[Bug 1568433] perl-Config-Model-2.120-1.fc29 FTBFS: tests fail with Config-Model-Tester-3.006

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1568433

Emmanuel Seyman  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 CC||emman...@seyman.fr
   Fixed In Version||perl-Config-Model-2.121-1.f
   ||c29
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
Last Closed||2018-05-16 01:13:08



--- Comment #2 from Emmanuel Seyman  ---
perl-Config-Model has been updated to 2.121 then to 2.123 in Rawhide.

-- 
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: Intel's Clear Linux optimizations

[Hayden Barnes]

Would it be possible to mirror the Clear Linux kernel in copr or a third-party 
dnf repo?

That would allow Fedora to keep it's general purpose kernel but then allow 
performance hounds to install the Clear Linux kernel.

There is something similar already for people who want to use upstream vanilla 
kernel.

The Clear Linux performance metrics posted by Phoronix are compelling.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1578364] abi-compliance-checker-2.3 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1578364



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
abi-compliance-checker-2.3-1.fc28 has been pushed to the Fedora 28 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-f38c8d8188

-- 
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

[Bug 1575520] abi-compliance-checker doesn't work under F28

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1575520



--- Comment #22 from Fedora Update System  ---
abi-compliance-checker-2.3-1.fc28 has been pushed to the Fedora 28 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-f38c8d8188

-- 
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

[Bug 1576567] abi-compliance-checker: misses find dependency

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1576567



--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System  ---
abi-compliance-checker-2.3-1.fc28 has been pushed to the Fedora 28 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-f38c8d8188

-- 
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

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

[updates]

The following Fedora EPEL 7 Security updates need testing:
 Age  URL
  38  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-2c81054303   
remctl-3.14-1.el7
  13  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-996cb2153b   
quassel-0.12.5-1.el7
  13  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-5ae7f0e7c7   
python-pygit2-0.26.4-1.el7 libgit2-0.26.3-1.el7
  12  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-ce811a54c9   
roundcubemail-1.1.12-2.el7
  10  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-1ec98a14c5   
seamonkey-2.49.3-1.el7
  10  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-1698223c96   
mysql-mmm-2.2.1-15.el7


The following builds have been pushed to Fedora EPEL 7 updates-testing

abi-compliance-checker-2.3-1.el7
kf5-frameworkintegration-5.36.0-2.el7.1
kf5-kdeclarative-5.36.0-2.el7.1
prosody-0.10.1-1.el7
python-PyGithub-1.39-1.el7
python-ddt-1.1.3-1.el7

Details about builds:



 abi-compliance-checker-2.3-1.el7 (FEDORA-EPEL-2018-b68f0ba2c0)
 An ABI Compliance Checker

Update Information:

Improvements  * Support for GCC 8 * Use -fdump-lang-class instead of -fdump-
class-hierarchy * Use -fdump-lang-raw instead of -fdump-translation-unit *
Enable internal mangling of C++ funcs for all future GCC versions * Added -keep-
reserved option to report changes in reserved fields * Fixed license to LGPL 2.1
Bug Fixes  * Fix detection of GCC 7 compiled with --with-gcc-major-version-only
* Fixed internal mangling * Escape braces in regex for compatibility with future
Perl 5 versions * Redirect stderr of objdump -f to null    - Rebased patch
from upstream commit for gcc 8 compatibility, fixes 1575520. - Add findutils as
a package requirement, fixes 1576567.

ChangeLog:

* Tue May 15 2018 Richard Shaw  - 2.3-1
- Update to 2.3.
* Tue May  8 2018 Richard Shaw  - 2.2-3
- Rebased patch from upstream commit for gcc 8 compatibility, fixes 1575520.
- Add findutils as a package requirement, fixes 1576567.
* Wed Feb  7 2018 Fedora Release Engineering  - 2.2-2
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_28_Mass_Rebuild

References:

  [ 1 ] Bug #1578364 - abi-compliance-checker-2.3 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1578364
  [ 2 ] Bug #1575520 - abi-compliance-checker doesn't work under F28
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1575520
  [ 3 ] Bug #1576567 - abi-compliance-checker: misses find dependency
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1576567




 kf5-frameworkintegration-5.36.0-2.el7.1 (FEDORA-EPEL-2018-abf0730bcc)
 KDE Frameworks 5 Tier 4 workspace and cross-framework integration plugins

Update Information:

Rebuild for rhel7.5 (Qt 5.9.x)

ChangeLog:

* Tue May 15 2018 Rex Dieter  - 5.36.0-2.1
- (branch) rebuild (qt5)

References:

  [ 1 ] Bug #1578526 - Needs rebuild for RHEL 7.5
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1578526
  [ 2 ] Bug #1578527 - Needs rebuild for RHEL 7.5
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1578527




 kf5-kdeclarative-5.36.0-2.el7.1 (FEDORA-EPEL-2018-abf0730bcc)
 KDE Frameworks 5 Tier 3 addon for Qt declarative

Update Information:

Rebuild for rhel7.5 (Qt 5.9.x)

ChangeLog:

* Tue May 15 2018 Rex Dieter  - 5.36.0-2.1
- (branch) rebuild (qt5)

References:

  [ 1 ] Bug #1578526 - Needs rebuild for RHEL 7.5
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1578526
  [ 2 ] Bug #1578527 - Needs rebuild for RHEL 7.5
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1578527




 prosody-0.10.1-1.el7 

[Bug 1578364] abi-compliance-checker-2.3 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1578364



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
abi-compliance-checker-2.3-1.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-b68f0ba2c0

-- 
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

[Bug 1575520] abi-compliance-checker doesn't work under F28

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1575520



--- Comment #21 from Fedora Update System  ---
abi-compliance-checker-2.3-1.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-b68f0ba2c0

-- 
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

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

[updates]

The following Fedora EPEL 6 Security updates need testing:
 Age  URL
  38  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-5aca1d385d   
remctl-3.14-1.el6
  35  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-dd6e4a3f0b   
python34-3.4.8-1.el6
  10  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-db2f6088bd   
seamonkey-2.49.3-1.el6
  10  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-228dbec48f   
mysql-mmm-2.2.1-3.el6


The following builds have been pushed to Fedora EPEL 6 updates-testing

prosody-0.10.1-1.el6

Details about builds:



 prosody-0.10.1-1.el6 (FEDORA-EPEL-2018-c313d160b2)
 Flexible communications server for Jabber/XMPP

Update Information:

Prosody 0.10.1 ==  See upstream's blog post at
https://blog.prosody.im/prosody-0-10-1-released/ for a full overview of the
release changes.  Security * SQL: Ensure user archives are purged
when a user account is deleted (fixes #1009)  Fixes and improvements
--* Core: More robust signal handling (fixes #1047,
#1029)   * MUC: Ensure that elements which match our from are stripped (fixes
#1055)   * MUC: More robust handling of storage failures (fixes #1091, #1091)
* mod_mam: Ensure a user's archiving preferences apply even when they are
offline (fixes #1024)   * Compatibility improvements with LuaSec 0.7, improving
curve support   * mod_stanza_debug: New module that logs full stanzas sent and
received for debugging purposes   * mod_mam: Implement option to enable MAM
implicitly when client support is detected (#867)   * mod_mam: Add an option for
whether to include 'total' counts by default in queries (for performance)   *
MUC: send muc#stanza_id feature as per XEP-0045 v1.31 (fixes #1097)  Minor
changes -* SQL: Suppress error log if a transaction failed but
was retried ok   * core.stanza_router: Verify that xmlns exists for firing
stanza/iq/xmlns/name events (fixes #1022) (thanks SamWhited)   * mod_carbons:
Synthesize a 'to' attribute for carbons of stanzas to "self" (fixes #956)   *
Core: Re-enable timestamps by default when logging to files (fixes #1004)   *
HTTP: Report HTML Content-Type on error pages (fixes #1030)   * mod_c2s: Set a
default value for c2s_timeout (fixes #1036)   * prosodyctl: Fix traceback with
lfs < 1.6.2 and show warning   * Fix incorrect '::' compression of a single
0-group which broke some IPv6 address matching   * mod_dialback: Copy function
from mod_s2s instead of depending on it, which made it harder to disable s2s
(fixes #1050)   * mod_storage_sql: Add an index to SQL archive stores to improve
performance of some queries   * MUC: Don't attempt to reply to errors with more
errors (fixes #1122)   * Module API: Fix parameter order to http client
callbacks   * mod_blocklist: Allow mod_presence to handle subscription stanzas
before bouncing outgoing presence (fixes #575)   * mod_http_files: Fix directory
listing cache entries not expiring (fixes #1130)  Please also read the upgrade
notes at https://prosody.im/doc/release/0.10.0#upgrade_notes if you are
upgrading from 0.9.x.

