date:20230908

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2236101

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version|perl-HTML-FormatText-WithLi |perl-HTML-FormatText-WithLi
   |nks-0.15-26.el8 |nks-0.15-26.el8
   ||perl-HTML-FormatText-WithLi
   ||nks-0.15-26.el9



--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2023-31bf677b99 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=2236101

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202236101%23c7
___
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

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

2023-09-08 Thread updates

The following Fedora EPEL 9 Security updates need testing:
 Age  URL
   6  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2023-1e3b2a7b2f   
libtommath-1.2.0-10.el9
   3  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2023-d9153eda95   
salt-3005.2-1.el9


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

aspell-ta-20040424-31.el9
borgbackup-1.2.6-1.el9
dnsdist-1.8.1-1.el9
gpsd-epel-3.23.1-2.el9
packit-0.80.0-1.el9
python-brukerapi-0.1.9-2.el9
python-ogr-0.46.0-1.el9
python-userpath-1.9.1-1.el9

Details about builds:



 aspell-ta-20040424-31.el9 (FEDORA-EPEL-2023-8edda5c1d1)
 GNU Aspell Tamil Dictionary Package

Update Information:

Initial epel9 package

ChangeLog:

* Wed Jul 19 2023 Fedora Release Engineering  - 
20040424-31
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_39_Mass_Rebuild
* Fri Jun 30 2023 Parag Nemade  - 20040424-30
- Resolves:rhbz#2218586 - Add deprecated() as aspell package is deprecated from 
F39
- Migrate to SPDX license expression
* Wed Jan 18 2023 Fedora Release Engineering  - 
20040424-29
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_38_Mass_Rebuild
* Wed Jul 20 2022 Fedora Release Engineering  - 
20040424-28
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_37_Mass_Rebuild
* Wed Jan 19 2022 Fedora Release Engineering  - 
20040424-27
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_36_Mass_Rebuild
* Wed Jul 21 2021 Fedora Release Engineering  - 
20040424-26
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_35_Mass_Rebuild

References:

  [ 1 ] Bug #2178787 - Please branch and build aspell-ta in epel9
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2178787




 borgbackup-1.2.6-1.el9 (FEDORA-EPEL-2023-d7c164b6bb)
 A deduplicating backup program with compression and authenticated encryption

Update Information:

fix for CVE-2023-36811: spoofed archive leads to data loss  Please note that
starting with borgbackup 1.2.5 all borg repos must use TAM authentication:
https://github.com/borgbackup/borg/blob/1.2.6/docs/changes.rst#pre-125-archives-
spoofing-vulnerability-cve-2023-36811

ChangeLog:

* Tue Sep  5 2023 Felix Schwarz  - 1.2.6-1
- update to 1.2.6 to fix CVE-2023-36811
- rely on auto-generated version requirement for msgpack

References:

  [ 1 ] Bug #2236304 - CVE-2023-36811 borgbackup: spoofed archive leads to data 
loss [epel-all]
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2236304




 dnsdist-1.8.1-1.el9 (FEDORA-EPEL-2023-f26e7543e7)
 Highly DNS-, DoS- and abuse-aware loadbalancer

Update Information:

Uppdate to 1.8.1

ChangeLog:

* Fri Sep  8 2023 Sander Hoentjen  - 1.8.1-1
- Update to 1.8.1 (#2183113)
* Wed Jul 19 2023 Fedora Release Engineering  - 
1.8.0-3
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_39_Mass_Rebuild
* Thu Mar 30 2023 Sander Hoentjen  - 1.8.0-2
- Fix specfile error
* Thu Mar 30 2023 Sander Hoentjen  - 1.8.0-1
- Update to 1.8.0 (#2128188)
* Mon Feb 20 2023 Sander Hoentjen  - 1.7.3-3
- add patch for missing includes
* Thu Jan 19 2023 Fedora Release Engineering  - 
1.7.3-2
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_38_Mass_Rebuild

References:

  [ 1 ] Bug #2171471 - dnsdist: FTBFS in Fedora rawhide/f38
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2171471
  [ 2 ] Bug #2183113 - dnsdist-1.8.1 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2183113




 gpsd-epel-3.23.1-2.el9 (FEDORA-EPEL-2023-a2c2f5f191)
 Service daemon for mediating access to a GPS

Update Information:

Convert EPEL9 gpsd to gpsd-epel with just gpsd-libs, gpsd-devel and python3-gpsd

[Bug 2237914] perl-Sys-Virt-9.7.0 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2237914

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2023-7db7363bac has been pushed to the Fedora 39 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh
--advisory=FEDORA-2023-7db7363bac`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-7db7363bac

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information
on how to test updates.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2237914

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202237914%23c2
___
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

An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

2023-09-08 Thread Brendan Conoboy

Hi folks,

In March of this year, Josh Boyer sent out a message to Fedora's devel list
letting everybody know RHEL was going to move from bugzilla.redhat.com to
issues.redhat.com (Jira) in the future [1]. The work on this activity
has proceeded with relative quiet since, although a couple weeks ago
Florian mentioned on centos-devel that Platform Tools had begun to move
[2]. I'm now providing a more official followup:

All new issues found or desired in RHEL (Or CentOS Stream) need to be filed
on issues.redhat.com. It's no longer possible to create new BZs for
current RHEL (7 through 9) releases. Over the next few weeks, most RHEL
BZs will be migrated to tickets in the RHEL project on issues.redhat.com.
The BZs that are migrated will be closed with resolution MIGRATED and a
pointer to the Jira issue included in the external links section of each
respective BZ. Issues that don't get migrated may still be worked on in
Bugzilla- only new BZ creation is disabled, and only disabled in RHEL
products. Like before, most new RHEL issues are publicly visible by
default, without any login required to view.

RHEL making this change does not imply or require that Fedora do the same.
Rather, I'm mentioning this here because many community members who
contribute to Fedora via Bugzilla also do the same for RHEL and we
appreciate those contributions. People are welcome to create an account on
issues.redhat.com, just like was done on bugzilla.redhat.com previously,
see what we're up to, file issues, and contribute there as well. We've
created a hopefully-helpful article with account basics to get your account
setup [3].

I've sent a similar message to centos-devel, so apologies if you're reading
this a second time.

References:
1. Initial Announcement -
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/U7TZRWXVUGBCHS6EBJIBSFAVPFUHHV7J/
2. Migration Starting -
https://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/2023-August/143056.html
3. Issues.redhat.com account basics -
https://access.redhat.com/articles/7032570

--
Brendan Conoboy / CASE & CPE / 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

[Bug 2236101] perl-HTML-FormatText-WithLinks for EL8 and EL9

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2236101

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
   Fixed In Version||perl-HTML-FormatText-WithLi
   ||nks-0.15-26.el8
Last Closed||2023-09-09 00:32:12



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2023-6e0bf72d9d has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 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=2236101

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202236101%23c6
___
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: TSS maintainer volunteer - IBM TSS

2023-09-08 Thread Peter Robinson

Hi Kenneth,

> I'm not 100% clear on the process.  I have a .spec file that passes fedpkg
> mockbuild.
>
> I submitted the request to
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2238052.
>
> Is that all?  What else should I do?

