On 10/15/19 1:33 PM, Ankur Sinha wrote:
Hi Orion,
On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 15:37:57 -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote:
I have no idea as I really don't know exactly what --enable-mpi-cxx does. I
was surprised that it didn't appear to affect more packages.
F30 still seems to suffer from this issue.
There seems to be some confusion here as to the use cases of Fedora vs RHEL.
What's good for RHEL is not necessarily what's good for Fedora. I'm sorry, but
Fedora is not simply a sandbox to test things for RHEL, and that needs to be
made clear.
I'm comfortable saying that most Fedora users are
Neal Gompa wrote:
> It'd be interesting if an "inverse filter" could be applied. Instead
> of modules shadowing non-modular content, the other way around would
> occur. That would make it easy to clean that up.
And as I pointed out, if the proposal to require a non-modular default
version for
Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 8:44 PM Neal Gompa wrote:
>> It was damaging when it was happening before we have a way to depend
>> on modules from non-modular content. It essentially forces other
>> packagers to move to modules too. It's a snowball effect. And *right
>> now*
Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> Not necessarily. It may be that we have to content ourselves with some
> software always requiring a module enablement to use it. For example,
> I maintain a module for Review Board, a Django-based code review tool.
> For complicated reasons, it cannot run against Django
Hi
On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 9:21 PM Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 9:17 PM Stephen Gallagher
> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 9:14 PM Rahul Sundaram
> wrote:
> > If that's the case, the most obvious way to inform you is to disallow
> > the upgrade and have you resolve it
Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 7:58 PM Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> So completely disable all module support in DNF by default with some
>> global flag (make all the module code conditional under some new
>> enable_modules flag and default the flag to enable_modules = 0), then it
>>
On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 9:00 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 8:44 PM Neal Gompa wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 8:27 PM Stephen Gallagher
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 7:58 PM Kevin Kofler
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 9:17 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 9:14 PM Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> >
> >
> > Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Currently, our default stance has been "disallow the system upgrade if
> >> the modules they've locked onto won't be available
On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 9:14 PM Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>
>
> Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>>
>>
>> Currently, our default stance has been "disallow the system upgrade if
>> the modules they've locked onto won't be available there". This is
>> based on our philosophy that ultimately "the app is what
On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 8:42 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 8:12 PM Kevin Kofler wrote:
> >
> > Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > > 3) We need to get the policy I described above written onto -stone
> > > tablets- the Packaging Guidelines and then we need to go and make any
>
Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
> Currently, our default stance has been "disallow the system upgrade if
> the modules they've locked onto won't be available there". This is
> based on our philosophy that ultimately "the app is what matters".
> Most people don't install Linux because they enjoy
On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 8:44 PM Neal Gompa wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 8:27 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 7:58 PM Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > >
> > > Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > > > An awful lot of people are repeating this as if it's a solution
> > > > without
On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 8:27 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 7:58 PM Kevin Kofler wrote:
> >
> > Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > > An awful lot of people are repeating this as if it's a solution
> > > without understanding the existing architecture. Believe it or not,
> > >
On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 8:12 PM Kevin Kofler wrote:
>
> Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > 3) We need to get the policy I described above written onto -stone
> > tablets- the Packaging Guidelines and then we need to go and make any
> > stream that isn't compliant with it a non-default stream.
>
> But
On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 7:58 PM Kevin Kofler wrote:
>
> Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > An awful lot of people are repeating this as if it's a solution
> > without understanding the existing architecture. Believe it or not,
> > attempting to abandon default streams and go back to only non-modular
>
mcatanz...@gnome.org wrote:
> I think you're probably right that people mainly want Chrome for the
> multimedia support. But well, surely you are well aware that we'll
> never be able to point to the rpmfusion codecs packages in any official
> location. I know it's very frustrating, but the legal
Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> 3) We need to get the policy I described above written onto -stone
> tablets- the Packaging Guidelines and then we need to go and make any
> stream that isn't compliant with it a non-default stream.
But then we need a policy that requires a default version (non-modular
Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> An awful lot of people are repeating this as if it's a solution
> without understanding the existing architecture. Believe it or not,
> attempting to abandon default streams and go back to only non-modular
> content available by default is a lot harder than it sounds (or
Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
> You are mixing up parallel availability and parallel installability.
