On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 12:55 PM Marius Schwarz wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> while upgrading from F31 to F32, the selpolicy script has executed a
> full restorecon on any main path (/*):
>
> once after installing the package and once on removing the old package (
> aka house keeping the old package ).
>
>
On 12. 05. 20 0:32, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Mon, 2020-05-11 at 01:47 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 10. 05. 20 20:48, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
Basically we are switching from 'I go and install
fedora-obsolete-packages and have opted in to it' to 'I have to go
explictly exclude it to keep my
I'm building LibRaw 0.20 Beta 1 for rawhide, along with all direct consumers,
in a multi-stage chain build, today, including the following:
deepin-image-viewer
elementary-photos
freeimage
gthumb
indi-gphoto
krita
luminance-hdr
photoqt
shotwell
efl
entangle
gegl04
ImageMagick
kf5-libkdcraw
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 3/37 (x86_64)
ID: 595914 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso desktop_login
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/595914
ID: 595915 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso release_identification
URL:
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 3:13 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <
zbys...@in.waw.pl> wrote:
>
> > 1. Why do you want to be a member of FESCo?
> > 2. How do you currently contribute to Fedora? How does that
> > contribution benefit the community?
> > 3. How should we handle cases where Fedora's and
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 2:21 PM Gary Buhrmaster
wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 7:40 PM Chris Murphy wrote:
>
> > Bias is not the same thing as a conflict of interest. And it doesn't
> > inherently result in unfairness.
>
> Sometimes it is a matter avoiding even the appearance
> of
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 1/8 (x86_64)
New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-IoT-32-20200429.0):
ID: 595946 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso release_identification
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/595946
Passed openQA tests: 7/8 (x86_64)
Installed
On 11. 05. 20 22:33, Gwyn Ciesla via devel wrote:
I'm building LibRaw 0.20 Beta 1 for rawhide, along with all direct consumers, in
a multi-stage chain build, today, including the following:
deepin-image-viewer
elementary-photos
freeimage
gthumb
indi-gphoto
krita
luminance-hdr
photoqt
shotwell
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 12:49 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
>
> Oh, it's not about knowledge at all in this case, but about bias and
> objectivity. Obviously, people who design some change can never be
> fully neutral. Additionally, if we assume that FESCo members vote for
> their
This past weekend I finally decided to jump off the cliff and attempt
to re-launch the Java SIG. It seems there's some interest in keeping
the Java stack maintained, it's just not focused or organized right
now.
What we did when starting the Stewardship SIG seems to have worked out
pretty well,
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 01:47:32AM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 10. 05. 20 20:48, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > Basically we are switching from 'I go and install
> > fedora-obsolete-packages and have opted in to it' to 'I have to go
> > explictly exclude it to keep my obsolete packges'.
>
> As others
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 4:39 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> If we just make it an essay with suggestions of what to include, I think
> it might be more engaging than just a sentence or two on specific
> questions.
>
> Thinking about it from an editorial perspective, the questionnaire format
results in
Hi,
Miro Hrončok wrote on Mon, May 11, 2020 at 07:42:09PM +0200:
> Request package ownership via the *Take* button in he left column on
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/
>
> waypipe orphan 5 weeks ago
I would be interested in taking
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 10:56 PM Ben Cotton wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 4:39 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>>
>> If we just make it an essay with suggestions of what to include, I think
>> it might be more engaging than just a sentence or two on specific
>> questions.
>>
> Thinking about it from
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 02:27:06PM -0400, Ben Cotton wrote:
> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 1:24 PM Ben Cotton wrote:
> >
> > FESCo agreed[1] today that I am tasked with starting an open
> > discussion on the questions and collecting feedback for them to
> > approve.
>
> Based on the feedback in this
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 7:40 PM Chris Murphy wrote:
> Bias is not the same thing as a conflict of interest. And it doesn't
> inherently result in unfairness.
Sometimes it is a matter avoiding even the appearance
of impropriety that could be raised at a later date to
question the
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 04:26:36PM -0400, Ben Cotton wrote:
> On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 3:13 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <
> zbys...@in.waw.pl> wrote:
>
> >
> > > 1. Why do you want to be a member of FESCo?
