On Thursday, March 3, 2022 10:49:07 PM CET Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> (1) I don't deny that curl-minimal will reduce the size of some niche
> containers, my point is this is not a worthwhile goal to pursue given
> the costs.
I am pretty sure there are Fedora installations not based on containers
...snip...
>
> If this is just s390x builders, I'd prefer to see if we cannot rebalance
> them to just pass your builds. So, looking at it, we have 20 buildvm's
> on a host with 256gb mem. I could bump them all from 10 to 12 without
> overcommiting. I don't know if 2gb would help enough tho? Is
On Thu, Mar 3, 2022 at 8:01 PM Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Hi
>
> On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 11:40 AM Matthew Miller wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 08:13:15PM +0100, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
>> wrote:
>> > It would probably be good to use more of those features, but you need
>> > to understand
Hi
On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 11:40 AM Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 08:13:15PM +0100, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> wrote:
> > It would probably be good to use more of those features, but you need
> > to understand the service very well to know what systemd security
> > features
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2060156
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #5 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2060185
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #3 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2060072
--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-54aa09f5c4 has been pushed to the Fedora 36 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2060505
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #3 from
On 01. 03. 22 18:05, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 01. 03. 22 17:49, Major Hayden wrote:
On 3/1/22 10:44, Miro Hrončok wrote:
Do you think we should make /usr/bin/pypy3 PyPy 3.9 in Fedora 36? It is
rather late in the release cycle, but considering this is essentially a leaf
package I think this
On 03. 03. 22 19:21, Miro Hrončok wrote:
Hello.
pypy 2.7 fails to build with GCC 12 on 32 bit arches.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2046857
Instead of investigating this and trying to fix this, I wonder if I can just
excludearch %ix86 and %arm32. No other Fedora package really
On 03. 03. 22 19:21, Miro Hrončok wrote:
Hello.
pypy 2.7 fails to build with GCC 12 on 32 bit arches.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2046857
Instead of investigating this and trying to fix this, I wonder if I can just
excludearch %ix86 and %arm32. No other Fedora package really
Hi
On Thu, Mar 3, 2022 at 5:07 PM Lennart Poettering wrote:
>
> There have been various requests of generalizing this, and making it
> available for any kind of service, not just portable services. I'd be
> onboard with that actually, but there are some unanswered questions
> regarding how
On Thu, Mar 3, 2022, 1:21 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
> Hello.
>
> pypy 2.7 fails to build with GCC 12 on 32 bit arches.
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2046857
>
> Instead of investigating this and trying to fix this, I wonder if I can
> just
> excludearch %ix86 and %arm32. No other
On 3/3/22 16:49, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 03, 2022 at 08:14:20PM +0100, Kamil Dudka wrote:
>> On Thursday, March 3, 2022 3:24:38 PM CET Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>>> On Thu, Mar 03, 2022 at 09:04:10AM +0100, Kamil Dudka wrote:
The FTP protocol is still included in
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2060627
Bug ID: 2060627
Summary: perl-HTTP-Daemon-6.14 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-HTTP-Daemon
Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
On Do, 03.03.22 10:04, Rahul Sundaram (methe...@gmail.com) wrote:
> > ProtectHome= for example implies that a separate mount namespace is
> > allocated for each service. if you enable that for *all* services at
> > once, then this means all services will suddenly live in their own
> > mount
On Thu, Mar 03, 2022 at 08:14:20PM +0100, Kamil Dudka wrote:
> On Thursday, March 3, 2022 3:24:38 PM CET Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 03, 2022 at 09:04:10AM +0100, Kamil Dudka wrote:
> > > The FTP protocol is still included in libcurl-minimal, so the protocol is
> > > not going to
On Wed, Mar 2, 2022, at 7:04 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> * OOm killer looks and says... oh hey, I need to kill something. This
> kojid process/slice is taking up all the memory.
> * kojid is killed.
If we replaced Koji's backend with Kubernetes (at least my employer's
production way to run Linux
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2060186
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2060156
--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-7af28c8989 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 34.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-7af28c8989
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2060156
--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-b8f711ecbc has been submitted as an update to Fedora 35.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-b8f711ecbc
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2060156
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
--- Comment #2 from
On Thursday, March 3, 2022 3:24:38 PM CET Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 03, 2022 at 09:04:10AM +0100, Kamil Dudka wrote:
> > The FTP protocol is still included in libcurl-minimal, so the protocol is
> > not going to disappear with the proposed F37 change. On the other
> > hand, it may
On Thu, 3 Mar 2022, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
On Thu, 3 Mar 2022 at 11:07, Scott Talbert wrote:
On Thu, 3 Mar 2022, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> OK with some help from Miro on the python team, I was able to
use the
> scripts they use regularly to list what
On Thu, Mar 03, 2022 at 02:32:50AM +0100, Michal Schorm wrote:
> In many cases, the build is killed during compilation itself.
