Update: Porting to Modern C

2022-11-20 Thread Florian Weimer 
I'm still in the process of setting thigs up.  I've created a wiki page
separately from the change proposal that documents some project
procedures:

  

It has some instructions how to test things locally.  Thanks to Kevin's
help, we should soon have a special buildroot in Koji which will be
useful for testing as well.

The first pass will focus on implicit ints and implicit function
declarations, simply because we have to start somewhere, and I've got an
instrumented GCC for this.

Below, I'm listing packages which use implicit ints and call an
undeclared “exit” function.  Detection is therefore extremely reliable.
(In general, implicit function declarations are hard to detect because
sometimes there are calls to functions from configure checks which are
expected to be missing in Fedora, such as “getmntinfo”.  No such problem
with “exit” or implicit ints, though.)  In the list, I have excluded
issues that have already been fixed in rawhide, or for which I have
filed help-needed Bugzilla bugs (I hope I haven't missed anything).

I'll try to capture the work we do in a tracking repository, so that
other distributions can find it:

  

If you find something, please submit an MR to this repository.  (If we
can make this repository or another one editable by Fedora packages,
that would be fine, too.)

Thanks,
Florian

a52dec
abcMIDI
abe
aggregate
aide
aiksaurus
alpine
alsamixergui
am-utils
antlr
apr
aprsd
aprsdigi
apr-util
argus
arm-none-eabi-binutils-cs
arm-none-eabi-gcc-cs
arts
aterm
atomorun
auriferous
autogen
autossh
avr-binutils
BackupPC-XS
bacula
barcode
bbkeys
beecrypt
bes
bib2html
bigloo
binutils
BitchX
blt
bochs
boinc-client
bsp
bygfoot
cacti-spine
calc
ccd2iso
ccze
cdargs
clamsmtp
clearsilver
coan
Coin2
coin-or-Alps
coin-or-Bcp
coin-or-Bcps
coin-or-Blis
coin-or-Bonmin
coin-or-Cbc
coin-or-Cgl
coin-or-Clp
coin-or-CoinMP
coin-or-CoinUtils
coin-or-Couenne
coin-or-Data-miplib3
coin-or-Data-Netlib
coin-or-Dip
coin-or-DyLP
coin-or-FlopC++
coin-or-OS
coin-or-Osi
coin-or-SYMPHONY
coin-or-Vol
compat-guichan05
compat-guile18
compat-readline5
compat-readline6
compface
connect-proxy
corkscrew
crack-attack
crash
cronolog
cross-binutils
cups-bjnp
cylindrix
dbus-qt3
dd2
deletemail
denemo
devio
dhcping
dia
dieharder
discount
dmraid
drgeo
dsniff
dumb
dx
ebnetd
ebview
epic
erlang
eterm
execstack
fcode-utils
firebird
firewalk
florist
foobillard
freedroid
freeradius-client
freeze
fvwm
gambas3
gcl
gcolor2
gf2x
gforth
ghc
ghc8.10
ghc9.0
ghc9.2
ghc9.4
gimp
gl-117
GLee
glib
global
glusterfs-coreutils
gmp-ecm
gnokii
gnome-vfs2-monikers
gnupg1
gnustep-base
gq
grace
greyhounds
gsl
gt
gtkglext
gtorrentviewer
guile
guile30
hddtemp
hfsutils
hplip
htdig
httptunnel
hugs98
hylafax+
hyperestraier
ibp
ifstat
iftop
ike-scan
inadyn-mt
insight
irsim
itzam-core
jack_capture
jam
jfbterm
jgmenu
joe
jpeginfo
jpilot
jpilot-backup
jupp
jwhois
kBuild
kdeaddons
kdelibs3
kdepim3
klamav
kmod
koffice-kivio
ksh
ladspa-blop-plugins
latencytop
lcms2
libAfterImage
libcdaudio
libcgi
libcmml
libesmtp
libgle
libgringotts
libmcrypt
libmikmod
libmodelfile
libnet10
libnetfilter_conntrack
libnids
libofa
libopm
libprelude
librep
libsexymm
libsigc++
libssh
libuninum
libvisual
libvpx
links
log4cpp
lpsolve
lrzsz
lsof
lttv
Maelstrom
mail-notification
makebootfat
man2html
messiggy
mingw-gcc
mod2c
monit
mozjs68
mpich
mpqc
mpsolve
mrtg
mtpaint
myproxy
nacl
nagios
nas
nbtscan
ncl
netgen
njam
NLopt
nrpe
nss_updatedb
ntp-refclock
nulib2
numpy
ogmtools
oksh
oneko
openhpi-subagent
openjade
opensp
orangefs
otf2bdf
pachi
pamtester
papi
passt
pcb-rnd
perl
perl-Alien-Build
perl-Clownfish-CFC
perl-Curses
perl-eperl
perl-File-RsyncP
perl-grpc-xs
perl-Net-Pcap
perl-TermReadKey
perl-Tk
perl-XML-DifferenceMarkup
perl-XML-LibXSLT
pgadmin4
pl
plotmm
plotutils
procmail
prwd
psiconv
pwsafe
PyMca
python2.7
python3.10
python3.11
python3.6
python3.7
python3.8
python3.9
qdbm
radcli
raddump
rarian
rats
rblcheck
Ri-li
rootsh
rpld
rssh
rsync-bpc
ruby-gnome2
rudeconfig
rzip
SAASound
sage
samba
sane-backends
sane-frontends
sblim-cmpi-rpm
sc
scim-anthy
scim-fcitx
scim-m17n
scim-sayura
scmxx
scponly
serdisplib
shadow-utils
sing
sjinn
slashem
slrn
spamassassin
spamprobe
sphinx
sqlite2
sqliteodbc
squeak-vm
squidGuard
srcpd
ssmtp
stress-ng
sunwait
swig
t1lib
tcpdump
tcpick
tcpreplay
tetex-dvipost
texlive-base
tgif
thttpd
timidity++
tinyfugue
tn5250
tucnak
twlog
uim
uisp
ularn
unicornscan
unrealircd
unuran
uperf
up-imapproxy
uread
uucp
vim
volpack
w3m
wabt
wgrib
whatmask
whowatch
wide-dhcpv6
wmapmload
wmweather+
wol
worminator
wxGTK3
xaos
xbae
xbiso
xdaliclock
xdialog
xgalaxy
xloadimage
xmlto
xpa
xpenguins
xsane
xskat
yices
ypserv
zisofs-tools
___
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/

