Re: How to bootstrap a set of packages?

2019-04-14 Thread Nicolas Mailhot 
Le dimanche 14 avril 2019 à 19:52 +0200, Robert-André Mauchin a écrit :
> Hello,
> 
> I'd like to bootstrap all Golang packages to be able to detect
> whatever cyclic 
> dependencies we have introduced over the years.
> Basically what I need is to be able to build from the base rawhide
> (or Koji 
> latest) without any preexisting Go package, and slowly build the
> packages 
> iteratively, starting from a clean slate.
> How can I achieve this? Is there a way to blacklist a set of packages
> from a 
> repo? There's the "custom" target in COPR but it has nothing
> available at all 
> and I don't know how to start from scratch.

What will work is:
1. a local mock,

2. with an
exclude=golang-*-devel
directive on the rawhide repo

3. and a local repo of build results

4. and a script that copies mock build results to this repo and
craterepo_c's it

Rawhide x86_64 is good enoufh to detect cycles, you do not need to
rebuild every single bit of it.

Alternatively, EL7 used to be in such a sad state for golang, that
doing anything with it pretty much required a full bootstrap. But I
haven't published by latest rebuild of go-rpm-macros for EL7. Il will
do that soon, if nothing else eats my time


Regards,

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot
___
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 Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Can we use SCLs for building for EPEL 6?

2019-04-14 Thread Dmitry Butskoy 

Stephen John Smoogen wrote:



On Sat, 13 Apr 2019 at 21:06, Todd Zullinger > wrote:


Neal Gompa wrote:
> If devtoolset is available for EPEL6 (which I think it is?)

I don't believe devtoolset was enabled for el6 in koji.
When it was added to the mock configs for el6/el7, the
consensus on the epel list was that it would be added to el6
if there was sufficient demand.  I've only seen it come up
once (or maybe twice) since then on the epel list.

I'm not familiar enough with the koji commands to confirm
it.  I can see that rhel7-server-rhscl-7 is listed in the
external repos, but I don't see a similar rhel6 SCL.

Apologies if I simply missed an announcement on the epel
lists and am passing on outdated data.


I believe Todd is correct. At the time there was the package needing 
SCL's was chromium and the owner had no interest for making the 
package in EL6. If zchunk needs it, we can put it in.


SeaMonkey as well. +1

Many years Firefox and Seamonkey are compelled to do extra builds of 
gcc-4.8 and python-2.7 at the beginning of the package compiling. And to 
provide an extra sources (gcc and pythin tarballs) in the srpms for this.


It seems that Firefox (part of RHEL packages set) uses SCL now, but 
Seamonkey (former Mozilla/Netscape) still cannot use it.



Dmitry Butskoy
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Buc
___
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 Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Donate 1 minute of your time to test upgrades from F29 to F30

2019-04-14 Thread Miro Hrončok 

On 14. 04. 19 20:21, Raphael Groner wrote:

$ sudo dnf --releasever=30 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f30 
--enablerepo=updates-testing distro-sync
[...]
  Problem 2: package python2-testify-0.11.0-12.fc29.noarch requires 
python2-flake8, but none of the providers can be installed
   - python2-flake8-3.5.0-6.fc29.noarch does not belong to a distupgrade 
repository
   - problem with installed package python2-testify-0.11.0-12.fc29.noarch


Fixed: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-46aa341001

--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
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 Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

package built but not tagged into Rawhide in Koji

2019-04-14 Thread Robin Lee 
Hi,

I have a package built on 10 Mar. Build is
deepin-qt-dbus-factory-1.1.0-1.fc31[1].
The package is already available in public repo. But I just found it
is not tagged
into rawhide, queried with 'koji latest-build rawhide deepin-qt-dbus-factory'.

I never met this case. What should I do?

[1] https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1216408

-robin
___
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 Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: package built but not tagged into Rawhide in Koji

2019-04-14 Thread Kevin Fenzi 
On 4/14/19 8:22 PM, Robin Lee wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I have a package built on 10 Mar. Build is
> deepin-qt-dbus-factory-1.1.0-1.fc31[1].
> The package is already available in public repo. But I just found it
> is not tagged
> into rawhide, queried with 'koji latest-build rawhide deepin-qt-dbus-factory'.
> 
> I never met this case. What should I do?

Nothing. This is more fallout from the block retired issues.

I've retagged everything back in now, so it should be fixed.

kevin




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
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 Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Can we use SCLs for building for EPEL 6?

2019-04-14 Thread Stephen John Smoogen 
On Sat, 13 Apr 2019 at 21:06, Todd Zullinger  wrote:

> Neal Gompa wrote:
> > If devtoolset is available for EPEL6 (which I think it is?)
>
> I don't believe devtoolset was enabled for el6 in koji.
> When it was added to the mock configs for el6/el7, the
> consensus on the epel list was that it would be added to el6
> if there was sufficient demand.  I've only seen it come up
> once (or maybe twice) since then on the epel list.
>
> I'm not familiar enough with the koji commands to confirm
> it.  I can see that rhel7-server-rhscl-7 is listed in the
> external repos, but I don't see a similar rhel6 SCL.
>
> Apologies if I simply missed an announcement on the epel
> lists and am passing on outdated data.
>
>
I believe Todd is correct. At the time there was the package needing SCL's
was chromium and the owner had no interest for making the package in EL6.
If zchunk needs it, we can put it in.