> These aren't the same. Modularity does solve parallel availability
> problem. It was never designed to solve parallel installability problem.
… which is exactly why it causes version hell.
> I don't
On Wednesday, October 16, 2019 2:30:21 PM MST Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 04:30:32PM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
> > The idea is that it would act exactly the same way that dnf on the
> > local system would act: if you builddep software from a stream that
> > requires a
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762510
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
--- Comment #2 from
On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 04:30:32PM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> The idea is that it would act exactly the same way that dnf on the
> local system would act: if you builddep software from a stream that
> requires a non-default stream, it would enable that non-default
> stream.
Ah, I see.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762510
Emmanuel Seyman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #1 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762510
Bug ID: 1762510
Summary: Please build perl-Any-URI-Escape in normal EPEL8
Product: Fedora EPEL
Version: epel7
Status: NEW
Component: perl-Any-URI-Escape
Assignee:
https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/50656
--
389 Directory Server Development Team
___
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:
On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 10:49:29AM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 10:02:12AM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > I submitted a Change for wrangling today, but I'm also putting it here
> > for discussion:
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/OnDemandSideTags
> >
On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 2:41 PM Matthew Miller wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 01:28:37PM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > 1) This will be solved by the new Koji/MBS feature that we've
> > codenamed "Ursa Prime" (as a replacement for the original "Ursa Major"
> > tool that was built for
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761845
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
--- Comment #3 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761856
Paul Howarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||p...@city-fan.org
--- Comment #2 from
> On 16 Oct 2019, at 00:27, Mark Reynolds wrote:
>
>
> On 10/14/19 11:13 PM, William Brown wrote:
>>
>>> On 15 Oct 2019, at 15:51, Mark Reynolds wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 10/14/19 6:35 PM, William Brown wrote:
> On 15 Oct 2019, at 06:58, Mark Reynolds wrote:
>
> So we are
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762261
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
--- Comment #2 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762253
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
--- Comment #3 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761860
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
--- Comment #3 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761854
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
--- Comment #3 from
On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 07:10:11PM -, Leigh Scott wrote:
> > Yes; Leigh, let's please refrain from name calling. I often disagree with
> > John, but I don't think he's acting in bad faith here (or in Fedora in
> > general).
> Did I manage to earn another misconduct badge for that? ;-)
I hope
> On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 09:01:31PM -0700, John M. Harris Jr wrote:
>
> Yes; Leigh, let's please refrain from name calling. I often disagree with
> John, but I don't think he's acting in bad faith here (or in Fedora in
> general).
Did I manage to earn another misconduct badge for that? ;-)
> On Tuesday, October 15, 2019 8:59:18 PM MST Leigh Scott wrote:
>
> I am not a troll, and I definitely am listening. I read the third party
> software guidelines very carefully, on both the FESCo page, and the
> Workstation Group's page.
Sorry for mislabeling you :-)
Fedora only provides
On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 2:56 PM Matthew Miller wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 01:32:49PM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > remove it" or something like that. It should never be used in the
> > general case. Not even for "This is so old we should force upgrades".
> > For that we should just
On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 06:22:52PM +0200, Brian (bex) Exelbierd wrote:
> I haven't heard anyone mention FOSDEM yet. Booth applications are due soon
> and I'd like to see us coordinate again with our friends in CentOS. Is
> there anyone interested in owning this? If so, can you put together a
>
On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 01:32:49PM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> remove it" or something like that. It should never be used in the
> general case. Not even for "This is so old we should force upgrades".
> For that we should just drop the stream entirely from the next
> release, which would
On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 02:33:41PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> This isn't a settled question in Fedora, and it's one that people feel very
> passionate about in both sides. In the end, we decided that allowing the
> experiment was worthwhile _as a means to the eventual end_. This is why
>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1744690
Emmanuel Seyman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762449
Emmanuel Seyman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||1744709
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762253
Emmanuel Seyman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||1744709
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1744709
Emmanuel Seyman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends On||1762253, 1762449
Referenced Bugs:
On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 08:31:10AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> This is not true. It should be *possible* to have a fully modularized
> distribution, but that isn't a specific goal for Fedora or RHEL.
