Re: Official archiver of Fedora mailing lists shows e-mails with one day delay!

[Samuel Rakitničan]

> Sure Hyperkitty has drawbacks. Pipermail had drawbacks you complained
> about too. You seem to win either way because you can complain if we
> don't change stuff, and you can complain if we do change things. It is
> really extremely tiring trying to deal with your constant
> negativity... so I am going to stop doing so.

I am one happy user of Spinics too. I find HyperKitty interface slow and buggy. 
The only way I am using HyperKitty is to post a message, and every time I find 
some issue which I have to go to a report process first. For example right now 
HyperKitty is not displaying comments of this thread for me, so to reply to a 
message I have to copy it from spinics to reply to it.

https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/UQ42U25FVNEEVHLHQHYQ46W65USIM4PE/

Reported the issue here:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/6759

There is also an issue with quotation where is taking the reply header from a 
previous poster. I just delete that header.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Official archiver of Fedora mailing lists shows e-mails with one day delay!

[Farhad Mohammadi Majd]

I forgot to say, it was between the hours 15-16 of 2 march (in local time) that 
I sent two e-mails to mentioned threads, but nor my e-mails and others e-mails 
was visible until 3 march 13:30-14:00. so it is actually 22-23 hours delay.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Official archiver of Fedora mailing lists shows e-mails with one day delay!

[Farhad Mohammadi Majd]

On Sat, 2018-03-03 at 18:30 +0100, Timotheus Pokorra wrote:
> Hello Farhad,
> 
> > https://www.spinics.net/lists/fedora-devel/threads.html#241887
> > 
> > Please do something for this problem, it is really bad situation
> > you
> > are waiting for e-mails and check the web page several times but
> > you
> > don't see anything! |:
> > 
> 
> I don't think that spinics.net is the official archiver of the
> Fedora 
> mailing lists.
> 
> As far as I know, the official mailing list archive for the users
> list 
> is located here:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproje
> ct.org/2018/3/
> 
> and it seems to be uptodate as far as I can see...
> 

Hello

Here is a big mis-understanding!!, I know that official archiver is 
"https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/; not "spinics.net" my mean was 
exactly "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/; which uses HyperKitty and I 
used it to open some threads, I know that HyperKitty has some advantages over 
traditional archive software, but it seems there are some problems here, I also 
mentioned in the original massage that:

"I doubt to this situation and *searched internet* with *mentioned
titles* and *found mentioned links* "

I provided links from "spinics.net" just as reference comparison to 
"https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/;

I am sure the problem was not from my web browser (Firefox ESR 52) because I 
opened archives even with "Private Mode" which does not store and use cache.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

[Jerry James]

On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 10:09 AM, Igor Gnatenko
 wrote:
> If you fixed package(s), found false positive, found missing packages in list
> or anything else -- please let me know.

Fixed: abc, gnofract4d, libedit, lrslib.

The abe package does not actually need a C++ compiler for building on
Linux.  The configure script does check for a C++ compiler, for use
with XCode on OS X.  But only a C compiler is ever invoked on non-OS X
platforms.  This should be considered a false positive.

The flocq and gappalib-coq packages share build-related files with
several other projects by the same upstream.  These two packages
contain no C or C++ code, only coq proof files and a bit of ocaml
code.  One could argue that upstream should not bother checking for a
C++ compiler in projects that contain no C++ code, but I will bet that
upstream's response will be that it keeps things simpler to share
configure scripts, etc., across all of the projects he maintains.

I don't know why I am listed as being associated with the
perl-Text-Aspell package.  I haven't been a maintainer since 2011.  In
fact, I retired that package once

Regards,
-- 
Jerry James
http://www.jamezone.org/
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1551252] New: perl-SNMP-Info-3.49 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1551252

Bug ID: 1551252
   Summary: perl-SNMP-Info-3.49 is available
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: perl-SNMP-Info
  Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
  Assignee: w...@gouldfamily.org
  Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: ktdre...@ktdreyer.com,
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org,
w...@gouldfamily.org



Latest upstream release: 3.49
Current version/release in rawhide: 3.47-1.fc29
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/SNMP-Info/

Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a
stable branch: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy

More information about the service that created this bug can be found at:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/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/3318/

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: How do you bump fedora-repos-rawhide to f29?

[stan]

On Sat, 3 Mar 2018 23:24:07 + (UTC)
Philip Kovacs  wrote:

> Alright I got around the catch-22 of dnf needing the f29 keys in
> order to install the f29 keys with: dnf install --nogpgcheck
> fedora-gpg-keys-29-0.1
> 
> That cleared the road for me. 

The latest fedora-gpg-keys package for F28 has the key for F29 in it,
so if that is installed, it wouldn't be necessary to do the
--nogpgcheck.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: How do you bump fedora-repos-rawhide to f29?

[Philip Kovacs]

Alright I got around the catch-22 of dnf needing the f29 keys in order to 
install the f29 keys with:
dnf install --nogpgcheck fedora-gpg-keys-29-0.1

That cleared the road for me. 

On Saturday, March 3, 2018 5:41 PM, Philip Kovacs  wrote:
 

 Yeah I'm living in the chaos of going from f28 rawhide to f29 rawhide.    
Thanks for the tips. 

