Re: wlroots 0.16 update announcement

On 11/27/22 14:51, Aleksei Bavshin wrote: Greetings, Sometime within the next week, I'll be updating wlroots in rawhide to 0.16.0[1] and sway to the latest release candidate. As usual, the update contains API/ABI breaking changes and soname will be bumped to libwlroots.so.11. wlroots0.15

[Bug 2150467] New: perl-MCE-1.882 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2150467 Bug ID: 2150467 Summary: perl-MCE-1.882 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-MCE Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

On Sat, 2022-12-03 at 00:12 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 11:55 PM Sérgio Basto > wrote: > > > > On Fri, 2022-12-02 at 22:41 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: > > > On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 10:29 PM Sérgio Basto > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > On Fri, 2022-12-02 at 17:34 -0600, Richard

Re: Inactive packagers to be removed after the F37 release

On 12/2/22 14:04, Vít Ondruch wrote: Dne 02. 12. 22 v 8:00 Benson Muite napsal(a): - rpms/ruby-ncurses Taken Why? It does not deserve to live, at least in its current (abandoned and deprecated) form. Thanks for the warning. Orphaned it. Vít

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 11:55 PM Sérgio Basto wrote: > > On Fri, 2022-12-02 at 22:41 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 10:29 PM Sérgio Basto > > wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, 2022-12-02 at 17:34 -0600, Richard Shaw wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 5:31 PM Sérgio Basto > >

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

On Fri, 2022-12-02 at 22:41 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 10:29 PM Sérgio Basto > wrote: > > > > On Fri, 2022-12-02 at 17:34 -0600, Richard Shaw wrote: > > > > On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 5:31 PM Sérgio Basto > > wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > I think it's important to bring

[EPEL-devel] Fedora EPEL 7 updates-testing report

The following Fedora EPEL 7 Security updates need testing: Age URL 9 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-10049c7b14 libbsd-0.11.7-1.el7 2 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-63588ab702 woff-0.20091126-11.el7 1

[EPEL-devel] Fedora EPEL 8 updates-testing report

The following Fedora EPEL 8 Security updates need testing: Age URL 9 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-08012668ea libbsd-0.11.7-1.el8 1 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-d9f41aade7 snapd-2.57.6-1.el8 The following builds have been

[Bug 2144904] perl-App-cpm for EPEL 9

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2144904 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #5 from

[EPEL-devel] Fedora EPEL 9 updates-testing report

The following Fedora EPEL 9 Security updates need testing: Age URL 3 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-8f2df2e1e2 botan2-2.19.3-1.el9 1 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-48ffd03f66 snapd-2.57.6-1.el9 The following builds have been

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 10:29 PM Sérgio Basto wrote: > > On Fri, 2022-12-02 at 17:34 -0600, Richard Shaw wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 5:31 PM Sérgio Basto wrote: > > Hi, > > I think it's important to bring ImageMagick 7 to Fedora, and it should > have been done a long time ago . > The

[Bug 2150184] perl-Net-Server-2.013 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2150184 --- Comment #8 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- the-new-hotness/release-monitoring.org's scratch build of perl-Net-Server-2.013-1.fc36.src.rpm for rawhide completed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=94862047 -- You

[Bug 2150184] perl-Net-Server-2.013 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2150184 --- Comment #7 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- Created attachment 1929574 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1929574=edit Update to 2.013 (#2150184) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for

[Bug 2150184] perl-Net-Server-2.013 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2150184 Upstream Release Monitoring changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|perl-Net-Server-2.012 is|perl-Net-Server-2.013 is

Re: Web Assembly on Fedora: interested in a Fedora SIG to work on this?

Michael, On 2022-12-03 05:06, Michael Dawson wrote: Great to see all the interest so far. Will continue to point people to this thread to collect those who are interested in being involved and will look to get the SIG rolling early in the new year. Excellent! - thanks! P. -- Philip Rhoades

Re: F38 proposal: Fedora Sway Spin (Self-Contained Change proposal)

Major, On 2022-12-03 02:27, Major Hayden wrote: On 12/1/22 11:35, Ben Cotton wrote: == Detailed Description == Fedora Window Manager spins greatly benefit users who enjoy a minimal desktop. Sway is beginning to become well polished and is continuing to gain traction from the community. Fedora

