Miro Hrončok wrote on 2024/01/25 1:38:
Dear maintainers.
Based on the current fail to build from source policy, the following packages
should be retired from Fedora 40 approximately one week before branching.
5 weekly reminders are required, hence the retirement will happen
approximately in 5
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2261854
Bug ID: 2261854
Summary: perl-PDL-2.085 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-PDL
Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2258287
--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2024-7b72801203 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
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2259685
--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2024-7b72801203 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
The following Fedora EPEL 7 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
5 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2024-4ff425606f
openssl11-1.1.1k-7.el7
2 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2024-54270ec4b3
clojure-1.8.0-2.el7
The following builds have been
The following Fedora EPEL 8 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
26 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2024-3a29f0d349
python-paramiko-2.12.0-2.el8
5 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2024-76443fce3f
indent-2.2.13-5.el8
5
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2260383
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #3 from
Hey folks! You may have noticed unpredictable openQA test failures on
Rawhide updates ATM. This is mainly because of the mass rebuild. All the
packages from the mass rebuild have been tagged into the buildroot repo
(which the openQA tests use), so now there are far more on-the-fly
updates than
On 2024-01-29 16:00, Sérgio Basto wrote:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Versioning/#_rawhide_is_allowed_to_lag_temporarily
you may do a new build with lower EVR
That is not what that guideline says. It says the Rawhide build can be
lower-versioned than a current
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1936241
Jeffrey Hutzelman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jh...@cmu.edu
--- Comment #3
Sérgio Basto wrote:
> yes rawhide user should use dnf distro-sync not dnf upgrade
+1. Rawhide EVRs should be allowed to go backwards, that is an integral part
of being a development branch.
Kevin Kofler
--
___
devel mailing list --
On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 1:00 AM Sérgio Basto wrote:
>
(snip)
> yes rawhide user should use dnf distro-sync not dnf upgrade
It is better, yes, but it is not *required*.
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Versioning/#_rawhide_is_allowed_to_lag_temporarily
This is a
On Mon, 2024-01-29 at 15:43 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> nirik ran a script that checks for versioning issues in Rawhide
> today,
> and it found several:
> https://pagure.io/releng/issue/11922#comment-893797
>
> Some of these followed a pattern, so I figured a reminder was in
> order.
> In
nirik ran a script that checks for versioning issues in Rawhide today,
and it found several: https://pagure.io/releng/issue/11922#comment-893797
Aside from rogue version downgrades (see other mail), a few of these
followed a different pattern: problems with snapshot versioning.
1. patool:
nirik ran a script that checks for versioning issues in Rawhide today,
and it found several: https://pagure.io/releng/issue/11922#comment-893797
Some of these followed a pattern, so I figured a reminder was in order.
In all these cases, a new version was pushed to Rawhide, then "reverted"
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2261658
Bug ID: 2261658
Summary: rt: FTBFS in Fedora rawhide/f40
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: rt
Assignee: rc040...@freenet.de
Reporter:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2261658
--- Comment #2 from Fedora Release Engineering ---
Created attachment 2013429
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=2013429=edit
root.log
file root.log too big, will only attach last 32768 bytes
--
You are receiving this
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2261658
--- Comment #3 from Fedora Release Engineering ---
Created attachment 2013430
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=2013430=edit
state.log
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2261658
--- Comment #1 from Fedora Release Engineering ---
Created attachment 2013428
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=2013428=edit
build.log
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2261642
Bug ID: 2261642
Summary: perl-Module-CoreList-5.20240129 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-Module-CoreList
Keywords:
I've orphaned gnome-translate and libtranslate packages.
Both are unmaintained upstream more than a decade and do not work
nowadays at all.
For replacement just use translate-shell package (cmdline only).
