Le 26/09/2023 à 19:32, Carlos O'Donell a écrit :
In version 8.3 (F40) we'll includes the UTC definition
in our patch to use system tzdata, UTC being use
as the fallback value.
I'm curious; what does this patch look like?
(trivial) patch to our system tzdata patch attached
In short, if file
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2240303
--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2023-251cf0a8cc has been pushed to the Fedora 39 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
OLD: Fedora-39-20230925.n.1
NEW: Fedora-39-20230926.n.1
= SUMMARY =
Added images:4
Dropped images: 2
Added packages: 8
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 38
Downgraded packages: 1
Size of added packages: 6.99 MiB
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Size
Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> I am still opposed, because it is still a backwards-incompatible change that
> breaks existing repositories (such as my Calcforge one)
Backwards-incompatible changes are often made far too nonchalantly.
This is not one of those cases. When it comes to
On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 07:22:56PM +0200, Alexander Sosedkin wrote:
>
> Whoa, that's too many, I suspect misreporting.
Could be.
> I seriously doubt they were all really using DSA-1024 and switched over.
> But if that really was the case --- great job to all of them.
>
> > The list from
Hello,
I'm $SUBJ, as I have no longer use for it.
Feel free to take it if you're interested:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rubygem-transaction-simple
Regards,
Pavel
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an
On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 5:40 PM Kevin Kofler via devel
wrote:
> I am still opposed, because it is still a backwards-incompatible change that
> breaks existing repositories (such as my Calcforge one) just so that someone
> can tick a checkbox on some "security" checklist.
Are you saying you need
On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 10:20 AM Alexander Sosedkin
wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> 6 months ago, there's been a F38 blocker: https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2960
> Long story short:
> RPM has moved to sequoia,
> sequoia has started respecting crypto-policies,
> Google repos have been signed with a 1024-bit
On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 6:23 PM Alexander Sosedkin wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 7:47 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 11:19:18AM +0200, Alexander Sosedkin wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > 6 months ago, there's been a F38 blocker:
> > >
Alexander Sosedkin wrote:
> Because of that, I'd like to revert that RPM policy relaxation
> https://gitlab.com/redhat-crypto/fedora-crypto-policies/-/commit/a12f7b20638be8f872ad1995c7d2edce41c227b5
> in (f39) rawhide and align RPM security with the rest of the policy.
>
> Thoughts / feedback?
On Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 4:39 AM Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Dne 22. 09. 23 v 16:01 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek napsal(a):
> > On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 10:43:05AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2233281#c3
> >>
> >> This probably answers my question. So heads up
On Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 4:52 AM Remi Collet wrote:
>
> Le 25/09/2023 à 10:38, Vít Ondruch a écrit :
> >
> > Dne 22. 09. 23 v 16:01 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek napsal(a):
> >> On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 10:43:05AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> >>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2233281#c3
On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 7:47 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 11:19:18AM +0200, Alexander Sosedkin wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > 6 months ago, there's been a F38 blocker: https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2960
> > Long story short:
> > RPM has moved to sequoia,
> > sequoia has started
redhat-rpm-config-267-1.fc40 activates the first phase of compiler flags
to avoid regressions in the Fedora C99 port. Implicit ints and implicit
function declarations will be rejected by default. The recommended way
to opt out is to set %build_type_safety_c to 0. See the buildflags.md
On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 12:44 PM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
>
> Dne 19. 09. 23 v 11:19 Alexander Sosedkin napsal(a):
> > Because of that, I'd like to revert that RPM policy relaxation
> > https://gitlab.com/redhat-crypto/fedora-crypto-policies/-/commit/a12f7b20638be8f872ad1995c7d2edce41c227b5
> > in
Neal Gompa wrote:
> To summarize: there's no such thing as a "good" time to do it, and the
> SIG feels that doing it at the Plasma 6.0 major version upgrade allows
> us to reset expectations, as users are used to major versions being
> significantly different than their predecessors. Otherwise, we
On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 12:06 PM Maxwell G wrote:
>
> On Tue Sep 26, 2023 at 13:07 +0200, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> > Maxwell G wrote:
> > > Also, I do not like that this is tied together to the Plasma 6 change.
> > > Nobody is actually talking about the subject of the change, KDE Plasma
>
On Tue Sep 26, 2023 at 13:07 +0200, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> Maxwell G wrote:
> > Also, I do not like that this is tied together to the Plasma 6 change.
> > Nobody is actually talking about the subject of the change, KDE Plasma
> > 6; most of the conversation is about dropping X11 which was
Dear all,
You are kindly invited to the meeting:
EPEL Steering Committee on 2023-09-27 from 16:00:00 to 17:00:00 US/Eastern
At fedora-meet...@irc.libera.chat
The meeting will be about:
This is the weekly EPEL Steering Committee Meeting.
A general agenda is the following:
#topic aloha
I (FAS: music) plan to adopt the python-pybv package and unretire it in
F39 and F40/Rawhide. This email provides the required[1] notice. This
package was retired while orphaned today due to FTI/FTBFS.
I already have a PR that fixes the FTI/FTBFS[2], so I will be able to
deal with that
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20230925.n.1
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20230926.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:4
Dropped images: 4
Added packages: 5
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 62
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 2.14 MiB
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Maxwell G wrote:
> Also, I do not like that this is tied together to the Plasma 6 change.
> Nobody is actually talking about the subject of the change, KDE Plasma
> 6; most of the conversation is about dropping X11 which was tacked on to
> this Change.
> It would be better as a separate Change
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2240644
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version||perl-PDF-API2-2.045-1.fc40
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2240644
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
--- Comment #1 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2240644
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Doc Type|---
On Tuesday, 26 September 2023 at 10:49, Jan Grulich wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This is specified in the QAdwaitaDecorations package itself.
>
> See
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/qadwaitadecorations/blob/rawhide/f/qadwaitadecorations.spec#_31
> .
Thanks, I forgot about Supplements.
Regards,
Hi,
This is specified in the QAdwaitaDecorations package itself.
See
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/qadwaitadecorations/blob/rawhide/f/qadwaitadecorations.spec#_31
.
Regards,
Jan
út 26. 9. 2023 v 9:47 odesílatel Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski <
domi...@greysector.net> napsal:
> Hello!
>
>
Hello!
I'm having hard time figuring out which package brought in the weak
dependencies in my morning update:
...
Installing weak dependencies:
qadwaitadecorations-qt5 x86_64 0.1.1-1.fc38 updates 55 k
qadwaitadecorations-qt6 x86_64 0.1.1-1.fc38 updates 62 k
After the update completed, rpm says
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2240458
--- Comment #4 from Jitka Plesnikova ---
It seems that reverting patch mention in comment [1] should be used as
workaround. I tried it and irssi which I rebuilt with this perl worked as
expected.
[1]
29 matches
Mail list logo
