Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

Le 18/02/2018 à 18:09, Igor Gnatenko a écrit : > If you fixed package(s), found false positive, found missing packages in list > or anything else -- please let me know. All php-* packages (C extensions) should already be ok, BR on php-devel should be enough. Remi

[389-devel] Please review: 49570 - x.py

https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49570 https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/raw/files/028eb1c97dced4e42e7923a8c 9340dcc84912630c5916f8bd18cd00047406cd2-0001-Ticket-49570-Make-build- commands-easier-to-run-and-a.patch -- Thanks, William Brown ___

Re: Scilab, rkward install in Rawhide: nothing provides libgfortran.so.4()

> On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 11:05:39AM -, Amit Saha wrote: > > Rebuild whatever fortran packages have failed during mass rebuild which > should have fixed this. Sorry - can you please clarify? > > > Jakub ___ devel mailing list --

Re: Unannounced soname bump: gnome-desktop3

On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 10:10 PM, wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 1:13 PM, Yaakov Selkowitz > wrote: >> >> gnome-desktop3 was updated a week ago to 3.27.90, which bumped ABI from >> .so.12 to .so.17. AFAICS no notice was given, nor am I sure that

Re: Unannounced soname bump: gnome-desktop3

On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 1:13 PM, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote: gnome-desktop3 was updated a week ago to 3.27.90, which bumped ABI from .so.12 to .so.17. AFAICS no notice was given, nor am I sure that this was even noticed by the maintainer, because once again:

Fedora Rawhide-20180218.n.0 compose check report

Missing expected images: Workstation live i386 Kde live i386 Failed openQA tests: 24/129 (x86_64), 6/22 (i386), 1/2 (arm) ID: 193702 Test: x86_64 Server-boot-iso install_default@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/193702 ID: 193703 Test: x86_64 Server-boot-iso

Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 06:09:40PM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal-pkgs.txt These are fixed: flac123 fping fxload ocp perl-HTML-Strip sedutil I retired msed because sedutil replaced it. ___ devel

Re: can't push to perl-HTML-Strip master

On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 05:14:11PM -0800, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On 02/18/2018 04:29 PM, Chuck Anderson wrote: > > Can someone please help me with this? I'm listed as an admin on > > src.fedoraproject.org for perl-HTML-Strip, but I still cannot commit to > > master: > > > >> fedpkg push > >

Re: can't push to perl-HTML-Strip master

On 02/18/2018 04:29 PM, Chuck Anderson wrote: > Can someone please help me with this? I'm listed as an admin on > src.fedoraproject.org for perl-HTML-Strip, but I still cannot commit to > master: > >> fedpkg push > Enter passphrase for key '/home/cra/.ssh/fedora_rsa': > X11 forwarding request

Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

On 19/02/18 00:30, Hedayat Vatankhah wrote: I've fixed all my packages except simspark & rcssserver3d, which seem to crash on i686 when generating docs using pdflatex, which will probably needs a fix in TeXLive. Yes that's the crash that is blocking me as well... It is new since the texlive

[Test-Announce] 2018-02-19 @ 16:00 UTC - Fedora QA Meeting

# Fedora Quality Assurance Meeting # Date: 2018-02-19 # Time: 16:00 UTC (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto) # Location: #fedora-meeting on irc.freenode.net Greetings testers! Apologies for the late notice, but we haven't met for a few weeks, so I thought we could do the

Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

Hi, I've fixed all my packages except simspark & rcssserver3d, which seem to crash on i686 when generating docs using pdflatex, which will probably needs a fix in TeXLive. Regards, Hedayat /*Igor Gnatenko*/ wrote on Sun, 18 Feb 2018 18:09:40 +0100: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash:

can't push to perl-HTML-Strip master

Can someone please help me with this? I'm listed as an admin on src.fedoraproject.org for perl-HTML-Strip, but I still cannot commit to master: >fedpkg push Enter passphrase for key '/home/cra/.ssh/fedora_rsa': X11 forwarding request failed on channel 0 Counting objects: 6, done. Delta

[Bug 1546590] New: perltidy-20180219 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1546590 Bug ID: 1546590 Summary: perltidy-20180219 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: perltidy Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged Assignee: p...@city-fan.org

Re: dnf: Can't tell me what is pulling in a dependency?