BTW, executable name "/usr/bin/translate" is now free (once upon a time
someone wanted
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2261451
--- Comment #2 from Fedora Release Engineering ---
Created attachment 2012857
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=2012857=edit
root.log
file root.log too big, will only attach last 32768 bytes
--
You are receiving this
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2261451
--- Comment #3 from Fedora Release Engineering ---
Created attachment 2012858
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=2012858=edit
state.log
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2261452
--- Comment #1 from Fedora Release Engineering ---
Created attachment 2012859
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=2012859=edit
build.log
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2261451
Bug ID: 2261451
Summary: perl-WWW-Google-Contacts: FTBFS in Fedora rawhide/f40
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-WWW-Google-Contacts
Assignee:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2261452
--- Comment #2 from Fedora Release Engineering ---
Created attachment 2012860
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=2012860=edit
root.log
file root.log too big, will only attach last 32768 bytes
--
You are receiving this
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2261452
Bug ID: 2261452
Summary: perl-Wx-GLCanvas: FTBFS in Fedora rawhide/f40
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-Wx-GLCanvas
Assignee:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2261452
--- Comment #3 from Fedora Release Engineering ---
Created attachment 2012861
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=2012861=edit
state.log
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2261449
--- Comment #3 from Fedora Release Engineering ---
Created attachment 2012852
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=2012852=edit
state.log
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2261451
--- Comment #1 from Fedora Release Engineering ---
Created attachment 2012856
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=2012856=edit
build.log
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2261449
--- Comment #1 from Fedora Release Engineering ---
Created attachment 2012850
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=2012850=edit
build.log
file build.log too big, will only attach last 32768 bytes
--
You are receiving this
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2261449
--- Comment #2 from Fedora Release Engineering ---
Created attachment 2012851
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=2012851=edit
root.log
file root.log too big, will only attach last 32768 bytes
--
You are receiving this
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2261449
Bug ID: 2261449
Summary: perl-Prima: FTBFS in Fedora rawhide/f40
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-Prima
Assignee: ppi...@redhat.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2261448
--- Comment #3 from Fedora Release Engineering ---
Created attachment 2012849
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=2012849=edit
state.log
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2261448
--- Comment #1 from Fedora Release Engineering ---
Created attachment 2012847
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=2012847=edit
build.log
file build.log too big, will only attach last 32768 bytes
--
You are receiving this
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2261448
--- Comment #2 from Fedora Release Engineering ---
Created attachment 2012848
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=2012848=edit
root.log
file root.log too big, will only attach last 32768 bytes
--
You are receiving this
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2261448
Bug ID: 2261448
Summary: perl-Curses: FTBFS in Fedora rawhide/f40
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-Curses
Assignee: steve.tray...@cern.ch
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2261445
--- Comment #3 from Fedora Release Engineering ---
Created attachment 2012840
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=2012840=edit
state.log
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2261445
--- Comment #2 from Fedora Release Engineering ---
Created attachment 2012839
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=2012839=edit
root.log
file root.log too big, will only attach last 32768 bytes
--
You are receiving this
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2261446
--- Comment #3 from Fedora Release Engineering ---
Created attachment 2012843
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=2012843=edit
state.log
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2261446
--- Comment #2 from Fedora Release Engineering ---
Created attachment 2012842
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=2012842=edit
root.log
file root.log too big, will only attach last 32768 bytes
--
You are receiving this
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2261446
--- Comment #1 from Fedora Release Engineering ---
Created attachment 2012841
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=2012841=edit
build.log
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2261446
Bug ID: 2261446
Summary: perl-Cairo: FTBFS in Fedora rawhide/f40
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-Cairo
Assignee: spo...@gmail.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2261445
Bug ID: 2261445
Summary: perl-Authen-Krb5-Admin: FTBFS in Fedora rawhide/f40
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-Authen-Krb5-Admin
Assignee:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2261445
--- Comment #1 from Fedora Release Engineering ---
