A qua, 04-05-2022 às 15:38 -0400, Stephen John Smoogen escreveu:
>
>
> On Wed, 4 May 2022 at 15:31, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> > On Wed, 2022-05-04 at 20:25 +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> > > dnf --enablerepo=epel-next-testing --whatprovides "libpoppler-
On Wed, 2022-05-04 at 20:25 +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> dnf --enablerepo=epel-next-testing --whatprovides "libpoppler-
> qt5.so*"
> nothing ?!?
I missed repoquery word .
dnf --enablerepo=epel-next-testing repoquery --whatprovides
"libpoppler-qt5.so*"
nothing
On Wed, 2022-05-04 at 08:01 -0700, Troy Dawson wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 9:31 AM Troy Dawson
> wrote:
> > During the past week qt5 was updated on CentOS Stream 8 and 9 to
> > version 5.15.3. This caused updates to break for KDE users running
> > CentOS Stream 8 and 9. The epel 8 and 9
On Wed, 2022-05-04 at 17:01 +0200, Ondrej Nosek wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> A few months ago fedpkg introduced a change which avoids downloading
> source files (from dist-git) that are not used in the specfile and
> therefore downloading them would be wasting of resources and time.
> The original
Hi,
we have a proposal to drop redhat-lsb , shouldn't we try to keep it ?
redhat-lsb still in version 4 when LSB 5.0 was released June 3, 2015.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2076968
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/redhat-lsb
Best regards,
--
Sérgio M. B.
A qui, 28-04-2022 às 15:18 +0100, Sérgio Basto escreveu:
> On Thu, 2022-04-28 at 07:09 -0700, Troy Dawson wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 28, 2022 at 2:57 AM Sérgio Basto
> > wrote:
> > > A qui, 28-04-2022 às 10:48 +0100, Sérgio Basto escreveu:
> >
On Thu, 2022-04-28 at 07:09 -0700, Troy Dawson wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 28, 2022 at 2:57 AM Sérgio Basto
> wrote:
> > A qui, 28-04-2022 às 10:48 +0100, Sérgio Basto escreveu:
> > > A qua, 27-04-2022 às 16:58 -0700, Troy Dawson escreveu:
> > > >
> >
A qui, 28-04-2022 às 10:48 +0100, Sérgio Basto escreveu:
> A qua, 27-04-2022 às 16:58 -0700, Troy Dawson escreveu:
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 4:38 PM Sérgio Basto
> > wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2022-04-27 at 23:44 +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> > &
A qua, 27-04-2022 às 16:58 -0700, Troy Dawson escreveu:
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 4:38 PM Sérgio Basto
> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2022-04-27 at 23:44 +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2022-04-13 at 17:54 -0500, Carl George wrote:
> > > > > This
On Wed, 2022-04-27 at 23:44 +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> On Wed, 2022-04-13 at 17:54 -0500, Carl George wrote:
> > > This was approved [0] in today's EPEL Steering Committee meeting.
> > > Please continue with the process for incompatible upgrades from
> >
On Wed, 2022-04-13 at 17:54 -0500, Carl George wrote:
> > This was approved [0] in today's EPEL Steering Committee meeting.
> > Please continue with the process for incompatible upgrades from
> > step 4
> > forward [1].
> >
> > [0]
> >
On Fri, 2022-04-22 at 13:04 +0530, Vipul Siddharth wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 22, 2022 at 12:49 PM Leigh Scott
> wrote:
> >
> > Why post something that has expired?
> Hi leigh, When I shared the email, the giveaway was still active :)
> given it was just for 24 hours, It had to expire after some time
>
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Apr 8, 2022 at 3:00 PM Sérgio Basto
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, 2022-04-08 at 13:08 -0700, Troy Dawson wrote:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Apr 8,
On Sat, 2022-04-09 at 12:48 +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Looks like there's a little bit of a mess around LLVM 14 / GCC /
> annobin updates brewing in f36-updates-testing.
>
> Right now, there's *two* updates in "testing" state that contain
> builds of annobin:
>
> -
On Fri, 2022-04-08 at 13:08 -0700, Troy Dawson wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 8, 2022 at 12:46 PM Sérgio Basto
> wrote:
> > On Thu, 2022-03-31 at 11:54 +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> > > > This update changes a library soname, which makes it an
> > > > inc
On Thu, 2022-03-31 at 11:54 +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> > This update changes a library soname, which makes it an
> > incompatible
> > upgrade. It must follow the EPEL incompatible upgrades policy [0].
