On Wed, 29 Dec 2021 at 19:00, Gordon Messmer
wrote:
[..]
> > To me this is like saying 'move everything into /usr but because its
> > volitile move it back into /var but in a sub-directory from where it
> > was so you can keep an image running.' In this case, this doesn't
> > sound like any
Dear Gordon,
> Why would you need to move the rpmdb? Users probably aren't
> installing rpm packages in containers at run time (particularly if
> /usr is read-only); installation typically happens when building the
> container image, at which point /usr isn't read-only.
I do actually install
On Wed, 29 Dec 2021 at 16:16, Michel Alexandre Salim <
sali...@fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 10:51:44AM -0500, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> > Also please realise that the community can eat only so many changes per
> > release no matter how much you want to otherwise. You
On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 3:36 PM Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, 29 Dec 2021 at 13:51, Gordon Messmer wrote:
>>
>> On 12/29/21 09:59, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>> > The modern day case where /usr is read-only is inside a container and
>> > you put an overlay or using some sort of
On Thu, Dec 30, 2021 at 12:47:56AM +, Fedora Rawhide Report wrote:
> OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20211217.n.1
> NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20211229.n.1
So, FYI, breakage here in composes was:
- A glibc update broke 'ldconfig -p' on armv7 on 2021-12-17.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2
On Wednesday, 29 December 2021 15.01.49 WET Ben Cotton wrote:
> == Detailed Description ==
> In most of Linux distributions the standard Hunspell dictionary path
> is `/usr/share/hunspell/` but in Fedora still has
> `/usr/share/myspell/`. This effort is to follow default standard to
> install all
> Looks like of all the architecture build failures tracking bugs listed
> in
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_architecture_build_failures,
> the aarch64 one is currently closed:
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=922257
>
> Looks like at some point all
On 12/29/21 13:21, Sebastian Crane wrote:
Why would you need to move the rpmdb? Users probably aren't
installing rpm packages in containers at run time (particularly if
/usr is read-only); installation typically happens when building the
container image, at which point /usr isn't read-only.
I
On Wed, 29 Dec 2021 at 10:02, Ben Cotton wrote:
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Hunspell_dictionary_dir_change
>
> == Summary ==
> Update Hunspell Dictionary system directory from /usr/share/myspell/
> to /usr/share/hunspell/
>
> == Owner ==
> * Name: [[User:vishalvvr| Vishal
On 12/29/21 6:38 PM, Elliott Sales de Andrade wrote:
On Wed, 29 Dec 2021 at 10:02, Ben Cotton wrote:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Hunspell_dictionary_dir_change
== Summary ==
Update Hunspell Dictionary system directory from /usr/share/myspell/
to /usr/share/hunspell/
== Owner ==
*
On Wed, 29 Dec 2021 at 13:51, Gordon Messmer
wrote:
> On 12/29/21 09:59, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> > The modern day case where /usr is read-only is inside a container and
> > you put an overlay or using some sort of linking to /var which is
> > read-write in case of reboots.
>
>
> Right,
On Wed, 2021-12-29 at 12:57 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 12:48 PM Gordon Messmer
> wrote:
> >
> > On 12/29/21 07:26, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> > > On 29/12/2021 16:01, Ben Cotton wrote:
> > > > Currently, the RPM databases is located in `/var`. Let's move it
> > > >
On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 12:57:25PM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> of the RPM database. Once the RPM database is moved, it becomes
> possible to split /var into its own subvolume and make it trivial to
> configure a full boot-to-snapshot system leveraging the technologies
> we have available to us.
On 12/29/21 2:20 PM, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 12:27 PM Artem Tim wrote:
Cantarell current default UI font in GNOME (Workstation) will be replaced by
Noto font as well or remain?
