https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007499
Bug ID: 2007499
Summary: Please update to > 1.02
Product: Fedora
Version: 34
Status: NEW
Component: perl-GnuPG-Interface
Assignee: emman...@seyman.fr
Reporter:
On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 3:37 PM Antonio T. sagitter
wrote:
>
> gnome-chemistry-utils is ready for openbabel3; it's in my Copr project.
Well done Antonio!
I will give it a try this weekend.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To
Hi.
I created small script `remove-retired-packages`. You can try it using:
$ sudo dnf copr enable msuchy/remove-retired-packages
$ remove-retired-packages
This script removes packages retired between Fedora N and Fedora N-1. You can
run it with parameter:
$ remove-retired-packages 30
And
On 9/23/21 9:00 AM, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 23. 09. 21 5:41, Orion Poplawski wrote:
-Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}
+Requires: utf8proc%{?_isa} >= %{version}-%{release}
I'd assume that anybody (even you) might need to rebuild this package in
EPEL at any time for various
Hi,
I've noticed that the %_host macro is defined as armv7hl-redhat-linux-gnu on
the arm builders. I believe this is coming from the mockhost config
option in kojid.
In /usr/lib/rpm/macros %_host is defined as armv7hl-redhat-linux-gnueabi
which matches the gcc triple used on arm. Is there a
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2006977
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #2 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1949278
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #3 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007171
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #2 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007048
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #2 from
On 9/22/21 12:54 AM, Zdenek Dohnal wrote:
On 9/21/21 1:21 PM, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 5:36 AM Zdenek Dohnal wrote:
- several other printer applications was implemented by Till
Kamppeter[1][2][3][4] - Till makes it available as Snaps, I'm planning
to package it into Fedora as
On 9/23/21 7:28 AM, Troy Dawson wrote:
That looks great, and very close to what I've done.
I have a couple of variations.
I think the biggest is that I set a variable called rhel_name and then
change %{name} to %{rhel_name}. It looks like you only had two
instances of %{name} but I've had a
The following Fedora EPEL 8 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
1 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-7d0a7b6146
libspf2-1.2.11-1.20210922git4915c308.el8
1 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-3dbdaa5f12
On 9/23/21 2:11 AM, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 23. 09. 21 1:40, Josh Stone wrote:
>> On 9/22/21 4:21 AM, Miro Hrončok wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> for many releases, Fedora has the brp-mangle-sehbangs BuildRoot Policy
>>> Script
>>> that does the following:
>>>
>>>1) Gets all executable files in
On 23. 09. 21 17:28, Adam Williamson wrote:
... (in
fact, we could have a discussion about getting rid of buildroot
overrides, at this point).
Buildroot overrides still have their use cases. E.g. when there is an existing
update stuck at testing (e.g. during a freeze) that is needed to allow
The Fedora Linux 35 Beta RC2 compose[1] is GO and will be shipped live
on Tuesday, 28 September 2021.
For more information please check the Go/No-Go meeting minutes[2] or log[3].
Thank you to everyone who has and still is working on this release!
The Final Freeze begins on
Tuesday 5 October.
The Fedora Linux 35 Beta RC2 compose[1] is GO and will be shipped live
on Tuesday, 28 September 2021.
For more information please check the Go/No-Go meeting minutes[2] or log[3].
Thank you to everyone who has and still is working on this release!
The Final Freeze begins on
Tuesday 5 October.
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 1/15 (aarch64)
Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-IoT-35-20210922.0):
ID: 999225 Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_clevis@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/999225
Soft failed openQA tests: 1/16 (x86_64)
(Tests
On 23/09/21 16:30, Mamoru TASAKA wrote:
> Mattia Verga via devel wrote on 2021/09/23 15:11:
>> I've created f35-build-side-46123 and tagged fpc-3.2.2-3.fc35 into that.
>>
>> Lazarus rebuild is in progress. I will take care of rebuilding the other
>> packages listed in bug 1987485 as soon as I can.
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 2/204 (x86_64), 5/141 (aarch64)
New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-35-20210922.n.0):
ID: 998728 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso
install_btrfs_preserve_home_uefi@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/998728
ID: 998883
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007254
--- Comment #2 from Petr Pisar ---
It's not a problem with Net::SSLeay::CTX_set_options(). For some reason when
entering POE::Component::SSLify::_createSSLcontext() these OpenSSL errors are
found on the stack:
13073: 1 - error:0A000126:SSL
On Thu, 2021-09-23 at 11:29 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Package_Update_Guide/#updating_inter_dependent_packages
>
> Says:
>
> """
> You may need a buildroot override to complete a multi-package update
> successfully. For instance in the
On Wednesday, September 22, 2021 5:34:17 PM EDT Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > From all the scan that we've done on fullish installs in the past,
> > there's
> > only 2 others that you might run across: application/x-elc (lisp) and
> > application/x-java-applet.