Well the package is already in Fedora with a maintainer [1] so you
don't need to do a review but you should reach out to that maintainer
if you wish to assist them in co-maintaining the package. It seems you
already know them any way as you cc:ed them on the email.

I suggest a read through of the packaging guidelines [2] would also
assist you greatly as they're pretty decent :)

[1] https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/tss2
[2] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/
___
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: Access superseded Fedora RPMs

2023-09-08 Thread Samuel Sieb


On 2023-09-08 12:58, Kai A. Hiller wrote:
I’m trying to recreate – on the level of RPMs – a Fedora system as 
resolved by DNF at an earlier moment in time (think lockfile). 
Collecting a list of the installed RPMs and their versions for a given 
system is easily done via `dnf list installed`; though, afaict these 
RPMs in their exact versions may no longer be available at Fedora 
mirrors at a later point in time. This leads to my question: Is there a 
Fedora-canonical way of finding and attaining these superseded RPMs?


The only versions available are the initially released version in the 
"fedora" repo and the *latest* version in the "fedora-updates" repo. 
Any updates other than the latest are only available in koji for a 
limited time.


(Alternatively, I was thinking about hosting a private, modified mirror 
that serves all versions of an RPM. Does that sound like a good idea?)


If you need the intermediate versions, that's a good option.
___
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 MIT license , what todo ?

2023-09-08 Thread Sandro


On 08-09-2023 16:48, Sérgio Basto wrote:




done [1] thanks , btw another question I don't need do a new build
isn't it ?

No, since there was no license change - in your case not even the
specifier changed 


and if the license format changed , should we build a new release ? and
in all branches or just in rawhide ?


I believe, and Miroslav will correct me if I'm wrong, the script looks 
at the changelog and searches for SPDX. As long as there's a changelog 
entry, the package is considered migrated.


However, if the License: tag value changes, it is recommended to 
rebuild, so the new license makes it into the package. Of course, this 
can also be done with the next update or mass rebuild.


-- Sandro
___
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: Access superseded Fedora RPMs

2023-09-08 Thread Michel Lind

Hi Kai,

On Fri, Sep 08, 2023 at 09:58:58PM +0200, Kai A. Hiller wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> I’m trying to recreate – on the level of RPMs – a Fedora system as resolved
> by DNF at an earlier moment in time (think lockfile). Collecting a list of
> the installed RPMs and their versions for a given system is easily done via
> `dnf list installed`; though, afaict these RPMs in their exact versions may
> no longer be available at Fedora mirrors at a later point in time. This
> leads to my question: Is there a Fedora-canonical way of finding and
> attaining these superseded RPMs?
> 
> (Alternatively, I was thinking about hosting a private, modified mirror that
> serves all versions of an RPM. Does that sound like a good idea?)
>
Try installing fedora-repos-archive -- you'll get a repo definition for
fedora-updates-archive, which has all versions of released updates
rather than just the latest.

IIRC it was added on the request of CoreOS.

Best regards,

-- 
Michel Lind (né Salim)
identities: https://keyoxide.org/5dce2e7e9c3b1cffd335c1d78b229d2f7ccc04f2


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
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: Need help with build failure

On Fri, 2023-09-08 at 15:47 +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> On Fri, 2023-09-08 at 16:25 +0200, Lumír Balhar wrote:
> > Hi.
> > 
> > Have you managed to fix the issue? The error is produce by the
> > configure 
> > script and the check is implemented there somewhere around line
> > 4293
> > but 
> > I don't understand it well enough to tell you what causing it to
> > detect 
> > the cross compilation.
> 
> 
> sorry for my previous message is not for this thread 
> 
> in this thread , 
> I got the same problem and fix it with adding --host=$(uname -m) [1]
> 
> but just need the fix to build in koji , if in a local build with
> mock
> on my laptop, I don't need the fix. 
> 
> [1] 
> %configure --host=$(uname -m)

commmit [1] try to fix:
configure: error: cannot run C++ compiled programs.
If you meant to cross compile, use `--host'.
See `config.log' for more details

[1]
https://pkgs.rpmfusion.org/cgit/free/libvlcpp.git/commit/?id=331cb7448337da30053badab2a7850fcfcb31aaa

this happened to me before on 2023-08-04 02:20:05 +0100 before branch
F39 

In my case it builds locally without this hack, which is weird .


> > Lumír
> > 
> > On 9/6/23 14:54, Mattia Verga wrote:
> > > python-calcephpy builds were FTB since between the F39 mass
> > > rebuild
> > > (which completed fine) and the Cython 3.x change (which started
> > > to
> > > fail).
> > > While I was waiting for upstream to fix the package for
> > > compatibility with Cython 3.x I tried to rebuild it forcing
> > > cython
> > > < 3.0, but I got an odd build failure to which I didn't pay great
> > > attention, I simply thought about some glitch trying to force the
> > > cython version to the compat package.
> > > 
> > > Now that upstream released a new version compatible with Cython
> > > 3.x
> > > I tried to update the package, but I still get the odd build
> > > failure. It seems that during the configure script the package
> > > complains about being cross-built... the latest build attempt
> > > completed fine on i686 and ppc64le, while failed on other
> > > architectures.
> > > 
> > > Does anyone have any idea about this?
> > > Thanks
> > > Mattia
> > > 
> > > [1]
> > > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=32685
> > > [2] https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=105822496
> > > ___
> > > python-devel mailing list -- python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> > > To unsubscribe send an email to
> > > python-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/python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> > > Do not reply to spam, report it:
> > > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
> > ___
> > python-devel mailing list -- python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> > To unsubscribe send an email to
> > python-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/python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> > Do not reply to spam, report it:
> > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
> 

-- 
Sérgio M. B.
___
python-devel mailing list -- python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-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/python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Access superseded Fedora RPMs

2023-09-08 Thread Kai A. Hiller


Hello,

I’m trying to recreate – on the level of RPMs – a Fedora system as 
resolved by DNF at an earlier moment in time (think lockfile). 
Collecting a list of the installed RPMs and their versions for a given 
system is easily done via `dnf list installed`; though, afaict these 
RPMs in their exact versions may no longer be available at Fedora 
mirrors at a later point in time. This leads to my question: Is there a 
Fedora-canonical way of finding and attaining these superseded RPMs?


(Alternatively, I was thinking about hosting a private, modified mirror 
that serves all versions of an RPM. Does that sound like a good idea?)


Kind regards
Kai
___
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: TSS maintainer volunteer - IBM TSS

2023-09-08 Thread Kenneth Goldman

I'm not 100% clear on the process.  I have a .spec file that passes fedpkg 
mockbuild.

I submitted the request to 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2238052.

Is that all?  What else should I do?