On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 9:10 AM, Richard Shaw wrote: > I was updating my mythtv box and I saw that it was pulling in some mysql > community packages as a dependency but I looked through the options and I > couldn't find ANYTHING that would tell me what was pulling in those >

[Bug 1546584] New: perl-Importer-0.025 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1546584 Bug ID: 1546584 Summary: perl-Importer-0.025 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: perl-Importer Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged Assignee:

Re: F29 System Wide Change: Remove GCC from BuildRoot

El vie, 16-02-2018 a las 12:56 +0100, Jan Kurik escribió: > Proposed System Wide Change: Remove GCC from BuildRoot > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Remove_GCC_from_BuildRoot > > > Owner(s): > * Igor Gnatenko > > > Removing gcc and gcc-c++ from default buildroot in Koji and mock. >

Re: Should we have a release manager for each release? (or, "who owns rawhide"?)

El jue, 15-02-2018 a las 17:34 -0500, Matthew Miller escribió: > As shown at https://www.happyassassin.net/nightlies.html, we haven't > had a successful compose for almost two weeks. AIUI this is mostly > worked out now, but it raises the question: who should be keeping > track > of this and

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

The following Fedora EPEL 6 Security updates need testing: Age URL 950 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-7168 rubygem-crack-0.3.2-2.el6 840 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-e2b4b5b2fb mcollective-2.8.4-1.el6 812

Re: to batch or not to batch?

On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 11:40:47AM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote: > On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 11:15 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek > wrote: > > Bodhi currently provides "batched updates" [1] which lump updates of > > packages that are not marked urgent into a single batch,

Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

On 18 February 2018 at 20:52, Igor Gnatenko wrote: [..] >> Yesterday I've replayed on your proposal but I've not realized that my >> reply was held by the moderator. >> You started introducing changes only after less than 24h after >> publishing proposal. >> It

Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

On dimanche 18 février 2018 18:09:40 CET Igor Gnatenko wrote: > Over this weekend I've performed scratch-mass-rebuild without having gcc > and gcc-c++ in buildroot of all Fedora packages, many of which failed due > to random reasons and I grepped all logs for some common errors found by >

drpm

On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 01:13:26PM -, Artur Iwicki wrote: > By the way - does drpm handling depend on repo / mirror settings? I > ask because I'm under the impression that lately hardly any package > update on my system is done via delta-RPMs; it's about 1-in-100 or > so. Is this more a matter

[Bug 1544283] perl-Mojolicious-7.66 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1544283 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Fixed

[Bug 1546413] perl-Moose-2.2010 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1546413 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Fixed

Re: Removal of BuildRoot

On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 09:13:22AM +0100, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 10:37:08PM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 4:25 PM, Jason L Tibbitts III > > wrote: > > >> "DS" == David Sommerseth writes: > > > > > >

Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Sun, 2018-02-18 at 20:45 +, Philip Kovacs wrote: > Ok, my configure.ac initializes libtool with both c and c++ : > LT_INIT()LT_LANG([C])LT_LANG([C++]) > where only C is needed. There are no ill-effects other than producing some > noise in

Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Sun, 2018-02-18 at 20:36 +, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > On 18 February 2018 at 17:09, Igor Gnatenko > wrote: > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > > Hash: SHA256 > > > > Over this weekend I've performed

Re: Removal of BuildRoot

On 18 February 2018 at 18:06, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: [..] >> I think that you are not fully aware what you've just done. > > Actually I am fully aware. I have been agreeing with parts of what you > have written but you keep thinking I am attacking you because I don't >

