FTBFS issues

On 12/01/2016 06:06 AM, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 4:36 PM, Petr Šabata wrote: >> (Since this is a common question: No, the final Base Runtime module, >> or the Generational Core stack it is part of, won't be self-hosting and >> we won't be shipping the

Re: Creating an new update is failing

On 12/01/2016 07:19 AM, Jiri Vanek wrote: > On 12/01/2016 10:55 AM, Jiri Vanek wrote: >> On 11/30/2016 07:10 PM, Patrick マルタインアンドレアス Uiterwijk wrote: >>> Hi, >>> Hello, I'm trying to create a new update and I'm getting this error: Builds : Unable to create update.

[Bug 1398478] perl-Perl-Critic-Pulp-91 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1398478 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Perl-Critic-Pulp-92-1.fc23 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 23. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-177bbd6ad1 -- You are receiving this

[Bug 1400224] perl-Perl-Critic-Pulp-92 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1400224 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Perl-Critic-Pulp-92-1.fc23 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 23. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-177bbd6ad1 -- You are receiving this

[Bug 1398478] perl-Perl-Critic-Pulp-91 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1398478 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Perl-Critic-Pulp-92-1.fc24 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 24. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-6e6fc07729 -- You are receiving this

[Bug 1400224] perl-Perl-Critic-Pulp-92 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1400224 --- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Perl-Critic-Pulp-92-1.fc24 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 24. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-6e6fc07729 -- You are receiving this

[Bug 1398478] perl-Perl-Critic-Pulp-91 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1398478 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Perl-Critic-Pulp-92-1.fc25 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 25. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-aba5e8d95b -- You are receiving this

[Bug 1400224] perl-Perl-Critic-Pulp-92 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1400224 --- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Perl-Critic-Pulp-92-1.fc25 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 25. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-aba5e8d95b -- You are receiving this

  1   2   >