ChangeLog:

* Tue May 15 2018 Robert Scheck  0.10.1-1
- Upgrade to 0.10.1 (#1578371)
* Fri Feb  9 2018 Fedora Release Engineering  - 
0.10.0-2
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_28_Mass_Rebuild

References:

  [ 1 ] Bug #1578371 - prosody-0.10.1 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1578371

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

[Bug 1576567] abi-compliance-checker: misses find dependency

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1576567



--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System  ---
abi-compliance-checker-2.3-1.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-b68f0ba2c0

-- 
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

[Bug 1576567] abi-compliance-checker: misses find dependency

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1576567

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System  ---
abi-compliance-checker-2.3-1.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-21e393fe5c

-- 
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

[Bug 1575520] abi-compliance-checker doesn't work under F28

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1575520

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System  ---
abi-compliance-checker-2.3-1.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-21e393fe5c

-- 
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

[Bug 1578364] abi-compliance-checker-2.3 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1578364

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System  ---
abi-compliance-checker-2.3-1.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-21e393fe5c

-- 
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

[EPEL-devel] Re: Blue Sky Discussion: EPEL-next or EPIC

[Neal Gompa]

On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 9:12 PM Jim Perrin  wrote:

> I *think* the version of rpm has been bumped enough as of EL 7.5 to
> support the tooling needed for modules. This would clearly need to be
> verified, but if this is the case then modern version of dnf may be all
> that's required.

Modularity is an abstraction on top of RPMs that requires a separate repo
and enhanced DNF for it.

I currently provide an EPEL-safe version of DNF in my COPR[1] that I'm
considering putting into EPEL, but it doesn't have the modularity stuff
because it's too much of a mess right now.

[1]: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/ngompa/dnf2-el7/



--
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[EPEL-devel] Re: Blue Sky Discussion: EPEL-next or EPIC

[Jim Perrin]

On 05/15/2018 12:06 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:



>   Modules
> 
> EPIC-6
> 
>Because EL-6’s tooling is locked at this point, it does not make
>sense to investigate modules.
> 
> EPIC-7
> 
>Currently EL-7 does not support Fedora modules and would require
>updates to yum, rpm and other tools in order to do so. If these
>show up in some form in a future minor release, then trees for
>modules can be created and builds done.
> 


I *think* the version of rpm has been bumped enough as of EL 7.5 to
support the tooling needed for modules. This would clearly need to be
verified, but if this is the case then modern version of dnf may be all
that's required.


> EPIC-next
> 
>The tooling for modules can match how Fedora approaches it. This
>means that rules for module inclusion will be similar to package
>inclusion.  EPIC-next modules must not replace/conflict with CentOS
>modules. They may use their own namespace to offer newer versions
>than what is offered and those modules may be removed in the next
>minor release if CentOS offers them then.
> 


-- 
Jim Perrin
The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org
twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1578594] New: perl-BSON-v1.6.0 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1578594

Bug ID: 1578594
   Summary: perl-BSON-v1.6.0 is available
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: perl-BSON
  Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
  Assignee: ppi...@redhat.com
  Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org, ppi...@redhat.com



Latest upstream release: v1.6.0
Current version/release in rawhide: 1.4.0-5.fc28
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/BSON/

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/12628/

-- 
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

May 2018 Elections: Nomination & Campaign period is open

[Jan Kurik]

Today we are starting the Nomination & Campaign period during which we
accept nominations to the "steering bodies" of the following teams:

* FESCo (Engineering) (4 seats) [1]
* Fedora Council (1 seat) [2]
* Mindshare (1 seat) [3]

This period is open until 2018-May-22 at 23:59:59 UTC.

The nominees can already start preparing their answers for questions
in the Election Questionnaire. The questions can be found in the
template files[4].

Nominees submit their questionnaire answers via a private Pagure
issue[5].  The Election Wrangler or their backup will publish the
interviews to the Community Blog [6] a day before the start of the
Voting period (2018-May-30).

Please note that the interview is mandatory for all nominees. Nominees
not having their interview ready by end of the Interview period
(2018-May-29) will be disqualified and removed from the election.
Nominees may submit their interview answers immediately and may edit
them until the end of the interview period.

Nominees are encouraged to begin their interview answers as soon as
they accept their nomination.

As part of the Campaign people might also ask questions to specific
candidates on @devel mailing list, if they want.

The full schedule of the May 2018 Elections is available on the
Elections wiki page [8].

[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Development/SteeringCommittee/Nominations
[2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Council/Nominations
[3] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mindshare/Nominations
[4] https://pagure.io/fedora-project-schedule/blob/master/f/elections/2018-May
[5] https://pagure.io/fedora-project-schedule/issues
[6] http://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/
[8] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Elections

Regards,
Jan
-- 
Jan Kuřík
JBoss EAP Program Manager
Red Hat Czech s.r.o., Purkynova 99/71, 612 45 Brno, Czech Republic
___
devel-announce mailing list -- devel-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-announce-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

May 2018 Elections: Nomination & Campaign period is open

[Jan Kurik]

Today we are starting the Nomination & Campaign period during which we
accept nominations to the "steering bodies" of the following teams:

* FESCo (Engineering) (4 seats) [1]
* Fedora Council (1 seat) [2]
* Mindshare (1 seat) [3]

This period is open until 2018-May-22 at 23:59:59 UTC.

The nominees can already start preparing their answers for questions
in the Election Questionnaire. The questions can be found in the
template files[4].

Nominees submit their questionnaire answers via a private Pagure
issue[5].  The Election Wrangler or their backup will publish the
interviews to the Community Blog [6] a day before the start of the
Voting period (2018-May-30).

Please note that the interview is mandatory for all nominees. Nominees
not having their interview ready by end of the Interview period
(2018-May-29) will be disqualified and removed from the election.
Nominees may submit their interview answers immediately and may edit
them until the end of the interview period.

Nominees are encouraged to begin their interview answers as soon as
they accept their nomination.

As part of the Campaign people might also ask questions to specific
candidates on @devel mailing list, if they want.

The full schedule of the May 2018 Elections is available on the
Elections wiki page [8].

[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Development/SteeringCommittee/Nominations
[2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Council/Nominations
[3] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mindshare/Nominations
[4] https://pagure.io/fedora-project-schedule/blob/master/f/elections/2018-May
[5] https://pagure.io/fedora-project-schedule/issues
[6] http://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/
[8] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Elections

Regards,
Jan
-- 
Jan Kuřík
JBoss EAP Program Manager
Red Hat Czech s.r.o., Purkynova 99/71, 612 45 Brno, Czech Republic
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1578182] perl-SOAP-Lite-1.27 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1578182

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-SOAP-Lite-1.27-1.fc28 has been pushed to the Fedora 28 testing repository.
If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-3ac808c810

-- 
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: marking all Python2 packages in Fedora rawhide as obsolete

[Miro Hrončok]

On 15.5.2018 14:17, Matej Habrnal wrote:> Seems, there will be more such 
packages.

Do you plan some massive marking of Python2 packages as obsolete in Rawhide?


