On Tue, 7 May 2019 at 23:46, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> On 5/6/19 11:57 AM, Jun Aruga wrote:
> > Yes, Kevin. Thank you for the info.
> > What I do not understand is below DockerHub has Feodra 30 ppc64le,
> > Fedora 29 armhfp that Fedora Project did not release.
> >
> > https://hub.docker.com/r/ppc64le
Hi Kevin,
On Wed, May 8, 2019 at 7:18 AM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> [...]
> flaper87:
>
> "redis": "flaper87",
I've been doing the Redis Fedora and EPEL updates for a few years now,
I'm happy to take this one on.
cheers.
--
Nathan
___
devel mailing
On 5/6/19 11:57 AM, Jun Aruga wrote:
> Yes, Kevin. Thank you for the info.
> What I do not understand is below DockerHub has Feodra 30 ppc64le,
> Fedora 29 armhfp that Fedora Project did not release.
>
> https://hub.docker.com/r/ppc64le/fedora/
> Fedora 29, 30
> https://hub.docker.com/r/arm32v7/
I'd like to appologize for the delay in this email.
The notices I get were being filtered and I didn't realize I wasn't
seeing them for a while. ;(
We've been told that the email addresses for these package maintainers
are no longer valid. I'm starting the unresponsive maintainer policy to
find
On Monday, 06 May 2019 at 02:49, Jerry James wrote:
> Awhile back, I mentioned that GCL was building in mock on my local
> machine, but was segfaulting on the koji builders. By dint of much
> experimentation, I now know what is going on. For the enlightenment
> of anybody who cares:
[snip excelle
> "AT" == Andrew Toskin writes:
AT> I'm looking specifically into VeraCrypt, the open-source fork from
AT> TrueCrypt.
Has the situation which has kept VeraCrypt out of Fedora previously been
changed?
See this, for example:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedorapro
Sorry if this has already been discussed, but I couldn't find a thread dealing
with this exact situation... I'm considering a new package that is
dual-licensed under a free and a nonfree license.
The Fedora Licensing Guidelines say:
> If code is multiple licensed, and at least one of the lice
Matthew Miller writes:
> On Sun, May 05, 2019 at 12:43:02PM -0700, stan via devel wrote:
> > To each their own, of course, but there was a long discussion of
> > discourse here a while ago. I tried it out, but it was like a bad
> > version of a mailing list. It sent me a mail informing me tha
On Tue, May 7, 2019 at 12:40 AM Nicolas Mailhot
wrote:
>
>
>
> Le May 6, 2019 4:29:22 PM UTC, Chris Murphy a écrit
> :
> >On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 1:52 AM Nicolas Mailhot
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Le dimanche 05 mai 2019 à 16:14 -0600, Chris Murphy a écrit :
> >> >
> >> > Right and that's the same with
On Tue, May 7, 2019 at 8:29 AM Steven A. Falco wrote:
>
> On 5/6/19 5:51 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
>
> > But it's worth keeping an eye on anomalies. There is the potential for
> > goofy things happening. Unrelated to this particular feature, rather
> > it was grub.cfg being updated, in cases where t
Except that everyone is on RH Summit, so there won't be a meeting today.
On Tue, May 7, 2019 at 4:54 PM Jun Aruga wrote:
> > The agenda for the meeting is available as flagged tickets [in the
> Modularity repository](
> https://pagure.io/modularity/issues?status=Open&tags=Meeting).
>
> No agenda
> pungi is the tool, and this:
> https://pagure.io/pungi-fedora/blob/f30/f/fedora-final.conf
> was the config used.
Kevin, I have a question.
https://pagure.io/pungi-fedora/blob/f30/f/fedora-final.conf#_322
> 'arches': ['armhfp', 'aarch64', 'ppc64le', 's390x', 'x86_64'],
From above setting for C
> The agenda for the meeting is available as flagged tickets [in the Modularity
> repository](https://pagure.io/modularity/issues?status=Open&tags=Meeting).
No agenda? I have several topics to let you discuss.
--
Jun Aruga / He - His - Him
___
devel m
The following Fedora EPEL 6 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
13 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-009f5f140b
php-horde-horde-5.2.21-1.el6
13 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-b9ea566899
php-horde-turba-4.2.24-1.el6
13 https://bodh
On 5/6/19 5:51 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> But it's worth keeping an eye on anomalies. There is the potential for
> goofy things happening. Unrelated to this particular feature, rather
> it was grub.cfg being updated, in cases where that update happened
> very quickly followed by an immediate reboot
I think the people who are using or used "meta-test-family" (the
application to test module), has these kind of testing files.
But I faced an installation error on my Fedora 30.
https://github.com/fedora-modularity/meta-test-family/issues/245
Are you using "meta-test-family" now?
Does it work on
Heads-up: I dropped most of the build flags customizations in mpich.
This "resets" mpich back to the Fedora defaults and, inter alia, adds
all the hardening options. Unit tests pass, including those in dependent
packages, but of course this is not a definitive proof of anything. If
you see any stra
On Mon, 2019-05-06 at 10:59 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
> Once upon a time, qca needed this, but hasn't for quite awhile, so
> I'm no
> longer interested in maintaining compat-opensl10-pkcs11-helper
>
> According to repoquery, one item (still) depends on it:
> gnupg-pkcs11-scd
I do not think this i
18 matches
Mail list logo
