Eric Edens via devel 于 2021年2月4日周四
上午10:54写道：
> I'm working on a package that adds a configuration to dracut.conf.d. [1]
> To rebuild initramfs, upstream's spec file calls `dracut --force` in
> `%post` . [2]
>
> Questions:
> - Is it recommended that the RPM updates initramfs?
- If so, what's
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1919731
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #5 from
Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> On Wednesday, 03 February 2021 at 14:29, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
>> But it means that provenpackagers who want to bump and rebuild have to
>> actually manually look at another branch (rawhide-build).
>
> No, why would they need to do that?
Because
On Wed, Feb 3, 2021 at 4:51 PM Frédéric Pierret
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> As discussed few weeks ago, I'm working on reproducible builds for Fedora.
> I've submitted a request for review for new packages:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1924918. Notably, reprotest is a
> striking tool
I'm working on a package that adds a configuration to dracut.conf.d. [1] To
rebuild initramfs, upstream's spec file calls `dracut --force` in `%post` . [2]
Questions:
- Is it recommended that the RPM updates initramfs?
- If so, what's the recommended method?
As background, the RPM will be used
The following Fedora EPEL 7 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
48 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2020-4a9fc09599
openjpeg2-2.3.1-10.el7
13 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-f1768ebc94
opensmtpd-6.8.0p2-1.el7
10
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1920120
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Fixed In
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1916153
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1924375
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #2 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1919731
Robert Scheck changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends On||1924943
Referenced Bugs:
Todd Zullinger wrote:
> […]
> In case it's helpful (and not better documented elsewhere),
> it's possible to rename your existing local master branch to
> rawhide and adjust the upstream tracking branch.
> In a typical dist-git clone from the rpms tree, you'd do
> this:
> git fetch && git
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1924943
Robert Scheck changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks|1919730 |1919731
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1919730
Robert Scheck changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends On|1924943 |
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1919730
Robert Scheck changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends On||1924943
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1924943
Robert Scheck changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||1919730
Doc Type|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1924943
Bug ID: 1924943
Summary: Please build perl-HTTP-ProxyAutoConfig for EPEL 8
Product: Fedora EPEL
Version: epel8
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Status: NEW
On Wed, Feb 03, 2021 at 05:41:27PM -0500, Elliott Sales de Andrade wrote:
> I just received 3 notifications that
>
> > the-new-hotness saw an update for , but pkgdb says the maintainers
> > are not interested in bugs being filed
>
> but all packages have monitoring enabled.
>
> Did something
[re-sending to devel instead of devel-announce, apologies if
this arrives twice.]
Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> Greetings everyone and thanks for your patience with us today.
Thank you Kevin and all the folks who help make such changes
happen relatively seamlessly. :)
> You will want to re-clone any
On Wed, Feb 03, 2021 at 10:50:43PM +0100, Frédéric Pierret wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As discussed few weeks ago, I'm working on reproducible builds for Fedora.
...snip...
I'll try and take a look at the tools mentioned when I get a chance, but
I wanted to just thank you for working on this. :)
So,
I just received 3 notifications that
> the-new-hotness saw an update for , but pkgdb says the maintainers
> are not interested in bugs being filed
but all packages have monitoring enabled.
Did something break with it? Maybe the branch name changes?
--
Elliott
Greetings everyone and thanks for your patience with us today.
Here's the current status of the branch conversion change:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/GitRepos-master-to-main
By namespace:
rpms: complete. 'rawhide' is now the default branch and
there's also a symref to 'main'.
Greetings everyone and thanks for your patience with us today.
Here's the current status of the branch conversion change:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/GitRepos-master-to-main
By namespace:
rpms: complete. 'rawhide' is now the default branch and
there's also a symref to 'main'.