The current plan is to keep Cantarell for now, though GNOME upstream
may decide to switch to
On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 02:13:19PM -0500, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 12:48 PM Gordon Messmer
> wrote:
> >
> > On 12/29/21 07:26, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> > > On 29/12/2021 16:01, Ben Cotton wrote:
> > >> Currently, the RPM databases is located in `/var`. Let's
On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 10:51:44AM -0500, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> Also please realise that the community can eat only so many changes per
> release no matter how much you want to otherwise. You can probably get this
> OR the fs-verity in some future release, but not both in the same release
On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 05:06:37PM -0500, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Dec 2021 at 16:16, Michel Alexandre Salim <
> sali...@fedoraproject.org> wrote:
>
>
> All that said, this isn't the first time this has happened. It is the
> reason why various large changes usually require groups
Ben Cotton wrote:
> == Summary ==
> Changing the default fonts for various languages to Noto Fonts as much
> as possible, to make consistency on the text rendering.
>
> == Owner ==
> * Name: [[User:Tagoh|Akira TAGOH]]
> * Email:
Considering that DejaVu had been chosen as the default font for
No missing expected images.
Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check!
14 of 43 required tests failed, 8 results missing
openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING**
below
Failed openQA tests: 29/228 (x86_64), 30/159 (aarch64)
ID: 1091854 Test: x86_64
On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 10:51:44AM -0500, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> F36 but needs to be worked through the proper channels of 'upstream'. Get
> the FHS updated and fixed, work out that the change actually is going to be
Pretty sure that's a non-starter. FHS 3.0 was released in 2015, and the
On Tue, Dec 28, 2021 at 09:20:11AM -0600, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 28, 2021 at 14:45:59 +0100,
> Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> >
> > But there is the inherent assumption there that the set of software released
> > by Fedora is identical to the set of software the user trusts. In
Hi Peter,
On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 09:19:02PM +, Peter Robinson wrote:
> > Looks like of all the architecture build failures tracking bugs listed
> > in
> > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_architecture_build_failures,
> > the aarch64 one is currently closed:
> >
> >
Hi,
I'd like orphan jctools , because it is a FTBFS on rawhide (F36)
The only direct dependency is log4j [1] if someone want take it, let me
know , and I will transfer the ownership .
Thank you,
[1]
Depending on: jctools (4), status change: 2021-04-26 (35 weeks ago)
log4j (maintained by:
Announcing the creation of a new nightly release validation test event
for Fedora 36 Rawhide 20211229.n.1. 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
Thank you.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines:
On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 7:36 PM Matthew Miller wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 12:57:25PM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > of the RPM database. Once the RPM database is moved, it becomes
> > possible to split /var into its own subvolume and make it trivial to
> > configure a full boot-to-snapshot
On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 8:19 AM Tom Hughes via devel
wrote:
>
> I don't see how this is FHS compliant, which in turn would make
> it non-compliant with Fedora Packaging Guidelines, namely:
>
>
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_filesystem_layout
>
> The FHS describes
On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 03:17:42PM +, Tom Hughes via devel wrote:
> At this point somebody will no doubt argue that /usr changes on a
> package update and that the RPM database is a static definition of
> the currently installed OS files, but evidence says otherwise:
>
> % ls -l /var/lib/rpm
On 30/12/2021 07:02, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 8:19 AM Tom Hughes via devel
wrote:
I don't see how this is FHS compliant, which in turn would make
it non-compliant with Fedora Packaging Guidelines, namely:
On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 8:52 AM Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, 29 Dec 2021 at 10:19, Tom Hughes via devel
> wrote:
>>
>> I don't see how this is FHS compliant, which in turn would make
>> it non-compliant with Fedora Packaging Guidelines, namely:
>>
>
>
> I am in agreement here
On Tue, Dec 28, 2021 at 8:07 PM Samuel Sieb wrote:
>
> On 12/28/21 16:45, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 28, 2021 at 4:35 AM Mattia Verga via devel
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Il 28/12/21 04:28, Kevin Kofler via devel ha scritto:
> >>> But even off by default, I do not see how the "feature"
On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 5:42 AM Roberto Sassu via devel
wrote:
>
> > From: Nico Kadel-Garcia [mailto:nka...@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2021 10:29 AM
>
> [...]
>
> > From one of the patches:
> >
> > It accomplishes this task by storing reference values coming from
> >
No missing expected images.
Soft failed openQA tests: 1/8 (x86_64), 1/8 (aarch64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)
Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-34-20211227.0):
ID: 1091699 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL:
No missing expected images.