> --
> Todd
> ___
> 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 Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>


-- 
Stephen J Smoogen.
___
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 Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Donate 1 minute of your time to test upgrades from F29 to F30

2019-04-14 Thread Neal Gompa 
On Sun, Apr 14, 2019 at 9:11 PM Garry T. Williams  wrote:
>
> On Thursday, February 28, 2019 4:22:51 AM EDT Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> > Do you want to make Fedora 30 better? Please spend 1 minute of your time 
> > and try to run:
> >
> >   sudo dnf --releasever=30 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f30 
> > --enablerepo=updates-testing distro-sync
>
> garry@ifr$ sudo dnf --releasever=30 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f30 
> --enablerepo=updates-testing distro-sync
> [sudo] password for garry:
> Fedora 30 openh264 (From Cisco) - x86_64 1.3 kB/s | 542  B 00:00
> Fedora 30 openh264 (From Cisco) - x86_64 160 kB/s | 1.6 kB 00:00
> Importing GPG key 0xCFC659B9:
>  Userid : "Fedora (30) "
>  Fingerprint: F1D8 EC98 F241 AAF2 0DF6 9420 EF3C 111F CFC6 59B9
>  From   : /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-30-x86_64
> Is this ok [y/N]: y
> Fedora 30 openh264 (From Cisco) - x86_64 6.4 kB/s | 5.1 kB 00:00
> Fedora 30 - x86_64 - Test Updates4.3 MB/s |  14 MB 00:03
> Fedora 30 - x86_64 - Updates  98 kB/s |  18 kB 00:00
> Fedora 30 - x86_64   3.1 MB/s |  54 MB 00:17
> google-chrome 35 kB/s | 1.3 kB 00:00
> google-chrome 46 kB/s | 3.4 kB 00:00
> Copr repo for qt5-qtbase-print-dialog-advanced o 112 kB/s | 100 kB 00:00
> RPM Fusion for Fedora 30 - Free - Updates 68 kB/s |  71 kB 00:01
> Failed to synchronize cache for repo 'rpmfusion-free-updates'
> RPM Fusion for Fedora 30 - Free  1.1 MB/s | 737 kB 00:00
> RPM Fusion for Fedora 30 - Nonfree - Updates 185 kB/s |  71 kB 00:00
> Failed to synchronize cache for repo 'rpmfusion-nonfree-updates'
> RPM Fusion for Fedora 30 - Nonfree   148 kB/s | 227 kB 00:01
> Visual Studio Code20 kB/s | 2.9 kB 00:00
> Visual Studio Code   203 kB/s | 2.1 MB 00:10
> Ignoring repositories: rpmfusion-free-updates, rpmfusion-nonfree-updates
> Error:
>  Problem 1: package python2-cinderclient-3.5.0-1.fc29.noarch requires 
> python2-oslo-i18n >= 3.15.3, but none of the providers can be installed
>   - python2-oslo-i18n-3.19.0-1.fc29.noarch does not belong to a distupgrade 
> repository
>   - problem with installed package python2-cinderclient-3.5.0-1.fc29.noarch
>  Problem 2: problem with installed package mongodb-4.0.3-3.fc29.x86_64
>   - package mongodb-4.0.3-3.fc30.x86_64 requires 
> libboost_filesystem.so.1.66.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be 
> installed
>   - mongodb-4.0.3-3.fc29.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
>   - boost-filesystem-1.66.0-14.fc29.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade 
> repository
>  Problem 3: problem with installed package mongodb-server-4.0.3-3.fc29.x86_64
>   - package mongodb-server-4.0.3-3.fc30.x86_64 requires 
> libboost_program_options.so.1.66.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be 
> installed
>   - mongodb-server-4.0.3-3.fc29.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade 
> repository
>   - boost-program-options-1.66.0-14.fc29.x86_64 does not belong to a 
> distupgrade repository
> (try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages)
> garry@ifr$
>
> Perhaps mondodb is not upgradable?
>

MongoDB has been removed from Fedora:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/MongoDB_Removal


-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
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 Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Donate 1 minute of your time to test upgrades from F29 to F30

2019-04-14 Thread Miro Hrončok 

On 15. 04. 19 3:27, Neal Gompa wrote:

On Sun, Apr 14, 2019 at 9:11 PM Garry T. Williams  wrote:


On Thursday, February 28, 2019 4:22:51 AM EDT Miroslav Suchý wrote:

Do you want to make Fedora 30 better? Please spend 1 minute of your time and 
try to run:

   sudo dnf --releasever=30 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f30 
--enablerepo=updates-testing distro-sync