On Saturday, March 3, 2018 5:26 PM, stan  
wrote:
 

 On Sat, 3 Mar 2018 21:15:22 + (UTC)
Philip Kovacs  wrote:

> I would settle for knowledge of where the f29/rawhide gpg keys are
> hidden so I import them. The "To Rawhide" instructions below are
> outdated as they direct you to a page where the f29/rawhideare not
> presented. Upgrading Fedora using package manager - Fedora Project
> Wiki

You can go here
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1047417
and here
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1047416
and grab the packages for f29 and install them using
dnf -C update [list of packages]

In the past, I've had good luck enabling rawhide just by commenting out
the current repos, enabling the rawhide repos, and doing a dnf update
when I've been 1 version below rawhide.  I think things are somewhat
chaotic between rawhide and F28 because there have been so few composes
lately.  So the direct install of the files is probably better.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


   

   ___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: How do you bump fedora-repos-rawhide to f29?

[Philip Kovacs]

Yeah I'm living in the chaos of going from f28 rawhide to f29 rawhide.    
Thanks for the tips. 

On Saturday, March 3, 2018 5:26 PM, stan  
wrote:
 

 On Sat, 3 Mar 2018 21:15:22 + (UTC)
Philip Kovacs  wrote:

> I would settle for knowledge of where the f29/rawhide gpg keys are
> hidden so I import them. The "To Rawhide" instructions below are
> outdated as they direct you to a page where the f29/rawhideare not
> presented. Upgrading Fedora using package manager - Fedora Project
> Wiki

You can go here
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1047417
and here
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1047416
and grab the packages for f29 and install them using
dnf -C update [list of packages]

In the past, I've had good luck enabling rawhide just by commenting out
the current repos, enabling the rawhide repos, and doing a dnf update
when I've been 1 version below rawhide.  I think things are somewhat
chaotic between rawhide and F28 because there have been so few composes
lately.  So the direct install of the files is probably better.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


   ___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: How do you bump fedora-repos-rawhide to f29?

[stan]

On Sat, 3 Mar 2018 21:15:22 + (UTC)
Philip Kovacs  wrote:

> I would settle for knowledge of where the f29/rawhide gpg keys are
> hidden so I import them. The "To Rawhide" instructions below are
> outdated as they direct you to a page where the f29/rawhideare not
> presented. Upgrading Fedora using package manager - Fedora Project
> Wiki

You can go here
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1047417
and here
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1047416
and grab the packages for f29 and install them using
dnf -C update [list of packages]

In the past, I've had good luck enabling rawhide just by commenting out
the current repos, enabling the rawhide repos, and doing a dnf update
when I've been 1 version below rawhide.  I think things are somewhat
chaotic between rawhide and F28 because there have been so few composes
lately.  So the direct install of the files is probably better.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Broken dependencies: FreeSOLID

[Robert-André Mauchin]

On samedi 3 mars 2018 23:09:56 CET Martin Gansser wrote:
> Hi Kevin,
> i made the mentioned changes, i hope it's correct.
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/FreeSOLID/blob/master/f/FreeSOLID.spec
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Yes it should work now.

___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Broken dependencies: FreeSOLID

[Martin Gansser]

> No. Please just remove the "Requires: qhull" from the .pc file in 
> FreeSOLID-2.1.1-pkgconfig.patch entirely. There is already "@QHULL_LIBS@" in 
> "Libs:" that links to the qhull libraries.
> 
> You can add a "Requires: qhull-devel" to the RPM specfile (NOT the .pc file) 
> instead.
> 
> You cannot have a Requires on a non-pkgconfig library in the .pc file.
> 
> Kevin Kofler

Hi Kevin,
i made the mentioned changes, i hope it's correct.
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/FreeSOLID/blob/master/f/FreeSOLID.spec
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Official archiver of Fedora mailing lists shows e-mails with one day delay!

[Stephen John Smoogen]

On 3 March 2018 at 14:00, Kevin Kofler  wrote:
> Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>> That is correct. They are just one of many archivers on the internet
>> that get emails from Fedora and redisplay them. [This is one of the
>> reasons why people who ask us to remove their emails from the archives
>> are asking an impossible task.. there are hundreds of web archivers
>> and thousands of people who have copies of those emails and could put
>> them up.]
>
> The reason people are using spinics.net is because it still shows the
> messages in the familiar pipermail-like format. (Not sure whether they are
> using some version of pipermail or a custom software that just imitates the
> format.) HyperKitty has several drawbacks, e.g., it eats all indentation in
> the mails. It is sad that Fedora no longer provides pipermail archives.
>

Sure Hyperkitty has drawbacks. Pipermail had drawbacks you complained
about too. You seem to win either way because you can complain if we
don't change stuff, and you can complain if we do change things. It is
really extremely tiring trying to deal with your constant
negativity... so I am going to stop doing so.


> Kevin Kofler
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org



-- 
Stephen J Smoogen.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

How do you bump fedora-repos-rawhide to f29?

[Philip Kovacs]

I would settle for knowledge of where the f29/rawhide gpg keys are hidden so I 
import them.
The "To Rawhide" instructions below are outdated as they direct you to a page 
where the f29/rawhideare not presented.
Upgrading Fedora using package manager - Fedora Project Wiki

  
|  
|   |  
Upgrading Fedora using package manager - Fedora Project Wiki
   |  |

  |

 


___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Meeting March 5 (Monday)

[Silvia Sánchez]

Hello folks,

I'm out of luck in the last times...  I just realised I'm likely to be
offline at 16:00 this Monday as I'll be flying in the afternoon.  So
maybe I can attend later, or maybe not.
I'm sorry for the inconvenience. The storm has thrown everything into chaos.