> > This email can count as step 1 once you reply wi
On Tue, 2022-04-05 at 22:34 -0500, Richard Shaw wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 5, 2022 at 10:04 PM Neal Gompa
> wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 5, 2022 at 11:01 PM Richard Shaw
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Google has failed me, how do I go about moving an existing build
> > into a side tag I just created?
> > >
> >
> >
the maintainers seems unresponsive , the package also isn't updated in
Fedora.
I don't know what is the best to do ...
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/tinyproxy/pull-request/1
On Thu, 2022-03-31 at 19:20 +, Dan White via epel-devel wrote:
> Following
>
On Wed, 2022-03-30 at 21:54 -0500, Carl George wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 6:23 PM Sérgio Basto
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > ImageMagick 6.9.12.x have a bunch security fixes since 6.9.10.x .
> > I'd like update ImageMagick (IM) on epel8 with sonam
Hi,
ImageMagick 6.9.12.x have a bunch security fixes since 6.9.10.x .
I'd like update ImageMagick (IM) on epel8 with soname bump .
ImageMagick-6.9.10 last version, have almost 2 years and keep it and
just pull security patches, it would have a lot more work in my
opinion.
so in
Hi,
ImageMagick 6.9.12.x have a bunch security fixes since 6.9.10.x .
I'd like update ImageMagick (IM) on epel8 with soname bump .
ImageMagick-6.9.10 last version, have almost 2 years and keep it and
just pull security patches, it would have a lot more work in my
opinion.
so in
On Mon, 2022-03-28 at 16:43 -0500, Ron Olson wrote:
> Hey all-
> I’m unable to build Swift on Fedora 36 and Rawhide while it does
> build on F35. I’ve been able to condense the entire issue down to the
> following sample code that demonstrates the problem:
> nothing.S:
> #define
On Sun, 2022-03-27 at 14:52 -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 27, 2022 at 2:42 PM Sérgio Basto wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, 2022-02-27 at 17:15 +0100, Andreas Schneider wrote:
> > > On Sunday, 27 February 2022 10:06:17 CET Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
> > > wrote:
>
On Sun, 2022-02-27 at 17:15 +0100, Andreas Schneider wrote:
> On Sunday, 27 February 2022 10:06:17 CET Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
> wrote:
> > On 27/02/2022 08:23, Andreas Schneider wrote:
> >
> > > You don't have to. You can point electron builder to your system
> > > electron
> > > and
> it will
On Mon, 2022-03-21 at 15:56 +0100, Andreas Schneider wrote:
> On Saturday, March 19, 2022 7:01:46 AM CET Sérgio Basto wrote:
> > On Sun, 2022-02-27 at 17:15 +0100, Andreas Schneider wrote:
> >
> > > On Sunday, 27 February 2022 10:06:17 CET Vitaly Zaits
On Sun, 2022-02-27 at 17:15 +0100, Andreas Schneider wrote:
> On Sunday, 27 February 2022 10:06:17 CET Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
> wrote:
> > On 27/02/2022 08:23, Andreas Schneider wrote:
> >
> > > You don't have to. You can point electron builder to your system
> > > electron
> > > and
> it will
On Thu, 2022-03-10 at 00:15 +0200, Otto Urpelainen wrote:
> Leigh Scott kirjoitti 9.3.2022 klo 18.15:
> > > Sérgio Basto kirjoitti 7.3.2022 klo 18.17:
> > > Crossfire and freedroidrpg are games, so "is it needed?" and
> > > "does it
> > &
On Wed, 2022-03-16 at 07:17 -0700, Thomas Rodgers wrote:
> One more package that FTBFS due to CMake issues -
>
> grive2: FTBFS # Error: /builddir/build/BUILD/grive2-0.5.1/redhat-
> linux-build is not a directory
remove the dot and I bet that will work
>
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 2:22 PM
Hello,
On Thu, 2022-03-10 at 09:36 +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Ron Olson:
>
> > Building swiftlang on F36/Rawhide results in a a failure that,
> > boiled down to its essence, appears to be:
> >
> > /usr/bin/ld: /tmp/lto-llvm-4fd0b1.o: relocation R_X86_64_PC32
> > against undefined symbol
On Tue, 2022-03-08 at 16:01 +, Leigh Scott wrote:
> > On Mon, 07 Mar 2022 10:29:02 -0600
> > Michael Catanzaro >
> >
> > I'm not unwilling to retire them, I just want their users to be
> > retired
> > first so I don't leave a bunch of broken dependencies behind.