No. My plan was to make python3-foo obsolete python2-foo on python2-foo 
removal, but other FPC members are against that plan.


See https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/754

--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

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

[updates]

The following Fedora EPEL 7 Security updates need testing:
 Age  URL
  37  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-2c81054303   
remctl-3.14-1.el7
  13  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-996cb2153b   
quassel-0.12.5-1.el7
  13  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-5ae7f0e7c7   
python-pygit2-0.26.4-1.el7 libgit2-0.26.3-1.el7
  12  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-ce811a54c9   
roundcubemail-1.1.12-2.el7
   9  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-1ec98a14c5   
seamonkey-2.49.3-1.el7
   9  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-1698223c96   
mysql-mmm-2.2.1-15.el7


The following builds have been pushed to Fedora EPEL 7 updates-testing

R-3.5.0-1.el7
beaker-25.2-1.el7
check-mk-1.4.0p31-1.el7
epel-rpm-macros-7-18
php-pecl-amqp-1.9.3-1.el7
php-pecl-krb5-1.1.2-2.el7
python-repoze-who-testutil-1.0.1-15.el7
rpkg-1.54-1.el7

Details about builds:



 R-3.5.0-1.el7 (FEDORA-EPEL-2018-7df1b4d94f)
 A language for data analysis and graphics

Update Information:

Update R to 3.5.0. Rebuild rpy and rkward to match. rpy updated to 2.9.3 in
Fedora 28.

ChangeLog:

* Mon May 14 2018 Tom Callaway  - 3.5.0-1
- update to 3.5.0
- update xz bundle (rhel6 only)
* Sun May 13 2018 Stefan O'Rear  - 3.4.4-3
- Add riscv* to target CPU specs
* Mon Apr 30 2018 Pete Walter  - 3.4.4-2
- Rebuild for ICU 61.1

References:

  [ 1 ] Bug #1567573 - rpy-2.9.3 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1567573
  [ 2 ] Bug #1570804 - R-3.5.0 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1570804




 beaker-25.2-1.el7 (FEDORA-EPEL-2018-9ae98602ab)
 Full-stack software and hardware integration testing system

Update Information:

Upstream version 25.2

ChangeLog:

* Mon May 14 2018 Greg Hellings  - 25.2-1
- Upstream version 25.2

References:

  [ 1 ] Bug #1566043 - beaker-25.2 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1566043




 check-mk-1.4.0p31-1.el7 (FEDORA-EPEL-2018-8f18c45fef)
 A new general purpose Nagios-plugin for retrieving data

Update Information:

New upstream release: 1.4.0p31

ChangeLog:

* Fri May 11 2018 Andrea Veri  - 1.4.0p31-1
- New upstream release.
- New B-Ds: rrdtool-devel, boost-devel
- Start making use of the DST suite as check-mk requires a newer GCC
  than the one EPEL 6 / 7 ships with
- Upstream started shipping a Python module, land it on its own sub-package
- Landed 3 additional patches to make sure paths and versioning do match
  the ones EPEL 6 / 7 standards expect

References:

  [ 1 ] Bug #1568338 - False alerts wrt chrony since RHEL 7.5
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1568338
  [ 2 ] Bug #1520093 - New stable version is missing in Epel
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1520093
  [ 3 ] Bug #1575061 - [rebase] Check-mk 1.4.0 is considered upstream stable
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1575061




 epel-rpm-macros-7-18 (FEDORA-EPEL-2018-bce5b00d61)
 Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux RPM macros

Update Information:

Add various %build_* macros from Fedora.

ChangeLog:

* Mon May 14 2018 Jason L Tibbitts III  - 7-18
- Add various %build_* macros from Fedora.

References:

  [ 1 ] Bug #1578131 - [epel-rpm-macros] add 

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

[updates]

The following Fedora EPEL 6 Security updates need testing:
 Age  URL
  37  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-5aca1d385d   
remctl-3.14-1.el6
  35  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-dd6e4a3f0b   
python34-3.4.8-1.el6
   9  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-db2f6088bd   
seamonkey-2.49.3-1.el6
   9  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-228dbec48f   
mysql-mmm-2.2.1-3.el6


The following builds have been pushed to Fedora EPEL 6 updates-testing

R-3.5.0-1.el6
epel-rpm-macros-6-20
rpkg-1.54-1.el6

Details about builds:



 R-3.5.0-1.el6 (FEDORA-EPEL-2018-6c7fbce367)
 A language for data analysis and graphics

Update Information:

Update R to 3.5.0. Rebuild rpy and rkward to match. rpy updated to 2.9.3 in
Fedora 28.

ChangeLog:

* Mon May 14 2018 Tom Callaway  - 3.5.0-1
- update to 3.5.0
- update xz bundle (rhel6 only)
- disable tests on armv7hl
- disable info builds on rhel 6
* Sun May 13 2018 Stefan O'Rear  - 3.4.4-3
- Add riscv* to target CPU specs
* Mon Apr 30 2018 Pete Walter  - 3.4.4-2
- Rebuild for ICU 61.1

References:

  [ 1 ] Bug #1567573 - rpy-2.9.3 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1567573
  [ 2 ] Bug #1570804 - R-3.5.0 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1570804




 epel-rpm-macros-6-20 (FEDORA-EPEL-2018-e341fc55aa)
 Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux RPM macros

Update Information:

Add various %build_* macros from Fedora.

ChangeLog:

* Mon May 14 2018 Jason L Tibbitts III  - 6-20
- Add various %build_* macros from Fedora.

References:

  [ 1 ] Bug #1578131 - [epel-rpm-macros] add macros for new compiler/linker 
flags
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1578131




 rpkg-1.54-1.el6 (FEDORA-EPEL-2018-1290f8302b)
 Python library for interacting with rpm+git

Update Information:

- Pass the -s/--set-default-stream to mbs-manager for module local builds.
(jkaluza) - Write mock config correctly when run in Py 3 (cqi) - Add --with and
--without options to 'local' - rhbz#1533416 (tmz) - Add a test for 3f93433 (cqi)
- Raise error if rpm command returns non-zero (cqi) - Use getpass.getuser()
instead of pwd.getpwuid(os.getuid())[0] (jpopelka) - Allow setting custom MBS
config file and config section in rpkg.conf. (jkaluza) - Remove py35 testenv
(cqi) - Ignore .env and tags (cqi) - Remove question mark from giturl (cqi) -
Added custom ArgumentParser (supports allow_abbrev) (jkucera) - Grab the correct
first line in case of rpm output (zebob.m)    - Require python2-koji 1.15 as
the minimum version - Refine BuildRequires

ChangeLog:

* Fri May 11 2018 Chenxiong Qi  - 1.54-1
- Pass the -s/--set-default-stream to mbs-manager for module local builds.
  (jkaluza)
- Write mock config correctly when run in Py 3 (cqi)
- Add --with and --without options to 'local' - rhbz#1533416 (tmz)
- Add a test for 3f93433 (cqi)
- Raise error if rpm command returns non-zero (cqi)
- Use getpass.getuser() instead of pwd.getpwuid(os.getuid())[0] (jpopelka)
- Allow setting custom MBS config file and config section in rpkg.conf.
  (jkaluza)
- Remove py35 testenv (cqi)
- Ignore .env and tags (cqi)
- Remove question mark from giturl (cqi)
- Added custom ArgumentParser (supports allow_abbrev) (jkucera)
- Grab the correct first line in case of rpm output (zebob.m)
* Mon Apr 16 2018 Chenxiong Qi  - 1.53-2
- Require python2-koji 1.15 as the minimum version
- Refine BuildRequires

References:

  [ 1 ] Bug #1533416 - RFE: please add --with/--without options to fedpkg local
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1533416

[Bug 1569985] perl-DBIx-RunSQL-0.19 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1569985

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
   Fixed In Version||perl-DBIx-RunSQL-0.19-1.fc2
   ||8
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed||2018-05-15 16:05:32



--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-DBIx-RunSQL-0.19-1.fc28 has been pushed to the Fedora 28 stable
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.