Hi,
As discussed few weeks ago, I'm working on reproducible builds for Fedora. I've
submitted a request for review for new packages:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1924918. Notably, reprotest is a
striking tool to test reproduciblity by changing multiples build factors (time,
On Wed, Feb 03, 2021 at 11:56:50AM -0800, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 03, 2021 at 11:01:50AM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> >
> > And in possibly related news, there seem to be a lot of side tags in
> > Rawhide:
> >
> > $ koji list-tags | grep f34-build-side | wc -l
> > 145
>
>
On Wed, Feb 03, 2021 at 11:01:50AM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>
> And in possibly related news, there seem to be a lot of side tags in Rawhide:
>
> $ koji list-tags | grep f34-build-side | wc -l
> 145
Yeah, there sure are. ;(
our monitor-gating script seems to leak them sometimes.
On Wed, Feb 03, 2021 at 10:53:32AM -0600, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> Has anybody investigated Jim Salter's claims that Fedora 32 is slow
> to launch applications? Recent article:
>
> https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/02/ubuntu-core-20-adds-secure-boot-with-hardware-backed-encryption/
>
> "in
On Wed, 2021-02-03 at 12:54 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 29/01/21 10:06 -0800, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
> > On Mon, 2021-01-25 at 10:00 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > > Tom Rodgers completed the Boost 1.75.0 build for the change
> > >
On Wed, 3 Feb 2021 at 14:13, Artem Tim wrote:
> I did my own various tests on Ryzen (Zen 2) 4 month ago or so on Fedora
> 32/33 vs Clear Linux which known to be "fastest" distro and in almost all
> benchmarks Fedora was equal or even faster a little bit then Clear Linux.
> In rare cases Clear
I did my own various tests on Ryzen (Zen 2) 4 month ago or so on Fedora 32/33
vs Clear Linux which known to be "fastest" distro and in almost all benchmarks
Fedora was equal or even faster a little bit then Clear Linux. In rare cases
Clear Linux was faster within the margin of error. Have no
On Wed, Feb 3, 2021 at 5:54 PM Michael Catanzaro wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Has anybody investigated Jim Salter's claims that Fedora 32 is slow to
> launch applications? Recent article:
>
> https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/02/ubuntu-core-20-adds-secure-boot-with-hardware-backed-encryption/
>
> "in my
On Wed, 2021-02-03 at 10:53 -0600, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Has anybody investigated Jim Salter's claims that Fedora 32 is slow
> to
> launch applications? Recent article:
>
> https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/02/ubuntu-core-20-adds-secure-boot-with-hardware-backed-encryption/
>
>
I filed:
https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2573
about this.
We can revert what we need to, and sorry for the hassle again.
kevin
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1924375
--- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2021-c3904984c0 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 33.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-c3904984c0
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
Hi,
On Wednesday, 2021-02-03 14:32:53 +0100, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> But Jami itself depends on FFmpeg.
And I rather use a build from upstream repo with rpmfusion ffmpeg than
I'd be using a crippled build that ripped out ffmpeg.
On Wed, Feb 03, 2021 at 06:03:30PM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote:
>
> Note that the text on the Change page does not reflect what was
> actually approved by FESCo:
> https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2519#comment-706518
>
> For reference: Approve Change proposal to rename branch names from
> "master"
On 03. 02. 21 16:10, Petr Lautrbach wrote:
Now we havehttps://src.fedoraproject.org/tests/selinux/ with default
branch "rawhide". "rawhide" doesn't make sense in this repo as it
contains tests used on all Fedora versions and also downstream Red Hat
Enterprise Linux.
Note that that depends.
On Wed, Feb 03, 2021 at 05:50:30PM +0100, Petr Šplíchal wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Feb 2021 at 17:42, Petr Lautrbach wrote:
>
> > Petr Lautrbach writes:
> >
> > > Kevin Fenzi writes:
> > >
> > >> Greetings everyone.
> > >>
> > >> We finally have everything in place and hopefully tested to make the
> >
On Mon, 2020-12-21 at 11:28 -0500, Ben Cotton wrote:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/RPMCoW
>
>
> == Summary ==
>
> RPM Copy on Write provides a better experience for Fedora Users as it
> reduces the amount of I/O and offsets CPU cost of package
> decompression. RPM Copy on Write uses
F33 on EFI + Xen delays 30+ seconds, sometimes hangs, on boot @ grub2 error,
...