> >
> > Paul.
>
> dillo,
On Wed, 2022-03-09 at 08:20 +0200, Otto Urpelainen wrote:
> Sérgio Basto kirjoitti 7.3.2022 klo 18.17:
> > Hi,
> > In resume glib still required for 20 packages [1],
> > apart of the sweet memories that some package bring to us , any of
> > these packages is need
On Tue, 2022-03-08 at 01:41 +0100, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> > The maintainer is unwilling to retire them.
> >
> > I think we should ask FESCo to force them to be retired. It's
> > confusing
> > to have ancient versions of the packages in the distro, and they will
Hi,
On Fri, 2022-03-04 at 18:07 +0100, Kamil Dudka wrote:
> On Friday, March 4, 2022 4:17:01 PM CET Sérgio Basto wrote:
> > I think you missed the
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/CMake_to_do_out-of-source_builds
>
> When the change landed, I had to fix all
Hi,
In resume glib still required for 20 packages [1],
apart of the sweet memories that some package bring to us , any of
these packages is needed ? or haven't replacement ?
Thanks
[1]
Depending packages (rawhide) (20): NsCDE alsa-firmware alsa-tools
bubblemon crossfire crossfire-client
On Fri, 2022-03-04 at 16:04 +0100, Michal Schorm wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 4, 2022 at 3:40 PM Sérgio Basto wrote:
> > The fix is just remove "\ ." (the dot) on %cmake
>
> That isn't a fix, that's a workaround for a broken CMake - atleast
> that I believe, as
On Fri, 2022-03-04 at 09:26 -0500, Steven A. Falco wrote:
> There is a new FTBFS for KiCad [1]. I filed an issue with KiCad [2]
> and got a comment from the project leader:
>
> This looks like cmake issue to me. For some reason cmake is
> creating an incorrect build folder:
>
> --
On Fri, 2022-02-25 at 08:02 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 25, 2022 at 4:54 AM Andreas Schneider
> wrote:
> >
> > Hello!
> >
> > Over the past 8 month, I've been working on getting Electron [1]
> > built on
> > Fedora. Yesterday I was finally able to do the first working build
> > for
On Fri, 2022-02-25 at 02:43 +0300, Dmitry Butskoy wrote:
> Sérgio Basto wrote:
> > On Thu, 2022-02-24 at 21:20 +0300, Dmitry Butskoy wrote:
> > > Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> > > > > Second, the alternate Springdale Linux repo
> > > > > http://springda
On Fri, 2022-02-25 at 02:43 +0300, Dmitry Butskoy wrote:
> Sérgio Basto wrote:
> > On Thu, 2022-02-24 at 21:20 +0300, Dmitry Butskoy wrote:
> > > Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> > > > > Second, the alternate Springdale Linux repo
> > > > > http://sprin
On Thu, 2022-02-24 at 21:20 +0300, Dmitry Butskoy wrote:
> Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Second, the alternate Springdale Linux repo
> > > http://springdale.princeton.edu/data/springdale/SCL/7/x86_64/ see
> > > ms
> > > to have all the ones (which are provided in sources by RedHat),
> >
On Mon, 2022-02-14 at 11:28 +, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> On Mon, 2022-02-14 at 10:34 +0100, Michal Schorm wrote:
> > The time had to come, when two packages would generate the same
> > hash.
> >
> > I was hit by:
> > ---
> > Error: Transaction test
On Wed, 2022-02-16 at 17:57 -0300, Diego Herrera wrote:
> Hi. I was checking if the scrcpy software [1] could get packaged, but
> to continue I need to know how to package an APK package file. For
> context, this project consists on a Linux client and an Android
> server app that is uploaded as an
Hi,
Can someone help me ?