-- 
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: Fedora Media Writer for macOS, is not signed?

[Mohan Boddu]

We know about the issue and hoping to fix it soon.

On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 4:50 AM Jiri Eischmann  wrote:

> Chris Murphy píše v Pá 11. 05. 2018 v 16:42 -0600:
> > Hi,
> >
> > The Fedora Media Writer for macOS at getfedora.org is not signed. I
> > filed this bug a couple weeks ago but somehow lost track of it, and
> > also it's possibly not the right location for the bug report as it
> > relates to what's offered on getfedora.org
> >
> > As I mention in the bug, it's not a big deal to use the work around
> > for unsigned binaries when testing. But today I tested both the macOS
> > and Windows versions available on getfedora.org, the macOS version is
> > not signed, the Windows version is signed by Red Hat Inc.
> >
> > https://github.com/FedoraQt/MediaWriter/issues/163
> >
> > Is this this a releng issue I should file a separate bug for?
>
> Yes, this is a releng issue, the developer (Martin Bříza)
> doesn't sign the binaries. He only provides the code and it's built and
> signed by Fedora releng.
>
> Jiri
> ___
> 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

Fedora Rawhide-20180515.n.2 compose check report

[Fedora compose checker]

No missing expected images.

Failed openQA tests: 23/137 (x86_64), 8/24 (i386), 1/2 (arm)

New failures (same test did not fail in Rawhide-20180513.n.1):

ID: 237471  Test: x86_64 Server-boot-iso install_default@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/237471
ID: 237492  Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_cockpit_basic
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/237492
ID: 237496  Test: x86_64 Everything-boot-iso install_default@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/237496
ID: 237534  Test: x86_64 AtomicHost-dvd_ostree-iso install_default@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/237534
ID: 237550  Test: x86_64 universal install_mirrorlist_graphical
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/237550
ID: 237589  Test: x86_64 universal install_ext3@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/237589
ID: 237592  Test: x86_64 universal install_no_swap@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/237592
ID: 237605  Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_2_desktop_encrypted_64bit
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/237605

Old failures (same test failed in Rawhide-20180513.n.1):

ID: 237509  Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso base_services_start
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/237509
ID: 237516  Test: i386 Workstation-boot-iso install_default
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/237516
ID: 237517  Test: i386 Workstation-boot-iso memory_check
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/237517
ID: 237532  Test: arm Minimal-raw_xz-raw.xz 
install_arm_image_deployment_upload
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/237532
ID: 237543  Test: x86_64 AtomicWorkstation-dvd_ostree-iso 
base_services_start
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/237543
ID: 237570  Test: x86_64 universal install_blivet_ext3
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/237570
ID: 237571  Test: x86_64 universal install_blivet_btrfs
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/237571
ID: 237572  Test: x86_64 universal install_blivet_no_swap
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/237572
ID: 237573  Test: x86_64 universal install_blivet_xfs
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/237573
ID: 237574  Test: x86_64 universal install_blivet_software_raid
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/237574
ID: 237575  Test: x86_64 universal install_blivet_lvmthin
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/237575
ID: 237576  Test: x86_64 universal install_blivet_ext3@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/237576
ID: 237577  Test: x86_64 universal install_blivet_btrfs@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/237577
ID: 237578  Test: x86_64 universal install_blivet_no_swap@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/237578
ID: 237579  Test: x86_64 universal install_blivet_xfs@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/237579
ID: 237580  Test: x86_64 universal install_blivet_software_raid@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/237580
ID: 237581  Test: x86_64 universal install_blivet_lvmthin@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/237581
ID: 237615  Test: x86_64 universal install_rescue_encrypted
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/237615
ID: 237620  Test: i386 universal install_blivet_lvmthin
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/237620
ID: 237621  Test: i386 universal install_blivet_software_raid
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/237621
ID: 237622  Test: i386 universal install_blivet_xfs
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/237622
ID: 237623  Test: i386 universal install_blivet_no_swap
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/237623
ID: 237624  Test: i386 universal install_blivet_btrfs
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/237624
ID: 237625  Test: i386 universal install_blivet_ext3
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/237625

Soft failed openQA tests: 7/137 (x86_64), 3/24 (i386)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)

New soft failures (same test did not soft fail in Rawhide-20180513.n.1):

ID: 237531  Test: i386 KDE-live-iso install_default
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/237531

Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Rawhide-20180513.n.1):

ID: 237493  Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_realmd_join_kickstart
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/237493
ID: 237494  Test: i386 Server-boot-iso install_default
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/237494
ID: 237495  Test: i386 Server-dvd-iso install_default
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/237495
ID: 237519  Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso install_no_user
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/237519
ID: 237520  Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso install_default@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/237520
ID: 237521  Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso install_default_upload
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/237521
ID: 237597  

[EPEL-devel] Blue Sky Discussion: EPEL-next or EPIC

[Stephen John Smoogen]

 EPIC Planning Document
 __

History / Background

   Since 2007, Fedora Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux (EPEL) has
   been rebuilding Fedora Project Linux packages for Red Hat
   Enterprise Linux and its clones. Originally the goal was to compile
   packages that RHEL did not ship but were useful in the running of
   Fedora Infrastructure and other sites. Packages would be forked
   from the nearest Fedora release (Fedora 3 for EPEL-4, Fedora 6 for
   EPEL-5) with little updating or moving of packages in order to give
   similar lifetimes as the EL packages. Emphasis was made on
   backporting fixes versus upgrading, and also not making large
   feature changes which would cause confusion. If a package could not
   longer be supported, it would be removed from the repository to
   eliminate security concerns. At the time RHEL lifetimes were
   thought to be only 5-6 years so backporting did not look like a
   large problem.

   As RHEL and its clones became more popular, Red Hat began to extend
   the lifetime of the Enterprise Linux releases from 6 years to 10
   years of "active" support. This made trying to backport fixes
   harder and many packages in EPEL would be "aged" out and
   removed. This in turn caused problems for consumers who had tied
   kickstarts and other scripts to having access to those
   packages. Attempts to fix this by pushing for release upgrade
   policies have run into resistance from packagers who find focusing
   on the main Fedora releases a full time job already and only build
   EPEL packages as one-offs. Other attempts to update policies have
   run into needing major updates and changes to build tools and
   scripting but no time to do so. Finally, because EPEL has not
   majorly changed in 10 years, conversations about changing fall into
   "well EPEL has always done it like this" from consumers, packagers,
   and engineering at different places.

   In order to get around many of these resistance points with
   changing EPEL, I suggest that we frame the problems around a new
   project called Extra Packages for Inter Communities. The goal of
   this project would be to build packages from FedoraProject Linux
   releases to various Enterprise Linux whether they are Red Hat
   Enterprise Linux, CentOS, Scientific Linux or Oracle Enterprise
   Linux.
   __

Problems and Proposals

  Composer Limitations:

   Problem

  Currently EPEL uses the Fedora build system to compose a release
  of packages every couple of days. Because each day creates a new
  compose, the only channels are the various architectures and a
  testing where future packages can be tested. Updates are not in
  a seperate because EPEL does not track releases.

   EPEL packagers currently have to support a package for the 10 year
   lifetime of an RHEL release. If they have to update a release, all
   older versions are no longer available. If they no longer want to
   support a package it is completely removed. While this sounds like
   it increases security of consumers, Fedora does not remove old
   packages from older releases.

   Proposed Solution

  EPIC will match the Enterprise Linux major/minor numbers for
  releases. This means that a set of packages will be built
  for say EL5 subrelease 11 (aka 5.11). Those packages would
  populate for each supported architecture a release, updates
  and updates-testing directory. This will allow for a set of
  packages to be composed when the subrelease occurs and then
  stay until the release is ended.

  /pub/epic/releases/5/5.11/{x86_64,source,i386,aarch64,arm,ppc64}/
  /pub/epic/updates/5/5.11/{x86_64,source,i386,aarch64,arm,ppc64}/
  /pub/epic/updates/testing/5/5.11/{x86_64,source,i386,aarch64,arm,ppc64}/

   Once a minor release is done, the old tree will be hard linked to
   an appropriate archive directory.

  /pub/archives/epic/releases/5/5.11/{x86_64,source,i386,aarch64,arm,ppc64}/
  /pub/archives/epic/updates/5/5.11/{x86_64,source,i386,aarch64,arm,ppc64}/
  /pub/archives/epic/updates/testing/5/5.11/{x86_64,source,i386,aarch64,arm,ppc6
4}/

   A new one will be built and placed in appropriate sub
   directories. Hard links to the latest will point to the new one,
   and after some time the oldtree will be removed from the active
   directory tree.

  Channel Limitations:

   Problem

  EPEL is built against a subset of channels that Red Hat
  Enterprise Linux has for customers, namely the Server, High
  Availability, Optional, and some sort of Extras. Effort is
  made to make sure that EPEL does not replace with newer
  packages anything in those channels. However this does not
  extend to packages which are in the Workstation, Desktop,
  and similar 

[EPEL-devel] [Fedocal] Reminder meeting : EPEL Steering Committee

[smooge]

Dear all,

You are kindly invited to the meeting:
   EPEL Steering Committee on 2018-05-16 from 18:00:00 to 19:00:00 GMT
   At fedora-meet...@irc.freenode.net

The meeting will be about:
The EPEL Steering Committee will have a weekly meeting to cover current tasks 
and problems needed to keep EPEL going.


Source: https://apps.fedoraproject.org/calendar/meeting/8724/

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

Re: F29 System Wide Change: Let's Label Our Variants!

[Matthew Miller]

On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 01:15:53PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> That's different from counting "we have 87 Fedora Server installs!" based
> on variant though.  I'm simply suggesting that in our statistics gathering,
> we take any measurement there with a grain of salt.  With a mutable package
> set post-installation, there are any number of combinations that can
> falsely provide what the machine is.  For example, it is trivial to install
> Server and then add KDE to it.  Now you have something identified as Server
> that is really more of a Workstation (and a KDE one at that), simply
> because the user chose to use the Server iso to start with.  Variant is an
> artifact creation-time suggestion, not a description of a system or it's
> actual usage post-install.

Oh, absolutely. I think, though, even if it's salted a bit, it's still
a pretty good indicator of intent.

-- 
Matthew Miller

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

Re: F29 System Wide Change: Let's Label Our Variants!

[Matthew Miller]

On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 12:49:44PM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> The fedora-release-$VARIANT subpackage also provides a set of Requires:
> that indicates a minimum set of packages that must be on the system for it
> to still call itself "Server Edition". (For example, if you tried to remove
> the 'cockpit-ws' package, it would result in fedora-release-server being
> removed and /etc/os-release going back to the non-edition content)
> 
> So we *can* rely on this indicating a minimum level of functionality on the
> system.

We could do something similar for the spin subpackages as well -- do
you think that should be part of this initial plan?



-- 
Matthew Miller

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

Re: F29 System Wide Change: Let's Label Our Variants!

[Josh Boyer]

On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 12:50 PM Stephen Gallagher 
wrote:



> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 12:29 PM Josh Boyer 
wrote:

>> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 12:21 PM Jan Kurik  wrote:

>> > = Proposed System Wide Change: Let's Label Our Variants! =
>> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Label_Our_Variants


>> > Owner(s):
>> >* Matthew Miller 
>> >* Mohan Boddu 


>> > Start using the VARIANT and VARIANT_ID fields in /etc/os-release for
>> > Spins, Labs and the base container image rather than just the main
>> > Fedora Editions.



>> > == Detailed description ==
>> > Right now, we use the VARIANT field (and machine-readable VARIANT_ID)
>> > in /etc/os-release) only for the main Fedora Editions (and Fedora
>> > Cloud Base, because of its history as an edition previously). This
>> > means we can't tell the difference between a KDE desktop spin, a
>> > container image, or just a generic netinstall constructed into a
>> > custom system unlike any of our various flavors. Let's start using it
>> > widely.

>> Variant definitions seem like they're really only valid for things like
>> install media and container images.  They express intent well enough for
>> what the spin or Edition is for, but after installation the package set
>> deviates widely.  We can't assume something that has the Server variant
in
>> /etc/os-release is actually representative of anything Fedora ships as
>> Server without doing a package comparison along the way.  If we're using
>> variant to count anything, I think we need to scope it only to "initial
>> installations".


> The fedora-release-$VARIANT subpackage also provides a set of Requires:
that indicates a minimum set of packages that must be on the system for it
to still call itself "Server Edition". (For example, if you tried to remove
the 'cockpit-ws' package, it would result in fedora-release-server being
removed and /etc/os-release going back to the non-edition content)

> So we *can* rely on this indicating a minimum level of functionality on
the system.

I have nothing against using variants or applying them to describe minimum
functionality.  Minimum function is good and we should retain that.

That's different from counting "we have 87 Fedora Server installs!" based
on variant though.  I'm simply suggesting that in our statistics gathering,
we take any measurement there with a grain of salt.  With a mutable package
set post-installation, there are any number of combinations that can
falsely provide what the machine is.  For example, it is trivial to install
Server and then add KDE to it.  Now you have something identified as Server
that is really more of a Workstation (and a KDE one at that), simply
because the user chose to use the Server iso to start with.  Variant is an
artifact creation-time suggestion, not a description of a system or it's
actual usage post-install.

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

Fop fonts issue in a freshly updated Fedora 28+

[Peter Lemenkov]

Hello All!

Just got a strange issue while generating doc-files from sources with fop:

https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/763/26980763/build.log

Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NoSuchMethodError:
org.apache.fontbox.cff.CFFFont.getProperty(Ljava/lang/String;)Ljava/lang/Object;
at org.apache.fop.fonts.truetype.OTFFile.readName(OTFFile.java:134)
at org.apache.fop.fonts.truetype.OpenFont.readFont(OpenFont.java:740)
at org.apache.fop.fonts.truetype.OFFontLoader.read(OFFontLoader.java:109)
at org.apache.fop.fonts.truetype.OFFontLoader.read(OFFontLoader.java:93)
at org.apache.fop.fonts.FontLoader.getFont(FontLoader.java:124)
at org.apache.fop.fonts.FontLoader.loadFont(FontLoader.java:108)
at org.apache.fop.fonts.autodetect.FontInfoFinder.find(FontInfoFinder.java:254)
at org.apache.fop.fonts.FontAdder.add(FontAdder.java:63)
at 
org.apache.fop.fonts.FontDetectorFactory$DefaultFontDetector.detect(FontDetectorFactory.java:105)
at org.apache.fop.fonts.FontManager.autoDetectFonts(FontManager.java:229)
at 
org.apache.fop.fonts.DefaultFontConfigurator.configure(DefaultFontConfigurator.java:82)
at 
org.apache.fop.render.PrintRendererConfigurator.getCustomFontCollection(PrintRendererConfigurator.java:147)
at 
org.apache.fop.render.PrintRendererConfigurator.setupFontInfo(PrintRendererConfigurator.java:127)
at org.apache.fop.render.intermediate.IFUtil.setupFonts(IFUtil.java:170)
at 
org.apache.fop.render.intermediate.IFRenderer.setupFontInfo(IFRenderer.java:187)
at org.apache.fop.area.RenderPagesModel.(RenderPagesModel.java:75)
at org.apache.fop.area.AreaTreeHandler.setupModel(AreaTreeHandler.java:135)
at org.apache.fop.area.AreaTreeHandler.(AreaTreeHandler.java:105)
at 
org.apache.fop.render.RendererFactory.createFOEventHandler(RendererFactory.java:350)
at org.apache.fop.fo.FOTreeBuilder.(FOTreeBuilder.java:107)
at org.apache.fop.apps.Fop.createDefaultHandler(Fop.java:104)
at org.apache.fop.apps.Fop.(Fop.java:78)
at org.apache.fop.apps.FOUserAgent.newFop(FOUserAgent.java:179)
at org.apache.fop.cli.InputHandler.renderTo(InputHandler.java:107)
at org.apache.fop.cli.Main.startFOP(Main.java:186)
at org.apache.fop.cli.Main.main(Main.java:216)
make[3]: Leaving directory
'/builddir/build/BUILD/otp-OTP-20.3.6/lib/stdlib/doc/src'
make[3]: *** 
[/builddir/build/BUILD/otp-OTP-20.3.6/make/x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu/otp.mk:329:
../pdf/stdlib-3.4.5.pdf] Error 1
make[2]: Leaving directory '/builddir/build/BUILD/otp-OTP-20.3.6/lib/stdlib'
make[2]: *** [/builddir/build/BUILD/otp-OTP-20.3.6/make/otp_subdir.mk:29:
docs] Error 2
make[1]: Leaving directory '/builddir/build/BUILD/otp-OTP-20.3.6/lib'
make[1]: *** [/builddir/build/BUILD/otp-OTP-20.3.6/make/otp_subdir.mk:29:
docs] Error 2
make: *** [Makefile:416: docs] Error 2