Loading Xen 4.14.1 ...
error: ../../grub-core/fs/fshelp.c:257:file
`/EFI/fedora/x86_64-efi/module2.mod' not found.
Loading Linux 5.10.9-201.fc33.x86_64 ...
Loading initial
On Wed, Feb 3, 2021 at 4:10 PM Petr Lautrbach wrote:
>
> Kevin Fenzi writes:
>
> > Greetings everyone.
> >
> > We finally have everything in place and hopefully tested to make the
> > switch tomorrow from master to rawhide/main branches for
> > src.fedoraproject.org.
> >
> > At 13:30UTC we will
Hi,
Has anybody investigated Jim Salter's claims that Fedora 32 is slow to
launch applications? Recent article:
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/02/ubuntu-core-20-adds-secure-boot-with-hardware-backed-encryption/
"in my experience, Fedora 32 is noticeably, demonstrably more sluggish
to
On Wed, 3 Feb 2021 at 17:42, Petr Lautrbach wrote:
> Petr Lautrbach writes:
>
> > Kevin Fenzi writes:
> >
> >> Greetings everyone.
> >>
> >> We finally have everything in place and hopefully tested to make the
> >> switch tomorrow from master to rawhide/main branches for
> >>
On Wed, Feb 3, 2021 at 3:16 AM john tatt wrote:
>
> Hi
> So if I understand well, an EPEL package could be have to be desinstalled
> just because an update in Stream make it not compatible any more ?
> Strange
>
Yes and no
Yes - If you are running CentOS Stream, and don't have the epel-next
This has been fixed in fedpkg-1.40-4.fc33 - great stuff everyone!
Rich.
--
Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com
virt-p2v converts physical machines to virtual machines. Boot with a
cqrlog is failing due to a dep issue with lazarus:
DEBUG util.py:444: Error:
DEBUG util.py:444: Problem: conflicting requests
DEBUG util.py:444:- nothing provides qt5pas-devel(x86-64) =
2.6-2001006.fc34 needed by lazarus-2.0.10-6.fc34.x86_64
But the lazarus build should be providing the
Petr Lautrbach writes:
> Kevin Fenzi writes:
>
>> Greetings everyone.
>>
>> We finally have everything in place and hopefully tested to make the
>> switch tomorrow from master to rawhide/main branches for
>> src.fedoraproject.org.
>>
>> At 13:30UTC we will adjust pagure to reject pushes to
On Wed, Feb 03, 2021 at 11:14:38AM +, john tatt wrote:
> So if I understand well, an EPEL package could be have to be desinstalled
> just because an update in Stream make it not compatible any more ?
All changes landing in Stream are already approved to land in a RHEL minor
release. So this
= Meeting =
Minutes:
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-2/2021-02-03/fesco.2021-02-03-15.00.html
Minutes (text):
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-2/2021-02-03/fesco.2021-02-03-15.00.txt
Log:
It looks like upstream CMake hasn't updated the FindBoost.cmake file they
bundle (
https://gitlab.kitware.com/cmake/cmake/-/blob/master/Modules/FindBoost.cmake#L1604).
I have opened an upstream issue with CMake at
https://gitlab.kitware.com/cmake/cmake/-/issues/21773 since this also
affects some
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1924375
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
Fixed In Version|
Hi
So if I understand well, an EPEL package could be have to be desinstalled just
because an update in Stream make it not compatible any more ?
Strange
Le Mon Feb 01 2021 17:49:41 GMT+0100 (CET), Stephen John Smoogen
a écrit :
On Mon, 1 Feb 2021 at 11:00, Filip Bartmann wrote:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1919731
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
--- Comment #4 from
Kevin Fenzi writes:
> Greetings everyone.
>
> We finally have everything in place and hopefully tested to make the
> switch tomorrow from master to rawhide/main branches for
> src.fedoraproject.org.
>
> At 13:30UTC we will adjust pagure to reject pushes to 'master' and then
> will be moving
It tends to generate a lot of output around:
CMake Warning at /usr/share/cmake/Modules/FindBoost.cmake:1204 (message):
New Boost version may have incorrect or missing dependencies and imported
targets
Specifically for trying to build FreeCAD it KIND OF finds the libraries:
-- Found Boost:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1924375
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
On 03. 02. 21 12:58, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 03. 02. 21 12:14, john tatt wrote:
Hi
So if I understand well, an EPEL package could be have to be desinstalled just
because an update in Stream make it not compatible any more ?