> > > 2. How do you currently contribute to Fedora? How does that
> > > contribution
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 11:22 PM Chris Murphy wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 2:21 PM Gary Buhrmaster
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 7:40 PM Chris Murphy
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Bias is not the same thing as a conflict of interest. And it doesn't
> > > inherently result in
On Mon, 2020-05-11 at 01:47 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 10. 05. 20 20:48, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > Basically we are switching from 'I go and install
> > fedora-obsolete-packages and have opted in to it' to 'I have to go
> > explictly exclude it to keep my obsolete packges'.
>
> As others have
On 2020-05-11 10:42 a.m., Miro Hrončok wrote:
GREYCstoration orphan 5 weeks ago
That package can be retired because upstream superseded it by G'Mic a
long time ago. See http://cimg.eu/greycstoration/
--
Luya Tshimbalanga
Fedora Design Team
Fedora Design Suite maintainer
Hi all,
python-blist currently does not build against Python 3.9:
and worryingly, even the patch we use for Python 3.7 compatibility has
not been merged after two years; upstream seems to be totally dead:
https://github.com/DanielStutzbach/blist/pull/78
As such I'm leaning towards
On 5/11/20 6:38 PM, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
Hi all,
python-blist currently does not build against Python 3.9:
and worryingly, even the patch we use for Python 3.7 compatibility has
not been merged after two years; upstream seems to be totally dead:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Mon, 2020-05-11 at 22:41 -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 7:23 PM Miro Hrončok
> wrote:
> > On 12. 05. 20 0:32, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2020-05-11 at 01:47 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > > > On 10. 05. 20 20:48,
Once upon a time, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek said:
> Yep. There's also /run/systemd/resolve/resolv.conf, where systemd-resolved
> always exposes a list (with the limitations described above).
I wasn't aware of that file... to me, that's a rather obscure location
(and I didn't find it mentioned
Howdy,
On 5/11/20 9:21 PM, Igor Raits wrote:
The blist requirement is gone in 2.0.0; we should probably upgrade
from
the pre-release snapshot we've been using since 2017 (eek):
https://github.com/ultrajson/ultrajson/releases/tag/2.0.0
Thanks for noticing that!
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 7:23 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> On 12. 05. 20 0:32, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Mon, 2020-05-11 at 01:47 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> >> On 10. 05. 20 20:48, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> >>> Basically we are switching from 'I go and install
> >>> fedora-obsolete-packages and
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Mon, 2020-05-11 at 18:44 -0700, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
> On 5/11/20 6:38 PM, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
> > Hi all,
Hey,
> > python-blist currently does not build against Python 3.9:
> >
> > and worryingly, even the patch we use for
No missing expected images.
Passed openQA tests: 1/1 (x86_64)
--
Mail generated by check-compose:
https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 01:47:32AM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 10. 05. 20 20:48, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> >Basically we are switching from 'I go and install
> >fedora-obsolete-packages and have opted in to it' to 'I have to go
> >explictly exclude it to keep my obsolete packges'.
>
> As others
Hello everyone,
Please join us at the next Open NeuroFedora team meeting this week on
Monday (today) at 1800UTC in #fedora-neuro on IRC (Freenode).
https://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=#fedora-neuro
The channel is bridged to Telegram, so you can also join us there on the
@NeuroFedora group:
On 25. 03. 20 23:39, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 25. 03. 20 21:51, Mohan Boddu wrote:
Hi all,
As discussed in the spins list [1], we are adding the ability to ping
maintainers of spins or labs in compose failure tickets [2]. I made a
list of maintainers [3] from the existing kickstart files, please
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 10:42 AM Aoife Moloney wrote:
> ## GitForge Updates
> * We are tracking our progress here (nothing new added yet, fyi)
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Git_forge_update
> * And the council are tracking the community issues in this ticket
>
Oops, almost forgot to reply to this...
