The following Fedora EPEL 6 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
37 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-12f1eb1b1f
tomcat-7.0.94-1.el6
The following builds have been pushed to Fedora EPEL 6 updates-testing
python-collectd_cvmfs-1.2.2-1.el6
Details about
> > Cause i can't offer a review-swap (cause i am not in the packager
> > group), i offer a do-anything-swap in exchange to white_dune fedora
> > sponsoring.
>
> Posting links to the informal reviews you completed would be the best
> way to attract potential sponsors, but I cannot find any.
>
>
https://fedorapeople.org/groups/389ds/ci/nightly/2019/07/27/report-389-ds-base-1.4.1.6-20190726git4295210.fc30.x86_64.html
___
389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 2:26 PM Robert-André Mauchin
wrote:
> Review Request: wgctrl - Control of WireGuard interfaces on multiple
> platforms
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1730911
>
Done.
> Review Request: golang-github-mattn-ieproxy - Detect the proxy settings on
> Windows
# F31 Blocker Review meeting
# Date: 2019-07-29
# Time: 16:00 UTC
# Location: #fedora-blocker-review on irc.freenode.net
Hi folks! We have 4 proposed Beta blockers to review, so let's have a
Fedora 31 blocker review meeting on Monday!
If you have time this weekend, you can take a look at the
Oh wow, it's already that time in the Fedora 31 release cycle. Welcome
to the first Fedora 31 Beta blocker status email!
Action summary
Accepted blockers
-
1. bes — https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1728419
ACTION: Server WG to decide if it makes
On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 8:19 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> On 7/25/19 11:05 AM, Kaleb Keithley wrote:
> > hmmm. from the root.log
> >
> > DEBUG util.py:585: BUILDSTDERR: Error:
> > DEBUG util.py:585: BUILDSTDERR: Problem: conflicting requests
> > DEBUG util.py:585: BUILDSTDERR: - nothing
No missing expected images.
Compose PASSES proposed Rawhide gating check!
All required tests passed
Failed openQA tests: 6/147 (x86_64), 1/2 (arm)
New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20190725.n.0):
ID: 426641 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_notifications_postinstall
Hello,
On Friday, 26 July 2019 at 18:42, J. Scheurich wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Cause i can't offer a review-swap (cause i am not in the packager
> group), i offer a do-anything-swap in exchange to white_dune fedora
> sponsoring.
Posting links to the informal reviews you completed would be the best
way
* Kevin Fenzi [26/07/2019 09:25] :
>
> That said, we could:
> * make a bugzilla user for every package named
> 'packagename-ow...@fedoraproject.org'
> * assign bugs for that package to that user (no ccs)
Please don't do this.
The best feature the system we currently use has is accountability.
On 7/25/19 11:05 AM, Kaleb Keithley wrote:
> hmmm. from the root.log
>
> DEBUG util.py:585: BUILDSTDERR: Error:
> DEBUG util.py:585: BUILDSTDERR: Problem: conflicting requests
> DEBUG util.py:585: BUILDSTDERR: - nothing provides kernel >= 4.18.0
> needed by firewalld-0.6.4-1.fc31.noarch
>
Hello,
I'd like some help to review a handful of Golang packages:
Review Request: wgctrl - Control of WireGuard interfaces on multiple platforms
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1730911
Review Request: golang-github-mattn-ieproxy - Detect the proxy settings on
Windows platform
> "JN" == Jamie Nguyen writes:
JN> I couldn't find clear packaging policy on this. The guidelines [0]
JN> talk about %config(noreplace) vs %config, but /etc/named.conf is
JN> installed as a "noreplace" file.
I don't think there's a guideline about this. %config and
%config(noreplace) are
Hi,
Cause i can't offer a review-swap (cause i am not in the packager
group), i offer a do-anything-swap in exchange to white_dune fedora
sponsoring.
I have some experience in writing C, C++, java, awk, lex/yacc and
shellscript, but i don't have enough time to write a complex 30
lines
On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 09:25:54AM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On 7/26/19 4:25 AM, Hans de Goede wrote:
> > Proposal to really fix this. We often say that people should not feel they
> > own a package, but that this is all a team effort, hence we also promote
> > co-maintainer ship, so I propose
Dne 26. 07. 19 v 18:25 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a):
> On 7/26/19 4:25 AM, Hans de Goede wrote:
>
>> 1) Have some automated process automatically email co-maintainers when the
>> primary maintainer orphan the package.