Soft failed openQA tests: 1/8 (x86_64), 1/8 (aarch64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)
Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-35-20211227.0):
ID: 1091683 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL:
> From: Nico Kadel-Garcia [mailto:nka...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2021 10:29 AM
[...]
> From one of the patches:
>
> It accomplishes this task by storing reference values coming from
> software vendors and by reporting whether or not the
> digest of file content or
On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 6:06 AM Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 5:42 AM Roberto Sassu via devel
> wrote:
> >
> > > From: Nico Kadel-Garcia [mailto:nka...@gmail.com]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2021 10:29 AM
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > From one of the patches:
> > >
> > >
Hi,
I'm still reading the discussion, so just a short meta-comment
on grammar: please don't use masculine forms to describe all Fedora
users, we're not all guys…
On Tue, Dec 28, 2021 at 02:49:43PM +, Roberto Sassu via devel wrote:
> It could be even possible that a user installs
> his own
On 29/12/2021 12:38, Neal Gompa wrote:
Were they really? TPM devices*are* commonly used today to support
attestation and multi-factor encryption and authentication mechanisms.
In many ways, the trusted computing initiative was a success. And even
virtualization is used for implementing trusted
On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 6:39 AM Neal Gompa wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 6:06 AM Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 5:42 AM Roberto Sassu via devel
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > From: Nico Kadel-Garcia [mailto:nka...@gmail.com]
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2021
> From: Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek [mailto:zbys...@in.waw.pl]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2021 2:36 PM
> Hi,
>
> I'm still reading the discussion, so just a short meta-comment
> on grammar: please don't use masculine forms to describe all Fedora
> users, we're not all guys…
>
> On Tue, Dec
Dne 26. 12. 21 v 22:45 Matthew Miller napsal(a):
On Sun, Dec 26, 2021 at 10:08:24PM +0100, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
My next goal will be to download all Fedora's spec files, extract
the license line and run it through this script. But I am going to
be few days offline, so anyone who want step in
On Tue, Dec 28, 2021 at 1:19 PM Adam Williamson
wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2021-12-28 at 20:03 +0100, Frantisek Zatloukal wrote:
> > So, it seems it didn't come to my mind that builders might not have new
> > enough rpm to use rpm.open() which is available since rpm 4.17.0.
> >
> > A fix for it (
> >
Cantarell current default UI font in GNOME (Workstation) will be replaced by
Noto font as well or remain?
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
On 12/29/21 07:26, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
On 29/12/2021 16:01, Ben Cotton wrote:
Currently, the RPM databases is located in `/var`. Let's move it to
`/usr`. The move is already under way in rpm-ostree-based
installations, and in (open)SUSE.
It will break FHS compatibility. /usr must
On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 12:48 PM Gordon Messmer
wrote:
>
> On 12/29/21 07:26, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> > On 29/12/2021 16:01, Ben Cotton wrote:
> >> Currently, the RPM databases is located in `/var`. Let's move it to
> >> `/usr`. The move is already under way in rpm-ostree-based
> >>
On Wed, 29 Dec 2021 at 12:49, Gordon Messmer
wrote:
> On 12/29/21 07:26, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> > On 29/12/2021 16:01, Ben Cotton wrote:
> >> Currently, the RPM databases is located in `/var`. Let's move it to
> >> `/usr`. The move is already under way in rpm-ostree-based
> >>
On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 12:27 PM Artem Tim wrote:
>
> Cantarell current default UI font in GNOME (Workstation) will be replaced by
> Noto font as well or remain?
The current plan is to keep Cantarell for now, though GNOME upstream
may decide to switch to Noto as KDE Plasma did years ago.
--
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/RelocateRPMToUsr
== Summary ==
Currently, the RPM databases is located in `/var`. Let's move it to
`/usr`. The move is already under way in rpm-ostree-based
installations, and in (open)SUSE.