On 5/5/20 1:36 PM, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 05. 05. 20 8:43, Panu Matilainen wrote:
Hmm, OTOH this is a bit questionable: macro primitives can only take
arguments in the %{foo:bar} form, so perhaps the non-%{} form actually
should fall through silently.
On Mon, 11 May 2020 at 11:03, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 10:42 AM Aoife Moloney
> wrote:
> > ## GitForge Updates
> > * We are tracking our progress here (nothing new added yet, fyi)
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Git_forge_update
> > * And the council are tracking the
Now we must use qt5-qtbase-devel.
пн, 11 мая 2020 г., 12:01 Susi Lehtola :
> Hi,
>
>
> I just noticed that qt5-devel has been dropped. Is the idea to force
> all other packages to change
>
> Requires: qt5-devel
>
> into
>
> Requires: qt5-qtbase
> Requires: qt5-qtbase-gui
> Requires:
On 11. 05. 20 11:00, Susi Lehtola wrote:
Hi,
I just noticed that qt5-devel has been dropped. Is the idea to force
all other packages to change
Requires: qt5-devel
into
Requires: qt5-qtbase
Requires: qt5-qtbase-gui
Requires: qt5-qtbase-mysql
Requires: qt5-qtbase-postgresql
Requires:
No missing expected images.
Soft failed openQA tests: 1/1 (x86_64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)
ID: 595432 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/595432
--
Mail generated by check-compose:
No missing expected images.
Passed openQA tests: 1/1 (x86_64)
--
Mail generated by check-compose:
https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
On 11. 05. 20 9:43, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
The idea solution IMHO would be to allow erasing only the packages
that do not belong to a distupgrade repository. Possibly to have
that option only for the Fedora repos, so packages installed from a
thrid-party would not get erased.
I
# CPE Weekly: 2020-05-11
---
title: CPE Weekly status email
tags: CPE Weekly, email
---
Background:
The Community Platform Engineering group is the Red Hat team combining
IT and release engineering from Fedora and CentOS.Check out our teams
info here https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/cpe/
Hi,
I just noticed that qt5-devel has been dropped. Is the idea to force
all other packages to change
Requires: qt5-devel
into
Requires: qt5-qtbase
Requires: qt5-qtbase-gui
Requires: qt5-qtbase-mysql
Requires: qt5-qtbase-postgresql
Requires: qt5-qtconnectivity
Requires: qt5-qtdeclarative
Dne 11. 05. 20 v 9:43 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek napsal(a):
> , IMHO it would be better to make the user interface
> stronger: have dnf say what is removed and why (when obsoleted)
+1
But we should realize that DNF actually does not have user interface. IMHO this
should be only exposed using
On Fri, May 8, 2020 at 6:03 PM Tom Hughes wrote:
>
> On 08/05/2020 21:18, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > On Sat, May 2, 2020 at 6:26 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
> >>
> >> On 01. 05. 20 22:21, Ben Cotton wrote:
> >>> * Proposal owners:
> >>> The packages are already built for Fedora 33 in a non-default
On 11/05/2020 13:02, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
On Fri, May 8, 2020 at 6:03 PM Tom Hughes wrote:
On 08/05/2020 21:18, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
On Sat, May 2, 2020 at 6:26 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 01. 05. 20 22:21, Ben Cotton wrote:
* Proposal owners:
The packages are already built for
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Mon, 2020-05-11 at 08:02 -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> On Fri, May 8, 2020 at 6:03 PM Tom Hughes wrote:
> > On 08/05/2020 21:18, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > > On Sat, May 2, 2020 at 6:26 PM Miro Hrončok
> > > wrote:
> > > > On 01. 05. 20
During today's FESCo meeting, we encountered an unusual voting
situation for the first time: Four FESCo members voted in favor (+1)
of a measure and five FESCo members opted to abstain (0) for various
reasons. However, the FESCo voting policy currently reads: "A majority
of the committee (that is,
- Original Message -
> From: "Stephen Gallagher"
> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
>
> Sent: Monday, May 11, 2020 11:52:24 AM
> Subject: Proposal: Revise FESCo voting policy
>
> During today's FESCo meeting, we encountered an unusual voting
> situation for the first
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 11:53 AM Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
Replying out of order because I can :-)
> * A FESCo member may grant their proxy vote to another member of the
> Fedora community if they cannot be in attendance for a vote. If they
> do so, that vote is counted equivalently to any
On Mon, May 11, 2020 17:34:57 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 11. 05. 20 16:48, Ankur Sinha wrote:
> Thanks.