Because this keeps coming up, we talked about this at the Fedora Council
meeting today. Our
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762449
Bug ID: 1762449
Summary: perl-Type-Tiny for EL8
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-Type-Tiny
Assignee: rc040...@freenet.de
Reporter:
On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 01:28:37PM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> 1) This will be solved by the new Koji/MBS feature that we've
> codenamed "Ursa Prime" (as a replacement for the original "Ursa Major"
> tool that was built for RHEL 8). Unlike its predecessor, it requires
> no additional daemon
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762242
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
--- Comment #2 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1759023
Tom "spot" Callaway changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761775
Emmanuel Seyman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Depends On|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1758574
Emmanuel Seyman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||1761775
Referenced Bugs:
On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 01:00:37PM -0400, Przemek Klosowski via devel wrote:
> It's a difficult choice. My understanding is that Fedora does not
> 'recommend' proprietary software, but rather allows it to be found,
> in response to people searching for it by either specific terms
> (package name)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761846
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |MODIFIED
--- Comment #2 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761852
Emmanuel Seyman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #2 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762445
Bug ID: 1762445
Summary: package
perl-HTTP-Tiny-0.076-1.module_2073+eebc5b71.noarch
requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.26.2), but none of the
providers can be
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761854
Emmanuel Seyman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #2 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761845
Emmanuel Seyman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #2 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761855
Emmanuel Seyman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #2 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761860
Emmanuel Seyman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #2 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762253
Emmanuel Seyman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #2 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762261
Emmanuel Seyman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #1 from
https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/50654
--
389 Directory Server Development Team
___
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:
On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 09:01:31PM -0700, John M. Harris Jr wrote:
> > Don't waste your time answering this troll, he isn't listening.
> I am not a troll, and I definitely am listening. I read the third party
> software guidelines very carefully, on both the FESCo page, and the
> Workstation
On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 01:06:50PM -0500, Ty Young wrote:
> This is gold. Red Hat and Fedora will happily enforce a ridiculous
> Code of Conduct on non Red Hat and Fedora members but Red Hat and
> Fedora contributors will readily engage in name calling, harassment,
> and intimidation both on and
This is the Minimization Objective [0] update.
Status: Discovery phase
== Next phase proposed ==
The next phase has been proposed [1] [2] to the Council and feedback is
being collected. A formal vote happens in two weeks.
== PostgreSQL ==
Started talking to the maintainers about removing
On 10/15/19 10:59 PM, Leigh Scott wrote:
On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 12:44 AM, John M. Harris Jr
Don't waste your time answering this troll, he isn't listening.
This is gold. Red Hat and Fedora will happily enforce a ridiculous Code
of Conduct on non Red Hat and Fedora members but Red Hat and
Hi,
I am trying to build PyVISA (https://pyvisa.readthedocs.io/en/latest/)
using mock and the problem is, during the build it is looking for
"/builddir/build/BUILDROOT/python-pyvisa-1.10.0-1.fc30.x86_64/usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/pyvisa-1.10.0-py?.?.egg-info".
But the real name if the
On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 10:02:12AM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> I submitted a Change for wrangling today, but I'm also putting it here
> for discussion:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/OnDemandSideTags
>
> This is intended to be an alternative to modularity, in the sense
>
On Tue, 15 Oct 2019 at 19:53, wrote:
>
> I would like to log a serious issue with https://SoftwareCollections.org
>
> It says I need a Fedora ID.
>
OK first off, to log issues with SoftwareCollections, I don't see
where having a Fedora ID would do anything (or asked for). On the
bottom of the
On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 1:19 PM Przemek Klosowski via devel
wrote:
>
> On 10/15/19 9:26 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > Module stream metadata would gain two new optional attributes,
> > "upgrades:" and "obsoletes:".
