On 04/20/2016 08:12 AM, Dave Love wrote:
I have a package to submit that has an suid binary. The packaging
guidelines say in that case you must
%global _hardened_build 1
and it turns on PIE/PIC. However, it doesn't do so on el6, at least.
Should flags be added by hand and, if so, exactly whic
On Wed, 2016-04-20 at 12:49 +, Fedora compose checker wrote:
> Missing expected images:
>
> Kde live i386
> Workstation live i386
> Kde live x86_64
> Cloud_base raw-xz i386
> Kde raw-xz armhfp
> Workstation live x86_64
>
> Failed openQA tests: 37/54 (x86_64), 15/15 (i386)
After successful in
There has definitely been an API-change… You should contact upstream
about that and ask them to bump so-name… Two functions take different
count of parameters now and unsigned int != size_t, those are completely
different types, although both are numeric integers…
Am 20.04.2016 um 22:39 sch
Hi,
I'm orphaning thttpd since it didn't receive any updates for years,
plus upstream does not accept patches.
Other distros already switched for some forks [1].
[1]
https://blogs.gentoo.org/blueness/2014/10/03/sthttpd-a-very-tiny-and-very-fast-http-server-with-a-mature-codebase/
Best regards.
We have temporary problems with ppc builders so I stopped ppc builds for
now.
This does not affect i386 and x86_64 queue.
I anticipate that tomorrow I may start it again.
Mirek Suchy
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedorapr
I plan to build the latest version of yaml-cpp, 0.5.3, for rawhide soon.
There's no announced soversion bump but abi-compliance-checker doesn't
think they're compatible[1] so probably best to play it safe and rebuild
dependencies.
# dnf repoquery --alldeps --whatrequires "libyaml-cpp.so.0.5()(64bi
On 20/04/16 09:51 -0400, Przemek Klosowski wrote:
On 04/19/2016 11:55 PM, Jerry James wrote:
On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 8:50 PM, Richard Shaw wrote:
I'm pretty much stumped on a problem where freecad (really python-pivy)
segfaults on F24 but seems to run fine on F23 and I can't find any
substanti
On 04/20/2016 12:52 PM, Pete Travis wrote:
> This might also be interesting for Docs people.
>
How can we have these sorts of conversations without the multi-list problem?
There are several discussions that ought to involve marketing, docs,
design, etc. We definitely need to remove barriers to co
This might also be interesting for Docs people.
--Pete
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
The current supervisor package also lost its ZPLv2.1 license part.
On Wed, 2016-04-20 at 17:51 +0200, Nils Philippsen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'll push an update with python-meld3 version 1.0.2 to Rawhide
> shortly,
> its license changed from ZPLv2.1 to BSD.
>
> Nils
--
Nils Philippsen "Those who
Hi,
I'll push an update with python-meld3 version 1.0.2 to Rawhide shortly,
its license changed from ZPLv2.1 to BSD.
Nils
--
Nils Philippsen "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase
Red Hat a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty
n...@redhat.com
No most likely the suid file should be fine with SELInux. Only a
confined user would
be prevented from using it.
On 04/20/2016 07:12 AM, Dave Love wrote:
I have a package to submit that has an suid binary. The packaging
guidelines say in that case you must
%global _hardened_build 1
and it t
I have a package to submit that has an suid binary. The packaging
guidelines say in that case you must
%global _hardened_build 1
and it turns on PIE/PIC. However, it doesn't do so on el6, at least.
Should flags be added by hand and, if so, exactly which?
Also, does an suid binary require somet
OLD: Fedora-24-20160419.n.1
NEW: Fedora-24-20160420.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:10
Dropped images: 4
Added packages: 6
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 49
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 16.92 MiB
Size of dropped packages:0.00 B
Size
Missing expected images:
Cloud_base raw-xz i386
Failed openQA tests: 7/64 (x86_64), 17/17 (i386)
ID: 13698 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso install_default_upload
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/13698
ID: 13699 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso install_default@uefi
URL: https://openqa.f
On 04/19/2016 11:55 PM, Jerry James wrote:
On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 8:50 PM, Richard Shaw wrote:
I'm pretty much stumped on a problem where freecad (really python-pivy)
segfaults on F24 but seems to run fine on F23 and I can't find any
substantive difference between any of the packages.
Strange
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 12:42:26AM +0200, František Zatloukal wrote:
> Hi,
> Phoronix recently release article[1] about Intel's Clear Linux with some
> cool graphs showing nice performance gain compared to Xubuntu.
>
> I didn't have time to dig in and look how it's performing against Fedora,
> but
Adding the Fedora Marketing team to this discussion.
- Original Message -
> From: "Adam Samalik"
> To: developer-por...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Cc: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org, websi...@lists.fedoraproject.org, "Pavel
> Valena"
> Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2016 7:39:11 AM
> Subject
2016-04-20 14:48 GMT+02:00 Miroslav Suchý :
> Dne 18.4.2016 v 22:01 Robert Mayr napsal(a):
> > 'm trying to build a package in COPR, the source RPM is rather large
> (500MB), but it always worked fine also with bigger
> > source files. I supposed I had a bad URL an uploaded the SRPM twice, but
> t
On Sunday, February 21, 2016 9:28:08 AM WEST Orion Poplawski wrote:
> I'll be updating gsl to 2.1 in Rawhide on Monday and rebuilding
> dependent packages. See
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1276893 for some tracking
> info. A fair amount of work was done to get everything ready
Missing expected images:
Kde live i386
Workstation live i386
Kde live x86_64
Cloud_base raw-xz i386
Kde raw-xz armhfp
Workstation live x86_64
Failed openQA tests: 37/54 (x86_64), 15/15 (i386)
ID: 13627 Test: x86_64 Everything-boot-iso install_default
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/t
Dne 18.4.2016 v 22:01 Robert Mayr napsal(a):
> 'm trying to build a package in COPR, the source RPM is rather large (500MB),
> but it always worked fine also with bigger
> source files. I supposed I had a bad URL an uploaded the SRPM twice, but the
> result is the same.
I added there more space.
90% of the time, 32bit tests are failing all the time. It looks like nobody
cares. Let's ditch them and we will save some CPU time.
Alternatively, make all 32bit tests depend on `install_default` test so they
will not get scheduled if `install_default` fails.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedo
Hello Everyone,
we have prepared a new release of Fedora Developer Portal, and we would
like to hear your feedback before pushing it into production. If everything
goes fine, we would like to make the release on Monday, April 25th.
This email is the first of its kind. I would like to send it ever
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 5:02 AM, Matthew Miller
wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 12:42:26AM +0200, František Zatloukal wrote:
>> I think i'll be interesting to look into it and find out if Fedora can't
>> tweak compiler settings (eg use LTO for critical things like Mesa, Kernel,
>> ...). I think i
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20160419.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20160420.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:2
Dropped images: 2
Added packages: 4
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 165
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 6.74 MiB
Size of dropped packages
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 12:42:26AM +0200, František Zatloukal wrote:
> I think i'll be interesting to look into it and find out if Fedora can't
> tweak compiler settings (eg use LTO for critical things like Mesa, Kernel,
> ...). I think it could be interesting fo Fedora users to have this enabled
>
On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 02:26:27PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > Isn't bugzappers officially defunct? It does seem like a reasonable
> > enough policy, for whatever that's worth.
>
> Yeah, the group is. We can have an exciting debate about whether we
> consider that to mean the bug status work
28 matches
Mail list logo