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/opencv/blob/rawhide/f/opencv.spec
have py_provides but
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2054951
Thank you .
--
Sérgio M. B.
___
python-devel mailing list --
On Sun, 2022-02-13 at 14:11 +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> Hey,
> apparently some ELF files are identical between Fedora's pypy3.7-libs
> and
> pypy3.8-libs packages.
>
> On Fedora 34, this leads to installation conflict:
>
> Error: Transaction test error:
> file
On Tue, 2022-02-15 at 15:46 +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 15. 02. 22 15:31, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> > On Tue, 2022-02-15 at 10:33 +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > > On 14. 02. 22 10:34, Michal Schorm wrote:
> > > > The time had to come, when two packages would
On Tue, 2022-02-15 at 10:33 +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 14. 02. 22 10:34, Michal Schorm wrote:
> > The time had to come, when two packages would generate the same
> > hash.
> >
> > I was hit by:
> > ---
> > Error: Transaction test error:
> >
On Mon, 2022-02-14 at 10:34 +0100, Michal Schorm wrote:
> The time had to come, when two packages would generate the same hash.
>
> I was hit by:
> ---
> Error: Transaction test error:
> file /usr/lib/.build-id/34/feaa549462e8818baa0629ce11da344465882b
> conflicts between attempted installs of
./find_unblocked_orphans.py --max_deps 1 --skip-orphans jasper
Depending on: jasper (30),
DevIL (maintained by: jwrdegoede)
DevIL-1.7.8-38.fc36.i686 requires libjasper.so.4
DevIL-1.7.8-38.fc36.src requires jasper-devel = 2.0.33-2.fc36
DevIL-1.7.8-38.fc36.x86_64 requires libjasper.so.4()(64bit)
On Sat, 2022-01-29 at 11:12 -0800, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 29, 2022 at 05:38:42PM +, Mattia Verga via devel
> wrote:
> > Recently we're having some (a lot) of errors about updates stuck in
> > Bodhi with errors like "update ejected from the push because Cannot
> > find
> > relevant
Compose of f36 still have glew-2.1.0-11.fc36 maybe we can move it to a
side tag and start the rebuilds
Depending packages (66): FlightGear FlightGear-Atlas
OpenColorIO OpenImageIO SFML amanith astromenace avogadro2
avogadro2-libs blender bzflag calligra cegui cegui06 cloudcompare
colobot ddnet
Should I merge [1] and update the package ? the security bugs are
opened since September [2] ...
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-rencode/pull-request/1
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2003753
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2003754
--
Sérgio M. B.
On Wed, 2021-11-03 at 18:41 +, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> On Wed, 2021-11-03 at 14:26 -0400, Ben Beasley wrote:
> > I don’t know where to find documentation for operator precedence in
> > RPM
> > conditional expressions, but it looks like “!” binds more tightly
&
On Tue, 2022-02-01 at 01:03 +0100, Germano Massullo wrote:
> Good day. I have to search gcc-toolset among all Fedora packages specs
> files, in order to read some example of usage.
> Is that possible? For example cloning the whole git repository.
>
also you got sourcegraph
c and try a scratch build in koji just
on ppc64le arch with :
fedpkg scratch-build --srpm --arch=ppc64le
> Thanks
>
> 31 Jan 2022 16:47:07 Sérgio Basto :
>
> > On Mon, 2022-01-31 at 13:36 +0100, Dan Horák wrote:
> > > On Mon, 31 Jan 2022 12:04:08 +
> > >
On Mon, 2022-01-31 at 13:36 +0100, Dan Horák wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Jan 2022 12:04:08 +
> Sérgio Basto wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 2022-01-31 at 11:12 +0100, Dan Horák wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > as there are still a number of ppc64le build failures from the
On Mon, 2022-01-31 at 11:12 +0100, Dan Horák wrote:
> Hi,
>
> as there are still a number of ppc64le build failures from the mass
> rebuild, please make the FTBFS bugs block the "PPCTracker" so we know
> about them.