>
> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=23843 says
> "Fedora-Python-Classroom-Live"
>
> kickstarts have:
>
> fedora-arm-python-classroom.ks
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
=
#fedora-meeting-1: FESCO (2020-05-11)
=
Meeting started by ignatenkobrain at 15:03:42 UTC. The full logs are
available at
On Mon, May 11, 2020, at 4:40 AM, Aoife Moloney wrote:
> # CPE Weekly: 2020-05-11
> ---
> title: CPE Weekly status email
> tags: CPE Weekly, email
> ---
[snip]
>
> Source: https://hackmd.io/8iV7PilARSG68Tqv8CzKOQ
>
On my mobile device, this URL shows status from March. Am I doing it wrong?
Hi Miro,
On Mon, May 11, 2020 10:29:32 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> Hello again. Please, what is the TOM section for the Python Classroom Lab?
I can't see one here at the moment:
https://pagure.io/fedora-kickstarts/blob/master/f/maintainers.toml
So, I think you'll have to add a new one. I'd
On 11. 05. 20 16:48, Ankur Sinha wrote:
Hi Miro,
On Mon, May 11, 2020 10:29:32 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
Hello again. Please, what is the TOM section for the Python Classroom Lab?
I can't see one here at the moment:
https://pagure.io/fedora-kickstarts/blob/master/f/maintainers.toml
So, I
Hey All,
In the recent past, we have seen a lot of contributors send out
introduction emails to the Test list.
And most of you who are new, must be wondering about the emails that
you get about Test Days and release validations just before release.
Well, this is a video call where we will be
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 4:37 PM James Cassell
wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, May 11, 2020, at 4:40 AM, Aoife Moloney wrote:
> > # CPE Weekly: 2020-05-11
> > ---
> > title: CPE Weekly status email
> > tags: CPE Weekly, email
> > ---
> [snip]
> >
> > Source: https://hackmd.io/8iV7PilARSG68Tqv8CzKOQ
> >
>
>
Missing expected images:
Iot dvd aarch64
Iot dvd x86_64
Passed openQA tests: 8/8 (x86_64)
--
Mail generated by check-compose:
https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an
Once upon a time, Igor Raits said:
> * #2381 F33 System-Wide Change: systemd-resolved (ignatenkobrain,
> 15:10:20)
> * AGREED: APPROVED (+4, ±5, -0) (ignatenkobrain, 15:18:40)
> * AGREED: APPROVED (+5, ±4, -0) (ignatenkobrain, 15:20:51)
> * AGREED: APPROVED (+6, ±3, -0)
On 11. 05. 20 19:53, Mohan Boddu wrote:
Sorry for the late reply, compose-tracker uses the toml file
https://pagure.io/releng/compose-tracker/blob/master/f/compose_tracker.py#_151
And the PR is merged and it should work.
Thanks for confirmation.
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC:
On 11. 05. 20 19:36, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
One strong argument for the proposed change is that, currently, an
abstention or recusal (TIL that's the proper term) is essentially
equivalent to a negative vote. (As long as we require +5 to pass,
any vote apart from +1 has the same
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 05:36:06PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> One strong argument for the proposed change is that, currently, an
> abstention or recusal (TIL that's the proper term) is essentially
> equivalent to a negative vote. (As long as we require +5 to pass,
> any vote apart
On Monday, 11 May 2020 18.42.09 WEST Miro Hrončok wrote:
> The following packages are orphaned and will be retired when they
> are orphaned for six weeks, unless someone adopts them. If you know for sure
> that the package should be retired, please do so now with a proper reason:
>
Hi,
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 8:06 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> On 11. 05. 20 19:36, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > One strong argument for the proposed change is that, currently, an
> > abstention or recusal (TIL that's the proper term) is essentially
> > equivalent to a negative vote. (As
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 1:24 PM Ben Cotton wrote:
>
> FESCo agreed[1] today that I am tasked with starting an open
> discussion on the questions and collecting feedback for them to
> approve.