> >
> > If the "upgrades: " field exists in the metadata, libdnf
> > should
The following Fedora EPEL 8 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
9 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-04183e6fbf
scapy-2.4.3-2.el8
6 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-1c488e885d
python-ecdsa-0.13.3-1.el8
4
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761539
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #3 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762268
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #4 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1758280
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #6 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762252
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #4 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761988
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #4 from
On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 12:11 PM Adam Williamson
wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2019-10-15 at 12:25 -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
> >
> > > So: I'm on board with most of what you say here, but there's no need to
> > > say it means Modularity is "a failure". It means right now it's not
> > > entirely baked and
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762246
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
--- Comment #3 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762242
Paul Howarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #1 from Paul
On 10/15/19 9:26 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
Module stream metadata would gain two new optional attributes,
"upgrades:" and "obsoletes:".
If the "upgrades: " field exists in the metadata, libdnf
should switch to this stream if the following conditions are met:
1) Changing the stream would not
Thanks Sérgio,
It's been some time now and still no word.
I can see on https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/libpar2 there is a
co-maintainer by the name of maci. Perhaps he can take over the package?
Alternatively I don't mind doing so either.
Chris
On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 10:36 PM Sérgio Basto
On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 09:06:19AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2019-10-16 at 10:02 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > I submitted a Change for wrangling today, but I'm also putting it here
> > for discussion:
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/OnDemandSideTags
> >
>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762085
--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System ---
perl-Term-Table-0.014-1.fc29 has been pushed to the Fedora 29 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1757192
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 4:48 AM Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Jerry James:
> > Sorry for not cluing you in sooner. I sent email to the maintainers
> > of all the packages I need to rebuild, but that didn't include you.
> > I'll let you know as soon as these builds are tagged into Rawhide.
>
> Oh no,
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762269
--- Comment #5 from Xavier Bachelot ---
Thanks for the offer. The problem is I still need to be added to each package
in order to push to the branch.
Or I guess request to be added to provenpackager group, but I'm not sure I
qualify.
--
You
Hi All,
I haven't heard anyone mention FOSDEM yet. Booth applications are due soon
and I'd like to see us coordinate again with our friends in CentOS. Is
there anyone interested in owning this? If so, can you put together a
proposal for Mindshare?
regards,
bex
--
Brian "bex" Exelbierd
On Wednesday, October 16, 2019, Stephen Gallagher
wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 12:05 AM John M. Harris Jr
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tuesday, October 15, 2019 6:26:31 PM MST Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > > given that we're talking about the need to migrate defaults
> >
> > To clarify, that has not
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762269
--- Comment #4 from Tom "spot" Callaway ---
(In reply to Xavier Bachelot from comment #3)
> Btw, feel free to add me to any package I'm filing bug for and assign the
> bug to me. My FAS username is xavierb.
I don't have a lot of time right
On Tue, 2019-10-15 at 12:25 -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
>
> > So: I'm on board with most of what you say here, but there's no need to
> > say it means Modularity is "a failure". It means right now it's not
> > entirely baked and we're realizing the concept needs extending and
> > perhaps reworking a
On Wed, 2019-10-16 at 10:02 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> I submitted a Change for wrangling today, but I'm also putting it here
> for discussion:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/OnDemandSideTags
>
> This is intended to be an alternative to modularity, in the sense
> that
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762085
--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System ---
perl-Term-Table-0.014-1.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://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762272
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |MODIFIED
--- Comment #1 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762245
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |MODIFIED
--- Comment #2 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762246
Paul Howarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Notification time stamped 2019-10-16 15:16:43 UTC
From 4d5414ec291dbacf1b2f5be715f9f53209813877 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Fedora Release Engineering
Date: Jul 26 2019 04:27:13 +
Subject: - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_31_Mass_Rebuild
Signed-off-by: Fedora Release
Notification time stamped 2019-10-16 15:16:43 UTC
From 442e33cbd753578444e524f31df5baf41a26d6c6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Tom Callaway
Date: Feb 11 2019 21:17:12 +
Subject: 3.008
---
diff --git a/.gitignore b/.gitignore
index 86f401d..856f886 100644
--- a/.gitignore
+++ b/.gitignore
Notification time stamped 2019-10-16 15:16:43 UTC
From 2e8d5ef84323145164572f9c5a2a6c2a093f712a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Tom Callaway
Date: Oct 16 2019 15:16:32 +
Subject: Merge branch 'master' into epel8
---
diff --git a/.gitignore b/.gitignore
index e69de29..856f886 100644
---
1 - 100 of 204 matches
Mail list logo