>
> Here is what we know so far
> - segfaulting ICE with "during RTL pass:
On Sat, 2022-01-29 at 09:56 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 29, 2022 at 04:03:06PM +1000, Bob Hepple wrote:
> > One of my packages, stable for a long time, is now getting exotic
> > errors in rawhide such as
> >
> > -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE not defined
> > -D_GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS not defined
> >
On Tue, 2022-01-25 at 09:54 +, Paul Howarth wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I'm the Fedora maintainer of the perl-HTML-Tidy package and its
> underlying library, tidyp.
>
> The upstream maintainer of these packages has now stopped work on
> tidyp, and has archived the upstream repository in a
On Thu, 2022-01-27 at 11:09 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 10:32:22AM +0100, Thomas Haller wrote:
> > On Wed, 2022-01-26 at 23:57 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > > A new gcc with most importantly the https://gcc.gnu.org/PR104172
> > > bug (that caused a lot of ppc64le
On Thu, 2022-01-27 at 00:46 +, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> On Wed, 2022-01-26 at 23:57 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > A new gcc with most importantly the https://gcc.gnu.org/PR104172
> > bug (that caused a lot of ppc64le failures) fixed and variou
On Wed, 2022-01-26 at 23:57 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> A new gcc with most importantly the https://gcc.gnu.org/PR104172
> bug (that caused a lot of ppc64le failures) fixed and various other
> fixes (e.g. std::basic_string(std::nullptr_t) = deleted only done
> for C++23 etc.) is now in
On Sun, 2022-01-23 at 10:56 +0100, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> On 22/01/2022 17:22, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > The long double change is an ABI change, so this is kind of expected.
>
> abidiff automatic test found no ABI changes between 8.0 and 8.1.
Since early 2021 at least
On Mon, 2022-01-17 at 14:36 +, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> On Mon, 2022-01-17 at 15:10 +0100, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> > On 17/01/2022 15:00, Ben Beasley wrote:
> > > dependency “json”: https://github.com/nlohmann/json/issues/3138
> >
> > https://bugzilla.redh
On Mon, 2022-01-17 at 15:10 +0100, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> On 17/01/2022 15:00, Ben Beasley wrote:
> > dependency “json”: https://github.com/nlohmann/json/issues/3138
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2041187
>
Rawhide compose doomed again [1] :( , I still haven't the
Add him in CC
2021-12-20 is not long ago (IMO)
On Tue, 2022-01-11 at 13:43 +, Andrew Bauer wrote:
> In accordance with the Fedora non-responsive maintainer policy, I am
> attempting to contact
> Mohamed ElMorabity a.k.a. melmorabity.
>
> Does anyone know how to contact this package
On Mon, 2022-01-10 at 13:00 +0100, Robert-André Mauchin wrote:
> On 1/9/22 03:29, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 08, 2022 at 11:56:04PM +0900, Mamoru TASAKA wrote:
> > > Miro Hrončok wrote on 2022/01/08 20:05:
> > > > On 08. 01. 22 11:39, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > > > > The re2 package was
a big BTW when /etc/init.d/network will be removed or migrate to
systemd scripts ?
rpm -qf /etc/init.d/network --qf "packge = %{sourcerpm}\nsub-package =
%{name}\n"
packge = initscripts-10.09-1.fc34.src.rpm
sub-package = network-scripts
On Wed, 2022-01-05 at 09:05 -0500, Ben Cotton wrote:
>
a big BTW when /etc/init.d/network will be removed or migrate to
systemd scripts ?
rpm -qf /etc/init.d/network --qf "packge = %{sourcerpm}\nsub-package =
%{name}\n"
packge = initscripts-10.09-1.fc34.src.rpm
sub-package = network-scripts
On Wed, 2022-01-05 at 09:05 -0500, Ben Cotton wrote:
>
On Sat, 2022-01-01 at 11:11 +0100, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> I am processing results of license-validate audit, but it takes
> longer...
> So I am providing raw results of what I have. If you are maintainer one
> of these packages you may expect either BZ report or Pagure PR for your
> package in
Hi,
I just orphaned some java packages :
- jakarta-saaj
- jakarta-xml-ws
- jmock
Lack of time and nothing depend on it
Happy new year !
--
Sérgio M. B.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
Sent using a virtual keyboard on a phone
>
> > On Dec 29, 2021, at 20:22, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> >
> > JFYI (your redhat email failed)
> >
> > Forwarded Message
> > From: Sérgio Basto
> > To: Fedora devel
> > Cc: java-devel
On Fri, 2021-12-31 at 12:19 +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> Yup, my IRC notifications are often delayed by days, as well, making
> them ... very much less useful.