[Bug 2143423] Please branch and build perl-Net-Pcap in epel9.

2022-11-20 Thread bugzilla 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143423

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
   Assignee|dd...@cpan.org  |jples...@redhat.com
 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC|dd...@cpan.org, |
   |iarn...@gmail.com,  |
   |jples...@redhat.com |



--- Comment #1 from Jitka Plesnikova  ---
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/49235


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143423
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: metadata of updateinfo.xml

2022-11-20 Thread Daniel Alley 
> Is there any guide that explains fields of the updateinfo.xml files
> which are generated in repositories?

I very much wish there was, but alas, no.  Pretty much everything to do with 
rpm metadata is effectively implementation-defined, and the implementations are 
all different, especially with respect to distribution build tooling : /

> 
> I'm trying to figure out
> https://github.com/fedora-infra/bodhi/issues/2487 and I think we
> currently have weird data in updates. For example, looking to the
> 'issued' and 'modified' dates of few updates I see that the issued date
> is greater than the modified date... that's because Bodhi modifies the
> issued date with the timestamp of when the update is pushed to the
> repository, rather than using the submission date.

RHEL has a similar issue on occasion, even though the build tooling is 
completely different (not Bodhi).  The issued datetimestamp is often 1-2 
seconds after the updated date.  The specific reason is likely entirely 
different, though.

In practice I have found that having any kind of expectations about updateinfo 
metadata making coherent sense beyond "it technically meets the expected 
schema" leads to a lot of pain.  Fedora, SUSE, RHEL, Alma and Rocky all mess it 
up in different ways, 3rd party vendors that attempt to provide it do even 
worse, etc.

> I don't think that field is meant to be modified and I suppose it can
> lead yum/dnf to screw up. Is there any expert that can point me in the
> right direction here?
> 
> Mattia
___
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: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: SPDX Statistics

2022-11-20 Thread Kevin Kofler via devel 
Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> abattis-cantarell-fonts warning: not valid as calaway nor as SPDX, please
> check

The name Callaway has 2 'l's in it.