No.
Apologies, I've misread your email and I've mistaken
On Wed, Feb 03, 2021 at 02:03:56PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> I can't push to either "main" or "rawhide":
Never mind, I see from Kevin Fenzi's thread above why this has happened.
Rich.
--
Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
Read my programming
On Wed, Feb 03, 2021 at 02:59:10PM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> Regarding the "f33" issue, that sounds like a fedpkg bug.
I filed a bug:
https://pagure.io/fedpkg/issue/427
Rich.
--
Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
Read my programming and
Richard W.M. Jones píše v St 03. 02. 2021 v 13:53 +:
> $ fedpkg clone -B ocaml-ppx-hash
> Cloning into bare repository '/home/rjones/d/fedora/ocaml-ppx-
> hash/rpkg.git'...
> remote: Enumerating objects: 26, done.
> remote: Counting objects: 100% (26/26), done.
> remote: Compressing objects:
On 03. 02. 21 14:35, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
On Wednesday, 03 February 2021 at 14:24, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 03. 02. 21 14:08, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
On Wednesday, 03 February 2021 at 12:47, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 30/01/21 19:19 +0100, Kevin Kofler via devel
On Wed, Feb 03, 2021 at 02:59:10PM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 3, 2021 at 2:54 PM Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> >
> > $ fedpkg clone -B ocaml-ppx-hash
> > Cloning into bare repository
> > '/home/rjones/d/fedora/ocaml-ppx-hash/rpkg.git'...
> > remote: Enumerating objects: 26, done.
On Wed, Feb 03, 2021 at 01:53:49PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> $ fedpkg clone -B ocaml-ppx-hash
> Cloning into bare repository
> '/home/rjones/d/fedora/ocaml-ppx-hash/rpkg.git'...
> remote: Enumerating objects: 26, done.
> remote: Counting objects: 100% (26/26), done.
> remote: Compressing
On Wed, Feb 3, 2021 at 12:42 PM Milan Crha wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2021-02-03 at 15:26 +1000, David Airlie wrote:
> > Please test:
> >
> > mesa-21.0.0~rc3-2.fc34
> >
> > which I just built for rawhide.
>
> Hi,
> for what it's worth, it helped me with gdm, it opens now, but I cannot
> log in to
On Wed, Feb 3, 2021 at 2:54 PM Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>
> $ fedpkg clone -B ocaml-ppx-hash
> Cloning into bare repository
> '/home/rjones/d/fedora/ocaml-ppx-hash/rpkg.git'...
> remote: Enumerating objects: 26, done.
> remote: Counting objects: 100% (26/26), done.
> remote: Compressing
$ fedpkg clone -B ocaml-ppx-hash
Cloning into bare repository '/home/rjones/d/fedora/ocaml-ppx-hash/rpkg.git'...
remote: Enumerating objects: 26, done.
remote: Counting objects: 100% (26/26), done.
remote: Compressing objects: 100% (23/23), done.
remote: Total 26 (delta 12), reused 0 (delta 0),
On Wednesday, 03 February 2021 at 14:29, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > Instead of force pushing or reverting anything in the rawhide branch,
> > why not just have two branches?
> >
> > Maintainers commit to one branch, and if the build is successful that
> > branch is
On Wednesday, 03 February 2021 at 14:24, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 03. 02. 21 14:08, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> > On Wednesday, 03 February 2021 at 12:47, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > > On 30/01/21 19:19 +0100, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> > > > clime wrote:
> > > > > So if some other
Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> On 01.02.2021 19:49, Daniel Pocock wrote:
>> Has anybody tested the Jami softphone from Savoir-Faire Linux? It was
>> formerly known as Ring.
>
> Electron framework is forbidden on Fedora due to ffmpeg usage and it
> cannot be built from sources without Internet
Hi Sergio,
Could you trigger a rebuild of ccfits, please? It seems it was rebuilt
against cfitsio 3.470, being uninstallable right now in rawhide.