== Owner ==
* Name: [[User:chrismurphy| Chris Murphy]],
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Hunspell_dictionary_dir_change
== Summary ==
Update Hunspell Dictionary system directory from /usr/share/myspell/
to /usr/share/hunspell/
== Owner ==
* Name: [[User:vishalvvr| Vishal Vijayraghavan]]
* Email:
== Detailed Description ==
In most of Linux
I don't see how this is FHS compliant, which in turn would make
it non-compliant with Fedora Packaging Guidelines, namely:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_filesystem_layout
The FHS describes /usr here:
On 29/12/2021 16:01, Ben Cotton wrote:
Currently, the RPM databases is located in `/var`. Let's move it to
`/usr`. The move is already under way in rpm-ostree-based
installations, and in (open)SUSE.
It will break FHS compatibility. /usr must contain read-only data.
--
Sincerely,
Vitaly
On Wed, 29 Dec 2021 at 10:19, Tom Hughes via devel <
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> I don't see how this is FHS compliant, which in turn would make
> it non-compliant with Fedora Packaging Guidelines, namely:
>
>
I am in agreement here and think that this is NOT a change to be made in
Hello,
On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 4:04 PM Ben Cotton wrote:
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/DefaultToNotoFonts
>
> == Summary ==
> Changing the default fonts for various languages to Noto Fonts as much
> as possible, to make consistency on the text rendering.
>
> == Owner ==
> * Name:
On 29. 12. 21 13:42, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Dne 26. 12. 21 v 22:45 Matthew Miller napsal(a):
On Sun, Dec 26, 2021 at 10:08:24PM +0100, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
My next goal will be to download all Fedora's spec files, extract
the license line and run it through this script. But I am going to
be
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/DefaultToNotoFonts
== Summary ==
Changing the default fonts for various languages to Noto Fonts as much
as possible, to make consistency on the text rendering.
== Owner ==
* Name: [[User:Tagoh|Akira TAGOH]]
* Email:
== Detailed Description ==
For a long
On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 3:03 PM Ben Cotton wrote:
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/RelocateRPMToUsr
>
> == Summary ==
> Currently, the RPM databases is located in `/var`. Let's move it to
> `/usr`. The move is already under way in rpm-ostree-based
> installations, and in (open)SUSE.
On Wed, 2021-12-29 at 06:38 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> With Windows 11, they're *mandatory*. Corporate policies now
> effectively *require* TPM-based mechanisms *in addition* to classical
> password or token-based multi-factor authentication.
This certainly is not any reason to adopt this for
> I have created new tool license-validate:
> https://pagure.io/copr/license-validate/
I've written something relatively similar a few years back
(https://github.com/suve/vrms-rpm).
I took a look at the code - using a proper parser is definitely a better
solution than the error-prone,
manual
On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 11:03 AM Stephen Snow wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2021-12-29 at 06:38 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > With Windows 11, they're *mandatory*. Corporate policies now
> > effectively *require* TPM-based mechanisms *in addition* to classical
> > password or token-based multi-factor
> From: Nico Kadel-Garcia [mailto:nka...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2021 2:06 PM
[...]
> > With Windows 11, they're *mandatory*. Corporate policies now
> > effectively *require* TPM-based mechanisms *in addition* to classical
> > password or token-based multi-factor
On 12/29/21 09:59, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
The modern day case where /usr is read-only is inside a container and
you put an overlay or using some sort of linking to /var which is
read-write in case of reboots.
Right, that makes sense.
To me this is like saying 'move everything into
Dne 29. 12. 21 v 17:22 Artur Frenszek-Iwicki napsal(a):
My personal suggestion would be to add a "line by line" mode for interactive
usage,
so instead of:
K.I.S.S. I always start with tool which can handle one item. And then built
large tool on top of it.
$ license-validate --verbose
On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 1:35 PM Neal Gompa wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 11:03 AM Stephen Snow wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 2021-12-29 at 06:38 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > > With Windows 11, they're *mandatory*. Corporate policies now
> > > effectively *require* TPM-based mechanisms *in
On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 12:48 PM Gordon Messmer
wrote:
>
> On 12/29/21 07:26, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> > On 29/12/2021 16:01, Ben Cotton wrote:
> >> Currently, the RPM databases is located in `/var`. Let's move it to
> >> `/usr`. The move is already under way in rpm-ostree-based
> >>
Hi,
Looks like of all the architecture build failures tracking bugs listed
in
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_architecture_build_failures,
the aarch64 one is currently closed:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=922257
Looks like at some point all bugs are
Thank you for the feedback. It all makes sense, and I agree with your
points, so I won't put any more effort into this idea. I am also glad,
that this discussion happened and the idea won't be itching my brain
anymore.