Kind regards,
Silvia
FAS:  Lailah
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[EPEL-devel] Re: qt5 dependency problem

[Ken Taylor]

On 03/03/2018 01:20 PM, Christopher Brown wrote:


On 02/24/2018 02:15 PM, Sérgio Basto wrote:

On Sat, 2018-02-24 at 17:45 +, Christopher Brown wrote:

Hi,

In trying to install trojita, I got the following error:

$ sudo yum install trojita
Loaded plugins: langpacks
Resolving Dependencies
--> Running transaction check
---> Package trojita.x86_64 0:0.7-4.el7 will be installed
--> Processing Dependency: libQt5WebKitWidgets.so.5(Qt_5)(64bit) for
package: trojita-0.7-4.el7.x86_64
--> Processing Dependency: libKF5Gpgmepp-pthread.so.5()(64bit) for
package: trojita-0.7-4.el7.x86_64
--> Processing Dependency: libKF5QGpgme.so.5()(64bit) for package:
trojita-0.7-4.el7.x86_64
--> Processing Dependency: libQt5WebKit.so.5()(64bit) for package:
trojita-0.7-4.el7.x86_64
--> Processing Dependency: libQt5WebKitWidgets.so.5()(64bit) for
package: trojita-0.7-4.el7.x86_64
--> Processing Dependency: libmimetic.so.0()(64bit) for package:
trojita-0.7-4.el7.x86_64
--> Processing Dependency: libqt5keychain.so.1()(64bit) for package:
trojita-0.7-4.el7.x86_64
--> Running transaction check
---> Package kf5-gpgmepp.x86_64 0:16.04.3-1.el7 will be installed
---> Package mimetic.x86_64 0:0.9.8-6.el7 will be installed
---> Package qt5-qtwebkit.x86_64 0:5.6.2-1.el7 will be installed
--> Processing Dependency: qt5-qtbase(x86-64) = 5.6.2 for package:
qt5-qtwebkit-5.6.2-1.el7.x86_64
--> Processing Dependency: qt5-qtdeclarative(x86-64) = 5.6.2 for
package: qt5-qtwebkit-5.6.2-1.el7.x86_64
--> Processing Dependency: libQt5Positioning.so.5(Qt_5)(64bit) for
package: qt5-qtwebkit-5.6.2-1.el7.x86_64
--> Processing Dependency: libQt5Sensors.so.5(Qt_5)(64bit) for
package: qt5-qtwebkit-5.6.2-1.el7.x86_64
--> Processing Dependency: libQt5WebChannel.so.5(Qt_5)(64bit) for
package: qt5-qtwebkit-5.6.2-1.el7.x86_64
--> Processing Dependency: libQt5Positioning.so.5()(64bit) for
package: qt5-qtwebkit-5.6.2-1.el7.x86_64
--> Processing Dependency: libQt5Sensors.so.5()(64bit) for package:
qt5-qtwebkit-5.6.2-1.el7.x86_64
--> Processing Dependency: libQt5WebChannel.so.5()(64bit) for
package: qt5-qtwebkit-5.6.2-1.el7.x86_64
---> Package qtkeychain-qt5.x86_64 0:0.7.0-1.el7 will be installed
--> Processing Dependency: qtkeychain(x86-64) = 0.7.0-1.el7 for
package: qtkeychain-qt5-0.7.0-1.el7.x86_64
--> Running transaction check
---> Package qt5-qtlocation.x86_64 0:5.6.1-10.el7 will be installed
---> Package qt5-qtsensors.x86_64 0:5.6.1-10.el7 will be installed
---> Package qt5-qtwebchannel.x86_64 0:5.6.1-10.el7 will be installed
---> Package qt5-qtwebkit.x86_64 0:5.6.2-1.el7 will be installed
--> Processing Dependency: qt5-qtbase(x86-64) = 5.6.2 for package:
qt5-qtwebkit-5.6.2-1.el7.x86_64
--> Processing Dependency: qt5-qtdeclarative(x86-64) = 5.6.2 for
package: qt5-qtwebkit-5.6.2-1.el7.x86_64
---> Package qtkeychain.x86_64 0:0.7.0-1.el7 will be installed
--> Finished Dependency Resolution
Error: Package: qt5-qtwebkit-5.6.2-1.el7.x86_64 (epel)
    Requires: qt5-qtbase(x86-64) = 5.6.2
    Installed: qt5-qtbase-5.6.1-10.el7.x86_64 (@sl)
    qt5-qtbase(x86-64) = 5.6.1-10.el7
Error: Package: qt5-qtwebkit-5.6.2-1.el7.x86_64 (epel)
    Requires: qt5-qtdeclarative(x86-64) = 5.6.2
    Installed: qt5-qtdeclarative-5.6.1-10.el7.x86_64 (@sl)
    qt5-qtdeclarative(x86-64) = 5.6.1-10.el7
  You could try using --skip-broken to work around the problem
  You could try running: rpm -Va --nofiles --nodigest
$

...Any suggestions?


mock -r epel-7-x86_64-rpmfusion_free --install trojita

works fine here, it  installs  qt5-qtdeclarative-5.6.2-1.el7 and
  qt5-qtbase-5.6.2-1.el7 from base repo



Thanks for the reply. But I already use epel and nux, and when I 
install rpmfusion, I get many dependency errors reported for other 
packages. Is there another yum way (I mean, aside from downloading the 
individual packages and localinstall'ing them)?