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
___
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: checksec: Problem: conflicting requests in s390x

2023-09-08 Thread Yaakov Selkowitz

On Fri, 2023-09-08 at 18:50 +0200, Jun Aruga (he / him) wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 8, 2023 at 6:06 PM Yaakov Selkowitz 
> wrote:
> > 
> > On Fri, 2023-09-08 at 17:53 +0200, Jun Aruga wrote:
> > > I am running the scratch build for rpms/ruby [1] rawhide branch
> > > right
> > > now, and I see the following error in the root.log on only s390x
> > > CPU
> > > architecture. Do you know what's wrong?
> > > 
> > > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=105910607
> > > 
> > > s390x:
> > > https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/753/105910753/root.log
> > [snip[
> > > DEBUG util.py:442:   Problem: conflicting requests
> > > DEBUG util.py:442:    - nothing provides nm needed by
> > > checksec-2.6.0-5.fc40.noarch from build
> > 
> > This is a result of
> > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/checksec/c/7e260a6c3f4d6f17f02f9c40ff2308919670a50d?branch=rawhide
> > 
> > AFAICS that change is wrong, as nothing provides "nm".  That should
> > be
> > either Requires: /usr/bin/nm (literally, not %{_bindir}/nm !!) or
> > Requires: binutils.  Or maybe not at all, if one can still
> > (hopefully?)
> > safely presume that binutils is a necessary part of the base
> > buildroot.
> 
> Thanks for your investigation! For the checksec RPM, I reported the
> issue to the following bugzilla ticket.
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2235760#c12
> 
> Why is the following one not a proper solution? I don't understand
> it.
> 
> ```
> Requires: %{_bindir}/nm
> ```

https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_file_and_directory_dependencies

-- 
Yaakov Selkowitz
Principal Software Engineer - Emerging RHEL
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: checksec: Problem: conflicting requests in s390x

> > Why is the following one not a proper solution? I don't understand it.
> >
> > ```
> > Requires: %{_bindir}/nm
> > ```
>
> RPM cannot evaluate the %{_bindir} in Requires:. So it's essentially
> looking for a virtual provides with those literal characters, which it
> won't find.

OK. I understand it.

-- 
Jun | He - Him | Timezone: UTC+1 or 2, Czech Republic
See  for
the timezone.
___
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: checksec: Problem: conflicting requests in s390x

> > > DEBUG util.py:442:- nothing provides python3.12dist(unicorn) >=
> > > 1.0.2~rc1 needed by python3-pwntools-4.9.0-4.fc39.noarch from build
> >
> > This is a result of
> > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/unicorn/c/27cee3896b9c51abe3139222024e0a4def5e30e1?branch=rawhide
> >
> > Therefore, you cannot require python3-unicorn, or anything that itself
> > depends on python3-unicorn, until this is fixed.
>
> Hmm, okay. Do you know how to check which Requires of the ruby.spec
> depending on the python3-unicorn? Maybe using the def repoquery? I
> tried the following command. But maybe it's not correct to find the
> required RPM package to skip in on only s390x in this case.
>
> ```
> $ dnf repoquery \
>   --disablerepo=* \
>   --enablerepo=rawhide \
>   --enablerepo=rawhide-source \
>   --arch=src \
>   --arch=x86_64 \
>   --whatrequires python3-unicorn
> Last metadata expiration check: 0:21:48 ago on Fri 08 Sep 2023 06:25:43 PM 
> CEST.
> unicorn-devel-0:2.0.1.post1-4.fc39.x86_64
> ```

OK. Now I understand why the python3-pwntools package's error was
printed in the root.log of build of the rpms/ruby.

ruby.spec has the following line in it.
```
BuildRequires: %{_bindir}/checksec
```

But both checksec and python3-pwntools RPM packages include the file
`%{_bindir}/checksec` in it. So, the python3-pwntools was taken
unintentionally. Below is the reported ticket for the python3-pwntools
package. Thanks for reporting the issue, Vit.

Please resolve conflict with checksec package
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2238038

-- 
Jun | He - Him | Timezone: UTC+1 or 2, Czech Republic
See  for
the timezone.
___
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

[PSA] Toolbx is now marked as crit-path by Workstation

2023-09-08 Thread Sumantro Mukherjee

Hey All,

As a part of the changeset[0] we had infra help us out with Images and
QA help us out with
criterion [1] and OpenQA test[2]. As a final step, we have finally
added Toolbx as a crit-path under "workstation" [3] .

We have a Toolbx Test day on 2023-09-14 [4] , come and help us iron
out any rough edges
before release

Thanks to Infra and Rel-eng for all the help here :)

[0] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ToolbxReleaseBlocker
[1] 
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_39_Beta_Release_Criteria#Toolbx_Functionality
[2] 
https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/os-autoinst-distri-fedora/blob/main/f/tests/toolbox.pm
[3] https://pagure.io/fedora-comps/pull-request/885
[4] https://testdays.fedoraproject.org/events/167
-- 
//sumantro
Fedora QE
TRIED AND PERSONALLY TESTED, ERGO TRUSTED
___
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: checksec: Problem: conflicting requests in s390x

2023-09-08 Thread Vít Ondruch



Dne 08. 09. 23 v 19:02 Stephen Gallagher napsal(a):

On Fri, Sep 8, 2023 at 12:51 PM Jun Aruga (he / him)  wrote:

On Fri, Sep 8, 2023 at 6:06 PM Yaakov Selkowitz  wrote:

On Fri, 2023-09-08 at 17:53 +0200, Jun Aruga wrote:

I am running the scratch build for rpms/ruby [1] rawhide branch right
now, and I see the following error in the root.log on only s390x CPU
architecture. Do you know what's wrong?

https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=105910607

s390x:
https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/753/105910753/root.log

[snip[

DEBUG util.py:442:   Problem: conflicting requests
DEBUG util.py:442:- nothing provides nm needed by
checksec-2.6.0-5.fc40.noarch from build

This is a result of
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/checksec/c/7e260a6c3f4d6f17f02f9c40ff2308919670a50d?branch=rawhide

AFAICS that change is wrong, as nothing provides "nm".  That should be
either Requires: /usr/bin/nm (literally, not %{_bindir}/nm !!) or
Requires: binutils.  Or maybe not at all, if one can still (hopefully?)
safely presume that binutils is a necessary part of the base buildroot.

Thanks for your investigation! For the checksec RPM, I reported the
issue to the following bugzilla ticket.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2235760#c12

Why is the following one not a proper solution? I don't understand it.

```
Requires: %{_bindir}/nm
```

RPM cannot evaluate the %{_bindir} in Requires:.



This is expanded during build, isn't it?