Created attachment 2012838
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=2012838=edit
build.log
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Logs and minutes:
https://zbyszek.fedorapeople.org/fesco-2024-01-29.2024-01-29-19.30.log.html
https://zbyszek.fedorapeople.org/fesco-2024-01-29.2024-01-29-19.30.log.txt
https://zbyszek.fedorapeople.org/fesco-2024-01-29.2024-01-29-19.30.minutes.html
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2261386
Bug ID: 2261386
Summary: mod_perl: FTBFS in Fedora rawhide/f40
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: mod_perl
Assignee: zonexpertconsult...@outlook.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2261386
--- Comment #2 from Fedora Release Engineering ---
Created attachment 2012653
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=2012653=edit
root.log
file root.log too big, will only attach last 32768 bytes
--
You are receiving this
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2261386
--- Comment #1 from Fedora Release Engineering ---
Created attachment 2012652
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=2012652=edit
build.log
file build.log too big, will only attach last 32768 bytes
--
You are receiving this
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2261386
--- Comment #3 from Fedora Release Engineering ---
Created attachment 2012654
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=2012654=edit
state.log
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Dne 29. 01. 24 v 13:58 Ben Beasley napsal(a):
Could you please double-check this change? I noticed that in spacebar, LicenseRef-KDE-Accepted-GPL was the actual name
of a license file in the %files section; this was replaced with (GPL-2.0-only OR GPL-3.0-only), which causes the
package to
zuul commented on the pull-request: `Convert to %autorelease and
%autochangelog` that you are following:
``
Build succeeded.
https://fedora.softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/buildset/00a475203c7b4ddf91316585ebd988f5
- [check-for-arches
Hello folks,
before all, I want to thank everyone putting their time in reviewing new
package requests! That is a key task in distinguish Fedora among the
other Linux distribution and ensure we have high quality packages in our
repositories.
That said, I'd like to make a request and maybe
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2254463 reappeared, this
time on Fedora 39. The fix is known, it just needs to get built and
released.
On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 1:35 PM Richard Shaw wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 12:03 PM Jerry James wrote:
>>
>> For the second time in two days,
On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 12:03 PM Jerry James wrote:
> For the second time in two days, running "fedpkg build" gave me a few
> dozen lines that say:
>
> warning: runaway fork() in Lua script
>
> before the usual build messages start appearing. Is this a known issue?
>
Just started seeing this
For the second time in two days, running "fedpkg build" gave me a few
dozen lines that say:
warning: runaway fork() in Lua script
before the usual build messages start appearing. Is this a known issue?
It looks like I am not the only one to encounter this:
Hi all,
Per the Fedora Linux f40 schedule and the challenges [1], we started a
mass rebuild for Fedora Linux f40 on 2024-01-22. We did a mass
rebuild for Fedora Linux f40 for changes like:
- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/GNUToolchainF40
- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Java21
Hi all,
Per the Fedora Linux f40 schedule and the challenges [1], we started a
mass rebuild for Fedora Linux f40 on 2024-01-22. We did a mass
rebuild for Fedora Linux f40 for changes like:
- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/GNUToolchainF40
- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Java21
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1731721
Ralf Corsepius changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
Status|NEW
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1731700
Ralf Corsepius changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |CLOSED
Resolution|---
zuul commented on the pull-request: `Convert to %autorelease and
%autochangelog` that you are following:
``
Build succeeded.
https://fedora.softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/buildset/5ae0717deecf41f2a502d27b5140486c
- [check-for-arches
zuul commented on the pull-request: `Convert to %autorelease and
%autochangelog` that you are following:
``
Build succeeded.
https://fedora.softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/buildset/cf2bf27b41aa4f709db2ce8c459ceaa1
- [check-for-arches
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2260493
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Link ID|
zuul commented on the pull-request: `Convert to %autorelease and
%autochangelog` that you are following:
``
Build succeeded.
https://fedora.softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/buildset/38d17d49c2b743edb22bd4bb1903db8b
- [check-for-arches
zuul commented on the pull-request: `Convert to %autorelease and
%autochangelog` that you are following:
``
Build succeeded.
https://fedora.softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/buildset/be94edeec1da42878737fbfdec387606
- [check-for-arches
zuul commented on the pull-request: `Convert to %autorelease and
%autochangelog` that you are following:
``
Build failed. More information on how to proceed and troubleshoot errors
available at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Zuul-based-ci
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the
FESCo meeting Monday at 19:30 UTC in #meeting:fedoraproject.org
on Matrix.