Re: Intent to retire: zerofree

On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 09:19:09PM +0100, Robert Scheck wrote: > On Sun, 18 Feb 2018, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > There's also a more serious data safety issue: Although this probably > > works OK for ext2 since that format is frozen in time, it probably > > corrupts ext4 filesystems containing

Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

Ok, my configure.ac initializes libtool with both c and c++ : LT_INIT()LT_LANG([C])LT_LANG([C++]) where only C is needed.   There are no ill-effects other than producing some noise in the configureoutput, but I will patch out the LT_LANG([C++]) line to trim the noise. On Sunday, February

Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 11:09 AM, Igor Gnatenko < ignatenkobr...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA256 > > If you fixed package(s), found false positive, found missing packages in > list > or anything else -- please let me know. python-compreffor rats

Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

On 18 February 2018 at 17:09, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA256 > > Over this weekend I've performed scratch-mass-rebuild without having gcc and > gcc-c++ in buildroot of all Fedora packages, many of which failed due to >

Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Sun, 2018-02-18 at 14:18 -0600, Greg Hellings wrote: > Igor > > On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 11:09 AM, Igor Gnatenko < > ignatenkobr...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > > Hash: SHA256 > > > > If you fixed

[Bug 1546523] perl-Mouse-2.5.2 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1546523 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Fixed

Re: Intent to retire: zerofree

Once upon a time, Robert Scheck said: > On Sun, 18 Feb 2018, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > There's also a more serious data safety issue: Although this probably > > works OK for ext2 since that format is frozen in time, it probably > > corrupts ext4 filesystems

Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

Igor On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 11:09 AM, Igor Gnatenko < ignatenkobr...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA256 > > If you fixed package(s), found false positive, found missing packages in > list > or anything else -- please let me know. > > biblesync

Re: Intent to retire: zerofree

On Sun, 18 Feb 2018, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > There's also a more serious data safety issue: Although this probably > works OK for ext2 since that format is frozen in time, it probably > corrupts ext4 filesystems containing features that it doesn't know > about. > > It is for these reasons

Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Sun, 2018-02-18 at 20:06 +, Philip Kovacs wrote: > False positive on project pmix. I checked my rawhide build logs for all six > arches and there is no `checking for c++`, as you report, in the autotools > configure output. The project is a

Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

False positive on project pmix.  I checked my rawhide build logs for all six arches and there is no `checking for c++`, as you report, in the autotools configure output. The project is a C project and the spec properly lists BuildRequires: gcc`.  There is nothing wrong and nothing to do.

[Bug 1546520] perl-Perl6-Export-Attrs-0.000006 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1546520 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Fixed

Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

On 18/02/18 19:01, Igor Gnatenko wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Sun, 2018-02-18 at 18:53 +, Tom Hughes wrote: On 18/02/18 17:09, Igor Gnatenko wrote: Over this weekend I've performed scratch-mass-rebuild without having gcc and gcc-c++ in buildroot of all Fedora

Re: dnf: Can't tell me what is pulling in a dependency?

On Sun, 2018-02-18 at 09:13 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 9:10 AM, Richard Shaw > wrote: > > I was updating my mythtv box and I saw that it was pulling in some > > mysql > > community packages as a dependency but I looked through the options > > and I >

Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

modem-manager-gui and tworld have been fixed on all actively used branches. A.I. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Unannounced soname bump: gnome-desktop3

gnome-desktop3 was updated a week ago to 3.27.90, which bumped ABI from .so.12 to .so.17. AFAICS no notice was given, nor am I sure that this was even noticed by the maintainer, because once again: %{_libdir}/lib*.so.* I have rebuilt my affected package. -- Yaakov Selkowitz Software Engineer

Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 07:54:28PM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA256 > > On Sun, 2018-02-18 at 18:38 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 06:09:40PM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > > >

Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Sun, 2018-02-18 at 18:53 +, Tom Hughes wrote: > On 18/02/18 17:09, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > > Over this weekend I've performed scratch-mass-rebuild without having gcc > > and > > gcc-c++ in buildroot of all Fedora packages, many of which

Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Sun, 2018-02-18 at 19:44 +0100, Göran Uddeborg wrote: > Is there any way for me as a regular packager to test my fixes? The > "how to test" section on the wiki > (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Remove_GCC_from_BuildRoot#How_To_Test > ) >

Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Sun, 2018-02-18 at 18:38 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 06:09:40PM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > > Hash: SHA256 > > > > Over this weekend I've performed scratch-mass-rebuild

Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

On 18/02/18 17:09, Igor Gnatenko wrote: Over this weekend I've performed scratch-mass-rebuild without having gcc and gcc-c++ in buildroot of all Fedora packages, many of which failed due to random reasons and I grepped all logs for some common errors found by analyzing hundreds of build logs.

Intent to retire: zerofree

zerofree is a package that can take an ext2 (only?) filesystem, work out what parts of the filesystem are not used, and either zero them or sparsify them. This was useful in about 2009 when I added it to Fedora. However nowadays it's more convenient to use the equivalent kernel functionality

[ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

Is there any way for me as a regular packager to test my fixes? The "how to test" section on the wiki (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Remove_GCC_from_BuildRoot#How_To_Test) still says "mock with configuration provided (TODO)". I tried a standard mock build, with mock version 1.4.8-1, and

Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 06:09:40PM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA256 > > Over this weekend I've performed scratch-mass-rebuild without having > gcc and gcc-c++ in buildroot of all Fedora packages, Do you mind me asking how long that took (weekend = 2

[Bug 1459433] Unescaped % character in changelog

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1459433 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Plack-1.0047-1.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See

Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 9:09 AM, Igor Gnatenko wrote: If you fixed package(s), found false positive, found missing packages in list or anything else -- please let me know. I've updated fritzing. -- Ed Marshall Felix qui potuit rerum

Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

Hi Igor, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > If you fixed package(s), found false positive, found missing packages in list > or anything else -- please let me know. > git amahdal besser82 chrisw pcahyna pstodulk skisela tmz > paperkey fale tmz These are both fixed. I pushed git on Friday, but likely

Re: dnf: Can't tell me what is pulling in a dependency?

On Sun, 2018-02-18 at 08:10 -0600, Richard Shaw wrote: > I was updating my mythtv box and I saw that it was pulling in some > mysql community packages as a dependency but I looked through the > options and I couldn't find ANYTHING that would tell me what was > pulling in those packages. Nov "-v"

Re: Removal of sln

On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 04:06:31PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 12:47:24PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 04:08:09PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > > On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 09:53:35PM +, Richard W.M. Jones

[Bug 1459433] Unescaped % character in changelog

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1459433 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA

[Bug 1438957] icons are missing on bugzilla's front page

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1438957 --- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System --- bugzilla-5.0.4-1.fc26 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 26. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-b79f325c48 -- You are receiving this mail

[Bug 1438957] icons are missing on bugzilla's front page

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1438957 --- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System --- bugzilla-5.0.4-1.fc27 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 27. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-1e0e37e148 -- You are receiving this mail

Re: Removal of BuildRoot

On 18 February 2018 at 00:46, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > On 16 February 2018 at 15:50, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > [..] >> >> Even before EPEL-5 was EOL, very little of Fedora would compile out of >> >> the box and required massive amounts of %if and

Re: Changing config from a %post?

Once upon a time, Reindl Harald said: > Am 16.02.2018 um 15:35 schrieb Chris Adams: > >The imapproxy package config defaults to user "nobody", which should be > >changed (probably should have been done a while back, but whatever). > >The user is set in the config though,

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

The following Fedora EPEL 7 Security updates need testing: Age URL 1077 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-1087 dokuwiki-0-0.24.20140929c.el7 840 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-dac7ed832f mcollective-2.8.4-1.el7 422

Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Sun, 2018-02-18 at 17:38 +, Artur Iwicki wrote: > > If you fixed package(s), > > Just to make sure: the missing "BuildRequires:" should be added only on the > master (Rawhide) dist-git branch, or on all actively-in-use branches? It would

Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Sun, 2018-02-18 at 17:33 +, Sérgio Basto wrote: > Hi Igor , > > On Sun, 2018-02-18 at 18:09 +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > Over this weekend I've performed scratch-mass-rebuild without having > > gcc and > > gcc-c++ in buildroot of all

Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

> If you fixed package(s), Just to make sure: the missing "BuildRequires:" should be added only on the master (Rawhide) dist-git branch, or on all actively-in-use branches? ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an

[ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

Igor Gnatenko: > If you fixed package(s), I haven't yet, but I certainly will fix my packages (emacs-vm mindless ttf2pt1 xpenguins). pgpAihQdfU13Q.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe

Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

Hi Igor , On Sun, 2018-02-18 at 18:09 +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > Over this weekend I've performed scratch-mass-rebuild without having > gcc and > gcc-c++ in buildroot of all Fedora packages, many of which failed due > to random > reasons and I grepped all logs for some common errors found by >

[ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Over this weekend I've performed scratch-mass-rebuild without having gcc and gcc-c++ in buildroot of all Fedora packages, many of which failed due to random reasons and I grepped all logs for some common errors found by analyzing hundreds of build

[ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Over this weekend I've performed scratch-mass-rebuild without having gcc and gcc-c++ in buildroot of all Fedora packages, many of which failed due to random reasons and I grepped all logs for some common errors found by analyzing hundreds of build

Re: GCC 8: camotics fails to build for i686, ARMv7 arches (reading 31 bytes from a region of size 16)

> It means the package should probably not be using -Werror Oh yes forgot that upstream forces -Werror. For now I will keep upstream preference as long as the issues reported gets fixed. All the reported issues was fixed upstream and the package built successfully for Fedora 28. Thank you for

Re: F29 System Wide Change: Remove GCC from BuildRoot

Fedora decided to use gcc as *the* compiler [1], and frankly, we have enough trouble getting packages to compile without trying to support more than one compiler (vide the lass mass rebuild). What you propose: building with a different compiler, makes sense mostly at the level of a single

Re: fedup upload failure

On 02/18/2018 06:54 AM, Martin Gansser wrote: > keberos ticket > > $ klist -A > Ticket cache: KCM:1000 > Default principal: marti...@fedoraproject.org > > Valid starting ExpiresService principal > 02/11/18 11:46:54 02/12/18 11:45:58 >

Re: Removal of sln

On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 12:47:24PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 04:08:09PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 09:53:35PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > > sln (staticly linked ‘ln’) was removed from glibc recently: > > > > > >

Re: fedup upload failure

keberos ticket $ klist -A Ticket cache: KCM:1000 Default principal: marti...@fedoraproject.org Valid starting ExpiresService principal 02/11/18 11:46:54 02/12/18 11:45:58 HTTP/src.fedoraproject@fedoraproject.org renew until 02/18/18 11:45:58 02/11/18 11:46:02

Re: fedup upload failure

I see more error now ... $ koji build --scratch f27 ~/rpmbuild/SRPMS/vdr-epg2vdr-1.1.86-1.fc27.src.rpm AuthError: unable to obtain a session $ kinit -R marti...@fedoraproject.org kinit: Ticket expired while renewing credentials ___ devel mailing list

fedup upload failure

Hello, I'm getting the following error when I'm uploading a new tarball: $ kinit marti...@fedoraproject.org $ fedpkg new-sources vdr-plugin-epg2vdr-1.1.86.tar.bz2 Could not execute new_sources: Request is unauthorized. Any ideas as to why I can not do an fedpkg upload? I'm able to do a fedpkg

Re: dnf: Can't tell me what is pulling in a dependency?

On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 9:10 AM, Richard Shaw wrote: > I was updating my mythtv box and I saw that it was pulling in some mysql > community packages as a dependency but I looked through the options and I > couldn't find ANYTHING that would tell me what was pulling in those >

dnf: Can't tell me what is pulling in a dependency?

I was updating my mythtv box and I saw that it was pulling in some mysql community packages as a dependency but I looked through the options and I couldn't find ANYTHING that would tell me what was pulling in those packages. Nov "-v" and not "--debugsolver". Is it really not possible? Thanks,

Re: to batch or not to batch?

> Batching is now the default, but maintainers can push theirs updates > to stable, overriding this default, and make the update available the > next day. I think that since "batch override" doesn't push the package immediately, but rather schedules it for the next day, I agree with Fabio that it

[389-devel] Re: please review: Ticket 49296 - Fix race condition in connection code that allows anonymous limits to be applied after the initial bind occurs

Fixed typos in commit message https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/raw/files/5fe67b5583f885d5954485320da3eb3fd0dc11b6d3be4fc0e2d6146232db0b9e-0001-Ticket-49296-Fix-race-condition-in-connection-code-w.patch On 02/17/2018 06:45 PM, Mark Reynolds wrote: > https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49296 >

Re: to batch or not to batch?

On 02/17/2018 11:15 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: Bodhi currently provides "batched updates" [1] which lump updates of packages that are not marked urgent into a single batch, released once per week. This means that after an update has graduated from testing, it may be delayed up to a

Re: Removal of sln

On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 04:08:09PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 09:53:35PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > sln (staticly linked ‘ln’) was removed from glibc recently: > > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1531546 > > > > The explanation

[Bug 1459433] Unescaped % character in changelog

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1459433 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Plack-1.0047-1.fc26 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 26. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-f06b7cf746 -- You are receiving this mail

[Bug 1459433] Unescaped % character in changelog

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1459433 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Plack-1.0047-1.fc27 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 27. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-2808f7d416 -- You are receiving this mail

[Bug 1544589] perl-SNMP-Info-3.46 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1544589 Upstream Release Monitoring changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug 1546523] New: perl-Mouse-2.5.2 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1546523 Bug ID: 1546523 Summary: perl-Mouse-2.5.2 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: perl-Mouse Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged Assignee: emman...@seyman.fr

[Bug 1546520] New: perl-Perl6-Export-Attrs-0.000006 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1546520 Bug ID: 1546520 Summary: perl-Perl6-Export-Attrs-0.06 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: perl-Perl6-Export-Attrs Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged

Re: Koji build: cannot find spec file

> On 02/17/2018 08:22 PM, Jerry James wrote: > > Yeah, it's still broken. I looked at it a bit but couldn't see what the > exact cause of the breakage is. ;( > > If we cannot get it fixed by tomorrow morning, I'll revert us back to > the older koji version. ;( We have found and fixed the issue

Re: to batch or not to batch?

> Did I miss something on the plus or minus side? + Without batched updates, running “dnf update” gives a variable reward, like clicking refresh on Facebook or playing a fruit machine. Accumulating updates into a batch gives a calmer, more ordered experience. -- Peter Oliver

Re: to batch or not to batch?

On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 11:15 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > Bodhi currently provides "batched updates" [1] which lump updates of > packages that are not marked urgent into a single batch, released once > per week. This means that after an update has graduated from

Re: F29 System Wide Change: Remove GCC from BuildRoot

On 16 February 2018 at 11:56, Jan Kurik wrote: [..] > ** List of deliverables: > N/A (not a System Wide Change) > > * Policies and guidelines: > Nothing needed, guidelines already have paragraph about listing all > required BuildRequires. As definitely proposed change will

unannounced soname bump: gnome-desktop3 / libgnome-desktop-3

FYI, the .so version of libgnome-desktop-3 was bumped from 12 to 17 with the build of gnome-desktop3-3.27.90-1.fc28 without previous announcement. Packages that will have to be rebuilt - if it hasn't happened already (I didn't check individual changelogs, so no guarantee for correctness or

Re: Removal of BuildRoot

On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 10:37:08PM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 4:25 PM, Jason L Tibbitts III > wrote: > >> "DS" == David Sommerseth writes: > > > > DS> False positives are also easily filtered out by adding .rpmlint to > > DS> the