Vít



  So it's essentially
looking for a virtual provides with those literal characters, which it
won't find.
___
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


OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
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: checksec: Problem: conflicting requests in s390x

2023-09-08 Thread Stephen Gallagher

On Fri, Sep 8, 2023 at 12:51 PM Jun Aruga (he / him)  wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 8, 2023 at 6:06 PM Yaakov Selkowitz  wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 2023-09-08 at 17:53 +0200, Jun Aruga wrote:
> > > I am running the scratch build for rpms/ruby [1] rawhide branch right
> > > now, and I see the following error in the root.log on only s390x CPU
> > > architecture. Do you know what's wrong?
> > >
> > > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=105910607
> > >
> > > s390x:
> > > https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/753/105910753/root.log
> > [snip[
> > > DEBUG util.py:442:   Problem: conflicting requests
> > > DEBUG util.py:442:- nothing provides nm needed by
> > > checksec-2.6.0-5.fc40.noarch from build
> >
> > This is a result of
> > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/checksec/c/7e260a6c3f4d6f17f02f9c40ff2308919670a50d?branch=rawhide
> >
> > AFAICS that change is wrong, as nothing provides "nm".  That should be
> > either Requires: /usr/bin/nm (literally, not %{_bindir}/nm !!) or
> > Requires: binutils.  Or maybe not at all, if one can still (hopefully?)
> > safely presume that binutils is a necessary part of the base buildroot.
>
> Thanks for your investigation! For the checksec RPM, I reported the
> issue to the following bugzilla ticket.
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2235760#c12
>
> Why is the following one not a proper solution? I don't understand it.
>
> ```
> Requires: %{_bindir}/nm
> ```

RPM cannot evaluate the %{_bindir} in Requires:. So it's essentially
looking for a virtual provides with those literal characters, which it
won't find.
___
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: [Fedocal] Reminder meeting : ELN SIG

2023-09-08 Thread Stephen Gallagher

=
#fedora-meeting: ELN (2023-09-08)
=


Meeting started by sgallagh at 16:00:43 UTC. The full logs are available
at
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2023-09-08/eln.2023-09-08-16.00.log.html
.



Meeting summary
---
* Init Process  (sgallagh, 16:00:43)

* Agenda  (sgallagh, 16:05:34)
  * Agenda Item: Status Update  (sgallagh, 16:05:50)
  * Agenda Item: grub2-efi issues  (sgallagh, 16:08:21)

* grub2-efi issues  (sgallagh, 16:09:36)
  * LINK:

https://tiny.distro.builders/view-rpm--view-eln-extras--grub2-efi-x64-modules.html
(sgallagh, 16:12:06)
  * LINK: https://pagure.io/pungi-fedora/pull-request/1196#request_diff
(sgallagh, 16:16:10)
  * LINK:

https://gitlab.com/redhat/centos-stream/rpms/tboot/-/commit/26f7e15a839997e9daf0c2a85393fdfa12a7650b
(yselkowitz, 16:23:48)
  * There's a disconnect between CentOS Stream and ELN; tboot depends on
grub2-efi-x64-modules in CS9  (sgallagh, 16:26:12)
  * ACTION: yselkowitz will contact the maintainers to find out what
should happen in ELN  (sgallagh, 16:26:35)
  * The grub2-efi-x64-modules package was removed from ELN because it is
not present in the Content Resolver output.  (sgallagh, 16:27:24)

* Status Update  (sgallagh, 16:46:09)
  * First packages will be synced to CentOS Stream 10 next week.
Composes to come later.  (sgallagh, 16:50:23)
  * Direct CentOS Stream development is still not going to start; all
work should continue to happen on ELN until further notice.
(sgallagh, 16:50:55)

Meeting ended at 16:59:50 UTC.




Action Items

* yselkowitz will contact the maintainers to find out what should happen
  in ELN




Action Items, by person
---
* yselkowitz
  * yselkowitz will contact the maintainers to find out what should
happen in ELN
* **UNASSIGNED**
  * (none)




People Present (lines said)
---
* sgallagh (78)
* dcavalca (38)
* neil (24)
* yselkowitz (17)
* zodbot (11)
* sgallagh33 (7)
* tdawson (4)
* michel-slm (2)




Generated by `MeetBot`_ 0.4

.. _`MeetBot`: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Zodbot#Meeting_Functions
___
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: checksec: Problem: conflicting requests in s390x

On Fri, Sep 8, 2023 at 6:06 PM Yaakov Selkowitz  wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2023-09-08 at 17:53 +0200, Jun Aruga wrote:
> > I am running the scratch build for rpms/ruby [1] rawhide branch right
> > now, and I see the following error in the root.log on only s390x CPU
> > architecture. Do you know what's wrong?
> >
> > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=105910607
> >
> > s390x:
> > https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/753/105910753/root.log
> [snip[
> > DEBUG util.py:442:   Problem: conflicting requests
> > DEBUG util.py:442:- nothing provides nm needed by
> > checksec-2.6.0-5.fc40.noarch from build
>
> This is a result of
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/checksec/c/7e260a6c3f4d6f17f02f9c40ff2308919670a50d?branch=rawhide
>
> AFAICS that change is wrong, as nothing provides "nm".  That should be
> either Requires: /usr/bin/nm (literally, not %{_bindir}/nm !!) or
> Requires: binutils.  Or maybe not at all, if one can still (hopefully?)
> safely presume that binutils is a necessary part of the base buildroot.

Thanks for your investigation! For the checksec RPM, I reported the
issue to the following bugzilla ticket.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2235760#c12

Why is the following one not a proper solution? I don't understand it.

```
Requires: %{_bindir}/nm
```

> > DEBUG util.py:442:- nothing provides python3.12dist(unicorn) >=
> > 1.0.2~rc1 needed by python3-pwntools-4.9.0-4.fc39.noarch from build
>
> This is a result of
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/unicorn/c/27cee3896b9c51abe3139222024e0a4def5e30e1?branch=rawhide
>
> Therefore, you cannot require python3-unicorn, or anything that itself
> depends on python3-unicorn, until this is fixed.

Hmm, okay. Do you know how to check which Requires of the ruby.spec
depending on the python3-unicorn? Maybe using the def repoquery? I
tried the following command. But maybe it's not correct to find the
required RPM package to skip in on only s390x in this case.

```
$ dnf repoquery \
  --disablerepo=* \
  --enablerepo=rawhide \
  --enablerepo=rawhide-source \
  --arch=src \
  --arch=x86_64 \
  --whatrequires python3-unicorn
Last metadata expiration check: 0:21:48 ago on Fri 08 Sep 2023 06:25:43 PM CEST.
unicorn-devel-0:2.0.1.post1-4.fc39.x86_64
```

> --
> Yaakov Selkowitz
> Principal Software Engineer - Emerging RHEL
> 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



-- 
Jun | He - Him | Timezone: UTC+1 or 2, Czech Republic
See  for
the timezone.
___
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: checksec: Problem: conflicting requests in s390x

2023-09-08 Thread Yaakov Selkowitz

On Fri, 2023-09-08 at 17:53 +0200, Jun Aruga wrote:
> I am running the scratch build for rpms/ruby [1] rawhide branch right
> now, and I see the following error in the root.log on only s390x CPU
> architecture. Do you know what's wrong?
> 
> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=105910607
> 
> s390x:
> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/753/105910753/root.log
[snip[
> DEBUG util.py:442:   Problem: conflicting requests
> DEBUG util.py:442:    - nothing provides nm needed by
> checksec-2.6.0-5.fc40.noarch from build

This is a result of
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/checksec/c/7e260a6c3f4d6f17f02f9c40ff2308919670a50d?branch=rawhide

AFAICS that change is wrong, as nothing provides "nm".  That should be
either Requires: /usr/bin/nm (literally, not %{_bindir}/nm !!) or
Requires: binutils.  Or maybe not at all, if one can still (hopefully?)
safely presume that binutils is a necessary part of the base buildroot.

> DEBUG util.py:442:    - nothing provides python3.12dist(unicorn) >=
> 1.0.2~rc1 needed by python3-pwntools-4.9.0-4.fc39.noarch from build

This is a result of
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/unicorn/c/27cee3896b9c51abe3139222024e0a4def5e30e1?branch=rawhide

Therefore, you cannot require python3-unicorn, or anything that itself
depends on python3-unicorn, until this is fixed.

