[Test-Announce] 2017-03-20 @ 1600 UTC - Blocker Review Meeting

# F26 Blocker Review meeting # Date: 2017-03-20 # Time: 16:00 UTC # Location: #fedora-blocker-review on irc.freenode.net Greetings testers! Last week we determined that Alpha wasn't ready to ship, so we've had more time to work on and look for blockers. Currently we have 1 proposed blocker for

Re: Provenpackagers dealing with -Werror=format-security issues

On 19 March 2017 at 02:46, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > Will try to take care of those few but it is possible that it is few more > possible ways to lower compile time warnings verbosity level. > Started cleaning parted.spec and found method *much* more often used.

eseyman pushed to perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-Authentication (master). "Update to 0.21"

From 0108baa0e56559f9fa9bf43a26ac8bd0430e9e15 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Emmanuel Seyman Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2017 04:22:54 +0100 Subject: Update to 0.21 --- .gitignore | 1 + ...thentication-0.20-Silent-various-warnings.patch | 84

eseyman uploaded CGI-Application-Plugin-Authentication-0.21.tar.gz for perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-Authentication

719e70bdff70ecb9e404cb4a14318c75eab900c11e861c290b1bcf889de431bdbc98dcf44790fc5631b65ac7800d29a0c3df729bd0760aa35ffcc976209dcd09 CGI-Application-Plugin-Authentication-0.21.tar.gz

Re: Provenpackagers dealing with -Werror=format-security issues

BTW compilation warnings .. [tkloczko@domek SPECS.fedora]$ grep -- --disable-gcc-warnings *mingw-libtasn1.spec:%mingw_configure --disable-static *--disable-gcc-warnings*parted.spec:%configure --enable-selinux --disable-static *--disable-gcc-warnings* [tkloczko@domek SPECS.fedora]$ grep --

Re: uClibc-ng (was Re: Static libraries in Fedora distribution)

On 18 March 2017 at 22:24, Xose Vazquez Perez wrote: > You should consider switching to uClibc-ng [1]. > uClibc project is frozen, latest release [2] was done five years ago and > last > git commit [3] nearly two. > Than you for putting one more useful pebble in the my

Re: Static libraries in Fedora distribution (Was: Re: [Help Wanted] PPC64LE build for thrift)

On 18 March 2017 at 22:26, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > I read through the whole thread and I still don't understand why > packaging glibc-static in Fedora is not a good thing. > I've already described this multiple times trying to use different descriptions/analogies about

Re: Static libraries in Fedora distribution (Was: Re: [Help Wanted] PPC64LE build for thrift)

On 18 March 2017 at 06:21, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: [..] > > So here is kind contradiction because my past experience that such > binaries > > are used so long (+6 years) that it causes silent issues with conflicts > on > > kernel<->user space and sooner or later initial

[EPEL-devel] Fedora EPEL 5 updates-testing report

The following Fedora EPEL 5 Security updates need testing: Age URL 860 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2014-3849 sblim-sfcb-1.3.8-2.el5 503 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-edbea40516 mcollective-2.8.4-1.el5 475

[EPEL-devel] Fedora EPEL 7 updates-testing report

The following Fedora EPEL 7 Security updates need testing: Age URL 741 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-1087 dokuwiki-0-0.24.20140929c.el7 503 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-dac7ed832f mcollective-2.8.4-1.el7 205

[EPEL-devel] Fedora EPEL 6 updates-testing report

The following Fedora EPEL 6 Security updates need testing: Age URL 619 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-7031 python-virtualenv-12.0.7-1.el6 613 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-7168 rubygem-crack-0.3.2-2.el6 503

Provenpackagers dealing with -Werror=format-security issues

There was an issue[1] with GCC7 during the mass-rebuild. Despite the Fedora-wide setting of -Werror=format-security, GCC did not process its command-line properly and an unknown number of packages were built without this flag appropriately set. As a result, all of those packages built successfully

[Bug 1433635] New: perl-BibTeX-Parser-1.00 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1433635 Bug ID: 1433635 Summary: perl-BibTeX-Parser-1.00 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: perl-BibTeX-Parser Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged Assignee:

Provenpackagers dealing with -Werror=format-security issues

There was an issue[1] with GCC7 during the mass-rebuild. Despite the Fedora-wide setting of -Werror=format-security, GCC did not process its command-line properly and an unknown number of packages were built without this flag appropriately set. As a result, all of those packages built successfully

[EPEL-devel] Orphaned Packages in epel7 (2017-03-19)

The following packages are orphaned and will be retired when they are orphaned for six weeks, unless someone adopts them. If you know for sure that the package should be retired, please do so now with a proper reason: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_remove_a_package_at_end_of_life Note: If

[EPEL-devel] Orphaned Packages in epel5 (2017-03-19)

The following packages are orphaned and will be retired when they are orphaned for six weeks, unless someone adopts them. If you know for sure that the package should be retired, please do so now with a proper reason: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_remove_a_package_at_end_of_life Note: If

[EPEL-devel] Orphaned Packages in epel6 (2017-03-19)

The following packages are orphaned and will be retired when they are orphaned for six weeks, unless someone adopts them. If you know for sure that the package should be retired, please do so now with a proper reason: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_remove_a_package_at_end_of_life Note: If

Orphaned Packages in epel5 (2017-03-19)

The following packages are orphaned and will be retired when they are orphaned for six weeks, unless someone adopts them. If you know for sure that the package should be retired, please do so now with a proper reason: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_remove_a_package_at_end_of_life Note: If

Orphaned Packages in epel7 (2017-03-19)

The following packages are orphaned and will be retired when they are orphaned for six weeks, unless someone adopts them. If you know for sure that the package should be retired, please do so now with a proper reason: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_remove_a_package_at_end_of_life Note: If

Orphaned Packages in epel6 (2017-03-19)

The following packages are orphaned and will be retired when they are orphaned for six weeks, unless someone adopts them. If you know for sure that the package should be retired, please do so now with a proper reason: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_remove_a_package_at_end_of_life Note: If

Orphaned Packages in branched (2017-03-19)

The following packages are orphaned and will be retired when they are orphaned for six weeks, unless someone adopts them. If you know for sure that the package should be retired, please do so now with a proper reason: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_remove_a_package_at_end_of_life Note: If

Orphaned Packages in rawhide (2017-03-19)

The following packages are orphaned and will be retired when they are orphaned for six weeks, unless someone adopts them. If you know for sure that the package should be retired, please do so now with a proper reason: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_remove_a_package_at_end_of_life Note: If

Re: Fonts packaging Help wanted

On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 11:29:26AM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > Greetings. > > I thought I would toss this out in case anyone was looking for things to > package up. I can help with that. > https://github.com/googlei18n/fontmake - a python based font compiler. > Here are the dependencies

Re: Static libraries in Fedora distribution (Was: Re: [Help Wanted] PPC64LE build for thrift)

On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 10:25:38PM +, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > On 18 March 2017 at 19:58, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > > Although I'm nit-picking, this isn't entirely true. > > > > OCaml doesn't statically link C code, as you can see from: > > > > $ ldd

Re: Static libraries in Fedora distribution (Was: Re: [Help Wanted] PPC64LE build for thrift)

On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 10:21:06PM +, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > On 18 March 2017 at 21:40, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > > > Did you try to link it against uClibc? > > > > Yes, supermin supports several alternate libc. > > > So it is -1 from critical glibc-static using

Re: Static libraries in Fedora distribution (Was: Re: [Help Wanted] PPC64LE build for thrift)

On 18 March 2017 at 19:58, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > Although I'm nit-picking, this isn't entirely true. > > OCaml doesn't statically link C code, as you can see from: > > $ ldd /usr/bin/virt-builder > [..] So am I right that it looks like Ocaml can be removed as well from

uClibc-ng (was Re: Static libraries in Fedora distribution)

On 03/18/2017 10:11 PM, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > Did you try to link it against uClibc? > If t is about executable size depends which one libc functions linking with > uClibc should give you waay smaller binaries. > Please just try :) > *Install please uClibc-devel package and put

Re: Static libraries in Fedora distribution (Was: Re: [Help Wanted] PPC64LE build for thrift)

