Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Also, it is interesting that AFAIK, we have not yet dealt with issue
> like this (i.e. reporting issues against specific streams) for RHEL8 yet.
How can Modularity have been forced to production in both Fedora and RHEL
without something as basic as this figured out?
Hi,
I am Gobinda Das, working at Redhat india as a senior software engineer.
Now I want to take the build responsibility for below projects as (sac)
left redhat who use to take care build.
Projects are: gluster-ansible,gluster-ansible-cluster,
gluster-ansible-features, gluster-ansible-infra,
On ke, 18 joulu 2019, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Vít Ondruch wrote:
Also, it is interesting that AFAIK, we have not yet dealt with issue
like this (i.e. reporting issues against specific streams) for RHEL8 yet.
How can Modularity have been forced to production in both Fedora and RHEL
without
Hello.
Fmt 6.1.2 build completed for Rawhide. It include SOVERSION bump. All
dependent packages need to be rebuilded.
--
Sincerely,
Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.org)
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an
Dne 17. 12. 19 v 21:57 David Cantrell napsal(a):
> With regard to the recent protobuf package issue and the eclipse
> module, I
> started wondering how bugs work with packages bundled in modules.
> That is,
> packages that exist outside modules (e.g., protobuf) that end up
> bundled with
> some
On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 07:36:25AM +0100, Adrian Reber wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 16, 2019 at 09:26:16PM -0700, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> > On 12/1/19 10:48 AM, Adrian Reber wrote:
> > > I prepared a protobuf upgrade from 3.6 to 3.11 in rawhide. It comes with
> > > a soname update and requires its
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20191217.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20191218.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:1
Dropped images: 2
Added packages: 12
Dropped packages:25
Upgraded packages: 163
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 1.45 MiB
Size of dropped packages
On Wed, Dec 18, 2019, 14:29 Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
> On ke, 18 joulu 2019, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> >Vít Ondruch wrote:
> >> Also, it is interesting that AFAIK, we have not yet dealt with issue
> >> like this (i.e. reporting issues against specific streams) for RHEL8
> yet.
> >
> >How can
So I worked around it in my case, but is there a fix for the root cause?
Thanks,
Richard
>
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 11:21:45PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 17. 12. 19 21:57, David Cantrell wrote:
1) Are modules allowed to bundle packages that are provided by and currently
maintained in the base system? Are there are restrictions to what a module
can bundle (e.g., can a module bundle
On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 05:21:36PM -0700, John M. Harris Jr wrote:
On Tuesday, December 17, 2019 1:57:09 PM MST David Cantrell wrote:
With regard to the recent protobuf package issue and the eclipse module, I
started wondering how bugs work with packages bundled in modules. That is,
packages
On Wed, Dec 18, 2019 at 01:00:03PM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 17. 12. 19 v 21:57 David Cantrell napsal(a):
With regard to the recent protobuf package issue and the eclipse
module, I
started wondering how bugs work with packages bundled in modules.
That is,
packages that exist outside
On Wed, Dec 18, 2019, 14:44 Vitaly Zaitsev via devel <
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:
(snip)
Hello.
>
> Fmt 6.1.2 build completed for Rawhide. It include SOVERSION bump. All
> dependent packages need to be rebuilded.
It would be great to announce this stuff a week in advance, so
On Wed, Dec 18, 2019 at 03:29:14PM +0200, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
On ke, 18 joulu 2019, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Vít Ondruch wrote:
Also, it is interesting that AFAIK, we have not yet dealt with issue
like this (i.e. reporting issues against specific streams) for RHEL8 yet.
How can Modularity
On Wed, Dec 18, 2019 at 03:34:34PM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote:
On Wed, Dec 18, 2019, 14:29 Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
On ke, 18 joulu 2019, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>Vít Ondruch wrote:
>> Also, it is interesting that AFAIK, we have not yet dealt with issue
>> like this (i.e. reporting issues
I recently became co-maintainer for davfs2 and noticed that the package
featured an outdated license tag (davfs2 switched to the GPLv3 10 years ago)
-License:GPLv2+
+License:GPLv3+
Felix
___
devel mailing list --
No missing expected images.
Compose PASSES proposed Rawhide gating check!
All required tests passed
Failed openQA tests: 8/165 (x86_64), 1/2 (arm)
New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20191217.n.0):
ID: 499724 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_notifications_postinstall
On ke, 18 joulu 2019, David Cantrell wrote:
On Wed, Dec 18, 2019 at 03:34:34PM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote:
On Wed, Dec 18, 2019, 14:29 Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
On ke, 18 joulu 2019, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Vít Ondruch wrote:
Also, it is interesting that AFAIK, we have not yet dealt with
On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 07:33:12PM -0600, Chris Adams wrote:
> > Well, this definitely affects those using Fedora for enterprise
> > purposes. It's incredible how much businesses still rely on optical
> > media for these things.
> Again, you're projecting from an anecdote of one. My anecdote of
On Wed, Dec 18, 2019 at 3:38 PM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
wrote:
>
> On 18.12.2019 01:43, Brad Hubbard wrote:
> > I spoke to the maintainer. He said he'll take a look this weekend. His
> > workload is truly enormous and mind boggling so please be patient.