-- 
Yaakov Selkowitz
Principal Software Engineer - Emerging RHEL
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

checksec: Problem: conflicting requests in s390x

Hi,
I am running the scratch build for rpms/ruby [1] rawhide branch right
now, and I see the following error in the root.log on only s390x CPU
architecture. Do you know what's wrong?

https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=105910607

s390x:
https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/753/105910753/root.log
DEBUG util.py:442:  No matches found for the following disable plugin
patterns: local, spacewalk, versionlock
DEBUG util.py:442:  Error:
DEBUG util.py:442:   Problem: conflicting requests
DEBUG util.py:442:- nothing provides nm needed by
checksec-2.6.0-5.fc40.noarch from build
DEBUG util.py:442:- nothing provides python3.12dist(unicorn) >=
1.0.2~rc1 needed by python3-pwntools-4.9.0-4.fc39.noarch from build

[1] https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ruby

-- 
Jun | He - Him | Timezone: UTC+1 or 2, Czech Republic
See  for
the timezone.
___
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 2238025] perltidy-20230909 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2238025



--- Comment #2 from Upstream Release Monitoring 
 ---
the-new-hotness/release-monitoring.org's scratch build of
perltidy-20230909-1.fc38.src.rpm for rawhide completed
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=105910175


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2238025

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202238025%23c2
___
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 2238025] New: perltidy-20230909 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2238025

Bug ID: 2238025
   Summary: perltidy-20230909 is available
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
 Component: perltidy
  Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
  Assignee: p...@city-fan.org
  Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: lxt...@gmail.com, p...@city-fan.org,
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Releases retrieved: 20230909
Upstream release that is considered latest: 20230909
Current version/release in rawhide: 20230701-2.fc39
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Perl-Tidy/

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/3553/


To change the monitoring settings for the project, please visit:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perltidy


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2238025

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202238025%23c0
___
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 2238025] perltidy-20230909 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2238025



--- Comment #1 from Upstream Release Monitoring 
 ---
Created attachment 1987729
  --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1987729=edit
Update to 20230909 (#2238025)


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2238025

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202238025%23c1
___
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

Opportunity Open Source - OpenPrinting track

2023-09-08 Thread Zdenek Dohnal


Hi all,

I've joined virtually the Opportunity Open Source conference at IIT 
Mandi, India, where we as OpenPrinting held track about the recent 
events in our group.


Brief summary:

- current CUPS 2.4.x works with classic drivers and printer 
applications, as whole 2.x series will


- Till works on finishing common-print-dialog-backends into Ubuntu, so 
GTK4 applications can use unified print dialog with the latest features


- CUPS 2.5 is held until we have OAuth support (aimed at the end of this 
year)


- I will be releasing 2.4.x until CUPS 2.5 gold release - soon there 
will be 2.4.7 with several bug fixes.


- looking for help with desktop integration and feature implementation


Complete notes are attached.


Zdenek

--
Zdenek Dohnal
Senior Software Engineer
Red Hat, BRQ-TPBC
Opportunity open source



- now we work with printer apps and classic drivers - classic drivers will be 
removed in CUPS 3
- 2.4 Zdenek Dohnal released manager, 2.5 Till Kamppeter - delayed for OAuth
- 2.5:
  - getting rid of some deprecated functions (windows sspi tls implementation 
switched for LibreSSL)
  - new requirements - C99 standrad, DNS-SD (Avahi/mDNSResponder), TLS (Gnutls, 
LibreSSL), ZLIB, POSIX/Win threading
  - for discovery:
- wide-area DNS-SD for Avahi needs to implemented
- config profiles needs to be implemented
  - localization improvements
  - OAuth/OpenID - lot of desktop work - API, UI
  - job-sheets-col - (I want to print certain banner onto specific media - 
classified banner on blue paper)
  - backporting CUPS 3 things:
- better media-col suppport - cups_media_t
- HTML/Rest/JSON/JWT apis
- IPP file API (file of IPP attributes which you can use for printer 
configuration)
  - profiles - directory with file with plain text files of printers which want 
to see (~/.cups, ~/.config, /etc/cups/profiles)
- directives - Server/ServerName/Printer, filtering options (by location 
name, geo location, type)
  - OAuth/OpenID - replacement for kerberos, because it does not uphold 
security standards and win moves away from it
- OAuth does not need root to access the ticket or user changing
- 2.5 with OAuth and Kerberos, CUPS 3.0 removes Kerberos
- OpenID needed JSON and JWT
- basically adding support for RFC 8414/OpenID
- we need to cache bearer and refresh tokens per user/auth-server in cupsd 
once this is implemented
- once we have this we need Authorization UI and CLI tool for authentication
- CUPS 3.0
  - Mike Sweet release manager
  - libcups is now in the first beta, cups-sharing, cups-local in next year
  - cups-commands will be split into cups-local and cups-sharing
  - modular CUPS - library and two type of daemons - sharing, local
  - modules:
- libcups:
  - ippeverinter, ippevepcl, ippeveps, ippfind, ipptool, ipptransform (for 
transformations, use in ippeveprinter), libcups (see changes in MIGRATING.md)
  - removed deprecated APIs - bumped SONAME
- local:
  - cancel, lp, lpq, lpr, lpstat, cups-locald
  - temporary queues+profiles
  - runs as user
  - CUPS 2.x UNIX domain socket, DBUS API, XPC API
  - barely started
  - handling auth and notif UI
  - no web interface
  - job history for current login
  - convertion to/grom PDF/raster as printer wants
- sharing:
  - cupsaccept, cupsdisable, cupsenable, cupsreject, lpadmin, cups-sharingd
  - for SecurePrint, load balancing, OAuth, ACLs, print accounting
  - config similar to current cupsd
  - only network sockets
  - web interface, printers, jobs
- challenges - broader scope - lot of work on UI - uplifting GNOME/KDE/XFCE for 
new D-BUS API for printing auth, consent UI - common-print-dialog-backends
  - hopefully we can reuse some of PAPPL, reuse of authorization/notification 
UI from somewhere
  - bad Ghostscript license complicates PDF conversions with using its API (so 
we still need call it as binary) - maybe PDFium from Chrome can fix this


Desktop integration of the new architecture
===


- common print dialog backends now have support in GTK4, working on QT, Firefox
- for non-gnome desktop - update system-config-printer or get printer module 
from gnome-control-center and make it generic for all desktops (from current 
Gnome Control Center, GNOME is going to move to a new
  library which is not compatible with non-Gnome desktops)
___
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 MIT license , what todo ?

On Fri, 2023-09-08 at 15:55 +0200, Michael J Gruber wrote:
> Am Fr., 8. Sept. 2023 um 15:45 Uhr schrieb Sérgio Basto
> :
> > 
> > On Fri, 2023-09-08 at 08:39 +0200, Sandro wrote:
> > > On 08-09-2023 02:36, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> > > > xdg-utils is a MIT License [1] what SPDX license have [2] ? if
> > > > it
> > > > is
> > > > already a valid SPDX formula , what I should write on changelog
> > > > ?
> > > 
> > > Something like:
> > > 
> > > - Migrated to SPDX license (noop)
> > > 
> > 
> > done [1] thanks , btw another question I don't need do a new build
> > isn't it ?
> 
> No, since there was no license change - in your case not even the
> specifier changed :)
> 

and if the license format changed , should we build a new release ? and
in all branches or just in rawhide ? 