Based on the feedback in this thread and the discussion in FESCo
#2394[2], I will submit the following
On Sun, May 10, 2020 at 11:51 PM Petr Pisar wrote:
> How do you backport fixes? Do apply the fixes directly to dist-git? Or do you
> apply the fixes to a corresponding patches branch that you occur to have
> around till needed (e.g. till the hitorical code is supported) for the purpose
> of
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 4:16 PM Alex Scheel wrote:
> Abstaining is in two categories:
There is (at least) one additional category, which
is that the issue involves various levels of self
interest. Technically that is really called a recusal,
but the result is the same when it comes time
to
On 11. 05. 20 18:23, Ben Cotton wrote:
* To pass any measure, a majority — defined as the greater of half the
eligible votes (rounded up) — must vote in favor of the measure. The
standard set of eligible votes is one vote per FESCo member. No
measure may pass without at least one vote in favor.
On 11. 05. 20 18:23, Ankur Sinha wrote:
On Mon, May 11, 2020 17:34:57 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 11. 05. 20 16:48, Ankur Sinha wrote:
Thanks.
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=23843 says
"Fedora-Python-Classroom-Live"
kickstarts have:
fedora-arm-python-classroom.ks
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 05:01:09PM +, Gary Buhrmaster wrote:
> On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 4:16 PM Alex Scheel wrote:
> > Abstaining is in two categories:
>
> There is (at least) one additional category, which
> is that the issue involves various levels of self
> interest. Technically that
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 07:13:52PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 11. 05. 20 18:23, Ben Cotton wrote:
> >>* To pass any measure, a majority — defined as the greater of half the
> >>eligible votes (rounded up) — must vote in favor of the measure. The
> >>standard set of eligible votes is one vote
The following packages are orphaned and will be retired when they
are orphaned for six weeks, unless someone adopts them. If you know for sure
that the package should be retired, please do so now with a proper reason:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_remove_a_package_at_end_of_life
Note: If
Sorry for the late reply, compose-tracker uses the toml file
https://pagure.io/releng/compose-tracker/blob/master/f/compose_tracker.py#_151
And the PR is merged and it should work.
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 1:19 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> On 11. 05. 20 18:23, Ankur Sinha wrote:
> > On Mon, May
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 12:23 pm, Ben Cotton wrote:
So in theory a proposal could pass with a vote of (+1,8,-0). This
seems ungreat. If many FESCo members are unwilling to provide an
up/down, that indicates a problem with the proposal, IMO. I'd like to
see this have a floor (e.g. proposals
Il giorno lun, 11/05/2020 alle 09.40 +0100, Aoife Moloney ha scritto:
> # CPE Weekly: 2020-05-11
> ---
> title: CPE Weekly status email
> tags: CPE Weekly, email
> ---
>
...
>
> ## GitForge Updates
> * We are tracking our progress here (nothing new added yet, fyi)
>
Hi,
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 5:52 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
> During today's FESCo meeting, we encountered an unusual voting
> situation for the first time: Four FESCo members voted in favor (+1)
> of a measure and five FESCo members opted to abstain (0) for various
> reasons. However, the
On 11/05/20 19:42, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> The following packages are orphaned and will be retired when they
> are orphaned for six weeks, unless someone adopts them. If you know for
> sure
> that the package should be retired, please do so now with a proper reason:
>
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20200510.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20200511.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 1
Added packages: 3
Dropped packages:4
Upgraded packages: 69
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 1.02 MiB
Size of dropped packages
On 11. 05. 20 20:22, José Abílio Matos wrote:
On Monday, 11 May 2020 18.42.09 WEST Miro Hrončok wrote:
The following packages are orphaned and will be retired when they
are orphaned for six weeks, unless someone adopts them. If you know for sure
that the package should be retired, please do so
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 01:02:56PM -0500, Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Igor Raits said:
> > * #2381 F33 System-Wide Change: systemd-resolved (ignatenkobrain,
> > 15:10:20)
> > * AGREED: APPROVED (+4, ±5, -0) (ignatenkobrain, 15:18:40)
> > * AGREED: APPROVED (+5, ±4, -0)
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 08:25:35PM +0200, Aleksandra Fedorova wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 8:06 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
> >
> > On 11. 05. 20 19:36, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > > One strong argument for the proposed change is that, currently, an
> > > abstention or recusal
Hi,
while upgrading from F31 to F32, the selpolicy script has executed a
full restorecon on any main path (/*):
once after installing the package and once on removing the old package (
aka house keeping the old package ).
