Re: Ditch RPM in favor of DPKG

2019-02-19 Thread Dridi Boukelmoune
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 11:20 AM Emmanuel Seyman wrote: > > * Dridi Boukelmoune [19/02/2019 11:03] : > > > > Three of those packages are heavy on Perl code, and I'm not a Perl > > Monk. I tried to CC perl-sig as per the guidelines [1] (also tried with > > the mailing list address) but bugzilla

doxygen crash on aarch64

2019-02-19 Thread Ankur Sinha
Hello, For one of my packages, doxygen is crashing on aarch64 (and not on any other arch). Any ideas/tips on how to fix this? ... Patching output file 570/631 BUILDSTDERR: Patching output file 57malloc_consolidate(): invalid chunk size BUILDSTDERR: /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.YZzKpD: line 38: 6804 Aborted

Re: Ditch RPM in favor of DPKG

2019-02-19 Thread Neal Gompa
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 5:05 AM Dridi Boukelmoune wrote: > > Greetings packagers, > > I know how important RPM is to the Fedora Project, but it breaks > everything downstream and we'd be better off using DPKG as we should > have from day one. > > I'm calling this initiative fedpkg: Fedora

Re: F31 System-Wide Change proposal: BuildRequires Generators

2019-02-19 Thread Panu Matilainen
On 2/18/19 10:19 PM, Ben Cotton wrote: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/BuildRequires_Generators = BuildRequires Generators = == Summary == Add possibility to generate build-time dependencies within RPM spec file and teach RPM and mock how to handle this. == Owner == * Name:

Ditch RPM in favor of DPKG

2019-02-19 Thread Dridi Boukelmoune
Greetings packagers, I know how important RPM is to the Fedora Project, but it breaks everything downstream and we'd be better off using DPKG as we should have from day one. I'm calling this initiative fedpkg: Fedora Embraces DPKG. A bit of background here: I build both RPMs and DEBs for

Re: F31 System-Wide Change proposal: Automatic strict inter-package dependencies

2019-02-19 Thread Panu Matilainen
On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 9:21 PM Ben Cotton wrote: == Dependencies == RPM changes are needed. Will be handled by Proposal Owners. As with the other rpm change proposal, this change was submitted without prior communication with the primary rpm maintainers, so I think a clarification is

Re: Ditch RPM in favor of DPKG

2019-02-19 Thread Emmanuel Seyman
* Dridi Boukelmoune [19/02/2019 11:03] : > > Three of those packages are heavy on Perl code, and I'm not a Perl > Monk. I tried to CC perl-sig as per the guidelines [1] (also tried with > the mailing list address) but bugzilla replied kindly: > > CC: perl-sig did not match anything The Perl

Using docs related fields in Bugzilla

2019-02-19 Thread Ankur Sinha
Hello, While going through the NeuroFedora package reviews, I was wondering if it were OK for us to use the documentation related fields in Bugzilla to mark that we need to update our documentation at https://neuro.fedoraproject.org. Is it OK if we: - set a docs contact - set doc type - set doc

Re: F31 System-Wide Change proposal: BuildRequires Generators

2019-02-19 Thread Neal Gompa
On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 4:36 PM Dridi Boukelmoune wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 9:21 PM Ben Cotton wrote: > > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/BuildRequires_Generators > > > > = BuildRequires Generators = > > > > == Summary == > > Add possibility to generate build-time

Re: Ditch RPM in favor of DPKG

2019-02-19 Thread Neal Gompa
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 7:40 AM Sérgio Basto wrote: > > On Tue, 2019-02-19 at 11:03 +0100, Dridi Boukelmoune wrote: > > Greetings packagers, > > > > I know how important RPM is to the Fedora Project, but it breaks > > everything downstream and we'd be better off using DPKG as we should > > have

Re: Fedora 30 Mass Branching Starting Today

2019-02-19 Thread Mohan Boddu
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 8:26 AM Mohan Boddu wrote: > Hello All, > > Fedora 30 will be branched from rawhide today as per the Fedora 30 > schedule[1]. The process takes about a day and everything should be ready > by tomorrow. You can still be able to build packages normally until then, > but

Re: doxygen crash on aarch64

2019-02-19 Thread Peter Robinson
Hi, > For one of my packages, doxygen is crashing on aarch64 (and not on any > other arch). Any ideas/tips on how to fix this? Is the package name secret? More details are always good here. There's generally no issues with doxygen in general on aarch64. > ... > Patching output file 570/631 >

Re: RFE: fedpkgdiff?