Kevin Kofler
___
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: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[EPEL-devel] Fedora EPEL 9 updates-testing report

2022-11-20 Thread updates 
The following Fedora EPEL 9 Security updates need testing:
 Age  URL
   4  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-f2840cccbe   
ntfs-3g-2022.10.3-1.el9


The following builds have been pushed to Fedora EPEL 9 updates-testing

glances-3.3.0.4-1.el9
qvge-0.6.3-1.el9
rednotebook-2.27.1-1.el9

Details about builds:



 glances-3.3.0.4-1.el9 (FEDORA-EPEL-2022-f0b378668f)
 A cross-platform curses-based monitoring tool

Update Information:

Update to 3.3.0.4 (RHBZ #2138747)

ChangeLog:

* Sun Nov 20 2022 Ali Erdinc Koroglu  - 3.3.0.4-1
- Update to 3.3.0.4 (RHBZ #2138747)

References:

  [ 1 ] Bug #2138747 - glances-3.3.0.4 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2138747




 qvge-0.6.3-1.el9 (FEDORA-EPEL-2022-360e4cdec5)
 Graph editor

Update Information:

Release

ChangeLog:

* Sun Nov 20 2022 TI_Eugene  - 0.6.3-1
- Release bump
- Fixed #2139751
* Sat Jul 23 2022 Fedora Release Engineering  - 
0.6.3-0.4git2a44063
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_37_Mass_Rebuild




 rednotebook-2.27.1-1.el9 (FEDORA-EPEL-2022-dd912dc912)
 Daily journal with calendar, templates and keyword searching

Update Information:

New upstream version 2.27.1

ChangeLog:

* Sun Nov 20 2022 Phil Wyett  - 2.27.1-1
- New upstream version 2.27.1


___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[EPEL-devel] Fedora EPEL 8 updates-testing report

2022-11-20 Thread updates 
The following Fedora EPEL 8 Security updates need testing:
 Age  URL
   4  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-15e4c3606e   
ntfs-3g-2022.10.3-1.el8
   4  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-be3947859f   
heimdal-7.7.1-1.el8


The following builds have been pushed to Fedora EPEL 8 updates-testing

glances-3.3.0.4-1.el8
python-slixmpp-1.7.1-1.el8
rednotebook-2.27.1-1.el8

Details about builds:



 glances-3.3.0.4-1.el8 (FEDORA-EPEL-2022-c7b80f7731)
 A cross-platform curses-based monitoring tool

Update Information:

Update to 3.3.0.4 (RHBZ #2138747)

ChangeLog:

* Sun Nov 20 2022 Ali Erdinc Koroglu  - 3.3.0.4-1
- Update to 3.3.0.4 (RHBZ #2138747)

References:

  [ 1 ] Bug #2138747 - glances-3.3.0.4 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2138747




 python-slixmpp-1.7.1-1.el8 (FEDORA-EPEL-2022-bf8500ac5b)
 Slixmpp is an XMPP library for Python 3.5+

Update Information:

Security fix for CVE-2022-45197

ChangeLog:

* Sun Nov 20 2022 Matthieu Saulnier  - 1.7.1-1
- Update to 1.7.1
- Add patch to fix missing certificate hostname validation (RHBZ#2142758)

References:

  [ 1 ] Bug #2142756 - CVE-2022-45197 python-slixmpp: missing certificate 
hostname validation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2142756




 rednotebook-2.27.1-1.el8 (FEDORA-EPEL-2022-3240f259a5)
 Daily journal with calendar, templates and keyword searching

Update Information:

New upstream version 2.27.1

ChangeLog:

* Sun Nov 20 2022 Phil Wyett  - 2.27.1-1
- New upstream version 2.27.1


___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2130616] Please branch and build perl-Inline-C in epel9

2022-11-20 Thread bugzilla 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2130616
Bug 2130616 depends on bug 2130625, which changed state.

Bug 2130625 Summary: Please branch and build perl-Inline in epel9
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2130625

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2130616
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2130625] Please branch and build perl-Inline in epel9

2022-11-20 Thread bugzilla 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2130625

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
Last Closed||2022-11-21 01:13:41



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-a935feca4a has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 9 stable
repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2130625
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: FF 107.0 scratch builds - just for fun

2022-11-20 Thread Demi Marie Obenour 
On 11/20/22 17:40, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Sun, 2022-11-20 at 17:22 -0500, Demi Marie Obenour wrote:
>> On 11/20/22 07:24, Bojan Smojver via devel wrote:
>>> Now that nss 3.85 has been built, I thought I'd have a go at building
>>> FF 107.0, given that's been out for a few days and original builds
>>> failed in koji, because nss was too old at the time.
>>
>> Has switching to bundled NSS been considered?  For browsers anything
>> that holds up an update is very, *very* bad.
> 
> Casually handling crypto libraries is very, *very* worse.