On 18 March 2017 at 21:40, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > Did you try to link it against uClibc? > > Yes, supermin supports several alternate libc. So it is -1 from critical glibc-static using projects :) kloczek -- Tomasz Kłoczko | LinkedIn: *http://lnkd.in/FXPWxH

Re: Static libraries in Fedora distribution (Was: Re: [Help Wanted] PPC64LE build for thrift)

On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 09:11:56PM +, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > On 18 March 2017 at 20:01, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > > It would break supermin which compiles a tiny statically linked init. > > > > Actually as of today we are using dietlibc instead of glibc-static on > >

Re: Static libraries in Fedora distribution (Was: Re: [Help Wanted] PPC64LE build for thrift)

On 18 March 2017 at 20:01, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > It would break supermin which compiles a tiny statically linked init. > > Actually as of today we are using dietlibc instead of glibc-static on > every architecture that Fedora supports resulting in massive savings > in

Re: Static libraries in Fedora distribution (Was: Re: [Help Wanted] PPC64LE build for thrift)

On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 09:56:50AM -0700, Josh Stone wrote: > This may still be a useful consideration for Fedora itself. Would we > alienate anyone if Fedora removed glibc-static? It would break supermin which compiles a tiny statically linked init. Actually as of today we are using dietlibc

[Bug 1432920] perl-Pod-Perldoc-3.28 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1432920 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA

Re: Static libraries in Fedora distribution (Was: Re: [Help Wanted] PPC64LE build for thrift)

On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 05:08:50PM +, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > There are entire non-C language toolchains in > Fedora that are based on static compilation - eg OCaml Although I'm nit-picking, this isn't entirely true. OCaml doesn't statically link C code, as you can see from: $ ldd

Fedora 26-20170318.n.0 compose check report

Missing expected images: Server dvd i386 Server boot i386 Failed openQA tests: 15/107 (x86_64), 1/2 (arm) New failures (same test did not fail in 26-20170317.n.0): ID: 66963 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso realmd_join_cockpit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/66963 ID: 66964

Fedora Rawhide-20170318.n.0 compose check report

Missing expected images: Server dvd i386 Xfce raw-xz armhfp Server boot i386 Failed openQA tests: 26/107 (x86_64), 1/2 (arm) New failures (same test did not fail in Rawhide-20170317.n.0): ID: 66864 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso base_service_manipulation URL:

Fonts packaging Help wanted

Greetings. I thought I would toss this out in case anyone was looking for things to package up. Many fonts these days (the google ones at least) are shipping .glyphs files as source. The origin of this format seems to be a non free binary only macos app called "Glyphs". However, there's two

dfateyev requested branch epel7 for package perl-Devel-CheckLib

dfateyev requested branch epel7 for package perl-Devel-CheckLib https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/perl-Devel-CheckLib/ ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to

[Bug 1433597] perl-Test-TCP: bump version in epel7

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1433597 --- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Test-TCP-2.17-2.el7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 7. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2017-e9520547cc -- You are receiving this

[Bug 1433597] New: perl-Test-TCP: bump version in epel7

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1433597 Bug ID: 1433597 Summary: perl-Test-TCP: bump version in epel7 Product: Fedora EPEL Version: epel7 Component: perl-Test-TCP Severity: medium Assignee: de...@fateyev.com

dfateyev pushed to perl-Test-TCP (epel7). "perl-Test-TCP: 2.17 release"

From a96a70116489251ec96cd28caab84dbe978c6835 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Denis Fateyev Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2017 21:42:55 +0600 Subject: perl-Test-TCP: 2.17 release --- .gitignore | 2 +- perl-Test-TCP.spec | 38 +++--- sources

Broken dependencies: perl-Alien-ROOT

perl-Alien-ROOT has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree: On aarch64: perl-Alien-ROOT-5.34.36.1-4.fc26.noarch requires root-core On ppc64: perl-Alien-ROOT-5.34.36.1-4.fc26.noarch requires root-core On ppc64le: perl-Alien-ROOT-5.34.36.1-4.fc26.noarch requires root-core

Broken dependencies: perl-Alien-ROOT

perl-Alien-ROOT has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree: On ppc64: perl-Alien-ROOT-5.34.36.1-4.fc26.noarch requires root-core On ppc64le: perl-Alien-ROOT-5.34.36.1-4.fc26.noarch requires root-core Please resolve this as soon as possible.