> That should already be the case? FMN should mail you... perhaps this
> isn't
On 7/26/19 4:25 AM, Hans de Goede wrote:
> 1) Have some automated process automatically email co-maintainers when the
> primary maintainer orphan the package.
That should already be the case? FMN should mail you... perhaps this
isn't working?
> 2) Make taking over the package a 1 click action
On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 07:17:52PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
ape...@gmail.com apevec
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1731531
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1705932
athoscribe...@gmail.com athoscr
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1731532
https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/50519
--
389 Directory Server Development Team
___
389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to 389-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 04:13:50PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 1:14 PM Hans de Goede wrote:
> > Can we please stop this gargantuan time waste? Proposal to make this
> > less painful:
> >
> > 1) Have some automated process automatically email co-maintainers when the
> >
On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 1:14 PM Hans de Goede wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 22-07-19 10:47, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > The following packages are orphaned and will be retired when they
> > are orphaned for six weeks, unless someone adopts them. If you know for sure
> > that the package should be retired,
On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 02:41:44PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>
> I've been trying to build nbdkit which depends on libnbd >= 0.1.9
> in Fedora Rawhide this morning.
>
> I built libnbd a few hours ago, but it hasn't turned up in Rawhide.
>
> I also discovered that you can now submit
I need python3-oauth for MythTV on RPM Fusion. I looked into it and there
hasn't been a successful build since F28. I tried a simple update to python
3 BR's and the package built fine so I went ahead and built packages for
Rawhide and F30 based on the "no one seems to care about this package"
I've been trying to build nbdkit which depends on libnbd >= 0.1.9
in Fedora Rawhide this morning.
I built libnbd a few hours ago, but it hasn't turned up in Rawhide.
I also discovered that you can now submit updates for Rawhide, so why
not:
On 26/07/2019 14:17, Tom Hughes wrote:
On 23/07/2019 21:51, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
This is the first roll-out of this gating change, and so there may be
additional
tuning and fixes until things are as smooth as we want them to be.
With this
release we are looking for feedback on what can
On 23/07/2019 21:51, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
This is the first roll-out of this gating change, and so there may be additional
tuning and fixes until things are as smooth as we want them to be. With this
release we are looking for feedback on what can be improved. We have a dedicated
team
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/EnableSysctlPingGroupRange
(Note this change proposal was originally submitted before the
deadline, but was delayed due to some discussion between the change
owner and change wrangler)
== Summary ==
Enable the Linux kernel's net.ipv4.ping_group_range
On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 2:12 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> ktdre...@ktdreyer.com ktdreyer
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1731540
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1706223
Use kdre...@redhat.com instead.
He is currently on paternity leave and may not be responding to
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20190725.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20190726.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 3
Added packages: 4
Dropped packages:59
Upgraded packages: 68
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 4.80 MiB
Size of dropped packages
Hi,
On 22-07-19 10:47, Miro Hrončok wrote:
The following packages are orphaned and will be retired when they
are orphaned for six weeks, unless someone adopts them. If you know for sure
that the package should be retired, please do so now with a proper reason:
Announcing the creation of a new nightly release validation test event
for Fedora 31 Rawhide 20190726.n.0. Please help run some tests for this
nightly compose if you have time. For more information on nightly
release validation testing, see:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki
On 26. 07. 19 8:09, Haïkel wrote:
I'm still around, I had a kidney failure recently hence not able to answer.
Thanks for reaching back. Sorry to hear that.
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
devel mailing list --
Dne 25. 07. 19 v 23:07 Jason L Tibbitts III napsal(a):
>> "RF" == Richard Fearn writes:
> RF> According to
> RF>
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_architecture_build_failures:
>
>>> If a Fedora package does not successfully compile, build or work on
>>> an
Hi,
I noticed on an Ansible run that a recent update to bind changed
/etc/named.conf directly, instead of creating a separate rpmnew file.
(It's running sed in a scriptlet.)