garry@ifr$ sudo dnf --releasever=30 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f30 
--enablerepo=updates-testing distro-sync
[sudo] password for garry:
Fedora 30 openh264 (From Cisco) - x86_64 1.3 kB/s | 542  B 00:00
Fedora 30 openh264 (From Cisco) - x86_64 160 kB/s | 1.6 kB 00:00
Importing GPG key 0xCFC659B9:
  Userid : "Fedora (30) "
  Fingerprint: F1D8 EC98 F241 AAF2 0DF6 9420 EF3C 111F CFC6 59B9
  From   : /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-30-x86_64
Is this ok [y/N]: y
Fedora 30 openh264 (From Cisco) - x86_64 6.4 kB/s | 5.1 kB 00:00
Fedora 30 - x86_64 - Test Updates4.3 MB/s |  14 MB 00:03
Fedora 30 - x86_64 - Updates  98 kB/s |  18 kB 00:00
Fedora 30 - x86_64   3.1 MB/s |  54 MB 00:17
google-chrome 35 kB/s | 1.3 kB 00:00
google-chrome 46 kB/s | 3.4 kB 00:00
Copr repo for qt5-qtbase-print-dialog-advanced o 112 kB/s | 100 kB 00:00
RPM Fusion for Fedora 30 - Free - Updates 68 kB/s |  71 kB 00:01
Failed to synchronize cache for repo 'rpmfusion-free-updates'
RPM Fusion for Fedora 30 - Free  1.1 MB/s | 737 kB 00:00
RPM Fusion for Fedora 30 - Nonfree - Updates 185 kB/s |  71 kB 00:00
Failed to synchronize cache for repo 'rpmfusion-nonfree-updates'
RPM Fusion for Fedora 30 - Nonfree   148 kB/s | 227 kB 00:01
Visual Studio Code20 kB/s | 2.9 kB 00:00
Visual Studio Code   203 kB/s | 2.1 MB 00:10
Ignoring repositories: rpmfusion-free-updates, rpmfusion-nonfree-updates
Error:
  Problem 1: package python2-cinderclient-3.5.0-1.fc29.noarch requires 
python2-oslo-i18n >= 3.15.3, but none of the providers can be installed
   - python2-oslo-i18n-3.19.0-1.fc29.noarch does not belong to a distupgrade 
repository
   - problem with installed package python2-cinderclient-3.5.0-1.fc29.noarch
  Problem 2: problem with installed package mongodb-4.0.3-3.fc29.x86_64
   - package mongodb-4.0.3-3.fc30.x86_64 requires 
libboost_filesystem.so.1.66.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be 
installed
   - mongodb-4.0.3-3.fc29.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
   - boost-filesystem-1.66.0-14.fc29.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade 
repository
  Problem 3: problem with installed package mongodb-server-4.0.3-3.fc29.x86_64
   - package mongodb-server-4.0.3-3.fc30.x86_64 requires 
libboost_program_options.so.1.66.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be 
installed
   - mongodb-server-4.0.3-3.fc29.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade 
repository
   - boost-program-options-1.66.0-14.fc29.x86_64 does not belong to a 
distupgrade repository
(try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages)
garry@ifr$

Perhaps mondodb is not upgradable?



MongoDB has been removed from Fedora:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/MongoDB_Removal


Except it was not:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1677379

--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
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 Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Donate 1 minute of your time to test upgrades from F29 to F30

2019-04-14 Thread Miro Hrončok 

On 15. 04. 19 3:10, Garry T. Williams wrote:

Error:
  Problem 1: package python2-cinderclient-3.5.0-1.fc29.noarch requires 
python2-oslo-i18n >= 3.15.3, but none of the providers can be installed
   - python2-oslo-i18n-3.19.0-1.fc29.noarch does not belong to a distupgrade 
repository
   - problem with installed package python2-cinderclient-3.5.0-1.fc29.noarch


Fixed in https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-46aa341001


  Problem 2: problem with installed package mongodb-4.0.3-3.fc29.x86_64
   - package mongodb-4.0.3-3.fc30.x86_64 requires 
libboost_filesystem.so.1.66.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be 
installed
   - mongodb-4.0.3-3.fc29.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
   - boost-filesystem-1.66.0-14.fc29.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade 
repository
  Problem 3: problem with installed package mongodb-server-4.0.3-3.fc29.x86_64
   - package mongodb-server-4.0.3-3.fc30.x86_64 requires 
libboost_program_options.so.1.66.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be 
installed
   - mongodb-server-4.0.3-3.fc29.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade 
repository
   - boost-program-options-1.66.0-14.fc29.x86_64 does not belong to a 
distupgrade repository
(try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages)
garry@ifr$

Perhaps mondodb is not upgradable?


See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1677379

Mongodb should have been removed from Fedora 30, but it was not removed 
completely. Instead, it has broken upgrade.


--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
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 Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: How to bootstrap a set of packages?

2019-04-14 Thread Stephen John Smoogen 
On Sun, 14 Apr 2019 at 15:10, Nicolas Mailhot 
wrote:

> Le dimanche 14 avril 2019 à 19:52 +0200, Robert-André Mauchin a écrit :
> > Hello,
> >
> > I'd like to bootstrap all Golang packages to be able to detect
> > whatever cyclic
> > dependencies we have introduced over the years.
> > Basically what I need is to be able to build from the base rawhide
> > (or Koji
> > latest) without any preexisting Go package, and slowly build the
> > packages
> > iteratively, starting from a clean slate.
> > How can I achieve this? Is there a way to blacklist a set of packages
> > from a
> > repo? There's the "custom" target in COPR but it has nothing
> > available at all
> > and I don't know how to start from scratch.
>
> What will work is:
> 1. a local mock,
>
> 2. with an
> exclude=golang-*-devel
> directive on the rawhide repo
>
> 3. and a local repo of build results
>
>
You will need to look also in each of the packages if they have any
specific bootstrap configs in their src spec files. Various packaging
sections do this differently but they generally have some sort of
definition set so that the packages are built with minimal buildreqs. Once
the initial set of packages are done, then you redo the packages without
the bootstrap or other flags needed.



> 4. and a script that copies mock build results to this repo and
> craterepo_c's it
>
> Rawhide x86_64 is good enoufh to detect cycles, you do not need to
> rebuild every single bit of it.
>
> Alternatively, EL7 used to be in such a sad state for golang, that
> doing anything with it pretty much required a full bootstrap. But I
> haven't published by latest rebuild of go-rpm-macros for EL7. Il will
> do that soon, if nothing else eats my time
>
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Nicolas Mailhot
> ___
> 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 Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>


-- 
Stephen J Smoogen.
___
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 Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Can we use SCLs for building for EPEL 6?

2019-04-14 Thread Nico Kadel-Garcia 
On Sat, Apr 13, 2019 at 4:04 PM Jonathan Dieter  wrote:
>
> So, the background is that I'd like to build zchunk for EPEL 6 (it's
> already built for EPEL 7).  Unfortunately, the gcc in EL6 is too old to
> build zchunk, so I'd prefer to use a newer version from an SCL, rather
> than rewrite zchunk to be compatible with an ancient version of gcc.
>
> I noticed that SCLs are available for EPEL 7 (note the final repository
> in the list at https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taginfo?tagID=259),
> but not for EPEL 6 (see
> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taginfo?tagID=140).