Thank you 



> Michael
> ___
> 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

-- 
Sérgio M. B.
___
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: Need help with build failure

On Fri, 2023-09-08 at 16:25 +0200, Lumír Balhar wrote:
> Hi.
> 
> Have you managed to fix the issue? The error is produce by the
> configure 
> script and the check is implemented there somewhere around line 4293
> but 
> I don't understand it well enough to tell you what causing it to
> detect 
> the cross compilation.


sorry for my previous message is not for this thread 

in this thread , 
I got the same problem and fix it with adding --host=$(uname -m) [1]

but just need the fix to build in koji , if in a local build with mock
on my laptop, I don't need the fix. 

[1] 
%configure --host=$(uname -m)

> Lumír
> 
> On 9/6/23 14:54, Mattia Verga wrote:
> > python-calcephpy builds were FTB since between the F39 mass rebuild
> > (which completed fine) and the Cython 3.x change (which started to
> > fail).
> > While I was waiting for upstream to fix the package for
> > compatibility with Cython 3.x I tried to rebuild it forcing cython
> > < 3.0, but I got an odd build failure to which I didn't pay great
> > attention, I simply thought about some glitch trying to force the
> > cython version to the compat package.
> > 
> > Now that upstream released a new version compatible with Cython 3.x
> > I tried to update the package, but I still get the odd build
> > failure. It seems that during the configure script the package
> > complains about being cross-built... the latest build attempt
> > completed fine on i686 and ppc64le, while failed on other
> > architectures.
> > 
> > Does anyone have any idea about this?
> > Thanks
> > Mattia
> > 
> > [1] https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=32685
> > [2] https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=105822496
> > ___
> > python-devel mailing list -- python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> > To unsubscribe send an email to
> > python-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/python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> > Do not reply to spam, report it:
> > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
> ___
> python-devel mailing list -- python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to
> python-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/python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

-- 
Sérgio M. B.
___
python-devel mailing list -- python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-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/python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Need help with build failure

On Fri, 2023-09-08 at 16:25 +0200, Lumír Balhar wrote:
> Hi.
> 
> Have you managed to fix the issue? The error is produce by the
> configure 
> script and the check is implemented there somewhere around line 4293
> but 
> I don't understand it well enough to tell you what causing it to
> detect 
> the cross compilation.


and if the license format changed , should we build a new release ? and
in all branches or just in rawhide ? 

Thank you 

> Lumír
> 
> On 9/6/23 14:54, Mattia Verga wrote:
> > python-calcephpy builds were FTB since between the F39 mass rebuild
> > (which completed fine) and the Cython 3.x change (which started to
> > fail).
> > While I was waiting for upstream to fix the package for
> > compatibility with Cython 3.x I tried to rebuild it forcing cython
> > < 3.0, but I got an odd build failure to which I didn't pay great
> > attention, I simply thought about some glitch trying to force the
> > cython version to the compat package.
> > 
> > Now that upstream released a new version compatible with Cython 3.x
> > I tried to update the package, but I still get the odd build
> > failure. It seems that during the configure script the package
> > complains about being cross-built... the latest build attempt
> > completed fine on i686 and ppc64le, while failed on other
> > architectures.
> > 
> > Does anyone have any idea about this?
> > Thanks
> > Mattia
> > 
> > [1] https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=32685
> > [2] https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=105822496
> > ___
> > python-devel mailing list -- python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> > To unsubscribe send an email to
> > python-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/python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> > Do not reply to spam, report it:
> > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
> ___
> python-devel mailing list -- python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to
> python-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/python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

-- 
Sérgio M. B.
___
python-devel mailing list -- python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-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/python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Need help with build failure

2023-09-08 Thread Lumír Balhar


Hi.

Have you managed to fix the issue? The error is produce by the configure 
script and the check is implemented there somewhere around line 4293 but 
I don't understand it well enough to tell you what causing it to detect 
the cross compilation.


Lumír

On 9/6/23 14:54, Mattia Verga wrote:

python-calcephpy builds were FTB since between the F39 mass rebuild (which 
completed fine) and the Cython 3.x change (which started to fail).
While I was waiting for upstream to fix the package for compatibility with Cython 
3.x I tried to rebuild it forcing cython < 3.0, but I got an odd build failure 
to which I didn't pay great attention, I simply thought about some glitch trying 
to force the cython version to the compat package.

Now that upstream released a new version compatible with Cython 3.x I tried to 
update the package, but I still get the odd build failure. It seems that during 
the configure script the package complains about being cross-built... the 
latest build attempt completed fine on i686 and ppc64le, while failed on other 
architectures.

Does anyone have any idea about this?
Thanks
Mattia

[1] https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=32685
[2] https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=105822496
___
python-devel mailing list -- python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-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/python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

___
python-devel mailing list -- python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-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/python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2238020] New: perl-HTTP-BrowserDetect-3.39 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2238020

Bug ID: 2238020
   Summary: perl-HTTP-BrowserDetect-3.39 is available
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-HTTP-BrowserDetect
  Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
  Assignee: emman...@seyman.fr
  Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: emman...@seyman.fr,
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org, st...@silug.org
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Releases retrieved: 3.39
Upstream release that is considered latest: 3.39
Current version/release in rawhide: 3.38-2.fc39
URL: https://metacpan.org/release/HTTP-BrowserDetect

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/5936/


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


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2238020

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202238020%23c0
___
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: SPDX MIT license , what todo ?

2023-09-08 Thread Michael J Gruber

Am Fr., 8. Sept. 2023 um 15:45 Uhr schrieb Sérgio Basto :
>
> On Fri, 2023-09-08 at 08:39 +0200, Sandro wrote:
> > On 08-09-2023 02:36, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> > > xdg-utils is a MIT License [1] what SPDX license have [2] ? if it
> > > is
> > > already a valid SPDX formula , what I should write on changelog ?
> >
> > Something like:
> >
> > - Migrated to SPDX license (noop)
> >
>
> done [1] thanks , btw another question I don't need do a new build
> isn't it ?

No, since there was no license change - in your case not even the
specifier changed :)

Michael
___
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 MIT license , what todo ?

On Fri, 2023-09-08 at 08:39 +0200, Sandro wrote:
> On 08-09-2023 02:36, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> > xdg-utils is a MIT License [1] what SPDX license have [2] ? if it
> > is
> > already a valid SPDX formula , what I should write on changelog ?
> 
> Something like:
> 
> - Migrated to SPDX license (noop)
> 

done [1] thanks , btw another question I don't need do a new build
isn't it ?