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

On Fri, 2022-12-02 at 17:34 -0600, Richard Shaw wrote: > On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 5:31 PM Sérgio Basto > wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I think it's important to bring ImageMagick 7 to Fedora, and it > > should > > have been done a long time ago . > > The proposal now is to keep ImageMagick 6 and make a

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 6:35 PM Richard Shaw wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 5:31 PM Sérgio Basto wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I think it's important to bring ImageMagick 7 to Fedora, and it should >> have been done a long time ago . >> The proposal now is to keep ImageMagick 6 and make a new package

Re: Some reasons I really dislike buildroot overrides and would like us to get rid of them soon

On Sat, 2022-12-03 at 00:14 +0100, Kalev Lember wrote: > On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 10:30 PM Adam Williamson > wrote: > > > So there's this CI ticket ATM[0] about whether the environment in which > > CI tests are run should or should not include and update from the > > 'buildroot' repo, which

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 5:31 PM Sérgio Basto wrote: > Hi, > > I think it's important to bring ImageMagick 7 to Fedora, and it should > have been done a long time ago . > The proposal now is to keep ImageMagick 6 and make a new package with > ImageMagick 7 , when we have all applications use only

Re: Some reasons I really dislike buildroot overrides and would like us to get rid of them soon

On 03. 12. 22 0:14, Kalev Lember wrote: On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 10:30 PM Adam Williamson > wrote: So there's this CI ticket ATM[0] about whether the environment in which CI tests are run should or should not include and update from the 'buildroot'

Review Request: ImageMagick7

Hi, I think it's important to bring ImageMagick 7 to Fedora, and it should have been done a long time ago . The proposal now is to keep ImageMagick 6 and make a new package with ImageMagick 7 , when we have all applications use only ImageMagick 7, we move the sources from ImageMagick7 to

Re: Some reasons I really dislike buildroot overrides and would like us to get rid of them soon

On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 10:30 PM Adam Williamson wrote: > So there's this CI ticket ATM[0] about whether the environment in which > CI tests are run should or should not include and update from the > 'buildroot' repo, which contains both: > > 1. Packages that have been pushed stable since the

Re: Some reasons I really dislike buildroot overrides and would like us to get rid of them soon

On Fri Dec 2, 2022 at 13:30 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > What does everyone else think? Has the time come? Or is there more we > need to do to make side tags usable for all cases before getting rid of > overrides? -1. For many use cases, side tags are the correct solution and buildroot

Re: Some reasons I really dislike buildroot overrides and would like us to get rid of them soon

On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 11:13 PM Richard Shaw wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 3:30 PM Adam Williamson > wrote: >> >> >> What does everyone else think? Has the time come? Or is there more we >> need to do to make side tags usable for all cases before getting rid of >> overrides? > > > I wasn't

Re: Some reasons I really dislike buildroot overrides and would like us to get rid of them soon

On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 3:30 PM Adam Williamson wrote: > > What does everyone else think? Has the time come? Or is there more we > need to do to make side tags usable for all cases before getting rid of > overrides? > I wasn't aware of the CI issues so that seems like the last nail in the

Re: Web Assembly on Fedora: interested in a Fedora SIG to work on this?

> As Web Assembly (WASM) gains momentum we’d like to create a SIG as a place to > collaborate > to ensure that Fedora is a great platform to both build and run WASM > workloads. This > includes looking at the toolchains needed to build WASM as a target and the > runtimes > needed to run WASM.

Some reasons I really dislike buildroot overrides and would like us to get rid of them soon

So there's this CI ticket ATM[0] about whether the environment in which CI tests are run should or should not include and update from the 'buildroot' repo, which contains both: 1. Packages that have been pushed stable since the last time a compose succeeded (for Rawhide that's a Rawhide compose,

[EPEL-devel] Re: EPEL 7 retirement of findbugs-bcel

Yes, and if you can, tag it with "meeting" If it doesn't let you tag it with meeting, let me know and I'll do it. On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 11:49 AM Richard Fearn wrote: > It looks like the next step is to get this on the agenda for the EPEL > Steering Committee meeting. > > Should I create a

[Bug 2150409] New: perl-Date-Manip-6.90 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2150409 Bug ID: 2150409 Summary: perl-Date-Manip-6.90 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-Date-Manip Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged

Re: [HEADS UP] gpgme rebase to 1.17.1 and libqgpgme SONAME bump

Hmm, concerning `libphonenumber` there is no Java binding, only the C++ port of the original Java library. Moreover, nothing Java-related is distributed in the RPMs. That means that `BuildRequires: java-devel` is redundant here. I will try to do a scratch build. Regards, Jiri On Fri, Dec 2, 2022

Re: [HEADS UP] gpgme rebase to 1.17.1 and libqgpgme SONAME bump

Yes, builds in [1] were built with the `f38-build-side-60497` side tag. In [1] there are two errors that were not here in time I hit the submit button (maybe I should wait a bit longer): * `nothing provides libqgpgme.so.7 needed by kdepim-addons-22.08.3-1.fc38.i686` - this one was caused by not

[EPEL-devel] Re: EPEL 7 retirement of findbugs-bcel

It looks like the next step is to get this on the agenda for the EPEL Steering Committee meeting. Should I create a ticket here? https://pagure.io/epel/issues Regards, Richard -- Richard Fearn richardfe...@gmail.com ___ epel-devel mailing list --

Re: Web Assembly on Fedora: interested in a Fedora SIG to work on this?

> As Web Assembly (WASM) gains momentum we’d like to create a SIG as a place to > collaborate > to ensure that Fedora is a great platform to both build and run WASM > workloads. This > includes looking at the toolchains needed to build WASM as a target and the > runtimes > needed to run WASM.

Re: Web Assembly on Fedora: interested in a Fedora SIG to work on this?

I'm interested and am keen to learn more about how it all works. On Fri, 2 Dec 2022 at 18:07, Michael Dawson wrote: > Great to see all the interest so far. Will continue to point people to > this thread to collect those who are interested in being involved and will > look to get the SIG rolling

Re: [SONAME BUMP] capnproto 0.10.2

On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 4:13 PM Neal Gompa wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 10:07 AM Fabio Valentini wrote: > > > > On Thu, Dec 1, 2022 at 7:57 PM Neal Gompa wrote: > > > > > > Help would very much be appreciated, I'm currently underwater with other > > > work. > > > > I've prepared PRs with

Re: Web Assembly on Fedora: interested in a Fedora SIG to work on this?

Great to see all the interest so far. Will continue to point people to this thread to collect those who are interested in being involved and will look to get the SIG rolling early in the new year. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Fedora Review Service

On Fri, 2022-12-02 at 18:20 +0100, Jakub Kadlcik wrote: > Hello folks, > > for a couple of years now, I've been interested in the Fedora package > review process. Our queue is in hundreds of waiting packages for as > long as I can remember. I believe the situation can be improved. > > Since

Re: Fedora Review Service

On Fri, 2 Dec 2022 at 18:21, Jakub Kadlcik wrote: > > Hello folks, > > for a couple of years now, I've been interested in the Fedora package > review process. Our queue is in hundreds of waiting packages for as > long as I can remember. I believe the situation can be improved. > > Since summer, I

Fedora Review Service

Hello folks, for a couple of years now, I've been interested in the Fedora package review process. Our queue is in hundreds of waiting packages for as long as I can remember. I believe the situation can be improved. Since summer, I did ~40 package reviews to get a better grasp of the situation

Re: [Anaconda-devel] Anaconda Web UI

Hi, I'm sorry you feel it this way. Just want to point you to mount-point assignment feature which is in Anaconda for some time already (only text UI) where you are able to do your partitioning as you want and just assign that a mount points in Anaconda. I hope that helps. Best Regards,

Re: OpenCOLLADA dead upstream

On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 12:51 AM Luya Tshimbalanga wrote: > On 2022-11-30 17:55, Richard Shaw wrote: > > So it looks like the last commit was in 2018: > > https://github.com/KhronosGroup/OpenCOLLADA > > Before we go ripping it out of Fedora, is anyone aware of another active > upstream we can

Re: Mystery fedpkg srpm failure

* Sérgio Basto: >> > > As you can see, it does not expect spaces between Source[0-9]* >> > > and >> > > ':'. >> > > rpm, however, allows the spaces and there's 6 packages in Fedora >> > > that use this syntax quirk. >> > > [1]: https://pagure.io/rpkg/blob/master/f/pyrpkg/spec.py#_18 >> >>

Re: F38 proposal: Fedora Sway Spin (Self-Contained Change proposal)

