Hello, all.
I've recently learnt that there are two perl-related groups
in comps (which allows you to install groups of rpms with the
syntax "dnf group install ".
These groups are perl and perl-web. They are defined as follows:
Group: Perl Development
Description: Support for developing
On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 3:57 PM Jan Pazdziora wrote:
>
> Where did the different date of 2024-05-21 come from and where was
> it tracked?
It comes from the fact that the EOL date for Fedora Linux N is 4 weeks
from the release of the Fedora Linux N+2 final, so it's tracked on the
F40 schedule.
On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 11:03:07PM +0530, Samyak Jain wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> Fedora Linux 38 will go end of life for updates and support on
> 2024-05-21.
This announce comes as a surprise becuase it does not match the
https://fedorapeople.org/groups/schedule/f-38/f-38-key-tasks.html
On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 9:43 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
> Do you think that's worth a separate Change from the Node.js 22 Change
> I already filed? I can amend that (and ask FESCo to re-vote based on
> new information).
I think the change is significant enough, yes.
Having a separate change
On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 3:38 PM Fabio Valentini wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 9:33 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, May 13, 2024 at 8:21 AM Fabio Valentini
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, May 13, 2024 at 2:02 PM Stephen Gallagher
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Upstream Node.js
On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 9:33 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 13, 2024 at 8:21 AM Fabio Valentini wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, May 13, 2024 at 2:02 PM Stephen Gallagher
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Upstream Node.js has not supported the i686 architecture officially
> > > since Node.js 10.x
On Mon, May 13, 2024 at 8:21 AM Fabio Valentini wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 13, 2024 at 2:02 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> >
> > Upstream Node.js has not supported the i686 architecture officially
> > since Node.js 10.x (released in 2018). As of Node.js 22, it appears
> > that v8 will no longer build
Hello all,
Fedora Linux 38 will go end of life for updates and support on
2024-05-21.
No more updates of any kind, including security updates or security
announcements, will be available for Fedora Linux 38 after the said
date. All the updates of Fedora Linux 38 being pushed to stable will be
Similarly, python-llvmlite requires llvm14, and the upcoming upstream
release will require llvm15 (with a medium-term plan to get to llvm17).
For complex projects that are tightly coupled to the LLVM implementation
like this, there is generally *absolutely nothing* that downstream
packagers
Dear all,
You are kindly invited to the meeting:
EPEL Steering Committee on 2024-05-15 from 18:00:00 to 19:00:00 UTC
At fedora-meet...@chat.fedoraproject.org
The meeting will be about:
https://chat.fedoraproject.org/#/room/#meeting:fedoraproject.org
This is the weekly EPEL Steering
Hello all,
Fedora Linux 38 will go end of life for updates and support on
2024-05-21.
No more updates of any kind, including security updates or security
announcements, will be available for Fedora Linux 38 after the said
date. All the updates of Fedora Linux 38 being pushed to stable will be
On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 06:11:15PM GMT, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> On Tue, 2024-05-14 at 14:53 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > When is Fedora 38 going EOL?
> >
> > https://fedorapeople.org/groups/schedule/f-38/f-38-key-tasks.html say
> > s today
> >
On Tue, 2024-05-14 at 14:53 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> Hi,
>
> When is Fedora 38 going EOL?
>
> https://fedorapeople.org/groups/schedule/f-38/f-38-key-tasks.html say
> s today
> https://fedorapeople.org/groups/schedule/f-40/f-40-key-tasks.html say
> next week
>
> Which one is correct?