I couldn't find clear packaging policy on this. The guidelines [0] talk
about %config(noreplace) vs %config, but
Notification time stamped 2019-07-26 08:26:43 UTC
From 783a48096c081d1c6c6985e8ed3ae5207c4cdbc0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Fedora Release Engineering
Date: Jul 26 2019 08:26:38 +
Subject: - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_31_Mass_Rebuild
Signed-off-by: Fedora Release
Notification time stamped 2019-07-26 08:00:41 UTC
From 5d5c54844c2a56c6aa4a51f5a22c0498c5b95937 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Fedora Release Engineering
Date: Jul 26 2019 08:00:36 +
Subject: - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_31_Mass_Rebuild
Signed-off-by: Fedora Release
Notification time stamped 2019-07-26 07:58:50 UTC
From 41960306c515ba0046893a170cb8483c33d7444f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Fedora Release Engineering
Date: Jul 26 2019 07:58:44 +
Subject: - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_31_Mass_Rebuild
Signed-off-by: Fedora Release
Notification time stamped 2019-07-26 07:50:07 UTC
From 1e1c0d59003e5a52974fd3eddb7f39fd95ddb7e9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Fedora Release Engineering
Date: Jul 26 2019 07:50:02 +
Subject: - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_31_Mass_Rebuild
Signed-off-by: Fedora Release
Notification time stamped 2019-07-26 07:49:38 UTC
From d616ca7d5809ae635e89f2f58181c311364a2531 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Fedora Release Engineering
Date: Jul 26 2019 07:49:33 +
Subject: - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_31_Mass_Rebuild
Signed-off-by: Fedora Release
Notification time stamped 2019-07-26 07:25:36 UTC
From 2088188a20a6628ae813eaca2652f68f29da3845 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Fedora Release Engineering
Date: Jul 26 2019 07:25:31 +
Subject: - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_31_Mass_Rebuild
Signed-off-by: Fedora Release
On Fri, 26 Jul 2019 09:02:57 +0200
Dan Čermák wrote:
> Jason L Tibbitts III writes:
>
> >> "KK" == Kaleb Keithley writes:
> >
> > KK> I built the latest ceph-14 (14.2.2) on rawhide successfully two
> > KK> days ago. Two different builds on f30 built or are building
> > KK> fine on
Hi,
I am not consuming that package and not able to update it. Time which
i can dedicate to Fedora side is dropped for me now and I am not even
sure how long it would be the case so I hope `python-grapefruit` will
find an another package maintainer.
--
Praveen Kumar
Jason L Tibbitts III writes:
>> "KK" == Kaleb Keithley writes:
>
> KK> I built the latest ceph-14 (14.2.2) on rawhide successfully two days
> KK> ago. Two different builds on f30 built or are building fine on
> KK> x86_64, i686, and aarch64, but failed with different errors on
> KK>
Notification time stamped 2019-07-26 06:41:28 UTC
From 5edc047e9e3355f7b10f49d8d9a6859a29778bad Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Fedora Release Engineering
Date: Jul 26 2019 06:41:23 +
Subject: - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_31_Mass_Rebuild
Signed-off-by: Fedora Release
Notification time stamped 2019-07-26 06:41:00 UTC
From 81e9c9f5ea6bd07d38ba254e59ebf874008e6fc5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Fedora Release Engineering
Date: Jul 26 2019 06:40:54 +
Subject: - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_31_Mass_Rebuild
Signed-off-by: Fedora Release
Notification time stamped 2019-07-26 06:33:10 UTC
From 1f297502f1742132ee48330627c14c8880c6af56 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Fedora Release Engineering
Date: Jul 26 2019 06:33:05 +
Subject: - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_31_Mass_Rebuild
Signed-off-by: Fedora Release
Notification time stamped 2019-07-26 06:20:58 UTC
From e7721a1a2fae2ae976a6bd2944dfcb2b88b3ab91 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Fedora Release Engineering
Date: Jul 26 2019 06:20:53 +
Subject: - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_31_Mass_Rebuild
Signed-off-by: Fedora Release
Notification time stamped 2019-07-26 06:17:45 UTC
From 463c8de0251092aea355c6d7fe74c73e5935fa34 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Fedora Release Engineering
Date: Jul 26 2019 06:17:40 +
Subject: - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_31_Mass_Rebuild
Signed-off-by: Fedora Release
Notification time stamped 2019-07-26 06:15:11 UTC
From 72b0b951ac0306d0ad76368321af875aa185fcbb Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Fedora Release Engineering
Date: Jul 26 2019 06:15:06 +
Subject: - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_31_Mass_Rebuild
Signed-off-by: Fedora Release
Notification time stamped 2019-07-26 06:15:21 UTC
From 4768a9d9a9cc80b0d868d7be8e0091c2f0d538c1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Fedora Release Engineering
Date: Jul 26 2019 06:15:16 +
Subject: - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_31_Mass_Rebuild
Signed-off-by: Fedora Release
I'm still around, I had a kidney failure recently hence not able to answer.
Regards.
H.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
51 matches
Mail list logo