To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto
or run:
date -d '2024-01-29 19:30 UTC'
Links to all issues to be
churchyard opened a new pull-request against the project: `slic3r` that you are
following:
``
Convert to %autorelease and %autochangelog
``
To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/slic3r/pull-request/13
--
___
perl-devel
On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 6:37 AM Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 2:32 PM David Trudgian via epel-devel
> wrote:
> >
> > Dear all,
> >
> > Following advice from Neal elsewhere on this list [1], I’m requesting
> that the singularity-ce EPEL packages may be updated to 4.1.0 following
On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 2:32 PM David Trudgian via epel-devel
wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> Following advice from Neal elsewhere on this list [1], I’m requesting that
> the singularity-ce EPEL packages may be updated to 4.1.0 following the
> incompatible upgrade procedure. The justification for the
churchyard opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-Wx-GLCanvas`
that you are following:
``
Convert to %autorelease and %autochangelog
``
To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Wx-GLCanvas/pull-request/3
--
churchyard opened a new pull-request against the project:
`perl-Module-Build-WithXSpp` that you are following:
``
Convert to %autorelease and %autochangelog
``
To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Module-Build-WithXSpp/pull-request/1
--
churchyard opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-Growl-GNTP`
that you are following:
``
Convert to %autorelease and %autochangelog
``
To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Growl-GNTP/pull-request/1
--
churchyard opened a new pull-request against the project:
`perl-ExtUtils-Typemaps-Default` that you are following:
``
Convert to %autorelease and %autochangelog
``
To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-ExtUtils-Typemaps-Default/pull-request/1
--
churchyard opened a new pull-request against the project:
`perl-ExtUtils-CppGuess` that you are following:
``
Convert to %autorelease and %autochangelog
``
To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-ExtUtils-CppGuess/pull-request/2
--
Dear all,
Following advice from Neal elsewhere on this list [1], I’m requesting that the
singularity-ce EPEL packages may be updated to 4.1.0 following the incompatible
upgrade procedure. The justification for the upgrade is that 3.x singularity-ce
is no longer maintained upstream. Note that
Hello,
Many of the EPEL Steering Committee members will be at a conference this
Wedensday.
We have also changed the meeting time to 1800 UTC (Same date and location).
We don't have much (or anything) to cover.
Unless something dramatic comes up. I would like to cancel this weeks
meeting.
Troy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2251788
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2251788
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
--- Comment #9 from
Hey Folks,
KDE SIG x Fedora QA hosts the KDE Plasma 6 Test Week.
If you are willing to test new Desktop Environments or use KDE
for some time; this is your time.
Contribute to testing the new KDE and finding bugs ahead of the F40 release.
The instructions are simple, and can be found in the
jplesnik merged a pull-request against the project: `perl-Net-DNS` that you are
following.
Merged pull-request:
``
1.43 bump (rhbz#2251788)
``
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Net-DNS/pull-request/5
--
___
perl-devel mailing list --
On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 at 13:03, Richard Shaw wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 4:16 AM Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, 28 Jan 2024 at 15:18, Richard Shaw wrote:
>> >
>> > Well I upped the memory to 10GB and got it to build but the issue on i686
>> > with the wrong tbb package being pulled
I opened a PR on calligra[1] at the leaf of the remaining i686
dependency chain to start the process of dropping i686, because even if
we get openvdb working now, there’s no good reason to keep i686 versions
of these packages in the future. The EncourageI686LeafRemoval Change was
specifically
jplesnik opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-Net-DNS` that you
are following:
``
1.43 bump (rhbz#2251788)
``
To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Net-DNS/pull-request/5
--
___
perl-devel mailing list
On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 02:48:19PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 03:25:02PM +0100, Sandro wrote:
> > On 24-01-2024 17:38, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > > Dear maintainers.