As it's not directly a bug, more an intense waste of time and IO, i did
Am 11.05.20 um 20:35 schrieb Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek:
>
> Is /run/systemd/resolve/resolv.conf good enough? Would a comment in
> /etc/resolv.conf pointing the user to that file help?
>
Why not using a symlink from new to old resolve.conf?
This way old app will keep working and admins also do
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 08:58:46PM +0200, Marius Schwarz wrote:
> Am 11.05.20 um 20:35 schrieb Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek:
> >
> > Is /run/systemd/resolve/resolv.conf good enough? Would a comment in
> > /etc/resolv.conf pointing the user to that file help?
> >
> Why not using a symlink from new
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1793228
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-Schedule-Cron-Events-1 |perl-Schedule-Cron-Events-1
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1804272
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-Convert-UUlib-1.71-1.f |perl-Convert-UUlib-1.71-1.f
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1812799
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-DBD-Firebird-1.32-1.fc |perl-DBD-Firebird-1.32-1.fc
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1834480
Bug ID: 1834480
Summary: perl-FFI-CheckLib-0.27 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-FFI-CheckLib
Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1834627
--- Comment #1 from Upstream Release Monitoring
---
Skipping the scratch build because an SRPM could not be built: ['rpmbuild',
'-D', '_sourcedir .', '-D', '_topdir .', '-bs',
'/var/tmp/thn-ngijyz__/perl-Net-Whois-Raw.spec'] returned 1:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1793228
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-Schedule-Cron-Events-1 |perl-Schedule-Cron-Events-1
Howdy,
On 5/11/20 9:21 PM, Igor Raits wrote:
The blist requirement is gone in 2.0.0; we should probably upgrade
from
the pre-release snapshot we've been using since 2017 (eek):
https://github.com/ultrajson/ultrajson/releases/tag/2.0.0
Thanks for noticing that!
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1804272
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-Convert-UUlib-1.71-1.f |perl-Convert-UUlib-1.71-1.f
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1812799
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-DBD-Firebird-1.32-1.fc |perl-DBD-Firebird-1.32-1.fc
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1793228
--- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2020-8a57aafc66 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable
repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1804272
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-Convert-UUlib-1.71-1.f |perl-Convert-UUlib-1.71-1.f
https://fedorapeople.org/groups/389ds/ci/nightly/2020/05/12/report-389-ds-base-1.4.4.2-20200511git0cb1e04.fc31.x86_64.html
___
389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/51084
resolves:
https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/51079
https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/51080
—
Sincerely,
William Brown
Senior Software Engineer, 389 Directory Server
SUSE Labs
___
389-devel mailing
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Mon, 2020-05-11 at 18:44 -0700, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
> On 5/11/20 6:38 PM, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
> > Hi all,
Hey,
> > python-blist currently does not build against Python 3.9:
> >
> > and worryingly, even the patch we use for
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1834627
Bug ID: 1834627
Summary: perl-Net-Whois-Raw-2.99028 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-Net-Whois-Raw
Keywords: FutureFeature,
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1833325
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1833325
--- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2020-ee57378388 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 32.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-ee57378388
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1749126
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
1 - 100 of 124 matches
Mail list logo