> I'd understand the situation, if it would consistently fail somewhere
> during the testsuite on OOM errors, but it's weirder than that.
>
> Until now, I didn't have
Hello.
pypy 2.7 fails to build with GCC 12 on 32 bit arches.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2046857
Instead of investigating this and trying to fix this, I wonder if I can just
excludearch %ix86 and %arm32. No other Fedora package really requires pypy,
(asv uses it in %check but
Hello.
pypy 2.7 fails to build with GCC 12 on 32 bit arches.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2046857
Instead of investigating this and trying to fix this, I wonder if I can just
excludearch %ix86 and %arm32. No other Fedora package really requires pypy,
(asv uses it in %check but
On Thu, Mar 3, 2022 at 12:27 PM Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 02, 2022 at 09:04:04AM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > So why not have the OCaml toolchain exposed in RHEL CRB? It sounds
> > like it would be very beneficial to have it there.
>
> It's a good question. I think we chose not
On Wed, Mar 02, 2022 at 09:04:04AM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> So why not have the OCaml toolchain exposed in RHEL CRB? It sounds
> like it would be very beneficial to have it there.
It's a good question. I think we chose not to do that simply because
we were worried about handling CVEs in a
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2051426
Bug 2051426 depends on bug 2051424, which changed state.
Bug 2051424 Summary: Please branch and build perl-Log-Trace for EPEL 9
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2051424
What|Removed |Added
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2034031
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version||perl-Image-Size-3.300-23.el
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2031812
Bug 2031812 depends on bug 2030601, which changed state.
Bug 2030601 Summary: mod_perl in EPEL9
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2030601
What|Removed |Added
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2032430
Bug 2032430 depends on bug 2051427, which changed state.
Bug 2051427 Summary: Please branch and build perl-Hash-Flatten for EPEL 9
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2051427
What|Removed |Added
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2051427
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Status|ON_QA
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2051427
Bug 2051427 depends on bug 2051424, which changed state.
Bug 2051424 Summary: Please branch and build perl-Log-Trace for EPEL 9
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2051424
What|Removed |Added
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2051424
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2031751
Bug 2031751 depends on bug 2030601, which changed state.
Bug 2030601 Summary: mod_perl in EPEL9
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2030601
What|Removed |Added
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2030601
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version||mod_perl-2.0.12-3.el9
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2051427
Bug 2051427 depends on bug 2051426, which changed state.
Bug 2051426 Summary: Please branch and build perl-Test-Assertions for EPEL 9
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2051426
What|Removed |Added
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2051426
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version||perl-Test-Assertions-1.054-
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2042867
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #4 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2060072
--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-2ba3793d42 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2060072
--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-81c67ba011 has been pushed to the Fedora 35 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2060072
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #6 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2060505
--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-fb255e3592 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 36.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-fb255e3592
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2060505
Paul Howarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |MODIFIED
Fixed In Version|
On 2022-03-03 15:47, Sandro Mani wrote:
>
> On 03.03.22 15:30, Michael J Gruber wrote:
> > So, I explicitely asked what your plan was and got no response.
> >
> > I suggested to fix the problem at the root package and you went ahead
> rebuilding depending packages.
> >
> > I asked you to use
On Thu, 3 Mar 2022 at 11:07, Scott Talbert wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Mar 2022, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>
> > OK with some help from Miro on the python team, I was able to use the
> > scripts they use regularly to list what dependency problems they have
> with
> > soon to be orphaned packages. I
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2060505
Bug ID: 2060505
Summary: perl-DateTime-1.57 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-DateTime
Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2060505
--- Comment #1 from Upstream Release Monitoring
---
Scratch build failed. Details bellow:
GenericError: File upload failed:
cli-build/1646323542.9150794.laoTBnTx/perl-DateTime-1.57-1.fc34.src.rpm
Traceback:
File
On Thu, 3 Mar 2022, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
OK with some help from Miro on the python team, I was able to use the
scripts they use regularly to list what dependency problems they have with
soon to be orphaned packages. I have included the entire report as an
attachment as its big, but the
On Thu, Mar 3, 2022 at 10:36 AM Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>
>
> OK with some help from Miro on the python team, I was able to use the scripts
> they use regularly to list what dependency problems they have with soon to be
> orphaned packages. I have included the entire report as an attachment
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 19/229 (x86_64), 13/161 (aarch64)
New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-36-20220302.n.0):
ID: 1158343 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_default_upload
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1158343
ID: 1158375 Test: x86_64
On Thu, Mar 03, 2022 at 03:51:19PM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> Adding security into a system that didn't have it but is widely
> deployed and developed for is *hard*. It makes opt-out security really
> hard to do, which is why we went for opt-in. Tools like
> "systemd-analyze security"
Hi
On Thu, Mar 3, 2022 at 9:51 AM Lennart Poettering wrote:
>
> Yes, opt-out would be better than opt-in, but it would be a major
> compat break, UNIX software doesn't expect to be sandboxed, so if you
> sandbox everything out-of-the-box you'll be drowning in bugs, and the
> failure modes are
On Do, 03.03.22 09:25, Rahul Sundaram (methe...@gmail.com) wrote:
> Hi
>
> On Thu, Mar 3, 2022 at 8:18 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote
>
> >
> > What do you mean by "global service overrides"?