The SCL's have their uses, but for EPEL? I think they'd add
unnecessary complexity on an an unreliable developer codebase and be a
really bad idea to rely on for EPEL componenents. RHEL 6 is at release
6.10, and should be treated as end-of-life. If the component were
being embedded into the SCL, then it might make some sense to support.
But as best I can tell zchunk has nothing to do with the SCL except
for the gcc requirement.
___
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 Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: How to bootstrap a set of packages?

2019-04-14 Thread Nicolas Mailhot 
Le dimanche 14 avril 2019 à 16:06 -0400, Stephen John Smoogen a écrit :


> You will need to look also in each of the packages if they have any
> specific bootstrap configs in their src spec files.


Thanks, I forgot my awful bootstrap-aware chain building script also
did that. It would be nice if one of the official mock chain builder
grew the same capabilities

Regards,

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot


mass-rebuild.sh
Description: application/shellscript
___
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 Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Can we use SCLs for building for EPEL 6?

2019-04-14 Thread Kevin Kofler 
Jonathan Dieter wrote:
> For reference, you can find zck.h.in (which gets processed into zck.h
> with the version added) at:
> https://github.com/zchunk/zchunk/blob/master/include/zck.h.in
> 
> and zck_private.h at:
> https://github.com/zchunk/zchunk/blob/master/src/lib/zck_private.h
> 
> As far as I can see, gcc-4.7 doesn't like that I'm typedefing the same
> struct to the same type twice.  Later versions don't see it as a
> problem at all.
> 
> (Just to be clear, this still happens if I change zck_private.h to say:
> typedef struct zckCtx zckCtx;)

IMHO, zck_private.h should #include "zck.h" and only define itself whatever 
is not defined in the public header.

Kevin Kofler
___
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 Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Donate 1 minute of your time to test upgrades from F29 to F30

2019-04-14 Thread Garry T. Williams 
On Thursday, February 28, 2019 4:22:51 AM EDT Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> Do you want to make Fedora 30 better? Please spend 1 minute of your time and 
> try to run:
> 
>   sudo dnf --releasever=30 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f30 
> --enablerepo=updates-testing distro-sync

garry@ifr$ sudo dnf --releasever=30 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f30 
--enablerepo=updates-testing distro-sync
[sudo] password for garry:
Fedora 30 openh264 (From Cisco) - x86_64 1.3 kB/s | 542  B 00:00
Fedora 30 openh264 (From Cisco) - x86_64 160 kB/s | 1.6 kB 00:00
Importing GPG key 0xCFC659B9:
 Userid : "Fedora (30) "
 Fingerprint: F1D8 EC98 F241 AAF2 0DF6 9420 EF3C 111F CFC6 59B9
 From   : /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-30-x86_64
Is this ok [y/N]: y
Fedora 30 openh264 (From Cisco) - x86_64 6.4 kB/s | 5.1 kB 00:00
Fedora 30 - x86_64 - Test Updates4.3 MB/s |  14 MB 00:03
Fedora 30 - x86_64 - Updates  98 kB/s |  18 kB 00:00
Fedora 30 - x86_64   3.1 MB/s |  54 MB 00:17
google-chrome 35 kB/s | 1.3 kB 00:00
google-chrome 46 kB/s | 3.4 kB 00:00
Copr repo for qt5-qtbase-print-dialog-advanced o 112 kB/s | 100 kB 00:00
RPM Fusion for Fedora 30 - Free - Updates 68 kB/s |  71 kB 00:01
Failed to synchronize cache for repo 'rpmfusion-free-updates'
RPM Fusion for Fedora 30 - Free  1.1 MB/s | 737 kB 00:00
RPM Fusion for Fedora 30 - Nonfree - Updates 185 kB/s |  71 kB 00:00
Failed to synchronize cache for repo 'rpmfusion-nonfree-updates'
RPM Fusion for Fedora 30 - Nonfree   148 kB/s | 227 kB 00:01
Visual Studio Code20 kB/s | 2.9 kB 00:00
Visual Studio Code   203 kB/s | 2.1 MB 00:10
Ignoring repositories: rpmfusion-free-updates, rpmfusion-nonfree-updates
Error:
 Problem 1: package python2-cinderclient-3.5.0-1.fc29.noarch requires 
python2-oslo-i18n >= 3.15.3, but none of the providers can be installed
  - python2-oslo-i18n-3.19.0-1.fc29.noarch does not belong to a distupgrade 
repository
  - problem with installed package python2-cinderclient-3.5.0-1.fc29.noarch
 Problem 2: problem with installed package mongodb-4.0.3-3.fc29.x86_64
  - package mongodb-4.0.3-3.fc30.x86_64 requires 
libboost_filesystem.so.1.66.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be 
installed
  - mongodb-4.0.3-3.fc29.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
  - boost-filesystem-1.66.0-14.fc29.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade 
repository
 Problem 3: problem with installed package mongodb-server-4.0.3-3.fc29.x86_64
  - package mongodb-server-4.0.3-3.fc30.x86_64 requires 
libboost_program_options.so.1.66.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be 
installed
  - mongodb-server-4.0.3-3.fc29.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade 
repository
  - boost-program-options-1.66.0-14.fc29.x86_64 does not belong to a 
distupgrade repository
(try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages)
garry@ifr$

Perhaps mondodb is not upgradable?