Chris
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


Are you using yum-plugin-priorities? I have used that for all the time I 
have been using CentOS 5, 6 and 7.  I set priority=1 for the CentOS 
repos, 5 for epel and 10 for nux. Keeps dependency packages from 
tripping over one another.


Ken
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Unannounced soname bump (Rawhide): qpdf (libqpdf.so.18 -> libqpdf.so.21)

[Andrey Ponomarenko]

Added qpdf to the ABI tracker: https://abi-laboratory.pro/tracker/timeline/qpdf/

27.02.2018, 21:16, "Adam Williamson" :
> qpdf was updated from 7.1.1-4 to 8.0.0-1 in Rawhide on 2018-02-26.
> This update bumped the soname from libqpdf.so.18 to libqpdf.so.21 .
> This soname bump was not announced, as it is supposed to be, and
> dependent packages were not rebuilt.
>
> cups-filters depends on qpdf, so anything that includes cups-filters is
> now broken. This includes at least the Astronomy_KDE live image, per
> https://pagure.io/dusty/failed-composes/issue/24#comment-496381 .
>
> Once again, folks, *please* announce your soname bumps, and co-ordinate
> rebuilds. (In fact it looks like Zdenek is the maintainer of both
> packages and could have rebuilt cups-filters, but just forgot to).
>
> I will attempt a rebuild of cups-filters using provenpackager
> privileges.
> --
> Adam Williamson
> Fedora QA Community Monkey
> IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
> http://www.happyassassin.net
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Orphaning procedure for rubygem-review

[Antonio Trande]

Hi all.

This mail is part of the "orphaning" procedure for 'rubygem-review'
package [1].
Feel free to adopt it if interested.

[1] https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rubygem-review

-- 
---
Antonio Trande
Fedora Project
mailto 'sagitter at fedoraproject dot org'
GPG key: 0x5E212EE1D35568BE
GPG key server: https://keys.fedoraproject.org/



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: [Test-Announce] 2018-03-05 @ 16:00 UTC - Fedora QA Meeting

[Silvia Sánchez]

Hi everyone,

I've been talking with other people and apparently is quite common to
have issues with HP laptops.  F25 works but F27 doesn't, with an
extreme case of not booting at all.
In my case I suspect of Wayland, provided other desktops/spins did
work. But maybe I'm wrong or it's not the only one in fault. I can
provide hardware details in the meeting.

Regards,
Silvia
FAS: Lailah
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Official archiver of Fedora mailing lists shows e-mails with one day delay!

[Kevin Kofler]

Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> That is correct. They are just one of many archivers on the internet
> that get emails from Fedora and redisplay them. [This is one of the
> reasons why people who ask us to remove their emails from the archives
> are asking an impossible task.. there are hundreds of web archivers
> and thousands of people who have copies of those emails and could put
> them up.]

The reason people are using spinics.net is because it still shows the 
messages in the familiar pipermail-like format. (Not sure whether they are 
using some version of pipermail or a custom software that just imitates the 
format.) HyperKitty has several drawbacks, e.g., it eats all indentation in 
the mails. It is sad that Fedora no longer provides pipermail archives.

Kevin Kofler
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Broken dependencies: FreeSOLID

[Kevin Kofler]

Martin Gansser wrote:
> i changed now the line Requires: qhull to Requires: qhull-devel in patch
> FreeSOLID-2.1.1-pkgconfig.patch:
[snip]
> +Requires: qhull-devel
[snip]
> an then it requires the following packges, is this correct ?
[snip]
> pkgconfig(qhull-devel)

No. Please just remove the "Requires: qhull" from the .pc file in 
FreeSOLID-2.1.1-pkgconfig.patch entirely. There is already "@QHULL_LIBS@" in 
"Libs:" that links to the qhull libraries.

You can add a "Requires: qhull-devel" to the RPM specfile (NOT the .pc file) 
instead.

You cannot have a Requires on a non-pkgconfig library in the .pc file.

Kevin Kofler
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Appstream metadata compose failures

[Kevin Kofler]

PS:

I wrote:

> Richard Hughes wrote:
>> 64x64 is a very low bar indeed, compared to all of the other
>> platforms, e.g. Windows Store or the Apple AppStore.
> 
> All that's going to happen with such a requirement is that specfiles are
> going to run the icon through scale2x or hq2x if you're lucky, through a
> dumb ImageMagick convert resize if you're not.

… or in the worst case, they will just do nothing and AppStream will keep 
ignoring the application, which is sadly the current status quo for many 
packages.

Kevin Kofler
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Why size of repositories metadata is too high in Fedora?

[Kevin Kofler]

Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> data as well as the original repodata. In My Honest Opinion, this is
> not going away until the whole "let's keep this all in one database"
> approach is discarded and individual small metadata files for each
> RPM, which can be surveyed and updated individually, replace the
> repodata. That is much more like apt, and it's unlikely in the
> foreseeable feature.

This is essentially how the original yum 1 worked (it used RPM headers 
extracted into .hdr files), this was REALLY slow. It takes a lot of time to 
download many small files and to process them locally into something that 
can be reasonably queried. So I am sorry, but I don't see how that would be 
an improvement.

Kevin Kofler
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Frequently broken Rawhide/Branched composes

[Kevin Kofler]

Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> * It means things will likely be broken longer as there is less urgency
> to fix them quickly.