Best regards,
Alejandro
El jue, 14 ene 2021 a las 1:17, Sergio Pascual ()
escribió:
> Hello, I'm going to build new cfitsio 3.490 in Rawhide in a
On 2/3/21 2:27 PM, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Wed, Feb 3, 2021 at 7:26 AM Panu Matilainen wrote:
On 2/3/21 2:06 PM, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Wed, Feb 3, 2021 at 6:39 AM Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 03. 02. 21 10:13, Panu Matilainen wrote:
Hey all,
Just woke up to the fact that F34 is about to be
Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> Instead of force pushing or reverting anything in the rawhide branch,
> why not just have two branches?
>
> Maintainers commit to one branch, and if the build is successful that
> branch is automatically merged (as a fast-forward merge) to a
> "rawhide-build" branch.
>
>
Hello everyone,
We are about to start the change process. As previously mentioned,
pushes to 'master' branch will be disabled, once we made the changes,
we will send another email at which point you need to run `git fetch
-p` or checkout 'rawhide' branch and you can start building packages
in the
On 03. 02. 21 14:08, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
On Wednesday, 03 February 2021 at 12:47, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 30/01/21 19:19 +0100, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
clime wrote:
So if some other maintainer pushes his work to the server meanwhile,
this will just delete his work?
Hello everyone,
We are about to start the change process. As previously mentioned,
pushes to 'master' branch will be disabled, once we made the changes,
we will send another email at which point you need to run `git fetch
-p` or checkout 'rawhide' branch and you can start building packages
in the
On Wednesday, 03 February 2021 at 12:47, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 30/01/21 19:19 +0100, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> > clime wrote:
> > > So if some other maintainer pushes his work to the server meanwhile,
> > > this will just delete his work? Or what's the idea here?
> >
> > I guess the
On 03. 02. 21 13:51, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 03. 02. 21 13:06, Neal Gompa wrote:
1) branching is the*early* part of the cycle, not the late part and
I disagree.
Once we branch Fedora 34 from rawhide, we should stabilize it and not introduce
braking changes to it. The change completion
On 29/01/21 10:06 -0800, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
On Mon, 2021-01-25 at 10:00 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
Tom Rodgers completed the Boost 1.75.0 build for the change
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/F34Boost175
and I've rebuilt most of the packages that depend on it.
Some of the
On 03. 02. 21 13:06, Neal Gompa wrote:
1) branching is the*early* part of the cycle, not the late part and
I disagree.
Once we branch Fedora 34 from rawhide, we should stabilize it and not introduce
braking changes to it. The change completion deadline is at branching. Hence
branching of
On 03/02/21 12:24 -, Martin Gansser wrote:
you mean, this part of the patch can be removed ?
@@ -336,14 +331,14 @@
inline char_traits::char_type*
char_traits::move(char_type* s1, const char_type* s2,
int_type
n)
{
-return (cxxtools::Char*)std::memmove(s1, s2, n *
Thanks, I'll discuss it with upstream.
Regards
Martin
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
On Wed, Feb 3, 2021 at 7:26 AM Panu Matilainen wrote:
>
> On 2/3/21 2:06 PM, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 3, 2021 at 6:39 AM Miro Hrončok wrote:
> >>
> >> On 03. 02. 21 10:13, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> >>> Hey all,
> >>>
> >>> Just woke up to the fact that F34 is about to be branched, and
Missing expected images:
Minimal raw-xz armhfp
Xfce raw-xz armhfp
Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check!
5 of 43 required tests failed, 4 results missing
openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING**
below
Failed openQA tests: 19/181 (x86_64), 13/123
On 2/3/21 2:06 PM, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Wed, Feb 3, 2021 at 6:39 AM Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 03. 02. 21 10:13, Panu Matilainen wrote:
Hey all,
Just woke up to the fact that F34 is about to be branched, and that we
originally planned to phase out BDB rpmdb support to read-only in Fedora 34
you mean, this part of the patch can be removed ?