I second this
--
Sérgio M. B.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Wed, 2021-12-29 at 12:57 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 12:48 PM Gordon Messmer
> wrote:
> >
> > On 12/29/21 07:26, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> > > On 29/12/2021 16:01, Ben Cotton wrote:
> > > > Currently, the RPM databases is located in `/var`. Let's move it
> > > >
Hi,
I'd like orphan jctools , because it is a FTBFS on rawhide (F36)
The only direct dependency is log4j [1] if someone want take it, let me
know , and I will transfer the ownership .
Thank you,
[1]
Depending on: jctools (4), status change: 2021-04-26 (35 weeks ago)
log4j (maintained by:
On Sun, 2021-12-19 at 21:49 +0900, Mamoru TASAKA wrote:
> Sandro Mani wrote on 2021/12/15 20:15:
> >
> > On 15.12.21 11:11, Michael J Gruber wrote:
> > > Are you planning to bring these to F35, as well?
> > > Tesseract-5.0.0 appears to be mostly a bugfix release along with
> > > some other
*** It is multiple versions behind upstream (Fedora has 1.20.11,
upstream has released 1.20.12, 1.20.13, 1.20.14, 21.1.0, 21.1.1,
21.1.2), and has open CVE issues attached to it. ***
On Fri, 2021-12-17 at 12:21 +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> With the recent updates to use a
On Mon, 2021-12-13 at 08:53 -0500, Steven A. Falco wrote:
> On 12/12/21 06:21 PM, Scott Talbert wrote:
> > On Sun, 12 Dec 2021, Steven A. Falco wrote:
> >
> > > I also noticed that python3-wxpython4 appears to require the 3.0
> > > branch, so that might be what is causing both 3.0 and 3.1 of
On Mon, 2021-12-13 at 22:30 +1100, Frank Crawford wrote:
> On Mon, 2021-12-13 at 06:18 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 6:13 AM Troy Dawson
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sat, Dec 11, 2021 at 1:58 AM Frank Crawford
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Folks,
> > > >
> > >
On Mon, 2021-12-06 at 11:17 +, Mat Booth wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Dec 2021 at 10:43, Richard W.M. Jones
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 06, 2021 at 11:21:34AM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > > Full report available at:
> > > https://churchyard.fedorapeople.org/orphans-2021-12-06.txt
> > > grep it for
On Mon, 2021-12-06 at 12:12 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 06, 2021 at 11:59:05AM +0000, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> > Correct me, if I'm wrong, people to avoid put password in every
> > sudo
> > command, modify sudo to not ask password . And this behavior is a
> &g
On Wed, 2021-12-01 at 21:40 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 01, 2021 at 09:29:43AM -0600, Brandon Nielsen wrote:
> > On 11/29/21 1:33 PM, Ben Cotton wrote:
> > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Users_are_admins_by_default_in_Anaconda
> > >
> > > = Users are
On Mon, 2021-12-06 at 11:17 +, Mat Booth wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Dec 2021 at 10:43, Richard W.M. Jones
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 06, 2021 at 11:21:34AM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > > Full report available at:
> > > https://churchyard.fedorapeople.org/orphans-2021-12-06.txt
> > > grep it for
On Fri, 2021-12-03 at 15:36 +, Michael J Gruber wrote:
> F35 updates has libaom-3.2.0-2 and libjxl-0.6.1-6 already - so did
> the buildroot go through?
> (This conflicts with heif from rpmfusion, which I can't complain
> about here, of course.)
yes , buildroot go through , rpmfusion packages
On Thu, 2021-12-02 at 15:19 -0800, Samuel Sieb wrote:
> On 12/2/21 15:08, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> > I didn't understood . What is the difference for /lib64/ld-2.33.so
> > or
> > /lib/ld-2.33.so ?