[1] 
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/xdg-utils/c/2fdc5a60d2c08bf58f97cda5129d1b66a87332fc?branch=rawhide


> will mark the package as migrated even if the License: value doesn't 
> change. Alternatively, you can submit it for the ignore list:
> 
> https://pagure.io/copr/license-validate/blob/main/f/ignore-packages.txt
> 
> -- Sandro
> ___
> 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

-- 
Sérgio M. B.
___
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

Fedora 39 compose report: 20230908.n.0 changes

2023-09-08 Thread Fedora Branched Report

OLD: Fedora-39-20230907.n.0
NEW: Fedora-39-20230908.n.0

= SUMMARY =
Added images:1
Dropped images:  1
Added packages:  0
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages:   8
Downgraded packages: 0

Size of added packages:  0 B
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Size of upgraded packages:   33.14 MiB
Size of downgraded packages: 0 B

Size change of upgraded packages:   51.40 KiB
Size change of downgraded packages: 0 B

= ADDED IMAGES =
Image: Workstation live aarch64
Path: 
Workstation/aarch64/iso/Fedora-Workstation-Live-aarch64-39-20230908.n.0.iso

= DROPPED IMAGES =
Image: LXQt live aarch64
Path: Spins/aarch64/iso/Fedora-LXQt-Live-aarch64-39-20230907.n.0.iso

= ADDED PACKAGES =

= DROPPED PACKAGES =

= UPGRADED PACKAGES =
Package:  im-chooser-1.7.4-8.fc39
Old package:  im-chooser-1.7.4-7.fc39
Summary:  Desktop Input Method configuration tool
RPMs: im-chooser im-chooser-common im-chooser-xfce
Size: 1.32 MiB
Size change:  -505 B
Changelog:
  * Wed Sep 06 2023 Akira TAGOH  - 1.7.4-8
  - Rebuilt against the latest imsettings.
Resolves: rhbz#2237495


Package:  imsettings-1.8.5-1.fc39
Old package:  imsettings-1.8.4-1.fc39
Summary:  Delivery framework for general Input Method configuration
RPMs: imsettings imsettings-cinnamon imsettings-devel 
imsettings-gsettings imsettings-libs imsettings-lxde imsettings-mate 
imsettings-plasma imsettings-qt imsettings-xfce imsettings-xim
Size: 5.22 MiB
Size change:  21.73 KiB
Changelog:
  * Wed Sep 06 2023 Akira TAGOH  - 1.8.5-1
  - New upstream release.
  - Fix an issue that IMSETTINGS_IGNORE_SESSION doesn't work properly.
Resolves: rhbz#2237637


Package:  libblockdev-3.0.2-3.fc39
Old package:  libblockdev-3.0.2-2.fc39
Summary:  A library for low-level manipulation with block devices
RPMs: libblockdev libblockdev-btrfs libblockdev-btrfs-devel 
libblockdev-crypto libblockdev-crypto-devel libblockdev-devel libblockdev-dm 
libblockdev-dm-devel libblockdev-fs libblockdev-fs-devel libblockdev-loop 
libblockdev-loop-devel libblockdev-lvm libblockdev-lvm-dbus 
libblockdev-lvm-dbus-devel libblockdev-lvm-devel libblockdev-mdraid 
libblockdev-mdraid-devel libblockdev-mpath libblockdev-mpath-devel 
libblockdev-nvdimm libblockdev-nvdimm-devel libblockdev-nvme 
libblockdev-nvme-devel libblockdev-part libblockdev-part-devel 
libblockdev-plugins-all libblockdev-s390 libblockdev-s390-devel 
libblockdev-swap libblockdev-swap-devel libblockdev-tools libblockdev-utils 
libblockdev-utils-devel python3-blockdev
Size: 4.17 MiB
Size change:  15.48 KiB
Changelog:
  * Wed Sep 06 2023 Vojtech Trefny  - 3.0.2-3
  - Obsolete vdo plugin packages (#2237477)


Package:  netconsd-0.3-1.fc39
Old package:  netconsd-0.2-2.fc39
Summary:  The Netconsole Daemon
RPMs: netconsd
Size: 565.36 KiB
Size change:  900 B
Changelog:
  * Wed Sep 06 2023 Michel Lind  - 0.3-1
  - Update to 0.3
  - Prevent invalid fragment values from leading to a buffer overrun
  - Use SPDX license identifier


Package:  offlineimap-8.0.0-10.fc39
Old package:  offlineimap-8.0.0-7.fc38
Summary:  Powerful IMAP/Maildir synchronization and reader support
RPMs: offlineimap
Size: 395.85 KiB
Size change:  -10.55 KiB
Changelog:
  * Thu Jun 15 2023 Python Maint  - 8.0.0-8
  - Rebuilt for Python 3.12

  * Thu Jul 20 2023 Fedora Release Engineering  - 
8.0.0-9
  - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_39_Mass_Rebuild

  * Wed Sep 06 2023 sguel...@teelcom-bretagne.eu - 8.0.0-10
  - Backport py3.12 compatibility patch, see rhbz#2220052


Package:  python-iowait-0.2-25.fc39
Old package:  python-iowait-0.2-22.fc38
Summary:  Platform-independent module for I/O completion events
RPMs: python3-iowait
Size: 23.21 KiB
Size change:  107 B
Changelog:
  * Tue Jun 13 2023 Python Maint  - 0.2-23
  - Rebuilt for Python 3.12

  * Fri Jul 21 2023 Fedora Release Engineering  - 
0.2-24
  - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_39_Mass_Rebuild

  * Mon Sep 04 2023 Christiano Anderson  - 0.2-25
  - Added python3-setuptools dependency, closes RHBZ2155014


Package:  python-sciunit-0.2.7-10.fc39
Old package:  python-sciunit-0.2.7-6.fc38
Summary:  Framework for test-driven validation of scientific models
RPMs: python3-sciunit
Size: 209.64 KiB
Size change:  -7.44 KiB
Changelog:
  * Wed May 24 2023 Benjamin A. Beasley  - 0.2.7-7
  - Remove some obsolete details from the spec file
  - Don???t use a macro form of ???tar???
  - No need to manually enable the Python run-time dependency generator
  - No need to remove upstream egg-info when using pyproject-rpm-macros

  * Wed May 24 2023 Benjamin A. Beasley  - 0.2.7-8
  - Document cypy bundling

  * Fri Jul 21 2023 Fedora Release Engineering  - 
0.2.7-9
  - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_39_Mass_Rebuild

  * Tue Sep 05 2023 Sandro  - 0.2.7-10
  - Get rid

Review swap: objfw

2023-09-08 Thread Jonathan Schleifer


Hi!

Would someone be willing to review swap 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2235768 with me?


Thanks!

--
Jonathan
___
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: Bootstrapping package with circular dependencies in koji

2023-09-08 Thread Vít Ondruch

Getting back to this thread, because the good news is that things have 
improved and there is now easier way to bootstrap packages in Koji using 
side-tags:


https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Package_Update_Guide/#_using_macros_in_a_side_tag

and `%_with_bootstrap` macro.

https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Policy_for_buildroot_macros/

Enjoy.