For me it looks very much the same as the issue described here -
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/41501641/fop-giving-nosuchmethoderror-when-font-auto-detect-enable

However I'm not sure how to fix it?

>From looking at the RPM versions (comparing last successful buildroot
and this one) I found nothing really suspicious. Maybe Apache Fop
needs rebuild?

-- 
With best regards, Peter Lemenkov.
autoconf.noarch 2.69-27.fc28
automake.noarch 1.15.1-5.fc28
ed.x86_64 1.14.2-2.fc28
emacs.x86_64 1
emacs-common.x86_64 1
erlang.x86_64 20.3.2-2.fc28
flex.x86_64 2.6.1-7.fc28
fop.noarch 2.0-9.fc28
java-1.8.0-openjdk-devel.x86_64 1
libxslt.x86_64 1.1.32-2.fc28
lksctp-tools-devel.x86_64 1.0.16-9.fc28
m4.x86_64 1.4.18-6.fc28
ncurses-devel.x86_64 6.1-4.20180224.fc28
openssl-devel.x86_64 1
systemd-devel.x86_64 238-8.git0e0aa59.fc28
unixODBC-devel.x86_64 2.3.5-3.fc28
wxGTK3-devel.x86_64 3.0.4-1.fc28
xemacs.x86_64 21.5.34-29.20171230hg92757c2b8239.fc28
xemacs-packages-extra-el.noarch 20171219-2.fc28
zlib-devel.x86_64 1.2.11-8.fc28
GConf2.x86_64 3.2.6-20.fc28
ImageMagick-libs.x86_64 1
ModemManager-glib.x86_64 1.6.12-3.fc28
OpenEXR-libs.x86_64 2.2.0-11.fc28
SDL2.x86_64 2.0.8-2.fc28
adobe-mappings-cmap.noarch 20171205-3.fc28
adobe-mappings-cmap-deprecated.noarch 20171205-3.fc28
adobe-mappings-pdf.noarch 20180407-1.fc28
adwaita-cursor-theme.noarch 3.28.0-1.fc28
adwaita-icon-theme.noarch 3.28.0-1.fc28
alsa-lib.x86_64 1.1.6-2.fc28
apache-commons-codec.noarch 1.11-3.fc28
apache-commons-io.noarch 1
apache-commons-logging.noarch 1.2-13.fc28
at-spi2-atk.x86_64 2.26.2-1.fc28
at-spi2-atk-devel.x86_64 2.26.2-1.fc28
at-spi2-core.x86_64 2.28.0-1.fc28
at-spi2-core-devel.x86_64 2.28.0-1.fc28
atk.x86_64 2.28.1-1.fc28
atk-devel.x86_64 2.28.1-1.fc28
avahi-glib.x86_64 0.7-12.fc28
avahi-libs.x86_64 0.7-12.fc28
avalon-framework.noarch 4.3-19.fc28
avalon-logkit.noarch 2.1-29.fc28
batik.noarch 1.9-6.fc28
batik-css.noarch 1.9-6.fc28
brotli.x86_64 1.0.1-3.fc28
bzip2-devel.x86_64 1.0.6-26.fc28
cairo.x86_64 1.15.12-2.fc28
cairo-devel.x86_64 1.15.12-2.fc28
cairo-gobject.x86_64 1.15.12-2.fc28
cairo-gobject-devel.x86_64 1.15.12-2.fc28
cdparanoia-libs.x86_64 10.2-27.fc28
cmake-filesystem.x86_64 3.11.0-1.fc28
colord-libs.x86_64 1.4.2-1.fc28

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20180515.n.2 changes

[Fedora Rawhide Report]

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

Re: F29 System Wide Change: Let's Label Our Variants!

[Stephen Gallagher]

On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 12:29 PM Josh Boyer 
wrote:

> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 12:21 PM Jan Kurik  wrote:
>
> > = Proposed System Wide Change: Let's Label Our Variants! =
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Label_Our_Variants
>
>
> > Owner(s):
> >* Matthew Miller 
> >* Mohan Boddu 
>
>
> > Start using the VARIANT and VARIANT_ID fields in /etc/os-release for
> > Spins, Labs and the base container image rather than just the main
> > Fedora Editions.
>
>
>
> > == Detailed description ==
> > Right now, we use the VARIANT field (and machine-readable VARIANT_ID)
> > in /etc/os-release) only for the main Fedora Editions (and Fedora
> > Cloud Base, because of its history as an edition previously). This
> > means we can't tell the difference between a KDE desktop spin, a
> > container image, or just a generic netinstall constructed into a
> > custom system unlike any of our various flavors. Let's start using it
> > widely.
>
> Variant definitions seem like they're really only valid for things like
> install media and container images.  They express intent well enough for
> what the spin or Edition is for, but after installation the package set
> deviates widely.  We can't assume something that has the Server variant in
> /etc/os-release is actually representative of anything Fedora ships as
> Server without doing a package comparison along the way.  If we're using
> variant to count anything, I think we need to scope it only to "initial
> installations".
>
>
The fedora-release-$VARIANT subpackage also provides a set of Requires:
that indicates a minimum set of packages that must be on the system for it
to still call itself "Server Edition". (For example, if you tried to remove
the 'cockpit-ws' package, it would result in fedora-release-server being
removed and /etc/os-release going back to the non-edition content)

So we *can* rely on this indicating a minimum level of functionality on the
system.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1578364] abi-compliance-checker-2.3 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1578364



--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System  ---
abi-compliance-checker-2.3-1.fc27 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 27.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-21e393fe5c

-- 
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

[Bug 1575520] abi-compliance-checker doesn't work under F28

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1575520



--- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System  ---
abi-compliance-checker-2.3-1.fc27 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 27.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-21e393fe5c

-- 
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

[Bug 1576567] abi-compliance-checker: misses find dependency

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1576567



--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System  ---
abi-compliance-checker-2.3-1.fc27 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 27.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-21e393fe5c

-- 
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

[Bug 1576567] abi-compliance-checker: misses find dependency

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1576567



--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System  ---
abi-compliance-checker-2.3-1.el7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL
7. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-b68f0ba2c0

-- 
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

[Bug 1578364] abi-compliance-checker-2.3 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1578364



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
abi-compliance-checker-2.3-1.el7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL
7. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-b68f0ba2c0

-- 
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

[Bug 1575520] abi-compliance-checker doesn't work under F28

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1575520



--- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System  ---
abi-compliance-checker-2.3-1.el7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL
7. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-b68f0ba2c0

-- 
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

[Bug 1576567] abi-compliance-checker: misses find dependency

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1576567



--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System  ---
abi-compliance-checker-2.3-1.fc28 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 28.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-f38c8d8188

-- 
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

[Bug 1575520] abi-compliance-checker doesn't work under F28

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1575520



--- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System  ---
abi-compliance-checker-2.3-1.fc28 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 28.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-f38c8d8188

-- 
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

[Bug 1578364] abi-compliance-checker-2.3 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1578364



--- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System  ---
abi-compliance-checker-2.3-1.fc28 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 28.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-f38c8d8188

-- 
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: F29 System Wide Change: Let's Label Our Variants!