>
> Currently security hardening features are opt-in. You will have to set it
> on a per service
On 03.03.22 15:30, Michael J Gruber wrote:
So, I explicitely asked what your plan was and got no response.
I suggested to fix the problem at the root package and you went ahead
rebuilding depending packages.
I asked you to use proper commit messages/changelog if you do and got a series of
Petr said pretty much the same thing I was about to say.
As others have noted, the “indirect sub-type change” seems to be an
awkward way of saying the function prototype has changed, which is
certainly an ABI change for the mbest_search function. The only question
is, is mbest_search really
So, I explicitely asked what your plan was and got no response.
I suggested to fix the problem at the root package and you went ahead
rebuilding depending packages.
I asked you to use proper commit messages/changelog if you do and got a series
of "Rebuild (leptonica)", "Bump as F36 needs
Hi
On Thu, Mar 3, 2022 at 8:18 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote
>
> What do you mean by "global service overrides"?
Currently security hardening features are opt-in. You will have to set it
on a per service level. What I would prefer to see is the ability to have
an opt out of hardening
On Thu, Mar 03, 2022 at 09:04:10AM +0100, Kamil Dudka wrote:
> On Thursday, March 3, 2022 7:07:34 AM CET Ralf Corsépius wrote:
> > Am 24.02.22 um 19:35 schrieb Daniel P. Berrangé:
> >
> > > On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 07:16:26PM +0100, Ralf Corsépius wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > If someone is setting
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FPC
meeting Thursday at 2022-03-03 17:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on
irc.libera.chat.
Local time information (via. uitime):
= Day: Thursday ==
2022-03-03 09:00 PST US/Pacific
2022-03-03
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2060434
Bug ID: 2060434
Summary: perl-Parallel-Pipes-0.101 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-Parallel-Pipes
Keywords: FutureFeature,
V Thu, Mar 03, 2022 at 07:44:45AM -0600, Richard Shaw napsal(a):
> In this instance, it's not clear to me whether sub-type changes are ABI
> breaking or not...
>
> $ fedabipkgdiff --from fc37 codec2-1.0.3-1.fc37.x86_64.rpm
> Comparing the ABI of binaries between codec2-1.0.1-2.fc36.x86_64.rpm and
On Thu, Mar 3, 2022 at 1:45 PM Richard Shaw wrote:
> In this instance, it's not clear to me whether sub-type changes are ABI
> breaking or not...
Looking only at the output of the compare, those are
ABI breaking changes, and you will need to rebuild
deps, but if those deps are actually using
$ fedabipkgdiff --from fc37 codec2-1.0.3-1.fc37.x86_64.rpm
[[snip]]
1 function with some indirect sub-type change:
[C] 'function void mbest_search(const float*, float*, float*, int, int,
MBEST*, int*)' at mbest.c:123:1 has some indirect sub-type changes:
parameter 3 of type
OLD: Fedora-36-20220302.n.0
NEW: Fedora-36-20220303.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:1
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 1
Dropped packages:34
Upgraded packages: 7
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 7.10 MiB
Size of dropped packages:201.38 MiB
In this instance, it's not clear to me whether sub-type changes are ABI
breaking or not...