Has there ever been a case where Fedora’s NSS was not vulnerable to
something that the bundled NSS was vulnerable to?  To be clear, I am
referring to the NSS shipped by Mozilla as a part of Firefox.
Another option would be to ensure that NSS is promptly updated.
-- 
Sincerely,
Demi Marie Obenour (she/her/hers)
___
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: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: FF 107.0 scratch builds - just for fun

2022-11-20 Thread Simo Sorce 
On Sun, 2022-11-20 at 17:22 -0500, Demi Marie Obenour wrote:
> On 11/20/22 07:24, Bojan Smojver via devel wrote:
> > Now that nss 3.85 has been built, I thought I'd have a go at building
> > FF 107.0, given that's been out for a few days and original builds
> > failed in koji, because nss was too old at the time.
> 
> Has switching to bundled NSS been considered?  For browsers anything
> that holds up an update is very, *very* bad.

Casually handling crypto libraries is very, *very* worse.

Simo.

-- 
Simo Sorce
RHEL Crypto Team
Red Hat, Inc


___
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: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: FF 107.0 scratch builds - just for fun

2022-11-20 Thread Neal Gompa 
On Sun, Nov 20, 2022 at 5:23 PM Demi Marie Obenour
 wrote:
>
> On 11/20/22 07:24, Bojan Smojver via devel wrote:
> > Now that nss 3.85 has been built, I thought I'd have a go at building
> > FF 107.0, given that's been out for a few days and original builds
> > failed in koji, because nss was too old at the time.
>
> Has switching to bundled NSS been considered?  For browsers anything
> that holds up an update is very, *very* bad.

No. Just don't even go there. Bundled crypto libraries are even more dangerous.


-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
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: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: FF 107.0 scratch builds - just for fun

2022-11-20 Thread Demi Marie Obenour 
On 11/20/22 07:24, Bojan Smojver via devel wrote:
> Now that nss 3.85 has been built, I thought I'd have a go at building
> FF 107.0, given that's been out for a few days and original builds
> failed in koji, because nss was too old at the time.

Has switching to bundled NSS been considered?  For browsers anything
that holds up an update is very, *very* bad.
-- 
Sincerely,
Demi Marie Obenour (she/her/hers)
___
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: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2144345] New: perl-DBIx-Class-Schema-Loader-0.07050 is available

2022-11-20 Thread bugzilla 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2144345

Bug ID: 2144345
   Summary: perl-DBIx-Class-Schema-Loader-0.07050 is available
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-DBIx-Class-Schema-Loader
  Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
  Assignee: jples...@redhat.com
  Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: iarn...@gmail.com, jples...@redhat.com,
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Releases retrieved: 0.07050
Upstream release that is considered latest: 0.07050
Current version/release in rawhide: 0.07049-15.fc37
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/DBIx-Class-Schema-Loader/

Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a
stable branch: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/


More information about the service that created this bug can be found at:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Upstream_Release_Monitoring


Please keep in mind that with any upstream change, there may also be packaging
changes that need to be made. Specifically, please remember that it is your
responsibility to review the new version to ensure that the licensing is still
correct and that no non-free or legally problematic items have been added
upstream.


Based on the information from Anitya:
https://release-monitoring.org/project/6653/


To change the monitoring settings for the project, please visit:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-DBIx-Class-Schema-Loader


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2144345
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: FF 107.0 scratch builds - just for fun

2022-11-20 Thread Bojan Smojver via devel 
Everything except F38 completed fine.

-- 
Bojan
___
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: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: SPDX Statistics

2022-11-20 Thread Ralf Corsépius 



Am 20.11.22 um 17:38 schrieb Miroslav Suchý:

Dne 19. 11. 22 v 12:37 Miro Hrončok napsal(a):

On 18. 11. 22 15:09, Miroslav Suchý wrote:

|Fun fact: the script with the checks runs on my notebook for 32 hours.|



That sounds pretty bad. What is the biggest bottleneck? Do you clone 
the repositories from dist-git, or use 
https://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/repo/rpm-specs-latest.tar.xz ? 