Vít


Dne 24. 01. 23 v 19:38 Jaroslav Skarvada napsal(a):

Hi,

I need to bootstrap package which has bootstrap support written
according to the [1]. I am able to bootstrap it locally (rpmbuild,
mock, ...) with the "--with bootstrap" or "-D '_with_bootstrap 1'". Is
there support for it in koji? E.g. something like:
koji build SIDE-TAG PACKAGE --bootstrap? Or do I have to manually do:
1. patch:
- %bcond_with bootstrap
+ %bcond_without bootstrap
2. koji build SIDE-TAG SCM
3. update the circular dep
4. unpatch:
- %bcond_without bootstrap
+ %bcond_with bootstrap
5. release bump
6. koji build SIDE-TAG SCM

Or is there some better way?

thanks & regards

Jaroslav

[1] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#bootstrapping
___
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


OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
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

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20230908.n.0 changes

2023-09-08 Thread Fedora Rawhide Report

OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20230907.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20230908.n.0

= SUMMARY =
Added images:6
Dropped images:  1
Added packages:  6
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages:   210
Downgraded packages: 0

Size of added packages:  22.29 MiB
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Size of upgraded packages:   2.23 GiB
Size of downgraded packages: 0 B

Size change of upgraded packages:   -16.48 MiB
Size change of downgraded packages: 0 B

= ADDED IMAGES =
Image: Silverblue dvd-ostree aarch64
Path: 
Silverblue/aarch64/iso/Fedora-Silverblue-ostree-aarch64-Rawhide-20230908.n.0.iso
Image: Kinoite dvd-ostree x86_64
Path: Kinoite/x86_64/iso/Fedora-Kinoite-ostree-x86_64-Rawhide-20230908.n.0.iso
Image: Kinoite dvd-ostree ppc64le
Path: Kinoite/ppc64le/iso/Fedora-Kinoite-ostree-ppc64le-Rawhide-20230908.n.0.iso
Image: Silverblue dvd-ostree x86_64
Path: 
Silverblue/x86_64/iso/Fedora-Silverblue-ostree-x86_64-Rawhide-20230908.n.0.iso
Image: Workstation live aarch64
Path: 
Workstation/aarch64/iso/Fedora-Workstation-Live-aarch64-Rawhide-20230908.n.0.iso
Image: Silverblue dvd-ostree ppc64le
Path: 
Silverblue/ppc64le/iso/Fedora-Silverblue-ostree-ppc64le-Rawhide-20230908.n.0.iso

= DROPPED IMAGES =
Image: i3 live aarch64
Path: Spins/aarch64/iso/Fedora-i3-Live-aarch64-Rawhide-20230907.n.0.iso

= ADDED PACKAGES =
Package: caffe-1.0^git20200212.9b89154-6.fc40
Summary: A deep learning framework
RPMs:caffe caffe-devel
Size:20.97 MiB

Package: forge-srpm-macros-0.1.0-1.fc40
Summary: Macros to simplify packaging of forge-hosted projects
RPMs:forge-srpm-macros
Size:18.27 KiB

Package: python-autocommand-2.2.2-1.fc40
Summary: Generate argparse parsers from function signatures
RPMs:python3-autocommand
Size:35.75 KiB

Package: python-brukerapi-0.1.9-2.fc40
Summary: Python package providing I/O interface for Bruker data sets
RPMs:python-brukerapi-doc python3-brukerapi
Size:368.08 KiB

Package: python-jaraco-context-4.3.0-1.fc40
Summary: Context managers by jaraco
RPMs:python3-jaraco-context
Size:17.44 KiB

Package: uxplay-1.66-1.fc40
Summary: AirPlay Unix mirroring server
RPMs:uxplay
Size:919.46 KiB


= DROPPED PACKAGES =

= UPGRADED PACKAGES =
Package:  adwaita-icon-theme-45~rc-1.fc40
Old package:  adwaita-icon-theme-45~beta-2.fc39
Summary:  Adwaita icon theme
RPMs: adwaita-cursor-theme adwaita-icon-theme adwaita-icon-theme-devel
Size: 1.07 MiB
Size change:  -1.26 MiB
Changelog:
  * Tue Sep 05 2023 Kalev Lember  - 45~rc-1
  - Update to 45.rc


Package:  anaconda-40.3-1.fc40
Old package:  anaconda-40.2-1.fc40
Summary:  Graphical system installer
RPMs: anaconda anaconda-core anaconda-dracut anaconda-gui 
anaconda-install-env-deps anaconda-install-img-deps anaconda-live anaconda-tui 
anaconda-webui anaconda-widgets anaconda-widgets-devel
Size: 23.82 MiB
Size change:  92.33 KiB
Changelog:
  * Thu Sep 07 2023 Packit  - 40.3-1
  - Use Firefox environment variables for styling (mkolman)
  - make: Pass interactive container arguments only for run (vslavik)
  - make: Add container run options (vslavik)
  - make: Expand the ambiguous container option -t (vslavik)
  - make: One option per line for all container calls (vslavik)
  - Remove old product.py (vslavik)
  - GUI: Move helper for window header distribution text (vslavik)
  - Convert usages of product to core.product (vslavik)
  - Stop using old product in constants (vslavik)
  - Replace all uses of product values via constants (vslavik)
  - Make old product just a wrapper of the new one (vslavik)
  - Add a new product.py (vslavik)
  - Copy /var/lib/gnome-initial-setup/state to installed system (rstrode)
  - webui: add pixel test for modify storage test (rvykydal)
  - webui: use Blivet-gui name instead of Blivet (rvykydal)
  - webui: add tests for modify storage dialogs (rvykydal)
  - webui: if blivet-gui exits earlier then the delay update the dialog
(rvykydal)
  - webui: do not show rescan dialog in case of critical error (rvykydal)
  - webui: make blivet-gui start failure a Critical Error (rvykydal)
  - webui: catch errors when spawning blivet-gui (rvykydal)
  - webui: add dialogs around launching blivet-gui (rvykydal)
  - webui: show error name in Critical Error dialog only if it exists (rvykydal)
  - core: Look up live user from PKEXEC_UID (rstrode)
  - Revert the ESP maximum size back to 600MiB (richard)
  - Docs: added to 'Common bugs and issues' workaround for setup on 4K block
devices (k0ste)


Package:  angband-4.2.5-1.fc40
Old package:  angband-4.2.4-6.fc39
Summary:  Popular roguelike role playing game
RPMs: angband angband-data angband-doc
Size: 6.12 MiB
Size change:  796.21 KiB
Changelog:
  * Thu Sep 07 2023 Diego Herrera  4.2.5-1
  - Updated version to 4.2.5
  - Upstreamed assets
  - Enable x11 support


Package:  archlinux-keyring-20230821-2.fc40
Old package:  archlinux-keyring-20230821-1

Re: libtommath minor soname bump

2023-09-08 Thread Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski

On Thursday, 07 September 2023 at 22:40, František Šumšal wrote:
[...]
> Both abipkgdiff and rpmsodiff seem to be happy, i.e. there were no
> added/changed/removed symbols between 1.2.0 and 1.2.1, so the bump
> should be safe.

Excellent, this means the version update should be transparent to any
package depending on the library. You do not have to announce such
updates here.

Regards,
Dominik
-- 
Fedora   https://fedoraproject.org
There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and
oppression to develop psychic muscles.
-- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan
___
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 2237914] perl-Sys-Virt-9.7.0 is available