-- 
Garry T. Williams


___
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 Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Donate 1 minute of your time to test upgrades from F29 to F30

2019-04-14 Thread Hirotaka Wakabayashi 
Hello

I tested upgrades from F29 to F30. I use the following images:
https://download.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora/linux/releases/29/Cloud/x86_64/images/Fedora-Cloud-Base-Vagrant-29-1.2.x86_64.vagrant-virtualbox.box
https://download.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora/linux/releases/29/Cloud/x86_64/images/Fedora-Cloud-Base-29-1.2.x86_64.qcow2

On the image for Vagrant, I failed upgrades  I usually use this image for rpm 
packaging.```
[vagrant@fedora29 ~]$ sudo dnf --releasever=30 
--setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f30 --enablerepo=updates-testing 
distro-sync
Fedora Modular 30 - x86_64  
  650 kB/s | 
2.3 MB 00:03   
Fedora Modular 30 - x86_64 - Updates
  219  B/s | 
257  B 00:01   
Fedora 30 - x86_64 - Test Updates   
  1.8 MB/s |  
14 MB 00:07   
Fedora 30 - x86_64 - Updates
  234  B/s | 
257  B 00:01   
Fedora 30 - x86_64  
  1.1 MB/s |  
54 MB 00:48   
Error:
 Problem 1: problem with installed package 
gofed-infra-1.0.0-0.21.rc1.fc29.noarch
  - gofed-infra-1.0.0-0.21.rc1.fc29.noarch does not belong to a distupgrade 
repository
  - nothing provides python2.7dist(git) needed by 
gofed-infra-1.0.0-0.22.rc1.fc30.noarch
  - nothing provides python2.7dist(hglib) needed by 
gofed-infra-1.0.0-0.22.rc1.fc30.noarch
  - nothing provides python2.7dist(koji) needed by 
gofed-infra-1.0.0-0.22.rc1.fc30.noarch
  - nothing provides python2.7dist(python-gitdb) needed by 
gofed-infra-1.0.0-0.22.rc1.fc30.noarch
  - nothing provides python2.7dist(tarfile) needed by 
gofed-infra-1.0.0-0.22.rc1.fc30.noarch
  - nothing provides python2.7dist(urllib2) needed by 
gofed-infra-1.0.0-0.22.rc1.fc30.noarch
 Problem 2: problem with installed package 
gofed-gofedlib-1.0.0-0.21.rc1.fc29.x86_64
  - gofed-gofedlib-1.0.0-0.21.rc1.fc29.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade 
repository
  - nothing provides python2.7dist(jinja2) = 2.8 needed by 
gofed-gofedlib-1.0.0-0.22.rc1.fc30.x86_64
  - nothing provides python2.7dist(markupsafe) = 0.23 needed by 
gofed-gofedlib-1.0.0-0.22.rc1.fc30.x86_64
 Problem 3: problem with installed package gofed-1.0.0-0.21.rc1.fc29.x86_64
  - package gofed-1.0.0-0.22.rc1.fc30.x86_64 requires gofed-infra = 
1.0.0-0.22.rc1.fc30, but none of the providers can be installed
  - gofed-1.0.0-0.21.rc1.fc29.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
  - nothing provides python2.7dist(git) needed by 
gofed-infra-1.0.0-0.22.rc1.fc30.noarch
  - nothing provides python2.7dist(hglib) needed by 
gofed-infra-1.0.0-0.22.rc1.fc30.noarch
  - nothing provides python2.7dist(koji) needed by 
gofed-infra-1.0.0-0.22.rc1.fc30.noarch
  - nothing provides python2.7dist(python-gitdb) needed by 
gofed-infra-1.0.0-0.22.rc1.fc30.noarch
  - nothing provides python2.7dist(tarfile) needed by 
gofed-infra-1.0.0-0.22.rc1.fc30.noarch
  - nothing provides python2.7dist(urllib2) needed by 
gofed-infra-1.0.0-0.22.rc1.fc30.noarch
 Problem 4: problem with installed package 
gofed-resources-1.0.0-0.21.rc1.fc29.noarch
  - package gofed-resources-1.0.0-0.22.rc1.fc30.noarch requires gofed-gofedlib 
= 1.0.0-0.22.rc1.fc30, but none of the providers can be installed
  - gofed-resources-1.0.0-0.21.rc1.fc29.noarch does not belong to a distupgrade 
repository
  - nothing provides python2.7dist(jinja2) = 2.8 needed by 
gofed-gofedlib-1.0.0-0.22.rc1.fc30.x86_64
  - nothing provides python2.7dist(markupsafe) = 0.23 needed by 
gofed-gofedlib-1.0.0-0.22.rc1.fc30.x86_64
(try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages)
```

On the image for OpenStack, dependencies are successfully resolved. 
 ```
Transaction Summary
==
Install   20 Packages
Upgrade  392 Packages

...