> > >
> > > Based on the current fail to build from source policy, the following
> > >
On Wed, Jan 24, 2024 at 05:38:59PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> infinipath-psm honli
I think this project should be retired. The upstream repo has been archives
with a message that Intel no longer supports this project.
I'll rebuild mpich without this dependency.
Zbyszek
On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 7:13 AM Sérgio Basto wrote:
> >
> > Well I just re-tried openvdb with _smp_build_ncpus 1 and it still
> > failed so I don't think we have a choice at this point. Perhaps it
> > was hitting the 4GB max per process due to being 32bit?
> >
>
> Have you try set in build the
On Sun, 2024-01-28 at 15:57 -0600, Richard Shaw wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 28, 2024 at 9:55 AM Ben Beasley
> wrote:
> > Blender already excludes i686:
> >
> > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/blender/blob/8088da10c20e53ab0e1dd5de6fd3a2344bd288aa/f/blender.spec#_207
> >
> > So does prusa-slicer:
> >
On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 4:16 AM Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Jan 2024 at 15:18, Richard Shaw wrote:
> >
> > Well I upped the memory to 10GB and got it to build but the issue on
> i686 with the wrong tbb package being pulled in has not been corrected by
> any of the 4 maintainers of the
Miroslav,
Could you please double-check this change? I noticed that in spacebar,
LicenseRef-KDE-Accepted-GPL was the actual name of a license file in the
%files section; this was replaced with (GPL-2.0-only OR GPL-3.0-only),
which causes the package to FTBFS.
Looking at the grep output you
Hello all,
I recorded a very short video showing how you can contribute to the Log
Detective project.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-O7ryKCnlQ
Any help will be greatly appreciated :-)
Jakub
On Wed, Jan 17, 2024 at 8:26 PM Jiri Kyjovsky wrote:
> Hello Tristan,
>
> We store the data in
Hi,
I intend to get stgit unretired and want to maintain it in the future.
The package has been in Fedora up to f38 but has since been orphaned
and, following that, retired. The reason for orphaning it was lack of
time of the maintainer, especially as stgit got rewritten in Rust and
required
Good evening folks,
FESco previously approved a requirement[1] that Spin/Labs owners send a
keepalive request in order to keep building the spin or lab. I have
opened Pagure issues[2] for all Spins and Labs for this release[3].
If you are the owner of one of those spins and labs, please reply
Report started at 2024-01-28 16:04:44 UTC
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:
Good evening folks,
FESco previously approved a requirement[1] that Spin/Labs owners send a
keepalive request in order to keep building the spin or lab. I have
opened Pagure issues[2] for all Spins and Labs for this release[3].
If you are the owner of one of those spins and labs, please reply
Orphaned packages looking for new maintainers
--
___
devel-announce mailing list -- devel-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-announce-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
Dear maintainers.
Based on the current fail to build from source policy, the following packages
should be retired from Fedora 40 approximately one week before branching.
5 weekly reminders are required, hence the retirement will happen
approximately in 5 weeks, i.e. around 2024-02-28.
Since
Sorry for the late action. I've merged PR for mozc.
Thanks,
On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 3:43 AM Ben Beasley wrote:
>
> In one week, 2024-02-04, or slightly later, I plan to update abseil-cpp
> from 20230802.1 to 20230116.0 (Abseil LTS branch, Jan 2024)[1] in side
> tags for F40/Rawhide. If I miss
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2260383
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
--- Comment #2 from
On Fri, 26 Jan 2024 at 12:29, Florian Weimer wrote:
> In the past, this kind of problem would have just compiled and resulted
> in a run-time error when the Python extension module is loaded. In some
> cases, issues went completely unnoticed because the Python bindins were
> unused. But with GCC
1 - 100 of 113 matches
Mail list logo