>
rephrasing my question :
What is the difference of /usr/bin/ld.so for /
On Thu, 2021-12-02 at 19:38 +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> I'd like to provide an ld.so command as part of glibc. Today, ld.so
> can
> be used to activate preloading, for example. Compared to LD_PRELOAD,
> the difference is that it's specific to one process, and won't be
> inherited by
On Wed, 2021-12-01 at 14:39 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Di, 30.11.21 15:57, Adam Williamson (adamw...@fedoraproject.org)
> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 2021-11-30 at 22:39 +0000, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2021-11-30 at 16:03 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
>
On Tue, 2021-11-30 at 16:03 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 30, 2021 at 11:13:19AM +0000, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> > I don't use sudo , and I'm against the use of sudo , Fedora
> > tradition
> > do things as root .
>
> I hope we don't! Doing things wi
I don't use sudo , and I'm against the use of sudo , Fedora tradition
do things as root .
On Mon, 2021-11-29 at 14:33 -0500, Ben Cotton wrote:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Users_are_admins_by_default_in_Anaconda
>
> = Users are administrators by default in the installer GUI =
>
>
On Mon, 2021-11-29 at 15:08 +0100, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> On 29/11/2021 14:57, Jun Aruga wrote:
> > Did you find a better alternative syntax?
>
> Now I'm using the following:
>
> %global enable_foo 1
>
> %if %{enable_foo}
> ...
> %endif
I use %bcond , with %bcond we can manipulate
yes it works for me thank you
On Mon, 2021-11-29 at 13:25 +, Artur Frenszek-Iwicki wrote:
> Not sure if there's a way to test a conditional by itself, but if
> it's somewhere in a spec file,
> you can use "rpmspec --parse $FILE" to see what the spec looks like
> after it's parsed
> and all
`mock --with foo *.rpm` or `mock --without foo *.rpm` for the
> SRPM file.
>
> Jun
>
> An example using the %bcond macros.
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rpm/blob/rawhide/f/rpm.spec
>
> On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 2:03 PM Sérgio Basto wrote:
> >
>
Hi,
How I can check RPM Conditionals [1], for example How I can check what
is the result of:
%if 1
echo 1;
%else
echo 0;
%endif
Best regards,
[1]
https://rpm-packaging-guide.github.io/#rpm-conditionals
--
Sérgio M. B.
___
devel mailing
On Fri, 2021-11-26 at 14:37 -0500, Susi Lehtola wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> I am experiencing problems updating packages employing GitHub source
> URLs. For instance,
>
> $ spectool -g python-pyscf.spec
> Downloading:
> https://github.com/pyscf/pyscf/archive/v2.0.1/pyscf-2.0.1.tar.gz
> Download failed:
Many thanks , side-tag submitted to bodhi
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-b58af96f33
On Fri, 2021-11-26 at 12:44 +0900, Mamoru TASAKA wrote:
> Sérgio Basto wrote on 2021/11/22 21:49:
> > Hi,
> >
> > ImageMagick 6.9.12.30 have more security f
On Mon, 2021-11-22 at 14:44 +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 22. 11. 21 14:11, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 01:12:28PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > > Full report available at:
> > > https://churchyard.fedorapeople.org/orphans-2021-11-22.txt
> > > grep it for your FAS
Hi,
ImageMagick 6.9.12.30 have more security fixes and it was built on
Rawhide and F35
Now I think we also should update F34 since we have a bunch of security
fixes .
So I prepared f34-build-side-48004 so please use
fedpkg build --target=f34-build-side-48004 to build your package for
Fedora 34
On Fri, 2021-11-19 at 18:06 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 01:57:12PM +, Globe Trotter via devel
> wrote:
> > I opened the following:
> >
> > https://pagure.io/releng/issue/10396
> >
> > I am not quite sure what happens after this, so I thought that I
> >
On Thu, 2021-11-18 at 16:27 +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 1:14 PM Sérgio Basto wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> > another subject that can be related
> >
> > In thread "I think we should stop building i686 packages we're not
> >
On Sat, 2021-11-20 at 04:46 +, Globe Trotter via devel wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As the name says, this is a review request for the orphaned package
> oclock. I find that the old spec file from F34 complies without errors
> and so would like to maintain it. But first, I need a review. Could
> someone
On Thu, 2021-11-18 at 16:27 +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 1:14 PM Sérgio Basto
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> > another subject that can be related
> >
> > In thread "I think we should stop building i686 packages we're not
> &g
301 - 400 of 1526 matches
Mail list logo