Total download size: 282 M
Is this ok [y/N]:
Operation aborted.
```

Upgrades are successfully completed while I found scriptlets in dbus-daemon and 
systemd are failed 
because of "Failed to reload daemon: Access denied".```
Transaction Summary
==
Install   20 Packages
Upgrade  392 Packages

Total download size: 282 M
Is this ok [y/N]: y

...(snip)...
Upgraded: dbus-daemon-1:1.12.10-1.fc29.x86_64
  Running scriptlet: dbus-daemon-1:1.12.10-1.fc29.x86_64   

Re: Orphaning elasticsearch

2019-04-14 Thread Luis Enrique Bazán De León 
Hi Emanuel

I can work on it

Fas lbazan

Cheers,

El dom., 14 de abril de 2019 2:00 a. m., Emmanuel Seyman 
escribió:

>
> Hi, folks.
>
> A while back, I realized that I was the main admin for the elasticsearch
> package. Given that I'm not using elasticsearch these days (I signed up for
> co-maintainership because I maintain the perl bindings for ES) and with the
> upcoming retiring of most of the Java stack in Fedora, I just don't have
> the
> cycles to deal with this and I've decided to orphan the package.
>
> If any one of you wants to step up and become main admin, speak up in the
> coming days and we'll make it happen.
>
> Emmanuel
> ___
> 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 Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>
___
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 Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: Donate 1 minute of your time to test upgrades from F29 to F30

2019-04-14 Thread Wells, Roger K. 
On 4/13/19 10:42 PM, Phil Wyett wrote:
On Fri, 2019-03-01 at 13:52 +0800, Robin Lee wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 5:23 PM Miroslav Suchý 
>  wrote:
>>
>> Do you want to make Fedora 30 better? Please spend 1 minute of your time and
>> try to run:
>>
>>   sudo dnf --releasever=30 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f30 --
>> enablerepo=updates-testing distro-sync
>>
>> If you get this prompt:
>>
>>   ...
>>   Total download size: XXX M
>>   Is this ok [y/N]:
>>
>> you can answer N and nothing happens, no need to test the real upgrade.
>> Upgrades will be fine for you.
>>
>> But very likely you get some dependency problem now. In that case please
>> report it against appropriate package.

A quick upgrade test this morning with 30 beta and all current updates on a
'workstation' install.

Issue:

Downgrading:
 freerdp-libs x86_64 2:2.0.0-48.20190228gitce386c8.fc30
 libwinpr x86_64 2:2.0.0-48.20190228gitce386c8.fc30

Info:

Rawhide, f29 and f28 are all on -49, but 30 is not and no updates pending in
testing.

Regards

Phil


results here:

Transaction Summary
==
Install  62 Packages
Upgrade2260 Packages
Remove4 Packages
Downgrade 2 Packages

Total download size: 2.6 G
Is this ok [y/N]:

HTH

> ___ > 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 
> Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List 
> Archives: 
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
--
Roger Wells, P.E.
leidos
221 Third St
Newport, RI 02840
401-847-4210 (voice)
401-849-1585 (fax)
roger.k.we...@leidos.com

___
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 Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Donate 1 minute of your time to test upgrades from F29 to F30

2019-04-14 Thread Miro Hrončok 

On 14. 04. 19 8:55, Hirotaka Wakabayashi wrote:

Hello

I tested upgrades from F29 to F30. I use the following images:
https://download.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora/linux/releases/29/Cloud/x86_64/images/Fedora-Cloud-Base-Vagrant-29-1.2.x86_64.vagrant-virtualbox.box
https://download.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora/linux/releases/29/Cloud/x86_64/images/Fedora-Cloud-Base-29-1.2.x86_64.qcow2

On the image for Vagrant, I failed upgrades I usually use this image for rpm 
packaging.

```
[vagrant@fedora29 ~]$ sudo dnf --releasever=30 
--setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f30 --enablerepo=updates-testing distro-sync
Fedora Modular 30 - 
x86_64
650 kB/s | 2.3 MB 00:03
Fedora Modular 30 - x86_64 - 
Updates  
219  B/s | 257  B 00:01
Fedora 30 - x86_64 - Test 
Updates 
1.8 MB/s |  14 MB 00:07
Fedora 30 - x86_64 - 
Updates  
234  B/s | 257  B 00:01
Fedora 30 - 
x86_64
1.1 MB/s |  54 MB 00:48

Error:
  Problem 1: problem with installed package 
gofed-infra-1.0.0-0.21.rc1.fc29.noarch
   - gofed-infra-1.0.0-0.21.rc1.fc29.noarch does not belong to a distupgrade 
repository
   - nothing provides python2.7dist(git) needed by 
gofed-infra-1.0.0-0.22.rc1.fc30.noarch
   - nothing provides python2.7dist(hglib) needed by 
gofed-infra-1.0.0-0.22.rc1.fc30.noarch
   - nothing provides python2.7dist(koji) needed by 
gofed-infra-1.0.0-0.22.rc1.fc30.noarch
   - nothing provides python2.7dist(python-gitdb) needed by 
gofed-infra-1.0.0-0.22.rc1.fc30.noarch
   - nothing provides python2.7dist(tarfile) needed by 
gofed-infra-1.0.0-0.22.rc1.fc30.noarch
   - nothing provides python2.7dist(urllib2) needed by 
gofed-infra-1.0.0-0.22.rc1.fc30.noarch
  Problem 2: problem with installed package 
gofed-gofedlib-1.0.0-0.21.rc1.fc29.x86_64
   - gofed-gofedlib-1.0.0-0.21.rc1.fc29.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade 
repository
   - nothing provides python2.7dist(jinja2) = 2.8 needed by 
gofed-gofedlib-1.0.0-0.22.rc1.fc30.x86_64
   - nothing provides python2.7dist(markupsafe) = 0.23 needed by 
gofed-gofedlib-1.0.0-0.22.rc1.fc30.x86_64

  Problem 3: problem with installed package gofed-1.0.0-0.21.rc1.fc29.x86_64
   - package gofed-1.0.0-0.22.rc1.fc30.x86_64 requires gofed-infra = 
1.0.0-0.22.rc1.fc30, but none of the providers can be installed