Broken dependencies: perl-Gtk2-WebKit

perl-Gtk2-WebKit has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree: On x86_64: perl-Gtk2-WebKit-0.09-17.fc26.x86_64 requires libjavascriptcoregtk-1.0.so.0()(64bit) perl-Gtk2-WebKit-0.09-17.fc26.x86_64 requires libwebkitgtk-1.0.so.0()(64bit) On armhfp:

Re: Review Swaps: (mostly) very simple golang packages

> 6) golang-github-cznic-fileutil - File utility functions for Go (depends on > [2]) > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1431732 I will take this as well, would you take a look at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1394923 ? Thanks! -- Athos Ribeiro

Re: fedpkg push warning

Brad Bell wrote on 03/18/2017 07:25 PM: What does the waring below mean ? cppad>fedpkg push Total 0 (delta 0), reused 0 (delta 0) remote: /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/cffi/model.py:526: UserWarning: 'git_checkout_notify_t' has no values explicitly defined; next version will refuse to

pghmcfc pushed to perl-Test-Kwalitee (f26). "Update to 1.25 (..more)"

From fbae6ae9dee4c6486a5c4796146cb94f0ab67595 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Paul Howarth Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2017 08:40:50 + Subject: Update to 1.25 - New upstream release 1.25 - New test for compatibility in taint mode - Fix test to not rely on . in @INC ---

pghmcfc pushed to perl-Test-Kwalitee (master). "Update to 1.25 (..more)"

From fbae6ae9dee4c6486a5c4796146cb94f0ab67595 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Paul Howarth Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2017 08:40:50 + Subject: Update to 1.25 - New upstream release 1.25 - New test for compatibility in taint mode - Fix test to not rely on . in @INC ---

fedpkg push warning

What does the waring below mean ? cppad>fedpkg push Total 0 (delta 0), reused 0 (delta 0) remote: /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/cffi/model.py:526: UserWarning: 'git_checkout_notify_t' has no values explicitly defined; next version will refuse to guess which integer type it is meant to be

pghmcfc uploaded Test-Kwalitee-1.25.tar.gz for perl-Test-Kwalitee

89d1deea4045f373f15df0cdd2dec5131966bc4093035be5985af15122e9ae57e0c5c3edf8e95874f621dfc586956c348c300ddcf0943af7cb06e6cef2db9380 Test-Kwalitee-1.25.tar.gz

pghmcfc changed pghmcfc's 'approveacls' permission on perl-Error (el5) to 'Approved'

pghmcfc changed pghmcfc's 'approveacls' permission on perl-Error (el5) to 'Approved' https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/perl-Error/ ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to

pghmcfc changed pghmcfc's 'watchcommits' permission on perl-Error (el5) to 'Approved'

pghmcfc changed pghmcfc's 'watchcommits' permission on perl-Error (el5) to 'Approved' https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/perl-Error/ ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to

pghmcfc unorphaned perl-Error in el5

pghmcfc unorphaned perl-Error in el5 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/perl-Error/ ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

pghmcfc changed owner of perl-Error (el5) to 'pghmcfc'

pghmcfc changed owner of perl-Error (el5) to 'pghmcfc' https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/perl-Error/ ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to

pghmcfc changed pghmcfc's 'watchbugzilla' permission on perl-Error (el5) to 'Approved'

pghmcfc changed pghmcfc's 'watchbugzilla' permission on perl-Error (el5) to 'Approved' https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/perl-Error/ ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to

pghmcfc changed pghmcfc's 'commit' permission on perl-Error (el5) to 'Approved'

pghmcfc changed pghmcfc's 'commit' permission on perl-Error (el5) to 'Approved' https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/perl-Error/ ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to

Re: Static libraries in Fedora distribution (Was: Re: [Help Wanted] PPC64LE build for thrift)

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 6:58 AM, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > > On 16 March 2017 at 04:50, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: > [..] >> >> > And one more clarification: remove static libraries from glibc distro >> > packages does not blocks static linking. >> > It