This means less stress for maintainers who are usually not working full time 
on Fedora.

I don't see why a broken dependency in some leaf application that happens to 
be included on a release-blocking Edition or Spin needs to block the whole 
Rawhide compose. Such breakage is normal in a development version of a 
distribution, it happens even in Debian sid/unstable that probably has more 
daily users than Rawhide.

> * Shipping things out means we can't easily untag or revert packages
> with using Epoch's much more commonly.

That is due to the "Rawhide can never go backwards" policy, which I still do 
not understand the point of, especially in the light of "distro-sync" having 
been supported by both the old yum and the new dnf for years.

We allow even updates-testing to go backwards, so why not Rawhide? I think 
the only place we should ever enforce upgrade paths in is stable releases. 
Rawhide can go backwards just fine. The fix is simply to use dnf distro-sync 
instead of dnf update. (Enforcing the upgrade path from stable releases to 
Rawhide may make sense to prepare for when Rawhide will eventually be 
branched into a release, but what is the point of enforcing the upgrade path 
from Rawhide at day d to Rawhide at day d+1? Rawhide users can just be 
taught to use distro-sync, and users of stable releases will never see this 
upgrade path "breakage".)

Red Hat Linux and early Fedora had worked fine for years without that 
policy, and Epoch was required less often back then.

So please let us just repeal that "Rawhide can never go backwards" policy.

> * It will mean we are not in fact always shipping alpha quality, we
> could be shipping anything.

Even if everything composes, that does not guarantee any level of quality 
when you actually try to boot the composes.

Kevin Kofler
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[EPEL-devel] Re: qt5 dependency problem

[Christopher Brown]

On 02/24/2018 02:15 PM, Sérgio Basto wrote:

On Sat, 2018-02-24 at 17:45 +, Christopher Brown wrote:

Hi,

In trying to install trojita, I got the following error:

$ sudo yum install trojita
Loaded plugins: langpacks
Resolving Dependencies
--> Running transaction check
---> Package trojita.x86_64 0:0.7-4.el7 will be installed
--> Processing Dependency: libQt5WebKitWidgets.so.5(Qt_5)(64bit) for
package: trojita-0.7-4.el7.x86_64
--> Processing Dependency: libKF5Gpgmepp-pthread.so.5()(64bit) for
package: trojita-0.7-4.el7.x86_64
--> Processing Dependency: libKF5QGpgme.so.5()(64bit) for package:
trojita-0.7-4.el7.x86_64
--> Processing Dependency: libQt5WebKit.so.5()(64bit) for package:
trojita-0.7-4.el7.x86_64
--> Processing Dependency: libQt5WebKitWidgets.so.5()(64bit) for
package: trojita-0.7-4.el7.x86_64
--> Processing Dependency: libmimetic.so.0()(64bit) for package:
trojita-0.7-4.el7.x86_64
--> Processing Dependency: libqt5keychain.so.1()(64bit) for package:
trojita-0.7-4.el7.x86_64
--> Running transaction check
---> Package kf5-gpgmepp.x86_64 0:16.04.3-1.el7 will be installed
---> Package mimetic.x86_64 0:0.9.8-6.el7 will be installed
---> Package qt5-qtwebkit.x86_64 0:5.6.2-1.el7 will be installed
--> Processing Dependency: qt5-qtbase(x86-64) = 5.6.2 for package:
qt5-qtwebkit-5.6.2-1.el7.x86_64
--> Processing Dependency: qt5-qtdeclarative(x86-64) = 5.6.2 for
package: qt5-qtwebkit-5.6.2-1.el7.x86_64
--> Processing Dependency: libQt5Positioning.so.5(Qt_5)(64bit) for
package: qt5-qtwebkit-5.6.2-1.el7.x86_64
--> Processing Dependency: libQt5Sensors.so.5(Qt_5)(64bit) for
package: qt5-qtwebkit-5.6.2-1.el7.x86_64
--> Processing Dependency: libQt5WebChannel.so.5(Qt_5)(64bit) for
package: qt5-qtwebkit-5.6.2-1.el7.x86_64
--> Processing Dependency: libQt5Positioning.so.5()(64bit) for
package: qt5-qtwebkit-5.6.2-1.el7.x86_64
--> Processing Dependency: libQt5Sensors.so.5()(64bit) for package:
qt5-qtwebkit-5.6.2-1.el7.x86_64
--> Processing Dependency: libQt5WebChannel.so.5()(64bit) for
package: qt5-qtwebkit-5.6.2-1.el7.x86_64
---> Package qtkeychain-qt5.x86_64 0:0.7.0-1.el7 will be installed
--> Processing Dependency: qtkeychain(x86-64) = 0.7.0-1.el7 for
package: qtkeychain-qt5-0.7.0-1.el7.x86_64
--> Running transaction check
---> Package qt5-qtlocation.x86_64 0:5.6.1-10.el7 will be installed
---> Package qt5-qtsensors.x86_64 0:5.6.1-10.el7 will be installed
---> Package qt5-qtwebchannel.x86_64 0:5.6.1-10.el7 will be installed
---> Package qt5-qtwebkit.x86_64 0:5.6.2-1.el7 will be installed
--> Processing Dependency: qt5-qtbase(x86-64) = 5.6.2 for package:
qt5-qtwebkit-5.6.2-1.el7.x86_64
--> Processing Dependency: qt5-qtdeclarative(x86-64) = 5.6.2 for
package: qt5-qtwebkit-5.6.2-1.el7.x86_64
---> Package qtkeychain.x86_64 0:0.7.0-1.el7 will be installed
--> Finished Dependency Resolution
Error: Package: qt5-qtwebkit-5.6.2-1.el7.x86_64 (epel)
Requires: qt5-qtbase(x86-64) = 5.6.2
Installed: qt5-qtbase-5.6.1-10.el7.x86_64 (@sl)
qt5-qtbase(x86-64) = 5.6.1-10.el7
Error: Package: qt5-qtwebkit-5.6.2-1.el7.x86_64 (epel)
Requires: qt5-qtdeclarative(x86-64) = 5.6.2
Installed: qt5-qtdeclarative-5.6.1-10.el7.x86_64 (@sl)
qt5-qtdeclarative(x86-64) = 5.6.1-10.el7
  You could try using --skip-broken to work around the problem
  You could try running: rpm -Va --nofiles --nodigest
$