> >
> > Maybe you just build in logic to
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007259
--- Comment #2 from Petr Pisar ---
I think OpenSSL 1.1.1 is pulled in by few non-Perl packages. On my virtual
machine:
# rpm -q --whatrequires 'libssl.so.1.1()(64bit)'
ruby-libs-3.0.2-152.fc36.x86_64
krb5-libs-1.19.2-3.fc36.x86_64
On 23. 09. 21 5:41, Orion Poplawski wrote:
-Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}
+Requires: utf8proc%{?_isa} >= %{version}-%{release}
I'd assume that anybody (even you) might need to rebuild this package in EPEL
at any time for various reasons and %{release} might be larger than
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007259
--- Comment #1 from Paul Howarth ---
These failures happened after I updated perl-Net-SSLeay to include upstream's
fixes for OpenSSL 3.0.0 (plus an additional workaround that upstream want to
fix differently) and rebuilt that package. The
Mattia Verga via devel wrote on 2021/09/23 15:11:
I've created f35-build-side-46123 and tagged fpc-3.2.2-3.fc35 into that.
Lazarus rebuild is in progress. I will take care of rebuilding the other
packages listed in bug 1987485 as soon as I can. If the maintainers of
those packages want to
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007313
Bug ID: 2007313
Summary: perl-App-cpm-0.997007 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-App-cpm
Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
OLD: Fedora-35-20210922.n.0
NEW: Fedora-35-20210923.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 0
Dropped packages:2
Upgraded packages: 0
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 0 B
Size of dropped packages:742.91 KiB
Size
gnome-chemistry-utils is ready for openbabel3; it's in my Copr project.
On 9/1/21 10:35, Mamoru TASAKA wrote:
gnome-chemistry-utils
debian says only a small modification is needed:
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=946263#20
--
---
Antonio Trande
Fedora Project
mailto:
That looks great, and very close to what I've done.
I have a couple of variations.
I think the biggest is that I set a variable called rhel_name and then
change %{name} to %{rhel_name}. It looks like you only had two instances
of %{name} but I've had a couple with many instances of it, and this
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007254
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #1 from Petr Pisar
Missing expected images:
Xfce raw-xz armhfp
Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check!
1 of 43 required test results missing
Unsatisfied gating requirements that could not be mapped to openQA tests:
MISSING: fedora.Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2.x86_64.64bit - compose.cloud_autocloud
Failed openQA
tor 2021-09-23 klockan 11:29 +0200 skrev Miro Hrončok:
>
> However, I think side-tags should be the preferred solution, as their
> impact is
> isolated. Buildroot overrides create temporary broken dependencies
> for
> everybody, while side-tags don't.
For stable releases I think I agree, even
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007259
Bug ID: 2007259
Summary: perl-IO-Socket-SSL-2.072-2.fc36 FTBFS: read tests fail
(with openssl1.1-1.1.1l?)
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
URL:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007254
Bug ID: 2007254
Summary: perl-POE-Component-SSLify-1.012-24.fc36 FTBFS: Can't
use an undefined value as a symbol reference at
/builddir/build/BUILD/POE-Component-SSLify-1.012/blib/
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007251
Bug ID: 2007251
Summary: perl-Crypt-SMIME-0.27-5.fc36 FTBFS with OpenSSL 3:
Crypt::SMIME#setPublicKey: failed to load the public
cert: error:0480006C:PEM routines::no start line
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007247
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||1992484
|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007247
Bug ID: 2007247
Summary: perl-Crypt-SSLeay-0.72-32.fc36 FTBFS with OpenSSL 3:
SSLeay.so: undefined symbol: SSLv3_client_method
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status:
Dear all,
You are kindly invited to the meeting:
ELN SIG on 2021-09-24 from 12:00:00 to 13:00:00 US/Eastern
At fedora-meet...@irc.libera.chat
The meeting will be about:
Source: https://calendar.fedoraproject.org//meeting/9920/
___
devel
On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 5:36 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 03:48:43PM +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 3:11 PM Michael Catanzaro
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Sep 20 2021 at 02:43:20 PM +0200, Fabio Valentini
> > > wrote:
> > > > As usual, I'm
* Dominik Mierzejewski:
> On Thursday, 23 September 2021 at 09:52, Filip Janus wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> I am wondering about the right name for Autoconf compact package. I need to
>> add the latest release of autoconf into EPEL so I need a package with a
>> different name. Currently, there are in
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20210922.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20210923.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:1
Dropped images: 2
Added packages: 2
Dropped packages:21
Upgraded packages: 119
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 102.22 KiB
Size of dropped packages
V Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 12:04:36PM +0200, Miro Hrončok napsal(a):
> On 23. 09. 21 11:48, Artur Frenszek-Iwicki wrote:
> > Sounds good. I took a look at the "multi builds" page - it describes the
> > process neatly, but I think there's one thing that could be added there:
> > what if you already
On 23. 09. 21 12:51, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
On Thursday, 23 September 2021 at 09:52, Filip Janus wrote:
Hi all,
I am wondering about the right name for Autoconf compact package. I need to
add the latest release of autoconf into EPEL so I need a package with a
different name.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2005724
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jples...@redhat.com
--- Comment
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007172
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007171
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
--- Comment #1 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007171
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version||perl-App-Cme-1.033-1.fc36
--
On Thursday, 23 September 2021 at 09:52, Filip Janus wrote:
> Hi all,
> I am wondering about the right name for Autoconf compact package. I need to
> add the latest release of autoconf into EPEL so I need a package with a
> different name. Currently, there are in fedora autoconf, autoconf213, and
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1927876
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|perl-Search-Elasticsearch-7 |perl-Search-Elasticsearch-7
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1997118
--- Comment #1 from Jitka Plesnikova ---
Latest Fedora delivers 0.59 version. Upstream released 0.62. When you have free
time, please upgrade it.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1997118
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Upgrade |Upgrade
On 23. 09. 21 11:48, Artur Frenszek-Iwicki wrote:
Sounds good. I took a look at the "multi builds" page - it describes the
process neatly,
but I think there's one thing that could be added there: what if you already
built a package
in the main tag (but it didn't go through bodhi and get to
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007172
Bug ID: 2007172
Summary: Upgrade perl-Devel-NYTProf to 6.11
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-Devel-NYTProf
Assignee: jples...@redhat.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007171
Bug ID: 2007171
Summary: Upgrade perl-App-Cme to 1.033
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-App-Cme
Assignee: jples...@redhat.com
Sounds good. I took a look at the "multi builds" page - it describes the
process neatly,
but I think there's one thing that could be added there: what if you already
built a package
in the main tag (but it didn't go through bodhi and get to stable)? Will it be
included in the
newly-created side
No missing expected images.