[Josh Boyer]

On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 12:21 PM Jan Kurik  wrote:

> = Proposed System Wide Change: Let's Label Our Variants! =
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Label_Our_Variants


> Owner(s):
>* Matthew Miller 
>* Mohan Boddu 


> Start using the VARIANT and VARIANT_ID fields in /etc/os-release for
> Spins, Labs and the base container image rather than just the main
> Fedora Editions.



> == Detailed description ==
> Right now, we use the VARIANT field (and machine-readable VARIANT_ID)
> in /etc/os-release) only for the main Fedora Editions (and Fedora
> Cloud Base, because of its history as an edition previously). This
> means we can't tell the difference between a KDE desktop spin, a
> container image, or just a generic netinstall constructed into a
> custom system unlike any of our various flavors. Let's start using it
> widely.

Variant definitions seem like they're really only valid for things like
install media and container images.  They express intent well enough for
what the spin or Edition is for, but after installation the package set
deviates widely.  We can't assume something that has the Server variant in
/etc/os-release is actually representative of anything Fedora ships as
Server without doing a package comparison along the way.  If we're using
variant to count anything, I think we need to scope it only to "initial
installations".

josh

> == Scope ==
> * Proposal owners:
> Update the fedora-release package with subpackages for the various
> non-edition outputs. The "convert-to-edition" script may also be
> extended to handle non-editions, but this is not a required part of
> this change proposal.

> * Other developers:
> Maintainers of spins and labs will need to add the appropriate
> fedora-release-… subpackage to the appropriate kickstart file or comps
> group.

> * Release engineering:
> Release Engineering owns the fedora-release package.

> * List of deliverables:
> Workstation and Server deliverables already contain this, and so are
> not affected. The KDE Plasma Desktop Spin will be changed. There is no
> overall change to the list of deliverables itself.

> * Policies and guidelines:
> There was a previous decision to only do this for Editions. This
> change would update that. We would also update the Spins documentation
> to add this as a new step in that pricess.

> * Trademark approval:
> not needed for this Change


> --
> Jan Kuřík
> JBoss EAP Program Manager
> Red Hat Czech s.r.o., Purkynova 99/71, 612 45 Brno, Czech Republic
> ___
> 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

F29 System Wide Change: Let's Label Our Variants!

[Jan Kurik]

= Proposed System Wide Change: Let's Label Our Variants! =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Label_Our_Variants


Owner(s):
  * Matthew Miller 
  * Mohan Boddu 


Start using the VARIANT and VARIANT_ID fields in /etc/os-release for
Spins, Labs and the base container image rather than just the main
Fedora Editions.



== Detailed description ==
Right now, we use the VARIANT field (and machine-readable VARIANT_ID)
in /etc/os-release) only for the main Fedora Editions (and Fedora
Cloud Base, because of its history as an edition previously). This
means we can't tell the difference between a KDE desktop spin, a
container image, or just a generic netinstall constructed into a
custom system unlike any of our various flavors. Let's start using it
widely.


== Scope ==
* Proposal owners:
Update the fedora-release package with subpackages for the various
non-edition outputs. The "convert-to-edition" script may also be
extended to handle non-editions, but this is not a required part of
this change proposal.

* Other developers:
Maintainers of spins and labs will need to add the appropriate
fedora-release-… subpackage to the appropriate kickstart file or comps
group.

* Release engineering:
Release Engineering owns the fedora-release package.

* List of deliverables:
Workstation and Server deliverables already contain this, and so are
not affected. The KDE Plasma Desktop Spin will be changed. There is no
overall change to the list of deliverables itself.

* Policies and guidelines:
There was a previous decision to only do this for Editions. This
change would update that. We would also update the Spins documentation
to add this as a new step in that pricess.

* Trademark approval:
not needed for this Change


-- 
Jan Kuřík
JBoss EAP Program Manager
Red Hat Czech s.r.o., Purkynova 99/71, 612 45 Brno, Czech Republic
___
devel-announce mailing list -- devel-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-announce-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

F29 System Wide Change: Let's Label Our Variants!

[Jan Kurik]

= Proposed System Wide Change: Let's Label Our Variants! =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Label_Our_Variants


Owner(s):
  * Matthew Miller 
  * Mohan Boddu 


Start using the VARIANT and VARIANT_ID fields in /etc/os-release for
Spins, Labs and the base container image rather than just the main
Fedora Editions.



== Detailed description ==
Right now, we use the VARIANT field (and machine-readable VARIANT_ID)
in /etc/os-release) only for the main Fedora Editions (and Fedora
Cloud Base, because of its history as an edition previously). This
means we can't tell the difference between a KDE desktop spin, a
container image, or just a generic netinstall constructed into a
custom system unlike any of our various flavors. Let's start using it
widely.


== Scope ==
* Proposal owners:
Update the fedora-release package with subpackages for the various
non-edition outputs. The "convert-to-edition" script may also be
extended to handle non-editions, but this is not a required part of
this change proposal.

* Other developers:
Maintainers of spins and labs will need to add the appropriate
fedora-release-… subpackage to the appropriate kickstart file or comps
group.

* Release engineering:
Release Engineering owns the fedora-release package.

* List of deliverables:
Workstation and Server deliverables already contain this, and so are
not affected. The KDE Plasma Desktop Spin will be changed. There is no
overall change to the list of deliverables itself.

* Policies and guidelines:
There was a previous decision to only do this for Editions. This
change would update that. We would also update the Spins documentation
to add this as a new step in that pricess.

* Trademark approval:
not needed for this Change


-- 
Jan Kuřík
JBoss EAP Program Manager
Red Hat Czech s.r.o., Purkynova 99/71, 612 45 Brno, Czech Republic
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: /etc/profile.d/lang.sh -- still needed?

[David Kaspar [Dee'Kej]]

On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 3:46 PM, R P Herrold  wrote:

> If you wish to 'clean out' initscripts, migrate the content
> into the relevant bash, and tcsh packages, and be done with it
>

​Yeah, you're right. Good point.​ Though I would prefer these scripts be
moved into 'setup' package instead, so they stay together for easier
maintenance, and because the functionality of lang.sh is not used just by
bash, but other shells can use it as well.​
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: /etc/profile.d/lang.sh -- still needed?

[David Kaspar [Dee'Kej]]

On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 3:30 PM, Akira TAGOH  wrote:

> how/what does those scripts "block"?
>

​Right now, it depends on the "/usr/sbin/consoletype​", which is also part
of initscripts. I hope it will be possible to just switch it to "tty"
utility instead, so the dependency on initscripts can be completely broken.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: [fedora-arm] armhfp builder instability

[Florian Weimer]

On 05/15/2018 01:34 PM, Fabiano Fidêncio wrote:

On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 1:06 PM, Peter Robinson  wrote:

On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 12:02 PM, Florian Weimer  wrote:

Lately, I've seen quite a few spurious build failures.  Random SIGBUS is
particularly common, and gcc reports that it cannot reproduce the SIGBUS in
a second compilation, which usually points to a kernel/hardware issue.

The latest problem was a hang during a build (on
buildvm-armv7-07.arm.fedoraproject.org), with this kernel:

Linux buildvm-armv7-07.arm.fedoraproject.org 4.16.6-302.fc28.armv7hl+lpae #1
SMP Tue May 1 23:15:35 UTC 2018 armv7l armv7l armv7l GNU/Linux

This affects multiple builders, so I suspect a kernel issue, not dying
hardware because AFAIK, the machines are independent.