...Any suggestions?


mock -r epel-7-x86_64-rpmfusion_free --install trojita

works fine here, it  installs  qt5-qtdeclarative-5.6.2-1.el7  and
  qt5-qtbase-5.6.2-1.el7 from base repo



Thanks for the reply. But I already use epel and nux, and when I install 
rpmfusion, I get many dependency errors reported for other packages. Is 
there another yum way (I mean, aside from downloading the individual 
packages and localinstall'ing them)?


Chris
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: qarte - compilation fails

[Martin Gansser]

> Try this:
> 
> BuildRequires:  python3-devel
> # bytecompile with Python 3
> %global __python %{__python3}
> 
> in your specfile to force it to bytecompile your Python code with Python 3.
> 
> Kevin Kofler

Thanks for your feedback and solution, compiles/works fine now.
Martin
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Broken dependencies: FreeSOLID

[Martin Gansser]

> On samedi 3 mars 2018 17:30:30 CET Martin Gansser wrote:
> 
> Didn't you see the reply I made to your other thread?
> 
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/
> message/YIAXJASDD5J6NMJHTON5PK5CRB4FUDQA/
> 
> I explained how to get rid of that Requires.

Sorry i ignored your message.

i changed now the line Requires: qhull to Requires: qhull-devel in patch 
FreeSOLID-2.1.1-pkgconfig.patch:

--- /dev/null
+++ b/FreeSOLID.pc.in
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+prefix=@prefix@
+libdir=@libdir@
+includedir=@includedir@
+
+Name: FreeSolid
+Description: 3D collision detection C++ library
+Version: @VERSION@
+Requires: qhull-devel
+Libs: -L${libdir} -lFreeSOLID @QHULL_LIBS@
+Cflags: -I${includedir} -I/usr/include/FreeSOLID

an then it requires the following packges, is this correct ?
$ rpm -q --requires -p FreeSOLID-devel-2.1.1-29.fc27.x86_64.rpm 
/bin/sh
/bin/sh
/bin/sh
/usr/bin/pkg-config
FreeSOLID(x86-64) = 2.1.1-29.fc27
libFreeSOLID.so.0()(64bit)
pkgconfig
pkgconfig(qhull-devel)
rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1
rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Official archiver of Fedora mailing lists shows e-mails with one day delay!

[Stephen John Smoogen]

On 3 March 2018 at 12:30, Timotheus Pokorra
 wrote:
> Hello Farhad,
>
>> https://www.spinics.net/lists/fedora-devel/threads.html#241887
>>
>> Please do something for this problem, it is really bad situation you
>> are waiting for e-mails and check the web page several times but you
>> don't see anything! |:
>>
>
> I don't think that spinics.net is the official archiver of the Fedora
> mailing lists.
>
> As far as I know, the official mailing list archive for the users list is
> located here:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/us...@lists.fedoraproject.org/2018/3/
>
> and it seems to be uptodate as far as I can see...
>

That is correct. They are just one of many archivers on the internet
that get emails from Fedora and redisplay them. [This is one of the
reasons why people who ask us to remove their emails from the archives
are asking an impossible task.. there are hundreds of web archivers
and thousands of people who have copies of those emails and could put
them up.]


> have a nice weekend,
>   Timotheus
>
> 
> Diese Nachricht wurde versandt mit Webmail von www.tbits.net.
> This message was sent using webmail of www.tbits.net.
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org



-- 
Stephen J Smoogen.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Official archiver of Fedora mailing lists shows e-mails with one day delay!

[Timotheus Pokorra]

Hello Farhad,


https://www.spinics.net/lists/fedora-devel/threads.html#241887

Please do something for this problem, it is really bad situation you
are waiting for e-mails and check the web page several times but you
don't see anything! |:



I don't think that spinics.net is the official archiver of the Fedora 
mailing lists.


As far as I know, the official mailing list archive for the users list 
is located here:

https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/us...@lists.fedoraproject.org/2018/3/

and it seems to be uptodate as far as I can see...

have a nice weekend,
  Timotheus


Diese Nachricht wurde versandt mit Webmail von www.tbits.net.
This message was sent using webmail of www.tbits.net.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Broken dependencies: FreeSOLID

[Robert-André Mauchin]

On samedi 3 mars 2018 17:30:30 CET Martin Gansser wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > try qhull-devel instead of pkgconfig(qhull), afaik there was a change in
> > qhull package some days ago.
> 
> 
> but there is no pkgconfig(qhull) in the spec file ?
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/FreeSOLID/blob/master/f/FreeSOLID.spec
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Didn't you see the reply I made to your other thread?

https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/
message/YIAXJASDD5J6NMJHTON5PK5CRB4FUDQA/

I explained how to get rid of that Requires.