2019-02-19 Thread Richard Shaw
Out of curiosity I took a look at abipkgdiff that's provided by the libabigail package and it's a python wrapper around abipkgdiff. I'm a little rusty on Python but I could probably use that as a very nice starting point... The next question is what package would the wrapper go in? I think the

Re: doxygen crash on aarch64

2019-02-19 Thread Ankur Sinha
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 11:51:25 +, Ankur Sinha wrote: > On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 11:38:15 +, Peter Robinson wrote: > > Hi, > > > > > For one of my packages, doxygen is crashing on aarch64 (and not on any > > > other arch). Any ideas/tips on how to fix this? > > > > Is the package name secret?

Re: Ditch RPM in favor of DPKG

2019-02-19 Thread Leigh Scott
> Greetings packagers, > > I know how important RPM is to the Fedora Project, but it breaks > everything downstream and we'd be better off using DPKG as we should > have from day one. > > I'm calling this initiative fedpkg: Fedora Embraces DPKG. > > A bit of background here: I build both RPMs

Re: Ditch RPM in favor of DPKG

2019-02-19 Thread Sérgio Basto
On Tue, 2019-02-19 at 11:03 +0100, Dridi Boukelmoune wrote: > Greetings packagers, > > I know how important RPM is to the Fedora Project, but it breaks > everything downstream and we'd be better off using DPKG as we should > have from day one. > > I'm calling this initiative fedpkg: Fedora

Re: doxygen crash on aarch64

2019-02-19 Thread Ankur Sinha
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 11:38:15 +, Peter Robinson wrote: > Hi, > > > For one of my packages, doxygen is crashing on aarch64 (and not on any > > other arch). Any ideas/tips on how to fix this? > > Is the package name secret? More details are always good here. There's > generally no issues with

Re: Ditch RPM in favor of DPKG

2019-02-19 Thread Neal Gompa
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 7:06 AM Leigh Scott wrote: > > > Greetings packagers, > > > > I know how important RPM is to the Fedora Project, but it breaks > > everything downstream and we'd be better off using DPKG as we should > > have from day one. > > > > I'm calling this initiative fedpkg: Fedora

Fedora 30 Mass Branching Starting Today

2019-02-19 Thread Mohan Boddu
Hello All, Fedora 30 will be branched from rawhide today as per the Fedora 30 schedule[1]. The process takes about a day and everything should be ready by tomorrow. You can still be able to build packages normally until then, but after the mass branching rawhide and F31 will be separated. We

PSA: Bodhi cannot associate bugs with updates right now

2019-02-19 Thread Randy Barlow
Hello fellow Fedora people! I'm sorry to say, but Bodhi has a problem associating bugs with updates right now: https://github.com/fedora-infra/bodhi/issues/3024 For the moment, you should be able to create updates if you avoid adding bugs to them. I am working on a fix, and I apologize for the

Re: F31 System-Wide Change proposal: Automatic strict inter-package dependencies

2019-02-19 Thread Petr Pisar
On 2019-02-18, Ben Cotton wrote: > Let's take graphene as an example. > > Spec file contains: > > %package devel > Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} > %package tests > Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} > > > What we see when we build RPMs is: > * graphene-devel

Re: F31 System-Wide Change proposal: Automatic strict inter-package dependencies

2019-02-19 Thread Igor Gnatenko
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 4:26 PM Petr Pisar wrote: > On 2019-02-18, Ben Cotton wrote: > > Let's take graphene as an example. > > > > Spec file contains: > > > > %package devel > > Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} > > %package tests > > Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} =

Re: libravatar is in fedorainfracloud!