>
> Please ask him to add me as
Did you check if they do?
On Wed, Dec 18, 2019, 10:21 Vitaly Zaitsev via devel <
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> Hello.
>
> I'm going to update spdlog package to version 1.4.2 in Rawhide. This is
> not a header-only library anymore.
>
> This update can break dependent packages if they
Hello.
I'm going to update spdlog package to version 1.4.2 in Rawhide. This is
not a header-only library anymore.
This update can break dependent packages if they don't use
cmake/pkgconfig to import spdlog.
--
Sincerely,
Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.org)
On Wed, Dec 18, 2019 at 1:37 AM John M. Harris Jr
wrote:
> But it would mean that Fedora would potentially release with optical boot
> broken.
Yes, and it was said about a million times in all threads regarding this
change proposal. There is no need to say it again and again.
Yes, it can
On 18.12.2019 09:07, kefu chai wrote:
> Vitaly, sorry for the latency. thanks for your help. already added you
> as an admin of fmt project.
Thanks. Build completed:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1423531
--
Sincerely,
Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.org)
David Cantrell writes:
> On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 11:21:45PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
>> On 17. 12. 19 21:57, David Cantrell wrote:
>>> 1) Are modules allowed to bundle packages that are provided by and
>>> currently maintained in the base system? Are there are restrictions
>>> to what a
On Wednesday, December 18, 2019 10:01:02 AM MST Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 07:33:12PM -0600, Chris Adams wrote:
>
> > > Well, this definitely affects those using Fedora for enterprise
> > > purposes. It's incredible how much businesses still rely on optical
> > > media for
Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1785011
This bug is part of the non-responsive maintainer procedure for
btashton, following
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Policy_for_nonresponsive_package_maintainers/
.
Both of your packages are FTBFS in rawhide, including
James Paul Turner writes:
> Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1785011
>
> This bug is part of the non-responsive maintainer procedure for
> btashton, following
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Policy_for_nonresponsive_package_maintainers/
> .
>
> Both of your
On 19/12/19 01:00, David Cantrell wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 18, 2019 at 01:00:03PM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>> Just FTR, for Red Hat Software Collections, we are (ab)using "Version"
>> BZ field to track the SCL version (e.g. [1]), which in module
>> terminology resembles stream. Maybe we could reuse
On 12/18/19 8:35 AM, Adrian Reber wrote:
On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 07:36:25AM +0100, Adrian Reber wrote:
On Mon, Dec 16, 2019 at 09:26:16PM -0700, Orion Poplawski wrote:
On 12/1/19 10:48 AM, Adrian Reber wrote:
I prepared a protobuf upgrade from 3.6 to 3.11 in rawhide. It comes with
a soname
On 12/18/19 7:25 AM, Richard Shaw wrote:
So I worked around it in my case, but is there a fix for the root cause?
Thanks,
Richard
I have some slight hope that it was fixed in cmake 3.16.1. Can you try
with that?
--
Orion Poplawski
Manager of NWRA Technical Systems 720-772-5637
Notification time stamped 2019-12-18 11:22:51 UTC
From f97cd090c0c5e0e1fb2b785ea65661b721bbb880 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Paul Howarth
Date: Dec 18 2019 11:21:46 +
Subject: Update to 1.044
- New upstream release 1.044
- Handle a couple of new cases:
- Include the modules
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1655461
Upstream Release Monitoring
changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|w3c-markup-validator-201502
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1655461
--- Comment #5 from Upstream Release Monitoring
---
The following Sources of the specfile are not valid URLs so we cannot
automatically build the new version for you. Please use URLs in your Source
declarations if possible.
-
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1784658
--- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2019-913ba69bec has been submitted as an update to Fedora 31.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-913ba69bec
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1784170
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |MODIFIED
--- Comment #3 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1778465
Bug 1778465 depends on bug 1778463, which changed state.
Bug 1778463 Summary: [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-Data-Float
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1778463
What|Removed |Added
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1778463
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1784735
Bug ID: 1784735
Summary: RFE build perl-Params-Validate
Product: Fedora EPEL
Version: epel8
Status: NEW
Component: perl-Params-Validate
Assignee: p...@city-fan.org
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1784735
Steve Traylen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1784658
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |MODIFIED
CC|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1784658
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #2 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1784170
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #4 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1778849
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-Date-Manip-6.79-1.fc31 |perl-Date-Manip-6.79-1.fc31
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1781251
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-Devel-NYTProf-6.06-7.f |perl-Devel-NYTProf-6.06-7.f
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1781552
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-Archive-Extract-0.86-1 |perl-Archive-Extract-0.86-1
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1781561
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Fixed In
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1781552
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Fixed In
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1781251
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Fixed In
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1779900
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-Archive-Extract-0.84-1 |perl-Archive-Extract-0.84-1
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1781561
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-Net-Amazon-S3-0.87-1.f |perl-Net-Amazon-S3-0.87-1.f
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1779900
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Fixed In
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1781557
--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System ---
perl-CPANPLUS-0.990.400-1.fc31 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 stable
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
https://fedorapeople.org/groups/389ds/ci/nightly/2019/12/19/report-389-ds-base-1.4.3.0-20191219git7ffb2eb.fc31.x86_64.html
___
389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
54 matches
Mail list logo