___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Broken dependencies: FreeSOLID

[Martin Gansser]

> Hi,
> 
> try qhull-devel instead of pkgconfig(qhull), afaik there was a change in
> qhull package some days ago.

but there is no pkgconfig(qhull) in the spec file ?
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/FreeSOLID/blob/master/f/FreeSOLID.spec
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Test gate failures

[Michael Cronenworth]

Hello,

The "Test Gating" mechanism is preventing two updates from being pushed.

* F27 Wine 3.3
   - "The update can not be pushed: no test results found"
   - https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-fa6f017315
* F26 Wine 3.3
   - "The update can not be pushed: 1 of 2 required tests not found"
   - https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-c5a0e704d6

Is there a way to refresh the tests?

Thanks,
Michael
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Test-Announce] 2018-03-05 @ 16:00 UTC - Fedora QA Meeting

[Adam Williamson]

# Fedora Quality Assurance Meeting
# Date: 2018-03-05
# Time: 16:00 UTC
(https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto)
# Location: #fedora-meeting on irc.freenode.net

Greetings testers!

It's been a couple of weeks since we had a meeting, and we've
had exciting times in release engineering, plus we are now getting
close to the planned Beta release and there's a few other things to
discuss.

If anyone has any other items for the agenda, please reply to this
email and suggest them! Thanks. Silvia mentioned some things, so I'll
make sure to keep space for those during open floor if they aren't
proposed as agenda topics.

== Proposed Agenda Topics ==

1. Previous meeting follow-up
2. Fedora 28 status, freeze, schedule, major features
3. Test Day status
4. Open floor
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net
___
test-announce mailing list -- test-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to test-announce-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Re: Trying out More Go Packaging: Bugs and Questions

[Athos Ribeiro]

On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 07:22:42PM +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> Le mardi 27 février 2018 à 18:34 +0100, Robert-André Mauchin a écrit :
> > 
> > 
> > How do we test this? I installedtho go-srpm-macros from Rawhide but it
> > doesn't seem to have the required macros?
> 
> Yes in rawhide go-compilers and go-srpm-macros are in an intermediary
> not fully tested/integrated state.
> 
> The original PR that matched what's in the wiki and is known to work is
> here
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/go-compilers/pull-request/2
> 
> Just grab the files rebuild the resulting go-compilers package and
> you're set to try it on your projects (in a fedora-devel buildroot)
> 
> I'll try to mix it with all the nice work Jan did to keep all the parts
> where he improved the implementation without the loss of integration
> polish of the go-srpm-macros and go-compilers packages he pushed to
> fedora-devel. And I definitely do not want something that requires
> rewriting the wiki once again :)

Are there any intentions to push the macros into f28? I really liked the
improvements in the spec file sizes, but porting too many packages now
and keep them updated in both f28 and rawhide (making the branches
completely different) would mean a lot of extra work. Or maybe I am just
too late here since we are quite close from the beta freeze.

Thanks for the hard work though :)

-- 
Athos Ribeiro

http://www.ime.usp.br/~athoscr
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Appstream metadata compose failures

[Michael Schwendt]

On Fri, 02 Mar 2018 16:11:23 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:

> Richard Hughes wrote:
> > 64x64 is a very low bar indeed, compared to all of the other
> > platforms, e.g. Windows Store or the Apple AppStore.  
> 
> All that's going to happen with such a requirement is that specfiles are 
> going to run the icon through scale2x or hq2x if you're lucky, through a 
> dumb ImageMagick convert resize if you're not.
> 
> You cannot expect the packager to draw a new icon for upstream software.

One cannot even expect upstream to ship appdata files. The Claws Mail
developers have had some in their tarball for short time for every
plugin, then have dropped them again in the next minor release.
Probably due to maintenance overhead and missing translations.
http://git.claws-mail.org/?p=claws.git;a=tree;f=appdata;hb=HEAD
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Official archiver of Fedora mailing lists shows e-mails with one day delay!

[Farhad Mohammadi Majd]

I forgot to say, it was between the hours 15-16 of yesterday (in local
time) that I sent two e-mails to mentioned threads, but nor my e-mail
and others e-mails was visible until today 13:30-14:00. so it is
actually 22-23 hours delay.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Official archiver of Fedora mailing lists shows e-mails with one day delay!