2019-02-19 Thread John Harris
On Tuesday, February 19, 2019 11:46:16 PM EST Michal Novotny wrote: > Hello! > > maybe you know that around April 2018, there was an announcement that > libravatar service (a service for serving user avatars) is shutting > down: >

Re: F31 System-Wide Change proposal: BuildRequires Generators

2019-02-19 Thread Nicolas Mailhot
Le mardi 19 février 2019 à 18:04 +, Raphael Groner a écrit : > > Although, I doubt in general that any automagic with dependency > generators brings a huge benefit in the long run. That depends on the amount of deps the language uses. Human handcrafting is always better but it does not scale

libravatar is in fedorainfracloud!

2019-02-19 Thread Michal Novotny
Hello! maybe you know that around April 2018, there was an announcement that libravatar service (a service for serving user avatars) is shutting down: https://blog.libravatar.org/posts/Libravatar.org_is_shutting_down_on_2018-09-01/ This raised a big wave of interest in the service and in

Re: PSA: Bodhi cannot associate bugs with updates right now

2019-02-19 Thread Randy Barlow
On Tue, 2019-02-19 at 10:43 -0500, Randy Barlow wrote: > https://github.com/fedora-infra/bodhi/issues/3024 Bodhi 3.13.2 has been deployed to production just now, which should address the above issue. You should again be able to associate bugs with updates. Apologies for the issue! signature.asc

Fedora Atomic Host Two Week Release Announcement: 29.20190219.0

2019-02-19 Thread noreply
A new Fedora Atomic Host update is available via an OSTree update: Version: 29.20190219.0 Commit(x86_64): d00adf110907f93f6cdd05deda0e2878c9bd71c74e0c4c2e9a5250d2f4cc8868 Commit(aarch64): b87cb9e59aa668ea0e79c3d2e7c017a340c03dcf79a2f7756fedddb3831ca74e Commit(ppc64le):

Re: Fedora 30 Mass Branching Starting Today

2019-02-19 Thread Elliott Sales de Andrade
Hi, On Tue, 19 Feb 2019 at 09:21, Mohan Boddu wrote: > > Hello All, > > Fedora 30 will be branched from rawhide today as per the Fedora 30 > schedule[1]. The process takes about a day and everything should be ready by > tomorrow. You can still be able to build packages normally until then, but

Re: RFE: fedpkgdiff?

2019-02-19 Thread Todd Zullinger
Hi, Richard Shaw wrote: > Out of curiosity I took a look at abipkgdiff that's provided by the > libabigail package and it's a python wrapper around abipkgdiff. I'm a > little rusty on Python but I could probably use that as a very nice > starting point... > > The next question is what package

koji & s390x - [Errno 111] Connection refused

2019-02-19 Thread Lumir Balhar
Hello. I am building python-cassandra-driver in Koji and my last two attempts failed on s390x with error: URLError: Connection refused> I found also other builds with the same issue: * https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=32919248 *

Re: Retiring pysvn (was Re: Orphaning pysvn (and non-responsive maintainer: ravenoak))

2019-02-19 Thread Miro Hrončok
On 19. 02. 19 20:00, Barry Scott wrote: Sorry this was supposed to go only to Kevin. Actually, it's perfect that this went to devel. Everybody knows what's going on. The true spirit of open source and open collaboration. Please, keep doing this. Good luck with packaging, Barry! -- Miro

F30 System-Wide Change proposal: Move Gold Into A SubpackageOf Binutils

2019-02-19 Thread Ben Cotton
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/BINUTILS_GOLD == Summary == Move the GOLD linker from the main binutils package into its own sub-package. == Owner == * Name: Nick Clifton [https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Nickc] * Email: ni...@redhat.com == Detailed Description == The GOLD linker is

Re: F30 System-Wide Change proposal: Move Gold Into A SubpackageOf Binutils

2019-02-19 Thread Neal Gompa
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 4:38 PM Ben Cotton wrote: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/BINUTILS_GOLD > This looks like a Fedora 31 change, not a Fedora 30 change? -- 真実はいつも一つ!/ Always, there's only one truth! ___ devel mailing list --

abrt's usefulness for Firefox bug reporting

2019-02-19 Thread Chris Murphy
I've got a 100% reproducible crash[1] with Firefox on Wayland, but I've run into a brick wall getting it properly reported. Neither coredumpctl nor abrt even report a crash, so no coredump file exists. I was advised in my bug report that abrt doesn't provide useful information anyway [1], so I

Re: F30 System-Wide Change proposal: Move Gold Into A SubpackageOf Binutils

2019-02-19 Thread Ben Cotton
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 4:40 PM Neal Gompa wrote: > This looks like a Fedora 31 change, not a Fedora 30 change? > That is correct. I am going back to sleep now. -- Ben Cotton Fedora Program Manager TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis ___ devel mailing

Re: F30 System-Wide Change proposal: Move Gold Into A SubpackageOf Binutils

2019-02-19 Thread Miro Hrončok
On 19. 02. 19 22:37, Ben Cotton wrote: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/BINUTILS_GOLD == Summary == Move the GOLD linker from the main binutils package into its own sub-package. The wiki page seems weird. Everything is one level off. -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 IRC: mhroncok

Fedora 30 Change checkpoint: code complete (testable)

2019-02-19 Thread Ben Cotton
According to the Fedora 30 schedule[1], today is the deadline for changes to be in a testable state. If your change is ready to be tested, please set the status in the tracker bug to MODIFIED. If you know your change will not be ready for Fedora 30, you can set the version to rawhide and notify

Re: Ditch RPM in favor of DPKG

2019-02-19 Thread Sérgio Basto
On Tue, 2019-02-19 at 20:00 +0100, Dridi Boukelmoune wrote: > > TLDR , apt-rpm should be retired because nobody use it since more > > than > > 10 years . > > > > I maintain a lot of debian package in Fedora but apt-debian still > > not > > on Official repos you can get it from my devel corp repo

Re: Ditch RPM in favor of DPKG

2019-02-19 Thread Dridi Boukelmoune
> I'm the debhelper maintainer > > where are your packages submissions ? (can you add me please ) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=gnu-config https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=strip-nondeterminism I CC'd you just now. According to Neal we may not need to package GNU config,

Re: Ditch RPM in favor of DPKG

2019-02-19 Thread Tomasz Kłoczko
On Tue, 19 Feb 2019 at 11:11, Dridi Boukelmoune wrote: [..] > Apt is a mix of C, Perl and C++ code, so I would be reassured if I > could have a C++ co-maintainer too. I'm only a C developer so if > something goes wrong outside of the C realm that would be helpful. > Doesn't matter in what kind

Re: Orphaned packages that will be retired (and everything will most likely burn)

2019-02-19 Thread Jens-Ulrik Petersen
On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 11:30 PM Vít Ondruch wrote: > As long as we have no idea if the other maintainers are active, I am > strongly against the automation. I've been there. Followed nor > responsive policy just to find out later that instead of orphaning the > package, next inactive maintainer

Re: Retiring pysvn (was Re: Orphaning pysvn (and non-responsive maintainer: ravenoak))

2019-02-19 Thread Barry Scott
> On 18 Feb 2019, at 18:08, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > On 2/15/19 5:56 AM, Barry Scott wrote: >> >> >>> On 13 Feb 2019, at 13:52, Stephen Gallagher wrote: >>> >>> On Tue, Feb 5, 2019 at 10:01 AM Stephen Gallagher >>> wrote: I've been maintaining this for several years since the

Re: Retiring pysvn (was Re: Orphaning pysvn (and non-responsive maintainer: ravenoak))

2019-02-19 Thread Barry Scott
Sorry this was supposed to go only to Kevin. Barry ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List

Re: Ditch RPM in favor of DPKG

2019-02-19 Thread Dridi Boukelmoune
> TLDR , apt-rpm should be retired because nobody use it since more than > 10 years . > > I maintain a lot of debian package in Fedora but apt-debian still not > on Official repos you can get it from my devel corp repo [1] > My goal is make a system where rpm produce deb files , to allow Debian >

Re: Ditch RPM in favor of DPKG

2019-02-19 Thread Dridi Boukelmoune
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 7:08 PM Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > > On Tue, 19 Feb 2019 at 11:11, Dridi Boukelmoune > wrote: > [..] >> >> Apt is a mix of C, Perl and C++ code, so I would be reassured if I >> could have a C++ co-maintainer too. I'm only a C developer so if >> something goes wrong outside