On 12/1/22 11:35, Ben Cotton wrote: > == Detailed Description == > Fedora Window Manager spins greatly benefit users who enjoy a minimal > desktop. Sway is beginning to become well polished and is continuing > to gain traction from the community. Fedora particularly has a > first-class Wayland

Re: [SONAME BUMP] capnproto 0.10.2

On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 10:07 AM Fabio Valentini wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 1, 2022 at 7:57 PM Neal Gompa wrote: > > > > Help would very much be appreciated, I'm currently underwater with other > > work. > > I've prepared PRs with the version bumps for the different branches, > including lists of

Re: [SONAME BUMP] capnproto 0.10.2

On Thu, Dec 1, 2022 at 7:57 PM Neal Gompa wrote: > > Help would very much be appreciated, I'm currently underwater with other work. I've prepared PRs with the version bumps for the different branches, including lists of packages that need to be rebuilt: - rawhide:

Re: [Fedocal] Reminder meeting : ELN SIG

We have no agenda for today, so I’m going to cancel the meeting. The last meeting of the year will take place on December 16th. On Thu, Dec 1, 2022 at 7:00 AM wrote: > Dear all, > > You are kindly invited to the meeting: >ELN SIG on 2022-12-02 from 12:00:00 to 13:00:00 US/Eastern >At

F38 proposal: GNU Make version 4.4 (System-Wide Change proposal)

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/MAKE44 This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes process, proposals are publicly announced in order to receive community feedback. This proposal will only be implemented if approved by the Fedora Engineering Steering Committee. ==

F38 proposal: GNU Make version 4.4 (System-Wide Change proposal)

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/MAKE44 This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes process, proposals are publicly announced in order to receive community feedback. This proposal will only be implemented if approved by the Fedora Engineering Steering Committee. ==

[Bug 2150051] perl-Log-Dispatchouli-3.001 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2150051 Jitka Plesnikova changed: What|Removed |Added CC|iarn...@gmail.com, |

[Bug 2149651] perl-Module-Faker-0.023 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2149651 Jitka Plesnikova changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version||perl-Module-Faker-0.023-1.f

[Bug 2149651] perl-Module-Faker-0.023 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2149651 Jitka Plesnikova changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Doc Type|---

[Bug 2144904] perl-App-cpm for EPEL 9

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2144904 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED --- Comment #4 from

[Bug 2149282] perl-PAR-Packer-1.057 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2149282 Jitka Plesnikova changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version||perl-PAR-Packer-1.057-1.fc3

Re: Openvdb 10.0.1 failed on ppc64 architecture

On Fri, 2 Dec 2022 10:45:59 +0100 Dan Horák wrote: > On Fri, 2 Dec 2022 09:01:43 +0100 > Dan Horák wrote: > > > On Thu, 1 Dec 2022 17:51:08 -0800 > > Luya Tshimbalanga wrote: > > > > > Hello team, > > > > > > openvdb only failed on ppc64 architecture due to this error: > > > > > > -- > > >

[rpms/perl-Inline] PR #1: Package tests and update license to SPDX license

mspacek opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-Inline` that you are following: `` Package tests and update license to SPDX license `` To reply, visit the link below https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Inline/pull-request/1 ___

Re: Silent changes in Packaging Guidelines

There was no response from any FPC member as far as I can tell, therefore I have opened FPC ticket with the same request: https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/1232 Vít Dne 02. 11. 22 v 9:14 Petr Pisar napsal(a): It used to be a good practice to announce changes in Packaging

Re: Mystery fedpkg srpm failure

On Fri, 2022-12-02 at 10:14 +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Aleksei Bavshin: > > > On 12/1/22 23:18, Aleksei Bavshin wrote: > > > On 12/1/22 22:28, Florian Weimer wrote: > > > > I don't see what spec file aspect is causing this failure: > > > > > > > > $ fedpkg clone -a cups-bjnp > > > >

[rpms/perl-ExtUtils-CBuilder] PR #2: Update license to SPDX format; Add missing gating.yaml

jplesnik merged a pull-request against the project: `perl-ExtUtils-CBuilder` that you are following. Merged pull-request: `` Update license to SPDX format; Add missing gating.yaml `` https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-ExtUtils-CBuilder/pull-request/2