@@ -336,14 +331,14 @@
inline char_traits::char_type*
char_traits::move(char_type* s1, const char_type* s2,
int_type
n)
{
-return (cxxtools::Char*)std::memmove(s1, s2, n *
sizeof(cxxtools::Char));
+return
Missing expected images:
Iot dvd x86_64
Iot dvd aarch64
Failed openQA tests: 3/16 (x86_64), 4/15 (aarch64)
Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-IoT-34-20210202.0):
ID: 768948 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso podman
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/768948
ID: 768951
On Wed, Feb 3, 2021 at 6:39 AM Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> On 03. 02. 21 10:13, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> > Hey all,
> >
> > Just woke up to the fact that F34 is about to be branched, and that we
> > originally planned to phase out BDB rpmdb support to read-only in Fedora 34
> > [1].
> >
> > That's
On 03. 02. 21 12:14, john tatt wrote:
Hi
So if I understand well, an EPEL package could be have to be desinstalled just
because an update in Stream make it not compatible any more ?
No.
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
On 31/01/21 10:00 -, Martin Gansser wrote:
The issue has now been resolved with this patch:
+++ include/cxxtools/char.h 2021-01-30 18:28:23.87739 +0100
@@ -68,9 +68,7 @@
typedef int32_t value_type;
//! Constructs a character with a value of 0.
-
Announcing the creation of a new nightly release validation test event
for Fedora-IoT 34 RC 20210203.0. Please help run some tests for this
nightly compose if you have time. For more information on nightly
release validation testing, see:
Hey folks, Apologies for the delay in getting this out to you after the
start of the year. Hopefully you've noticed the changes to communication
since the results of the last survey we did in August. However, we know
this is ever changing, people join or become inactive and so want to ensure
we
On 30/01/21 19:19 +0100, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
clime wrote:
So if some other maintainer pushes his work to the server meanwhile,
this will just delete his work? Or what's the idea here?
I guess the safe thing to do would be to wait and see whether that commit
also fails to build
On Wed, 2021-02-03 at 15:26 +1000, David Airlie wrote:
> Please test:
>
> mesa-21.0.0~rc3-2.fc34
>
> which I just built for rawhide.
Hi,
for what it's worth, it helped me with gdm, it opens now, but I cannot
log in to "GNOME on Xorg", I'm immediately returned back to the gdm.
Logging to
On 03. 02. 21 10:13, Panu Matilainen wrote:
Hey all,
Just woke up to the fact that F34 is about to be branched, and that we
originally planned to phase out BDB rpmdb support to read-only in Fedora 34 [1].
That's too close to comfort for me, and might be considered too late for other
reasons
On Wed, Feb 03, 2021 at 09:20:37AM -, Martin Gansser wrote:
> Thanks for your help.
>
> Perhaps you can help me with another problem that exists with the testsuite
> on the ppc64le architecure [1]
>
> the error message is:
> serializationinfo::testRangeCheck: ASSERTION at
And in possibly related news, there seem to be a lot of side tags in Rawhide:
$ koji list-tags | grep f34-build-side | wc -l
145
Rich.
--
Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com
Announcing the creation of a new nightly release validation test event
for Fedora 34 Rawhide 20210203.n.0. Please help run some tests for this
nightly compose if you have time. For more information on nightly
release validation testing, see:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki
Thanks for your help.
Perhaps you can help me with another problem that exists with the testsuite on
the ppc64le architecure [1]
the error message is:
serializationinfo::testRangeCheck: ASSERTION at serializationinfo-test.cpp:561
exception of type std::range_error expected in
Hey all,
Just woke up to the fact that F34 is about to be branched, and that we
originally planned to phase out BDB rpmdb support to read-only in Fedora
34 [1].
That's too close to comfort for me, and might be considered too late for
other reasons too. So a slight change of plans, lets
Am 02.02.21 um 22:53 schrieb Matthew Miller:
On Tue, Feb 02, 2021 at 10:20:03PM +0100, Marius Schwarz wrote:
And worth repeating: lookit this nice new functionality...
sudo dnf offline-upgrade download
sudo dnf offline-upgrade reboot
# dnf offline-upgrade
Kein solcher Befehl:
99 matches
Mail list logo