Re: Using docs related fields in Bugzilla

2019-02-19 Thread Ankur Sinha
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 09:48:19 -0800, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On 2/19/19 2:49 AM, Ankur Sinha wrote: > > Hello, > > > > While going through the NeuroFedora package reviews, I was wondering if > > it were OK for us to use the documentation related fields in Bugzilla to > > mark that we need to update

Re: Using docs related fields in Bugzilla

2019-02-19 Thread Kevin Fenzi
On 2/19/19 2:49 AM, Ankur Sinha wrote: > Hello, > > While going through the NeuroFedora package reviews, I was wondering if > it were OK for us to use the documentation related fields in Bugzilla to > mark that we need to update our documentation at > https://neuro.fedoraproject.org. Is it OK if

Re: F31 System-Wide Change proposal: BuildRequires Generators

2019-02-19 Thread Raphael Groner
Hi, maybe you already noticed, there's a project called pipreqs that parses python code for import statements. We've already a review request: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1665749 Although, I doubt in general that any automagic with dependency generators brings a huge benefit in

Re: Ditch RPM in favor of DPKG

2019-02-19 Thread Dridi Boukelmoune
> For what it's worth, this was a terrible lede for this email. And I couldn't help it, my inner prankster insisted :) > having worked extensively with both package managers, I can sincerely > tell you both are ugly as hell, but rpm is less ugly than dpkg. Yes, I'm not saying that rpm is

Re: Ditch RPM in favor of DPKG

2019-02-19 Thread Sérgio Basto
On Tue, 2019-02-19 at 08:21 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 7:40 AM Sérgio Basto > wrote: > > > > On Tue, 2019-02-19 at 11:03 +0100, Dridi Boukelmoune wrote: > > > Greetings packagers, > > > > > > I know how important RPM is to the Fedora Project, but it breaks > > >

Re: Ditch RPM in favor of DPKG

2019-02-19 Thread Neal Gompa
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 12:16 PM Sérgio Basto wrote: > > On Tue, 2019-02-19 at 08:21 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 7:40 AM Sérgio Basto > > wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, 2019-02-19 at 11:03 +0100, Dridi Boukelmoune wrote: > > > > Greetings packagers, > > > > > > > > I know

Re: two Ceph updates for f28, f29, stuck in pending testing for six days

2019-02-19 Thread Kevin Fenzi
On 2/18/19 3:05 PM, Ken Dreyer wrote: > On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 2:48 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote: >> >> On 2/18/19 12:56 PM, Kaleb Keithley wrote: >>> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-1c53f1a6c8 >>> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-6a2e72916a >>> >>> Would someone

Re: Ditch RPM in favor of DPKG

2019-02-19 Thread Dridi Boukelmoune
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 11:20 AM Emmanuel Seyman wrote: > > * Dridi Boukelmoune [19/02/2019 11:03] : > > > > Three of those packages are heavy on Perl code, and I'm not a Perl > > Monk. I tried to CC perl-sig as per the guidelines [1] (also tried with > > the mailing list address) but bugzilla

Re: Ditch RPM in favor of DPKG

2019-02-19 Thread Emmanuel Seyman
* Dridi Boukelmoune [19/02/2019 11:03] : > > Three of those packages are heavy on Perl code, and I'm not a Perl > Monk. I tried to CC perl-sig as per the guidelines [1] (also tried with > the mailing list address) but bugzilla replied kindly: > > CC: perl-sig did not match anything The Perl

[Bug 1678447] perl-Time-HiRes-1.9760 is available

2019-02-19 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1678447 Petr Pisar changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED Fixed In Version|

[Bug 1678632] Review Request: apt - Main commandline package manager for Debian and its derivatives

2019-02-19 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1678632 Dridi Boukelmoune changed: What|Removed |Added CC||perl-devel@lists.fedoraproj

[Bug 1678626] Review Request: sbuild - Tool for building Debian binary packages from Debian sources

2019-02-19 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1678626 Dridi Boukelmoune changed: What|Removed |Added CC||perl-devel@lists.fedoraproj

[Bug 1678623] Review Request: strip-nondeterminism - File non-deterministic information stripper

2019-02-19 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1678623 Dridi Boukelmoune changed: What|Removed |Added CC||perl-devel@lists.fedoraproj