It is not so bad. I am not sitting in front of the computer and waiting 
till the script finish. :) I just wanted emphasis that I cannot gather 
the data daily and the heuristics is already complicated.



Why don't you extract the License-field from *.rpms and check if they 
comply to the new rules?


Ralf
___
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: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: SPDX Statistics

2022-11-20 Thread Miroslav Suchý 

Dne 19. 11. 22 v 12:37 Miro Hrončok napsal(a):

On 18. 11. 22 15:09, Miroslav Suchý wrote:

|Fun fact: the script with the checks runs on my notebook for 32 hours.|



That sounds pretty bad. What is the biggest bottleneck? Do you clone the repositories from dist-git, or use 
https://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/repo/rpm-specs-latest.tar.xz ? 


It is not so bad. I am not sitting in front of the computer and waiting till the script finish. :) I just wanted 
emphasis that I cannot gather the data daily and the heuristics is already complicated.


It is mostly quick'n'dirty design. Like gathering the data from one step. Then feeding the data from first step to next 
script which process second step. Then feeding the data to do third one...


I already started concating the pipes so it will run in paralel next time.

But yeah, biggest time consumer is git checkout of packages (that does not mention spdx in %changelog). I am not aware 
of other method how to retrieve git log.


Miroslav
___
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: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: metadata of updateinfo.xml

2022-11-20 Thread Mattia Verga via devel 
Il 20/11/22 11:05, Neal Gompa ha scritto:

> On Sun, Nov 20, 2022 at 4:32 AM Mattia Verga via devel
> [](mailto:devel@lists.fedoraproject.org)
> wrote:
>
>> Is there any guide that explains fields of the updateinfo.xml files
>> which are generated in repositories?
>>
>> I'm trying to figure out
>> https://github.com/fedora-infra/bodhi/issues/2487
>> and I think we
>> currently have weird data in updates. For example, looking to the
>> 'issued' and 'modified' dates of few updates I see that the issued date
>> is greater than the modified date... that's because Bodhi modifies the
>> issued date with the timestamp of when the update is pushed to the
>> repository, rather than using the submission date.
>>
>> I don't think that field is meant to be modified and I suppose it can
>> lead yum/dnf to screw up. Is there any expert that can point me in the
>> right direction here?
>
> The closest thing to a guide is this schema documentation file I found
> long ago from python-Updateinfo:
> https://pagure.io/python-Updateinfo/blob/master/f/docs/updateinfo.xsd
> In terms of a human expert, Pat Riehecky from CentOS is your best bet
> since he analyzed the format and built python-Updateinfo for
> Scientific Linux.
>
> I think you're right about issued and modified dates, though. That
> said, the issued date is normally supposed to be when it's released to
> the repository, I believe. But if we have both issued and modified,
> then issued should be when it's *first* published (first time it goes
> out of pending).

Well, if issued date is meant to be the date when the update is pushed to a 
repo, it will be changed from when the update is pushed to testing repo or to 
stable repo. Is that the intended behavior?

Nevertheless, I think Bodhi is currently producing faulty metadata, because the 
updateinfo file is made before recording changes to the updates. So:

- at the first compose when an update is pushed from pending to testing, the 
metadata reports `status="pending"` and both issued date and updated date are 
set to `date_submitted`
- in a later compose, metadata is changed to `status="testing"` and issued date 
is set to `date_pushed` (which is more recent than updated date)
- at the first compose that marks the update push to stable, the status remains 
`status="testing"` and issued date is reverted back to `date_submitted` 
(because for some reason Bodhi set `date_pushed` to None)
- finally, later composes we have the correct `status="stable"`, but with a 
issued date set to `date_pushed` (of the previous compose) and a modified date 
which is usually the original `date_submitted`

I think all of those date changes are the cause of the original issue reported 
for EPEL7, where yum screws up about metadata reporting bad updates. I suppose 
dnf just ignores those kind of errors, but the underling problem is still there.

I am quite worried about touching such critical code in Bodhi composer before 
someone else confirms my thought...