Soft failed openQA tests: 1/8 (x86_64), 1/8 (aarch64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)
Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-34-20210922.0):
ID: 997946 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL:
On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 11:13:37AM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 23. 09. 21 9:45, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> >After years of experience I wouldn't use "file" for anything I needed
> >to work reliably.
> >
> >If the test is really ELF or not ELF, how about detecting the ELF
> >header magic
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Package_Update_Guide/#updating_inter_dependent_packages
Says:
"""
You may need a buildroot override to complete a multi-package update
successfully. For instance in the case described above, you may need to rebuild
bar against the new
On 23. 09. 21 9:45, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
After years of experience I wouldn't use "file" for anything I needed
to work reliably.
If the test is really ELF or not ELF, how about detecting the ELF
header magic directly?
As I say in the rest of the email, I know how to detected elves. I
On 23. 09. 21 1:40, Josh Stone wrote:
On 9/22/21 4:21 AM, Miro Hrončok wrote:
Hello,
for many releases, Fedora has the brp-mangle-sehbangs BuildRoot Policy Script
that does the following:
1) Gets all executable files in the buildroot
2) Gets all "text" files from those
3a) Mangles
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1949278
--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2021-a66952c302 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 35.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-a66952c302
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1949278
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
Fixed
Am 22.09.21 um 18:45 schrieb Julian Sikorski:
W dniu 22.09.2021 o 18:42, Julian Sikorski pisze:
W dniu 22.09.2021 o 18:34, Julian Sikorski pisze:
W dniu 21.09.2021 o 23:12, Richard W.M. Jones pisze:
On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 10:16:17PM +0200, Julian Sikorski wrote:
W dniu 21.09.2021 o 11:00,
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1997116
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version||perl-Image-ExifTool-12.30-1
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1913148
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version||perl-TAP-Formatter-JUnit-0.
> I've created f35-build-side-46123 and tagged fpc-3.2.2-3.fc35 into that.
> Lazarus rebuild is in progress.
Thanks. Lazarus has been built successfully.
> If the maintainers of those packages want to rebuild their package
> (in the side-tag), please do so, it will speed up the process.
I'll go
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007048
--- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2021-8e22452051 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 35.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-8e22452051
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007048
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version||perl-Convert-ASN1-0.33-1.fc
Hi all,
I am wondering about the right name for Autoconf compact package. I need to
add the latest release of autoconf into EPEL so I need a package with a
different name. Currently, there are in fedora autoconf, autoconf213, and
autoconf268. The latest version is 2.71 so I have few options in my
After years of experience I wouldn't use "file" for anything I needed
to work reliably.
If the test is really ELF or not ELF, how about detecting the ELF
header magic directly?
$ if [[ $(dd if="/bin/ls" status=none bs=4 count=1) == $'\x7fELF' ]]; then echo
elf ; else echo not-elf; fi
elf
$ if
No missing expected images.
Soft failed openQA tests: 1/8 (x86_64), 1/8 (aarch64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)
Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-33-20210922.0):
ID: 997930 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL:
V Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 12:47:07PM -0400, Steve Grubb napsal(a):
> I find the file utility to be almost reliable. It changes how it identifies
> ELF
> files every couple releases. So, to stabilize this, fapolicyd-cli uses it's
> own logic to determine what kind of ELF file it finds. I also
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2006977
--- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2021-332617f8d1 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 35.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-332617f8d1
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007048
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Doc Type|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2006977
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|jples...@redhat.com,|
I've created f35-build-side-46123 and tagged fpc-3.2.2-3.fc35 into that.
Lazarus rebuild is in progress. I will take care of rebuilding the other
packages listed in bug 1987485 as soon as I can. If the maintainers of
those packages want to rebuild their package (in the side-tag), please
do so, it
77 matches
Mail list logo