Jakub
On Sun, Dec 26, 2021 at 7:31 AM Dan Čermák
wrote:
>
> Hi Jakube,
>
>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2034443
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.2 |perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.2
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2034440
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-Module-CoreList-5.2021 |perl-Module-CoreList-5.2021
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2031484
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #2 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2031801
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #3 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1811624
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #3 from
The following Fedora EPEL 7 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
13 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-afc31f929c
seamonkey-2.53.10.1-1.el7
1 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-82b601cdc1
libofx-0.9.9-3.el7
The following builds have
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2034440
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Fixed In
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2034443
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.2 |perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.2
Hi!
Two packages I built for EPEL 9 are now reported by koschei as having
missing build dependencies.
https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/package/davix?collection=epel9
https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/package/uglify-js?collection=epel9
The EPEL 9 builds were built using the following build
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2031484
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |MODIFIED
--- Comment #1 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1811624
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |MODIFIED
--- Comment #2 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1811577
Gwyn Ciesla changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gw...@protonmail.com
Blocks|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2031801
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |MODIFIED
--- Comment #2 from
On Wed, 29 Dec 2021 at 06:29, Mattias Ellert
wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Two packages I built for EPEL 9 are now reported by koschei as having
> missing build dependencies.
>
> https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/package/davix?collection=epel9
>
>
Can someone shed light on the status of python-gevent in EL9? It seems
to have been built for CS9:
https://kojihub.stream.centos.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=3414
(though perhaps not tagged?)
but builds for EPEL9 fail to find it:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Hunspell_dictionary_dir_change
== Summary ==
Update Hunspell Dictionary system directory from /usr/share/myspell/
to /usr/share/hunspell/
== Owner ==
* Name: [[User:vishalvvr| Vishal Vijayraghavan]]
* Email:
== Detailed Description ==
In most of Linux
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/DefaultToNotoFonts
== Summary ==
Changing the default fonts for various languages to Noto Fonts as much
as possible, to make consistency on the text rendering.
== Owner ==
* Name: [[User:Tagoh|Akira TAGOH]]
* Email:
== Detailed Description ==
For a long
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/RelocateRPMToUsr
== Summary ==
Currently, the RPM databases is located in `/var`. Let's move it to
`/usr`. The move is already under way in rpm-ostree-based
installations, and in (open)SUSE.
== Owner ==
* Name: [[User:chrismurphy| Chris Murphy]],
On Wed, 29 Dec 2021 at 10:19, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> Can someone shed light on the status of python-gevent in EL9? It seems
> to have been built for CS9:
>
> https://kojihub.stream.centos.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=3414
>
> (though perhaps not tagged?)
>
> but builds for EPEL9 fail to
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036118
Bug ID: 2036118
Summary: Please branch and build perl-XML-XPathEngine for
EPEL-8
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-XML-XPathEngine
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036122
Bug ID: 2036122
Summary: Please branch and build perl-HTML-TreeBuilder-XPath
for EPEL-8
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036122
Paul Howarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends On||2036118
Doc Type|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036118
Paul Howarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||2036122
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036123
Bug ID: 2036123
Summary: Please branch and build perl-HTML-Selector-XPath for
EPEL-8
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036118
Paul Howarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||2036123
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036123
Paul Howarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036122
Paul Howarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||2036123
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036125
Bug ID: 2036125
Summary: Please branch and build perl-HTML-TreeBuilder-LibXML
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-HTML-TreeBuilder-LibXML
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036118
Paul Howarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||2036125
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036125
Paul Howarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends On||2036122, 2036118
Doc Type|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036122
Paul Howarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||2036125
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036126
Bug ID: 2036126
Summary: Please branch and build perl-Web-Scraper for EPEL-8
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-Web-Scraper
Assignee:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036123
Paul Howarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||2036126
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036125
Paul Howarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||2036126
Referenced Bugs:
1 - 100 of 109 matches
Mail list logo