[Farhad Mohammadi Majd]

I forgot to say, it was between the hours 15-16 of yesterday (in local
time) that I sent two e-mails to mentioned threads, but nor my e-mail
and others e-mails was visible until today 13:30-14:00. so it is
actually 22-23 hours delay.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1551203] amavisd-release and amavisd-submit use wrong default socket path

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1551203



--- Comment #1 from Marcel Haerry  ---
Fixes:

* https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/amavisd-new/pull-request/1
* https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/amavisd-new/pull-request/2

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[rpms/amavisd-new] PR #1: fix RHBZ#1551203 - correct sock location

[Marcel Haerry]

maha opened a new pull-request against the project: `amavisd-new` that you are 
following:
``
fix RHBZ#1551203 - correct sock location
``

To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/amavisd-new/pull-request/1
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[rpms/amavisd-new] PR #2: fix RHBZ#1551203 - correct sock location

[Marcel Haerry]

maha opened a new pull-request against the project: `amavisd-new` that you are 
following:
``
fix RHBZ#1551203 - correct sock location
``

To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/amavisd-new/pull-request/2
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1551203] New: amavisd-release and amavisd-submit use wrong default socket path

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1551203

Bug ID: 1551203
   Summary: amavisd-release and amavisd-submit use wrong default
socket path
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: amavisd-new
  Assignee: j.orti.alca...@gmail.com
  Reporter: mh+fed...@scrit.ch
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: janfr...@tanso.net, j.orti.alca...@gmail.com,
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org, st...@silug.org,
vanmeeuwen+fed...@kolabsys.com



Description of problem:

The tools amavisd-release and amavisd-submit are not using the socket path in
/var/run that we patch into the default config.

We should make sure that they work out of the box.


Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

2.11.0


How reproducible:


Install amavisd and try to use amavisd-release or amavisd-submit and you'll get

# amavisd-release badh-DEADBEEF 
Can't connect to UNIX socket /var/spool/amavisd/amavisd.sock: No such file or
directory at /usr/bin/amavisd-release line 271.

While we are fixing the path for release, it's getting fixed wrong.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Broken dependencies: FreeSOLID

[Christian Dersch]

Oh, right, that was just mentioned on list some days ago…

On 03/03/2018 12:32 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 03/03/2018 12:19 PM, Christian Dersch wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> try qhull-devel instead of pkgconfig(qhull), afaik there was a change in
>> qhull package some days ago.
>
> No. The change you are referring to happened in April 2016!
>
> Ralf (Fedora qhull packager)
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Broken dependencies: FreeSOLID

[Ralf Corsepius]

On 03/03/2018 12:19 PM, Christian Dersch wrote:

Hi,

try qhull-devel instead of pkgconfig(qhull), afaik there was a change in
qhull package some days ago.


No. The change you are referring to happened in April 2016!

Ralf (Fedora qhull packager)
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Official archiver of Fedora mailing lists shows e-mails with one day delay!

[Farhad Mohammadi Majd]

At few days ago I did open two threads:

1: "Fedora 26 & 27 are unable to boot with normal graphic mode on this
PC with AMD/ATI RS740 [Radeon 2100] GPU" in "Users"

https://www.spinics.net/linux/fedora/fedora-users/threads.html#481765

2. "Why size of repositories metadata is too high in Fedora?" in
"devel"

https://www.spinics.net/lists/fedora-devel/threads.html#241887

I did set "Delivery status" to disabled via web page and used official
archiver for viewing emails, but until noon today, it doesn't show new
e-mails, I doubt to this situation and searched internet with mentioned
titles and found mentioned links, so I noticed official archiver of
Fedora is not reliable!

Please do something for this problem, it is really bad situation you
are waiting for e-mails and check the web page several times but you
don't see anything! |:

It currently shows all new e-mails but not two hours ago.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Broken dependencies: FreeSOLID

[Christian Dersch]

Hi,

try qhull-devel instead of pkgconfig(qhull), afaik there was a change in
qhull package some days ago.

Greetings,
Christian

On 03/03/2018 11:16 AM, Martin Gansser wrote:
> Hi,
>
> how can i solve this dependencies ?
>
> FreeSOLID has broken dependencies in the F-28 tree:
> On x86_64:
> FreeSOLID-devel-2.1.1-29.fc28.x86_64 requires pkgconfig(qhull)
> On armhfp:
> FreeSOLID-devel-2.1.1-29.fc28.armv7hl requires pkgconfig(qhull)
> On ppc64le:
> FreeSOLID-devel-2.1.1-29.fc28.ppc64le requires pkgconfig(qhull)
> On aarch64:
> FreeSOLID-devel-2.1.1-29.fc28.aarch64 requires pkgconfig(qhull)
> On ppc64:
> FreeSOLID-devel-2.1.1-29.fc28.ppc64 requires pkgconfig(qhull)
> On s390x:
> FreeSOLID-devel-2.1.1-29.fc28.s390x requires pkgconfig(qhull)
> On i386:
> FreeSOLID-devel-2.1.1-29.fc28.i686 requires pkgconfig(qhull)
> Please resolve this as soon as possible.
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Broken dependencies: FreeSOLID

[Martin Gansser]

Hi,

how can i solve this dependencies ?

FreeSOLID has broken dependencies in the F-28 tree:
On x86_64:
FreeSOLID-devel-2.1.1-29.fc28.x86_64 requires pkgconfig(qhull)
On armhfp:
FreeSOLID-devel-2.1.1-29.fc28.armv7hl requires pkgconfig(qhull)
On ppc64le:
FreeSOLID-devel-2.1.1-29.fc28.ppc64le requires pkgconfig(qhull)
On aarch64:
FreeSOLID-devel-2.1.1-29.fc28.aarch64 requires pkgconfig(qhull)
On ppc64:
FreeSOLID-devel-2.1.1-29.fc28.ppc64 requires pkgconfig(qhull)
On s390x:
FreeSOLID-devel-2.1.1-29.fc28.s390x requires pkgconfig(qhull)
On i386:
FreeSOLID-devel-2.1.1-29.fc28.i686 requires pkgconfig(qhull)
Please resolve this as soon as possible.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org