Bodhi
On 14. 05. 24 16:02, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 13. 05. 24 v 20:23 Miro Hrončok napsal(a):
On 13. 05. 24 15:38, Vít Ondruch wrote:
And TBH, for me as a Fedora used with no special interest in Python, the
current Python versioning sucks hard. How am I supposed to tell what is the
current version
For many years I have maintained xu4 (https://xu4.sourceforge.net/,
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/xu4/), an open source engine which
can run the freely available Ultima IV game files. When the original
code was subsumed into the ScummVM engine, I was conflicted about what
should be done with
Dne 13. 05. 24 v 20:23 Miro Hrončok napsal(a):
On 13. 05. 24 15:38, Vít Ondruch wrote:
And TBH, for me as a Fedora used with no special interest in Python,
the current Python versioning sucks hard. How am I supposed to tell
what is the current version just looking at e.g. the repository? Is
Dne 14. 05. 24 v 2:03 Stephen Gallagher napsal(a):
On Mon, May 13, 2024 at 10:09 AM Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 13. 05. 24 v 15:22 Panu Matilainen napsal(a):
On 5/13/24 16:09, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 13. 05. 24 v 11:39 Florian Festi napsal(a):
%patch otoh (now) is a regular (though internally
Dne 14. 05. 24 v 11:26 Tim Landscheidt napsal(a):
Vít Ondruch wrote:
%patch otoh (now) is a regular (though internally
implemented) macro that is expanded with other macros
and though can be used in other macros and expressions.
Do I read correctly that we can now use `%patch` in
e.g.
On Mon, May 13, 2024 at 3:42 PM Vít Ondruch wrote:
>
> My point is that we can spent time maintaining llvm00 - llvm99 packages
> or we can spent time adjusting upstream projects to be compatible with
> the latest llvm.
>
There are many projects that require a fair amount of work to be ported to
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20240513.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20240514.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 2
Added packages: 6
Dropped packages:1
Upgraded packages: 64
Downgraded packages: 3
Size of added packages: 1.12 MiB
Size of dropped packages:1.67
Hi,
When is Fedora 38 going EOL?
https://fedorapeople.org/groups/schedule/f-38/f-38-key-tasks.html says today
https://fedorapeople.org/groups/schedule/f-40/f-40-key-tasks.html say next week
Which one is correct?
Thanks,
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
--
On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 02:01:09PM +0300, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> On 5/14/24 13:39, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > On Mon, May 13, 2024 at 01:37:11PM +0300, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> > > I outlined the migration process last year in
> > >
On 5/14/24 13:39, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
On Mon, May 13, 2024 at 01:37:11PM +0300, Panu Matilainen wrote:
I outlined the migration process last year in
Yesterday, we ran into an issue where some of rpm upstream testcases are
suddenly failing on one system. The difference to everybody elses
working tests turned out to be Fedora 40, and was easily reproduced
elsewhere on F40 then.
On a closer look, the failing tests were all complaining
On Mon, May 13, 2024 at 01:37:11PM +0300, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> I outlined the migration process last year in
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/NEFOV236FJYS2RED2SEOV5YHDFLDX7DK/#OYCWXKAMIXEZNYPVOM6VQ3YYXQ76M3DG
> but failed to follow-up, so
Announcing the creation of a new nightly release validation test event
for Fedora 41 Rawhide 20240514.n.0. Please help run some tests for this
nightly compose if you have time. For more information on nightly
release validation testing, see:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki
On Monday, 13 May 2024 at 23:22, Nils Philippsen wrote:
[...]
> Let me try to clarify: Offering both major versions is mainly to cater
> for existing projects people might have. It’s hardly a maintenance
> burden as long as the dependencies are still available, at some point
> this might change
On 5/13/24 17:08, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 13. 05. 24 v 15:22 Panu Matilainen napsal(a):
On 5/13/24 16:09, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 13. 05. 24 v 11:39 Florian Festi napsal(a):
%patch otoh (now) is a regular (though internally implemented) macro
that is expanded with other macros and though can
Vít Ondruch wrote:
%patch otoh (now) is a regular (though internally
implemented) macro that is expanded with other macros
and though can be used in other macros and expressions.
>>> Do I read correctly that we can now use `%patch` in
>>> e.g. `%check` section? Interesting. Is
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2264848
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jples...@redhat.com
Depends
Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> the %check section
> (which, if I remember correctly is run AFTER the creation of the
> binary RPMs)
No, it runs after %install but before the files are packaged up. It's
possible for %check to make changes to what was staged in %install and
have those changes appear in
31 matches
Mail list logo