Mattia___
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: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2144291] New: perl-Module-CoreList-5.20221120 is available

2022-11-20 Thread bugzilla 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2144291

Bug ID: 2144291
   Summary: perl-Module-CoreList-5.20221120 is available
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-Module-CoreList
  Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
  Assignee: jples...@redhat.com
  Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: jose.p.oliveira@gmail.com, jples...@redhat.com,
mspa...@redhat.com,
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org, spo...@gmail.com,
st...@silug.org
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Releases retrieved: 5.20221120
Upstream release that is considered latest: 5.20221120
Current version/release in rawhide: 5.20221020-1.fc38
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Module-CoreList/

Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a
stable branch: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/


More information about the service that created this bug can be found at:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Upstream_Release_Monitoring


Please keep in mind that with any upstream change, there may also be packaging
changes that need to be made. Specifically, please remember that it is your
responsibility to review the new version to ensure that the licensing is still
correct and that no non-free or legally problematic items have been added
upstream.


Based on the information from Anitya:
https://release-monitoring.org/project/3080/


To change the monitoring settings for the project, please visit:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Module-CoreList


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2144291
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2144280] New: perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.20221120 is available

2022-11-20 Thread bugzilla 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2144280

Bug ID: 2144280
   Summary: perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.20221120 is available
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases
  Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
  Assignee: jples...@redhat.com
  Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: iarn...@gmail.com, jples...@redhat.com,
mspa...@redhat.com, perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Releases retrieved: 5.20221120
Upstream release that is considered latest: 5.20221120
Current version/release in rawhide: 5.20221020-1.fc38
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/CPAN-Perl-Releases/

Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a
stable branch: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/


More information about the service that created this bug can be found at:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Upstream_Release_Monitoring


Please keep in mind that with any upstream change, there may also be packaging
changes that need to be made. Specifically, please remember that it is your
responsibility to review the new version to ensure that the licensing is still
correct and that no non-free or legally problematic items have been added
upstream.


Based on the information from Anitya:
https://release-monitoring.org/project/5881/


To change the monitoring settings for the project, please visit:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2144280
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

FF 107.0 scratch builds - just for fun

2022-11-20 Thread Bojan Smojver via devel 
Now that nss 3.85 has been built, I thought I'd have a go at building
FF 107.0, given that's been out for a few days and original builds
failed in koji, because nss was too old at the time.

No idea how this is going to end up, but the tasks for F3{8,7,6,5} are
here, if anyone is interested:

https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=94367463
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=94367626
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=94367632
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=94367638

PS. I am not the FF maintainer (obviously), so this is just for kicks.

-- 
Bojan
___
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: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: metadata of updateinfo.xml

2022-11-20 Thread Neal Gompa 
On Sun, Nov 20, 2022 at 4:32 AM Mattia Verga via devel
 wrote:
>
> Is there any guide that explains fields of the updateinfo.xml files
> which are generated in repositories?
>
> I'm trying to figure out
> https://github.com/fedora-infra/bodhi/issues/2487 and I think we
> currently have weird data in updates. For example, looking to the
> 'issued' and 'modified' dates of few updates I see that the issued date
> is greater than the modified date... that's because Bodhi modifies the
> issued date with the timestamp of when the update is pushed to the
> repository, rather than using the submission date.
>
> I don't think that field is meant to be modified and I suppose it can
> lead yum/dnf to screw up. Is there any expert that can point me in the
> right direction here?
>

The closest thing to a guide is this schema documentation file I found
long ago from python-Updateinfo:
https://pagure.io/python-Updateinfo/blob/master/f/docs/updateinfo.xsd

In terms of a human expert, Pat Riehecky from CentOS is your best bet
since he analyzed the format and built python-Updateinfo for
Scientific Linux.

I think you're right about issued and modified dates, though. That
said, the issued date is normally supposed to be when it's released to
the repository, I believe. But if we have both issued and modified,
then issued should be when it's *first* published (first time it goes
out of pending).






--
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
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: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

metadata of updateinfo.xml

2022-11-20 Thread Mattia Verga via devel 
Is there any guide that explains fields of the updateinfo.xml files
which are generated in repositories?

I'm trying to figure out
https://github.com/fedora-infra/bodhi/issues/2487 and I think we
currently have weird data in updates. For example, looking to the
'issued' and 'modified' dates of few updates I see that the issued date
is greater than the modified date... that's because Bodhi modifies the
issued date with the timestamp of when the update is pushed to the
repository, rather than using the submission date.

I don't think that field is meant to be modified and I suppose it can
lead yum/dnf to screw up. Is there any expert that can point me in the
right direction here?

Mattia

___
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: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue