Re: Packages with compiled python files outside of /usr/lib*/python8

On Thursday, July 26, 2018 2:29:17 PM CEST Miro Hrončok wrote: > > Please, either make sure that %py_byte_compile doesn't collide with the > > default byte compilation machinery, or change the default right now (and > > define the '%_python_bytecompile_extra 0' in batch). The former is > >

Re: tool to order packages by build dependencies (rpmbuild-order)

Hello, On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 4:56 AM Jens-Ulrik Petersen wrote: > On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 12:54 AM Jens-Ulrik Petersen > wrote: > >> I should test some larger package sets to see how well rpmbuild-order >> scales too... >> > > BTW are there any tarballs of all the fedora spec files available

Re: Guideline change: glibc malloc as the C/C++/Rust allocator

* We have resources to support glibc malloc, but not for other mallocs. * Other mallocs  do not follow ABI and provide insufficient alignment. * Choosing a malloc is workload-dependent and forcing a non-default    malloc takes options away from system administrators. Could you please mention a

Re: tool to order packages by build dependencies (rpmbuild-order)

On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 12:54 AM Jens-Ulrik Petersen wrote: > I should test some larger package sets to see how well rpmbuild-order > scales too... > BTW are there any tarballs of all the fedora spec files available somewhere these days? Of course I could download srpms, or better: script

[389-devel] 389 DS nightly 2018-07-27 - 90% PASS

https://fedorapeople.org/groups/389ds/ci/nightly/2018/07/27/report-389-ds-base-1.4.0.11-2.fc28.x86_64.html ___ 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to 389-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code

Re: dokuwiki packagers unresponsive

On Thu, 2018-07-26 at 21:43 -0400, Solomon Peachy wrote: > On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 09:09:25PM +0200, Peter 'Pessoft' Kolínek > wrote: > > I'd like to fix some issues (including security problems) which are > > for > > a long time present in dokuwiki package. Maintainers of the > > dokuwiki > >

Re: dokuwiki packagers unresponsive

On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 09:09:25PM +0200, Peter 'Pessoft' Kolínek wrote: > I'd like to fix some issues (including security problems) which are for > a long time present in dokuwiki package. Maintainers of the dokuwiki > however seem unresponsive. It's worth stating that "some issues" is a

Re: Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found on s390x and armv7hl: .s390x.debug.#dwz#

On Wed, 2018-07-25 at 21:04 +0300, Pavel Alexeev wrote: > On 07/23/2018 12:36 PM, Dan Horák wrote: > > On Mon, 23 Jul 2018 10:43:43 +0200 > > Mark Wielaard wrote: > > > > > On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 10:52:38PM +0300, Pavel Alexeev wrote: > > > > Hello. > > > > > > > > I try build new version of

cmake segfault on 32-bit arches on Rawhide

I just tried a rebuild of a package in Rawhide, it worked on most arches, but failed on armv7hl and i686 (our only 32-bit arches). On both arches, cmake seems to have segfaulted: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=28626511

Re: Guideline change: glibc malloc as the C/C++/Rust allocator

On Thu, 26 Jul 2018, Florian Weimer wrote: > > Could you please mention a couple of bugs where this is shown? > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1237260 > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1303323 >

Re: Release criteria proposal: installing / removing software

On Wed, 2018-07-18 at 12:51 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Wed, 2018-07-18 at 08:49 +0200, drago01 wrote: > > On Wednesday, July 18, 2018, Chris Murphy wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 3:53 PM, Adam Williamson > > > wrote: > > > > On Tue, 2018-07-17 at 14:48 -0700, Adam Williamson

Re: Guideline change: glibc malloc as the C/C++/Rust allocator

On 07/26/2018 06:45 PM, R P Herrold wrote: On Thu, 26 Jul 2018, Florian Weimer wrote: I would like to request a change of the Packaging Guidelines, advising packagers not to interpose malloc. The use here of 'interpose' is unclear to me -- are you saying 'substitute a different' ? The

Re: Guideline change: glibc malloc as the C/C++/Rust allocator

On 07/26/2018 12:45 PM, R P Herrold wrote: > On Thu, 26 Jul 2018, Florian Weimer wrote: > >> I would like to request a change of the Packaging Guidelines, advising >> packagers not to interpose malloc. > > The use here of 'interpose' is unclear to me -- are you saying > 'substitute a different'

Re: tool to order packages by build dependencies (rpmbuild-order)

You are absolutely correct: there are times, e.g., that drinking coffee is "more important" to me than say, replying to e-mail. However I don't think that Haskel is the best language to feature up an already existing uglix tool. Meanwhile I do not know of a tool that schedules rpm builds

Re: [HEADS UP] gcc/gcc-c++ removal from buildroot and more

On 07/09/2018 07:03 PM, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > today we finally dropped gcc and gcc-c++ from the buildroot > . > This made 12 packages go away along with 134MB installed size. This > means that you need to add gcc/gcc-c++ in the

dokuwiki packagers unresponsive

Hello. I'd like to fix some issues (including security problems) which are for a long time present in dokuwiki package. Maintainers of the dokuwiki however seem unresponsive. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1518716 Does anyone know how to contact maintainers? Thanks. -- Kind

Re: Guideline change: glibc malloc as the C/C++/Rust allocator

On 07/26/2018 12:24 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote: > > > Dne 26.7.2018 v 18:03 Jason L Tibbitts III napsal(a): >>> "FW" == Florian Weimer writes: >> FW> I would like to request a change of the Packaging Guidelines, >> FW> advising packagers not to interpose malloc. >> >> How strong of a restriction

Re: Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found on s390x and armv7hl: .s390x.debug.#dwz#

Hello On 07/23/2018 12:36 PM, Dan Horák wrote: On Mon, 23 Jul 2018 10:43:43 +0200 Mark Wielaard wrote: On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 10:52:38PM +0300, Pavel Alexeev wrote: Hello. I try build new version of perdition package. It build fine

Re: F29 Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3

On 06/27/2018 06:18 AM, Lubomír Sedlář wrote: > Removing Yyum would mean that there will no longer be /usr/bin/pungi > available in Fedora. This would affect bodhi-server too. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send

Fedora testing-20180726.0 compose check report

No missing expected images. Passed openQA tests: 2/2 (x86_64) -- Mail generated by check-compose: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to

Guideline change: glibc malloc as the C/C++/Rust allocator

On Thu, 26 Jul 2018, Florian Weimer wrote: > I would like to request a change of the Packaging Guidelines, advising > packagers not to interpose malloc. The use here of 'interpose' is unclear to me -- are you saying 'substitute a different' ? > The reasons are: > > * We have resources to

Re: Guideline change: glibc malloc as the C/C++/Rust allocator

On 07/26/2018 11:43 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 04:37:33PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 05:32:32PM +0200, Igor Gnatenko wrote: On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 5:29 PM Florian Weimer wrote: I would like to request a change of the Packaging

Re: tool to order packages by build dependencies (rpmbuild-order)

On Thu, 2018-07-26 at 15:40 +, Jeff Johnson wrote: > There are easier ways to accomplish build ordering using tsort(1) and a minor > amount of scripting with the same simplifying assumptions your program is > making: > 1) no cycles > 2) every package provides its own name > 3) every package

Re: Guideline change: glibc malloc as the C/C++/Rust allocator

Dne 26.7.2018 v 18:03 Jason L Tibbitts III napsal(a): >> "FW" == Florian Weimer writes: > FW> I would like to request a change of the Packaging Guidelines, > FW> advising packagers not to interpose malloc. > > How strong of a restriction are you looking for? This sort of feels > like

Re: Guideline change: glibc malloc as the C/C++/Rust allocator

On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 11:03:08AM -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > > "FW" == Florian Weimer writes: > > FW> I would like to request a change of the Packaging Guidelines, > FW> advising packagers not to interpose malloc. > > How strong of a restriction are you looking for? This sort of

Orphan packages will be retired if they remain orphaned for six weeks"

On Thu, 26 Jul 2018, Miro Hrončok wrote: > Is $subj [1] an automated or manual process? Shall I retire packages I've > orphaned before more weeks or just wait? > > [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Orphaned_package_that_need_new_maintainers NONE of the outlinks to the actual packages at:

Re: Starting a Container SIG

On Wed, Jul 25, 2018, 9:13 PM Eduard Lucena wrote: > Hi, > > I'm not familiar with the container technology, but I will love to learn > it. I would like to help with this SIG. > Well, I'm not an expert at all, but like Eduard I would like to learn something related to containers. Ciao, A.

Re: tool to order packages by build dependencies (rpmbuild-order)

On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 6:04 PM Jens-Ulrik Petersen wrote: > On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 12:42 AM Jeff Johnson wrote: > >> There are easier ways to accomplish build ordering using tsort(1) and a >> minor amount of scripting with the same simplifying assumptions your >> program is making: >> 1) no

Re: Guideline change: glibc malloc as the C/C++/Rust allocator

> "FW" == Florian Weimer writes: FW> I would like to request a change of the Packaging Guidelines, FW> advising packagers not to interpose malloc. How strong of a restriction are you looking for? This sort of feels like something which would at the strongest be a "SHOULD NOT" but maybe

Re: tool to order packages by build dependencies (rpmbuild-order)

On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 12:42 AM Jeff Johnson wrote: > There are easier ways to accomplish build ordering using tsort(1) and a > minor amount of scripting with the same simplifying assumptions your > program is making: > 1) no cycles > 2) every package provides its own name > 3) every package

Re: Guideline change: glibc malloc as the C/C++/Rust allocator

On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 04:37:33PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 05:32:32PM +0200, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 5:29 PM Florian Weimer wrote: > > > > > I would like to request a change of the Packaging Guidelines, advising > > > packagers not to

Re: tool to order packages by build dependencies (rpmbuild-order)

There are easier ways to accomplish build ordering using tsort(1) and a minor amount of scripting with the same simplifying assumptions your program is making: 1) no cycles 2) every package provides its own name 3) every package supplies prerequisite package names without versions tsort(1) just

Re: Guideline change: glibc malloc as the C/C++/Rust allocator

On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 5:32 PM Igor Gnatenko < ignatenkobr...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 5:29 PM Florian Weimer wrote: > >> I would like to request a change of the Packaging Guidelines, advising >> packagers not to interpose malloc. >> >> The reasons are: >> >> * We

Re: Guideline change: glibc malloc as the C/C++/Rust allocator

On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 05:32:32PM +0200, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 5:29 PM Florian Weimer wrote: > > > I would like to request a change of the Packaging Guidelines, advising > > packagers not to interpose malloc. > > > > The reasons are: > > > > * We have resources to

Re: Guideline change: glibc malloc as the C/C++/Rust allocator

On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 5:29 PM Florian Weimer wrote: > I would like to request a change of the Packaging Guidelines, advising > packagers not to interpose malloc. > > The reasons are: > > * We have resources to support glibc malloc, but not for other mallocs. > * Other mallocs do not follow

Guideline change: glibc malloc as the C/C++/Rust allocator

I would like to request a change of the Packaging Guidelines, advising packagers not to interpose malloc. The reasons are: * We have resources to support glibc malloc, but not for other mallocs. * Other mallocs do not follow ABI and provide insufficient alignment. * Choosing a malloc is

Fedora updates-20180726.0 compose check report

No missing expected images. Passed openQA tests: 2/2 (x86_64) Installed system changes in test x86_64 AtomicHost-dvd_ostree-iso install_default@uefi: System load changed from 0.14 to 0.33 Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/260268#downloads Current test data:

Re: Starting a Container SIG

I would like to help! El mié., 25 de jul. de 2018 12:12 PM, Clement Verna < cve...@fedoraproject.org> escribió: > Greeting all, > > The container effort in Fedora has until now been looked after by the > Atomic WG, since this Working Group is now going to focus mostly on > Fedora CoreOS, I

Re: [CoreOS] Starting a Container SIG

On 07/25/2018 01:09 PM, Clement Verna wrote: Greeting all, The container effort in Fedora has until now been looked after by the Atomic WG, since this Working Group is now going to focus mostly on Fedora CoreOS, I propose to create a new container SIG to regroup people interested in the

Fedora 29 Self-Contained Change: Kubernetes modules

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/kubernetes-modules == Summary == Create modules for all supported Kubernetes versions. * Name: Lokesh Mandvekar * Email: l...@fedoraproject.org == Detailed Description == Currently, the Kubernetes upstream project develops and supports multiple versions of

Fedora 29 Self-Contained Change: Cloud Provider Image Updates

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/CloudProviderImageUpdates == Summary == Provide monthly updates to cloud provider images. == Owner == * SIG: Cloud * Primary Contact: [[User:jdoss| Joe Doss]] * Product: Cloud * Responsible WG: Cloud SIG == Detailed Description == Fedora Cloud images are

Fedora 29 Self-Contained Change: Kubernetes modules

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/kubernetes-modules == Summary == Create modules for all supported Kubernetes versions. * Name: Lokesh Mandvekar * Email: l...@fedoraproject.org == Detailed Description == Currently, the Kubernetes upstream project develops and supports multiple versions of

Fedora 29 Self-Contained Change: Update Haskell packages to Stackage LTS 11

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Update_Haskell_to_Stackage_LTS_11 == Summary == Update the Haskell package set from Stackage LTS 10 to LTS 11. This updates a subset of the Haskell libraries and packages to newer versions. == Owner == * Name: Jens Petersen, Fedora Haskell SIG * Email: ==

Fedora 29 Self-Contained Change: Stratis Storage 1.0

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/StratisStorage-1.0 == Summary == Add support for Stratis version 1.0, a local storage management solution. This will allow further testing and user feedback that will guide Stratis's development and stabilization, and let us consider future integration into

Re: Packages with compiled python files outside of /usr/lib*/python8

On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 06:38:43PM -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > zbyszekcalibre python-music21 I fixed those two. Zbyszek ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [atomic-devel] Starting a Container SIG

On 07/26/2018 12:45 AM, Masami Ichikawa wrote: > I'm interested in a container technology, so I'd like to help the SIG. +1 > > On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 1:15 PM, Tim Orling wrote: >> >> On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 2:42 PM Dusty Mabe wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 07/25/2018 01:09 PM, Clement Verna wrote:

Re: Packages with compiled python files outside of /usr/lib*/python8

On 26.7.2018 14:23, Pavel Raiskup wrote: On Saturday, June 16, 2018 1:38:43 AM CEST Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: In order to prepare for the default to change in a future release, the packaging guidelines have changed to require packages which install .py files outside of the regular python

Re: Packages with compiled python files outside of /usr/lib*/python8

On Saturday, June 16, 2018 1:38:43 AM CEST Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > In order to prepare for the default to change in a future release, the > packaging guidelines have changed to require packages which install .py > files outside of the regular python library locations to do the > following: >

[Bug 1608871] New: perl-App-cpm-0.976 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1608871 Bug ID: 1608871 Summary: perl-App-cpm-0.976 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: perl-App-cpm Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged Assignee:

Re: tool to order packages by build dependencies (rpmbuild-order)

On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 7:10 PM Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > Le 2018-07-26 07:20, Jens-Ulrik Petersen a écrit : > > https://github.com/juhp/rpmbuild-order > > It works by reading the BRs in spec files of the packages you want to > > build, generating a graph of their interdependencies internally,

Re: tool to order packages by build dependencies (rpmbuild-order)

On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 6:53 PM Igor Gnatenko < ignatenkobr...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 11:44 AM Jens-Ulrik Petersen > wrote: > >> On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 2:44 PM Igor Gnatenko < >> ignatenkobr...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: >> >>> So… Since I have hard times

Interested to take ownership of liberation-narrow-fonts package

Hi, I wish to ownership of liberation-narrow-fonts package. Enclosing package related information: Package Name: liberation-narrow-fonts [1] Branch : Master Issue : 7660 [2] Bugzilla Review Ticket : 1607713 [3] [1] https://github.com/liberationfonts/liberation-sans-narrow [2]

Re: "Orphan packages will be retired if they remain orphaned for six weeks"

On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 10:38:33AM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > Is $subj [1] an automated or manual process? Shall I retire packages I've > orphaned before more weeks or just wait? Please retire the pkgs yourself. This is currently not happening. The deprecation of pkgdb broke the script and the

Re: [CoreOS] Starting a Container SIG

- Original Message - > From: "Clement Verna" > To: "atomic-devel" , "Development discussions > related to Fedora" > , cor...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2018 7:09:39 PM > Subject: [CoreOS] Starting a Container SIG > > Greeting all, > > The container effort in

Re: tool to order packages by build dependencies (rpmbuild-order)

On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 3:58 PM David Tardon wrote: > On Thu, 2018-07-26 at 14:20 +0900, Jens-Ulrik Petersen wrote: > > You can try it from my copr repo: > > https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/petersen/rpmbuild-order > > - nothing provides >

rubygem-coderay license change

License of rubygem-coderay package was changed from: LGPLv2+ to: MIT https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rubygem-coderay/c/24c8b248c94fb8f0c4173e59bc8eb17f291c767e?branch=master -- Jun Aruga jar...@redhat.com ___ devel mailing list --

Re: tool to order packages by build dependencies (rpmbuild-order)

Le 2018-07-26 07:20, Jens-Ulrik Petersen a écrit : Hi https://github.com/juhp/rpmbuild-order It works by reading the BRs in spec files of the packages you want to build, generating a graph of their interdependencies internally, from which it outputs the packages in a build dependency order. If

Re: tool to order packages by build dependencies (rpmbuild-order)

On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 11:44 AM Jens-Ulrik Petersen wrote: > On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 2:44 PM Igor Gnatenko < > ignatenkobr...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > >> So… Since I have hard times understanding code, I will just ask questions >> here: >> * Does it use libsolv? I guess not. >> * Does it

[Bug 1606813] perl-XML-Xerces: FTBFS in Fedora rawhide

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1606813 Igor Gnatenko changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|---

Re: tool to order packages by build dependencies (rpmbuild-order)

On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 2:44 PM Igor Gnatenko < ignatenkobr...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > So… Since I have hard times understanding code, I will just ask questions > here: > * Does it use libsolv? I guess not. > * Does it handle rich dependencies? I guess not. > It only uses BuildRequires

[rpms/perl-XML-Xerces] New Commits To "rpms/perl-XML-Xerces" (master)

The following commits were pushed to the repo rpms/perl-XML-Xerces on branch master, which you are following: ee59f1c6920689b5a35959a822afea0352192fecXavier BachelotFix FTBFS#1606813 To view more about the commits, visit:

"Orphan packages will be retired if they remain orphaned for six weeks"

Is $subj [1] an automated or manual process? Shall I retire packages I've orphaned before more weeks or just wait? [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Orphaned_package_that_need_new_maintainers -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 IRC: mhroncok

[Bug 1399506] perl-File-Find-Rule-Age-0.302-5.fc26 FTBFS randomly

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1399506 --- Comment #4 from Tim Orling --- https://apps.fedoraproject.org/koschei/package/perl-File-Find-Rule-Age? Two failures. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

Re: tool to order packages by build dependencies (rpmbuild-order)

On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 1:21 PM Jens-Ulrik Petersen wrote: > > Hi, > > This is an early announcement about a tool called 'rpmbuild-order' I made to > sort RPM-based packages in build dependency order. I am not sure if such a > tool exists already? Certainly some tools like `mockchain` can

[Bug 1598971] perl-Log-Any-1.706 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1598971 Tim Orling changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED --- Comment #1 from Tim Orling

[Bug 1589408] perl-Unix-Statgrab-0.112 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1589408 Tim Orling changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED --- Comment #1 from Tim Orling

Re: tool to order packages by build dependencies (rpmbuild-order)

On Thu, 2018-07-26 at 14:20 +0900, Jens-Ulrik Petersen wrote: > You can try it from my copr repo: > https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/petersen/rpmbuild-order Error: Problem: conflicting requests - nothing provides

[Bug 1399506] perl-File-Find-Rule-Age-0.302-5.fc26 FTBFS randomly

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1399506 Tim Orling changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #3 from Tim Orling

Re: [fesco] Updated FTBFS package policy

On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 8:29 AM Anoop C S wrote: > On Fri, 2018-05-25 at 15:46 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > Fedora package maintainers, > > > > FESCo approved an updated policy for packages which fail to build from > > source during mass rebuilds (FTBFS) [1]. > > > > The updated

Re: [fesco] Updated FTBFS package policy

Dne 26.7.2018 v 08:21 Anoop C S napsal(a): > On Fri, 2018-05-25 at 15:46 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: >> Fedora package maintainers, >> >> FESCo approved an updated policy for packages which fail to build from >> source during mass rebuilds (FTBFS) [1]. >> >> The updated policy is

Re: jplesnik pushed to perl-XML-Parser (master). "Specify all dependencies"

Dne 23.7.2018 v 16:40 Vít Ondruch napsal(a): > > Dne 23.7.2018 v 15:28 Florian Weimer napsal(a): >> On 07/23/2018 02:35 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote: >>> >>> Dne 23.7.2018 v 14:19 Vít Ondruch napsal(a): Dne 23.7.2018 v 14:14 Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski napsal(a): > On Monday, 23 July 2018

Re: [fesco] Updated FTBFS package policy

On Fri, 2018-05-25 at 15:46 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > Fedora package maintainers, > > FESCo approved an updated policy for packages which fail to build from > source during mass rebuilds (FTBFS) [1]. > > The updated policy is still at >