[rpms/perl-ExtUtils-CBuilder] PR #2: Update license to SPDX format; Add missing gating.yaml

jplesnik opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-ExtUtils-CBuilder` that you are following: `` Update license to SPDX format; Add missing gating.yaml `` To reply, visit the link below https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-ExtUtils-CBuilder/pull-request/2

Re: Red Hat Bugzilla fonts

On 30/11/2022 11:54, Jens-Ulrik Petersen wrote: I think good to open a bug against the Bugzilla product in bugzilla. Done: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2150286 -- Sincerely, Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.org) ___ devel mailing

[Bug 1835353] rubygem-mail: Out of memory issue through nested MIME parts

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1835353 Ondrej Soukup changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1835361 CC|

Re: Inactive packagers to be removed after the F37 release

Dne 02. 12. 22 v 8:00 Benson Muite napsal(a): - rpms/ruby-ncurses Taken Why? It does not deserve to live, at least in its current (abandoned and deprecated) form. Vít - rpms/ucx Taken ___ devel mailing list --

Re: [HEADS UP] gpgme rebase to 1.17.1 and libqgpgme SONAME bump

On 02. 12. 22 1:46, Adam Williamson wrote: On Wed, 2022-11-30 at 13:59 +0100, Jiri Kucera wrote: Thanks for the reminder Petr. I will do the rebase in rawhide only then. Thanks for taking care of these dependencies and announcing the bump. For extra bonus points :D, if it's not too much

[rpms/perl-Module-Pluggable] PR #3: Package tests and update license to SPDX format

mspacek merged a pull-request against the project: `perl-Module-Pluggable` that you are following. Merged pull-request: `` Package tests and update license to SPDX format `` https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Module-Pluggable/pull-request/3

[rpms/perl-Module-Pluggable] PR #3: Package tests and update license to SPDX format

mspacek opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-Module-Pluggable` that you are following: `` Package tests and update license to SPDX format `` To reply, visit the link below https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Module-Pluggable/pull-request/3

[rpms/perl-Module-Pluggable] PR #2: Package tests and update license to SPDX format

mspacek closed without merging a pull-request against the project: `perl-Module-Pluggable` that you are following. Closed pull-request: `` Package tests and update license to SPDX format `` https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Module-Pluggable/pull-request/2

Re: A very brief introduction.

Hi Jaime, Welcome to the community, again. This would be the place to start for package maintenance: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Joining_the_Package_Maintainers/ There are lots of us sponsors around, so please go through the process and we'll be happy to help you

New zlib-1.2.13

Hi, I've been working on a zlib rebase for some time now. I would like to introduce it to you via COPR repo [1] first before I push it to Fedora rawhide. If you could test installing your package or even test the zlib functionality, the feedback would be much appreciated. The plan is to push

Re: [HEADS UP] gpgme rebase to 1.17.1 and libqgpgme SONAME bump

V Thu, Dec 01, 2022 at 04:46:06PM -0800, Adam Williamson napsal(a): > On Wed, 2022-11-30 at 13:59 +0100, Jiri Kucera wrote: > > Thanks for the reminder Petr. I will do the rebase in rawhide only then. > > Thanks for taking care of these dependencies and announcing the bump. > > For extra bonus

Re: Openvdb 10.0.1 failed on ppc64 architecture

On Fri, 2 Dec 2022 09:01:43 +0100 Dan Horák wrote: > On Thu, 1 Dec 2022 17:51:08 -0800 > Luya Tshimbalanga wrote: > > > Hello team, > > > > openvdb only failed on ppc64 architecture due to this error: > > > > -- > > > > [ 75%] Building CXX object > >

Re: Mystery fedpkg srpm failure

* Aleksei Bavshin: > On 12/1/22 23:18, Aleksei Bavshin wrote: >> On 12/1/22 22:28, Florian Weimer wrote: >>> I don't see what spec file aspect is causing this failure: >>> >>> $ fedpkg clone -a cups-bjnp >>> Cloning into 'cups-bjnp'... >>> remote: Enumerating objects: 278, done. >>> remote:

Re: Openvdb 10.0.1 failed on ppc64 architecture

On Thu, 1 Dec 2022 17:51:08 -0800 Luya Tshimbalanga wrote: > Hello team, > > openvdb only failed on ppc64 architecture due to this error: > > -- > > [ 75%] Building CXX object > openvdb/openvdb/CMakeFiles/openvdb_static.dir/instantiations/Composite.cc.o > cd