[Bug 1673009] perl-File-BOM-0.16 is available

2019-02-19 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1673009 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In

[Bug 1678632] Review Request: apt - Main commandline package manager for Debian and its derivatives

2019-02-19 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1678632 --- Comment #1 from Neal Gompa --- Taking this review. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1678632] Review Request: apt - Main commandline package manager for Debian and its derivatives

2019-02-19 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1678632 Neal Gompa changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ngomp...@gmail.com Alias|apt

pypy

2019-02-19 Thread Antonette Caldwell
Hi all I commented on https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1673127 that I will be working on building pypy. So far, I was able to build pypy and pypy3 on rawhide, but this is my first time creating the package. I copied the spec from both of the rpms/pypy packages[1], but I wanted to

[Bug 1673655] perl-MongoDB-2.0.3 is available

2019-02-19 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1673655 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In

[Bug 1678623] Review Request: strip-nondeterminism - File non-deterministic information stripper

2019-02-19 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1678623 Neal Gompa changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ngomp...@gmail.com

[Bug 1678632] Review Request: apt - Main commandline package manager for Debian and its derivatives

2019-02-19 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1678632 Neal Gompa changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ngomp...@gmail.com Flags|

[Bug 1678626] Review Request: sbuild - Tool for building Debian binary packages from Debian sources

2019-02-19 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1678626 Neal Gompa changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ngomp...@gmail.com

[Bug 1678623] Review Request: strip-nondeterminism - File non-deterministic information stripper

2019-02-19 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1678623 --- Comment #2 from Sergio Monteiro Basto --- It would be nice if we support epel 7 at least, I got this error [1] complete logs [2] Thanks [1] BUILDSTDERR: Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found: BUILDSTDERR:

[Bug 1674257] perl-Module-Load-0.34 is available

2019-02-19 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1674257 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-Module-Load-0.34-1.fc3 |perl-Module-Load-0.34-1.fc3

[Bug 1674257] perl-Module-Load-0.34 is available

2019-02-19 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1674257 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In

[389-devel] Pleas review

2019-02-19 Thread Anuj Borah
Hi all, Please review bellow PRs: https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/50180 https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/50168 Its pending from long time. Regards Anuj Borah ___ 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To

[Bug 1678915] New: perl-Test-Timer-2.10 is available

2019-02-19 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1678915 Bug ID: 1678915 Summary: perl-Test-Timer-2.10 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-Test-Timer Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged

[Bug 1678889] New: perl-Daemon-Control-0.001009 is available

2019-02-19 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1678889 Bug ID: 1678889 Summary: perl-Daemon-Control-0.001009 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-Daemon-Control Keywords: FutureFeature,

Fedora 30 Mass Branching Starting Today

2019-02-19 Thread Mohan Boddu
Hello All, Fedora 30 will be branched from rawhide today as per the Fedora 30 schedule[1]. The process takes about a day and everything should be ready by tomorrow. You can still be able to build packages normally until then, but after the mass branching rawhide and F31 will be separated. We

[Bug 1678875] New: perl-DBIx-Class-Schema-Config-0.001012 is available

2019-02-19 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1678875 Bug ID: 1678875 Summary: perl-DBIx-Class-Schema-Config-0.001012 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-DBIx-Class-Schema-Config

[Bug 1678879] New: perl-Plack-Middleware-ReverseProxy-0.16 is available

2019-02-19 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1678879 Bug ID: 1678879 Summary: perl-Plack-Middleware-ReverseProxy-0.16 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-Plack-Middleware-ReverseProxy

Review request

2019-02-19 Thread Robert-André Mauchin
Hi Perl SIG, Can a kind soul help with a review? Review Request: perl-File-Rsync - Perl module interface to rsync https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1678884 Thank you, Robert-André ___ perl-devel mailing list --

[EPEL-devel] [Fedocal] Reminder meeting : EPEL Steering Co

2019-02-19 Thread smooge
Dear all, You are kindly invited to the meeting: EPEL Steering Co on 2019-02-20 from 18:00:00 to 19:00:00 GMT At freenode@fedora-meeting The meeting will be about: This is the weekly EPEL Steering Committee Meeting. Agenda is in the