$ fedabipkgdiff --from fc37 codec2-1.0.3-1.fc37.x86_64.rpm
Comparing the ABI of binaries between codec2-1.0.1-2.fc36.x86_64.rpm and
codec2-1.0.3-1.fc37.x86_64.rpm:
changes of
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2060072
--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-0dc2e14956 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 8.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-0dc2e14956
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2060072
--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-2ba3793d42 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 34.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-2ba3793d42
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
With the obvious understanding that all work is done by people who are
willing to pitch in... who's domain does this fall under? Would this be
something that the Fedora Security Team would focus on? Would this be done
by the maintainers of the individual 'services'. I realize a lot of what
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2060072
--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-81c67ba011 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 35.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-81c67ba011
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2060072
--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-54aa09f5c4 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 36.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-54aa09f5c4
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
On Thu, Mar 3, 2022 at 8:24 AM Lennart Poettering
wrote:
>
> badly. One good example for that is crond: you never know what cron
> jobs intend to do, hence you cannot sandbox crond as a whole
> reasonably. Moreover, runtime matters: short-lived stuff is much less
>
>
I've also run into another
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2060185
--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-fb255e3592 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 36.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-fb255e3592
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2060072
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version||perl-Inline-C-0.82-1.fc37
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2060185
Paul Howarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |MODIFIED
Fixed In Version|
mspacek merged a pull-request against the project: `perl-Locale-Codes` that you
are following.
Merged pull-request:
``
3.70 bump
``
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Locale-Codes/pull-request/12
___
perl-devel mailing list --
On Do, 24.02.22 16:29, Marius Schwarz (fedora...@cloud-foo.de) wrote:
> Do those "insecure" units come from upstream projects, or is Fedora lagging
> behind some patches?
"insecure" is misleading. We call it "exposed", which is a different
thing.
> Is there a way to find out, if missing
On Wed, Mar 02, 2022 at 04:23:00PM -0500, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Hi
>
> On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 12:31 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 02:28:56PM -0500, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > > Ability to modify these policies via configuration (the above one looks
> > >
Missing expected images:
Minimal raw-xz armhfp
Compose PASSES proposed Rawhide gating check!
All required tests passed
Failed openQA tests: 16/231 (x86_64), 18/161 (aarch64)
New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20220302.n.0):
ID: 1157844 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso
mspacek opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-Locale-Codes` that
you are following:
``
3.70 bump
``
To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Locale-Codes/pull-request/12
___
perl-devel mailing list --
mspacek merged a pull-request against the project: `perl-Locale-Codes` that you
are following.
Merged pull-request:
``
3.70 bump
``
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Locale-Codes/pull-request/11
___
perl-devel mailing list --
mspacek opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-Locale-Codes` that
you are following:
``
3.70 bump
``
To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Locale-Codes/pull-request/11
___
perl-devel mailing list --
mspacek merged a pull-request against the project: `perl-Locale-Codes` that you
are following.
Merged pull-request:
``
3.70 bump
``
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Locale-Codes/pull-request/10
___
perl-devel mailing list --
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 1/8 (aarch64)
New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-Cloud-34-20220302.0):
ID: 1158178 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2
base_service_manipulation@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1158178
Soft failed openQA tests:
mspacek opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-Locale-Codes` that
you are following:
``
3.70 bump
``
To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Locale-Codes/pull-request/10
___
perl-devel mailing list --
mspacek merged a pull-request against the project: `perl-Locale-Codes` that you
are following.
Merged pull-request:
``
3.70 bump
``
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Locale-Codes/pull-request/9
___
perl-devel mailing list --
Kevin Kofler via devel kirjoitti 3.3.2022 klo 0.48:
Matthew Miller wrote:
I put #introductions in the default for "watching first post" because ...
I think seeing and welcoming new people joining our community is a good
default.
Frankly, I think most existing maintainers will not be
mspacek opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-Locale-Codes` that
you are following:
``
3.70 bump
``
To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Locale-Codes/pull-request/9
___
perl-devel mailing list --
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20220302.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20220303.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 18
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 96
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 18.18 MiB
Size of dropped packages:0
Hi
I'm planing on landing tesseract-5.1.0 and proj-9.0.0 in rawhide and F36
in the coming days. I'm doing a test run in these COPR repos:
tesseract: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/smani/tesseract5/
(all builds already complete)
proj:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2060156
Michal Josef Spacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
* Kevin Fenzi:
> Perhaps there's some way to adjust the oom killer to kill the build
> instead of kojid?
There is /proc/PID/oom_score_adj. I don't know how to use it, sorry.
Thanks,
Florian
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To
It would be nice to announce something like this. I am really not into
discourse and I don't plan to spend any time configuring it, so it would
at least spare me from wondering what is this about.
BTW this kind of nontransparency without logging into UI to have at
least chance to understand
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-35-20220302.0):
ID: 1157583 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL:
On Thursday, March 3, 2022 7:07:34 AM CET Ralf Corsépius wrote:
> Am 24.02.22 um 19:35 schrieb Daniel P. Berrangé:
>
> > On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 07:16:26PM +0100, Ralf Corsépius wrote:
>
>
>
> > If someone is setting up a personal private mirror, I struggle
> > to understand a reason why they
97 matches
Mail list logo