   - gofed-1.0.0-0.21.rc1.fc29.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade 
repository
   - nothing provides python2.7dist(git) needed by 
gofed-infra-1.0.0-0.22.rc1.fc30.noarch
   - nothing provides python2.7dist(hglib) needed by 
gofed-infra-1.0.0-0.22.rc1.fc30.noarch
   - nothing provides python2.7dist(koji) needed by 
gofed-infra-1.0.0-0.22.rc1.fc30.noarch
   - nothing provides python2.7dist(python-gitdb) needed by 
gofed-infra-1.0.0-0.22.rc1.fc30.noarch
   - nothing provides python2.7dist(tarfile) needed by 
gofed-infra-1.0.0-0.22.rc1.fc30.noarch
   - nothing provides python2.7dist(urllib2) needed by 
gofed-infra-1.0.0-0.22.rc1.fc30.noarch
  Problem 4: problem with installed package 
gofed-resources-1.0.0-0.21.rc1.fc29.noarch
   - package gofed-resources-1.0.0-0.22.rc1.fc30.noarch requires gofed-gofedlib 
= 1.0.0-0.22.rc1.fc30, but none of the providers can be installed
   - gofed-resources-1.0.0-0.21.rc1.fc29.noarch does not belong to a distupgrade 
repository
   - nothing provides python2.7dist(jinja2) = 2.8 needed by 
gofed-gofedlib-1.0.0-0.22.rc1.fc30.x86_64
   - nothing provides python2.7dist(markupsafe) = 0.23 needed by 
gofed-gofedlib-1.0.0-0.22.rc1.fc30.x86_64

(try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages)
```



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1698452

--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
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 Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Orphaning elasticsearch

2019-04-14 Thread Emmanuel Seyman 

Hi, folks.

A while back, I realized that I was the main admin for the elasticsearch
package. Given that I'm not using elasticsearch these days (I signed up for
co-maintainership because I maintain the perl bindings for ES) and with the
upcoming retiring of most of the Java stack in Fedora, I just don't have the
cycles to deal with this and I've decided to orphan the package.

If any one of you wants to step up and become main admin, speak up in the
coming days and we'll make it happen.

Emmanuel
___
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 Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: urw-base35-fonts package missing from f30 and rawhide composes

2019-04-14 Thread Fabio Valentini 
On Sun, Apr 14, 2019 at 5:58 PM Kevin Fenzi  wrote:
>
> This was due to a releng PR I merged yesterday to the script that blocks
> retired packages. ;(
>
> It blocked a bunch of things that are in a weird state (which we should
> totally fix), including that fonts package and all our images. :)

Whoops :)

> I've reverted the PR merge and unblocked all the packages.
> Things should return to normal in a bit here.
>
> Sorry for the troubles...
>
> kevin

No problem, thanks for fixing it!

Fabio

> ___
> 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 Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives: 
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
___
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 Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

urw-base35-fonts package missing from f30 and rawhide composes

2019-04-14 Thread Fabio Valentini 
Hi everybody,

I've noticed today that several of my packages are starting to fail to
build in koschei due to missing dependencies - on urw-base35-fonts.
Attempting fedpkg scratch builds in koji confirmed the issue.

For example:

Problem: package doxygen-1:1.8.15-9.fc31.x86_64 requires graphviz, but
none of the providers can be installed
- conflicting requests
- nothing provides urw-base35-fonts needed by graphviz-2.40.1-44.fc31.x86_64

The same issue makes inkscape and some other packages uninstallable on
fedora 30 and rawhide.

I've looked at koji, src.fp.org, and the compose report e-mails, but
didn't see anything obvious happen to the urw-base35-fonts package,
but it seems to be missing from the latest rawhide and f30 composes
for some reason.

Fabio
___
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 Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: urw-base35-fonts package missing from f30 and rawhide composes

2019-04-14 Thread Fabio Valentini 
On Sun, Apr 14, 2019 at 4:03 PM Fabio Valentini  wrote:
>
> Hi everybody,
>
> I've noticed today that several of my packages are starting to fail to
> build in koschei due to missing dependencies - on urw-base35-fonts.
> Attempting fedpkg scratch builds in koji confirmed the issue.
>
> For example:
>
> Problem: package doxygen-1:1.8.15-9.fc31.x86_64 requires graphviz, but
> none of the providers can be installed
> - conflicting requests
> - nothing provides urw-base35-fonts needed by graphviz-2.40.1-44.fc31.x86_64
>
> The same issue makes inkscape and some other packages uninstallable on
> fedora 30 and rawhide.
>
> I've looked at koji, src.fp.org, and the compose report e-mails, but
> didn't see anything obvious happen to the urw-base35-fonts package,
> but it seems to be missing from the latest rawhide and f30 composes
> for some reason.
>
> Fabio

Looking at the koschei status, ~2000 of all ~13000 tracked source
packages are now reported as un-buildable due to this - and this
doesn't include the number of un-installable packages.

Just saying.
___
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 Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Orphaning elasticsearch

2019-04-14 Thread Emmanuel Seyman 
* Luis Enrique Bazán De León [14/04/2019 08:22] :
>
> I can work on it

I've transferred the package to you, Luis. Good luck with it!

Emmanuel
___
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 Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: urw-base35-fonts package missing from f30 and rawhide composes

2019-04-14 Thread Steven A. Falco 
On 4/14/19 10:42 AM, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 14, 2019 at 4:03 PM Fabio Valentini  wrote:
>>
>> Hi everybody,
>>
>> I've noticed today that several of my packages are starting to fail to
>> build in koschei due to missing dependencies - on urw-base35-fonts.
>> Attempting fedpkg scratch builds in koji confirmed the issue.
>>
>> For example:
>>
>> Problem: package doxygen-1:1.8.15-9.fc31.x86_64 requires graphviz, but
>> none of the providers can be installed
>> - conflicting requests
>> - nothing provides urw-base35-fonts needed by graphviz-2.40.1-44.fc31.x86_64
>>
>> The same issue makes inkscape and some other packages uninstallable on
>> fedora 30 and rawhide.
>>
>> I've looked at koji, src.fp.org, and the compose report e-mails, but
>> didn't see anything obvious happen to the urw-base35-fonts package,
>> but it seems to be missing from the latest rawhide and f30 composes
>> for some reason.
>>
>> Fabio
> 
> Looking at the koschei status, ~2000 of all ~13000 tracked source
> packages are now reported as un-buildable due to this - and this
> doesn't include the number of un-installable packages.
> 
> Just saying.

I just built KiCad, which uses doxygen, via mock on my local machine.  The 
build was fine.

I'm also building KiCad via Copr, and Copr was able to install doxygen, so I 
expect that build to be fine.

However, I also tried to build via koji, and that one fails with essentially 
the same error that you reported:

Error: 
 Problem 1: package doxygen-1:1.8.15-9.fc31.x86_64 requires graphviz, but none 
of the providers can be installed
  - conflicting requests
  - nothing provides urw-base35-fonts needed by graphviz-2.40.1-44.fc31.x86_64
 Problem 2: package asciidoc-8.6.10-0.9.20180605git986f99d.fc30.noarch requires 
graphviz, but none of the providers can be installed
  - conflicting requests
  - nothing provides urw-base35-fonts needed by graphviz-2.40.1-44.fc31.x86_64
(try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages)

Summary:

mock build - pass
copr build - pass
koji build - fail

Steve
___
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 Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: urw-base35-fonts package missing from f30 and rawhide composes

2019-04-14 Thread Kevin Fenzi 
This was due to a releng PR I merged yesterday to the script that blocks
retired packages. ;(

It blocked a bunch of things that are in a weird state (which we should
totally fix), including that fonts package and all our images. :)

I've reverted the PR merge and unblocked all the packages.
Things should return to normal in a bit here.

Sorry for the troubles...

kevin




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
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 Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

How to bootstrap a set of packages?

2019-04-14 Thread Robert-André Mauchin 
Hello,

I'd like to bootstrap all Golang packages to be able to detect whatever cyclic 
dependencies we have introduced over the years.
Basically what I need is to be able to build from the base rawhide (or Koji 
latest) without any preexisting Go package, and slowly build the packages 
iteratively, starting from a clean slate.
How can I achieve this? Is there a way to blacklist a set of packages from a 
repo? There's the "custom" target in COPR but it has nothing available at all 
and I don't know how to start from scratch.

Best regards,

Robert-André

___
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 Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Donate 1 minute of your time to test upgrades from F29 to F30

2019-04-14 Thread Raphael Groner 
$ sudo dnf --releasever=30 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f30 
--enablerepo=updates-testing distro-sync
[...]
 Problem 1: package lxqt-l10n-0.13.0-1.fc29.noarch requires libfm-qt-l10n = 
0.13.0-1.fc29, but none of the providers can be installed
  - libfm-qt-l10n-0.13.0-1.fc29.noarch does not belong to a distupgrade 
repository
  - problem with installed package lxqt-l10n-0.13.0-1.fc29.noarch
 Problem 2: package python2-testify-0.11.0-12.fc29.noarch requires 
python2-flake8, but none of the providers can be installed
  - python2-flake8-3.5.0-6.fc29.noarch does not belong to a distupgrade 
repository
  - problem with installed package python2-testify-0.11.0-12.fc29.noarch
 Problem 3: problem with installed package hamcrest-1.3-24.fc29.noarch
  - package hamcrest-1.3-25.fc30.noarch requires hamcrest-core = 1.3-25.fc30, 
but none of the providers can be installed
  - hamcrest-1.3-24.fc29.noarch does not belong to a distupgrade repository
  - package hamcrest-core-1.3-25.fc30.noarch is excluded
 Problem 4: problem with installed package maven-wagon-ssh-3.1.0-2.fc29.noarch
  - package maven-wagon-ssh-3.2.0-2.fc30.noarch requires 
mvn(org.apache.maven.wagon:wagon-provider-api) = 3.2.0, but none of the 
providers can be installed
  - maven-wagon-ssh-3.1.0-2.fc29.noarch does not belong to a distupgrade 
repository
  - package maven-wagon-provider-api-3.2.0-2.fc30.noarch is excluded
 Problem 5: problem with installed package 
maven-wagon-ssh-common-3.1.0-2.fc29.noarch
  - package maven-wagon-ssh-common-3.2.0-2.fc30.noarch requires 
mvn(org.apache.maven.wagon:wagon-provider-api) = 3.2.0, but none of the 
providers can be installed
  - maven-wagon-ssh-common-3.1.0-2.fc29.noarch does not belong to a distupgrade 
repository
  - package maven-wagon-provider-api-3.2.0-2.fc30.noarch is excluded
(try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages)
[root@builder29 ~]# 
___
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 Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1697630] perl-App-a2p-1.011 is available

2019-04-14 Thread bugzilla 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1697630

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
   Fixed In Version|perl-App-a2p-1.011-1.fc31   |perl-App-a2p-1.011-1.fc31
   ||perl-App-a2p-1.011-1.fc30
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed||2019-04-15 00:01:32



--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-App-a2p-1.011-1.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 stable repository.
If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1699090] RPM package description out of date

2019-04-14 Thread bugzilla 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1699090



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-Net-DNS-SEC-1.11-3.fc30 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 30.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-77c2e4f650

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1699090] RPM package description out of date

2019-04-14 Thread bugzilla 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1699090

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-Net-DNS-SEC-1.11-3.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-77c2e4f650

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

[389-devel] 389 DS nightly 2019-04-15 - 91% PASS

2019-04-14 Thread vashirov 
https://fedorapeople.org/groups/389ds/ci/nightly/2019/04/15/report-389-ds-base-1.4.0.22-1.fc29.x86_64.html
___
389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to 389-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org