The issue also affects copying out the log files for Koji, so they probably
do not show the actual place of the hang.


There's a stability issue post upgrade, the upgrades moved the
underlying hypervisors to RHEL 7.5 and the build VMs to Fedora 28 at
the same time, the issue is known and is being investigated/worked
upon.



As I'm facing what seems to be the very same issue
(https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=26957996), I'd
like to ask whether there's a ticket/bug/issue opened for this that I
could follow and get some notification when it's solved.


It turns out there already was a kernel bug, which I just made public:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1576593

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

[rpms/abi-compliance-checker] New Commits To "rpms/abi-compliance-checker" (epel7)

[pagure]

The following commits were pushed to the repo rpms/abi-compliance-checker on 
branch
epel7, which you are following:
55ece21e412e7cbf98f406466be9c38eea1ffc20Richard ShawUpdate %%files for 
changes in doc names.



To view more about the commits, visit:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/abi-compliance-checker/commits/epel7
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[rpms/abi-compliance-checker] New Commits To "rpms/abi-compliance-checker" (f27)

[pagure]

The following commits were pushed to the repo rpms/abi-compliance-checker on 
branch
f27, which you are following:
55ece21e412e7cbf98f406466be9c38eea1ffc20Richard ShawUpdate %%files for 
changes in doc names.
7e4baacaeedfa1afee0766c11c9d84f4b4245567Richard ShawRemove gcc8 patch 
as it is no longer needed.
4fd72b1b1c8fc6f0c5013f3fd5329843feb6b440Richard ShawRemove gcc8 patch 
as it is no longer needed.
57e62cc83251216778a9d44d24df414eb2f509aeRichard ShawUpdate to 2.3.



To view more about the commits, visit:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/abi-compliance-checker/commits/f27
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[rpms/abi-compliance-checker] New Commits To "rpms/abi-compliance-checker" (f28)

[pagure]

The following commits were pushed to the repo rpms/abi-compliance-checker on 
branch
f28, which you are following:
55ece21e412e7cbf98f406466be9c38eea1ffc20Richard ShawUpdate %%files for 
changes in doc names.
7e4baacaeedfa1afee0766c11c9d84f4b4245567Richard ShawRemove gcc8 patch 
as it is no longer needed.
4fd72b1b1c8fc6f0c5013f3fd5329843feb6b440Richard ShawRemove gcc8 patch 
as it is no longer needed.
57e62cc83251216778a9d44d24df414eb2f509aeRichard ShawUpdate to 2.3.



To view more about the commits, visit:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/abi-compliance-checker/commits/f28
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[rpms/abi-compliance-checker] New Commits To "rpms/abi-compliance-checker" (master)

[pagure]

The following commits were pushed to the repo rpms/abi-compliance-checker on 
branch
master, which you are following:
55ece21e412e7cbf98f406466be9c38eea1ffc20Richard ShawUpdate %%files for 
changes in doc names.



To view more about the commits, visit:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/abi-compliance-checker/commits/master
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1578368] perl-ExtUtils-Manifest-1.71 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1578368

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 CC||jples...@redhat.com
   Fixed In Version||perl-ExtUtils-Manifest-1.71
   ||-1.fc29
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
   Assignee|ppi...@redhat.com   |jples...@redhat.com
Last Closed||2018-05-15 10:52:50



-- 
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/perl-ExtUtils-Manifest] New Commits To "rpms/perl-ExtUtils-Manifest" (master)

[pagure]

The following commits were pushed to the repo rpms/perl-ExtUtils-Manifest on 
branch
master, which you are following:
acb7852a7f291056247b189b1e70c0eb04b364bcJitka Plesnikova1.71 bump; 
Modernize spec file



To view more about the commits, visit:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-ExtUtils-Manifest/commits/master
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1577939] Upgrade perl-Net-OpenSSH to 0.78

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1577939

Steve Traylen  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE
Last Closed||2018-05-15 10:36:50



--- Comment #1 from Steve Traylen  ---
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1081989

-- 
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/perl-Net-OpenSSH] New Commits To "rpms/perl-Net-OpenSSH" (master)

[pagure]

The following commits were pushed to the repo rpms/perl-Net-OpenSSH on branch
master, which you are following:
d13e7ad1362b11f4c7cc320d7301f556ba597aa6Steve Traylen0.78 update



To view more about the commits, visit:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Net-OpenSSH/commits/master
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: /etc/profile.d/lang.sh -- still needed?

[R P Herrold]

On Tue, 15 May 2018, David Kaspar [Dee'Kej] wrote:

> It could at least tell us the current state of things, and maybe create a
> plan on how to fix things, so they could be eventually removed at some
> point.
> 
> In any case I would like to find a new home for these scripts, so they
> don't "block" other work on initscripts package. And if it would turned out
> we can't remove those scripts yet, at least to do some cleanup in those
> scripts if possible.

Why take the pain? What is to 'fix'? =-=- This approach is an: 
'let's break stuff, and then fix some of it, 
eventually, maybe, to the extent we identify it'

IF there were TDD ASSERT testing in place, it might be 
possible to locate some of the frammage -- but this is not 
anything like where the Fedorproject is

If you wish to 'clean out' initscripts, migrate the content 
into the relevant bash, and tcsh packages, and be done with it

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

Re: /etc/profile.d/lang.sh -- still needed?

[Akira TAGOH]

On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 8:39 PM, David Kaspar [Dee'Kej]
 wrote:
> I still get the feeling like we are not totally sure these scripts are still
> needed nowadays.

We definitely need it as long as we are relying on the environment
variable to set a locale. particularly to configure locale for
non-desktop spins. we could have another things though, it's simple
enough. dunno if we really want to have complex things for that.
Or at least you should clarify issues around it if any.

>  Do you think it would be too much dangerous to test if we
> need still those files in Fedora via the System-wide Change? (I.e. do the
> change in rawhide, see if it breaks something. fallback if necessary.) It
> could at least tell us the current state of things, and maybe create a plan
> on how to fix things, so they could be eventually removed at some point.
>
> In any case I would like to find a new home for these scripts, so they don't
> "block" other work on initscripts package. And if it would turned out we
> can't remove those scripts yet, at least to do some cleanup in those scripts
> if possible.

how/what does those scripts "block"?

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



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

[rpms/perl-HTTP-Daemon] New Commits To "rpms/perl-HTTP-Daemon" (f28)

[pagure]

The following commits were pushed to the repo rpms/perl-HTTP-Daemon on branch
f28, which you are following:
d592f9a5e0f014aa97a531e6a78b6f770f4f40cdJitka PlesnikovaCall 
sockhostname method on correct class object (bug #1578026)



To view more about the commits, visit:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-HTTP-Daemon/commits/f28
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[rpms/perl-HTTP-Daemon] New Commits To "rpms/perl-HTTP-Daemon" (master)

[pagure]

The following commits were pushed to the repo rpms/perl-HTTP-Daemon on branch
master, which you are following:
d592f9a5e0f014aa97a531e6a78b6f770f4f40cdJitka PlesnikovaCall 
sockhostname method on correct class object (bug #1578026)



To view more about the commits, visit:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-HTTP-Daemon/commits/master
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[rpms/abi-compliance-checker] New Commits To "rpms/abi-compliance-checker" (master)

[pagure]

The following commits were pushed to the repo rpms/abi-compliance-checker on 
branch
master, which you are following:
7e4baacaeedfa1afee0766c11c9d84f4b4245567Richard ShawRemove gcc8 patch 
as it is no longer needed.
4fd72b1b1c8fc6f0c5013f3fd5329843feb6b440Richard ShawRemove gcc8 patch 
as it is no longer needed.
57e62cc83251216778a9d44d24df414eb2f509aeRichard ShawUpdate to 2.3.



To view more about the commits, visit:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/abi-compliance-checker/commits/master
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[rpms/abi-compliance-checker] New Commits To "rpms/abi-compliance-checker" (epel7)

[pagure]

The following commits were pushed to the repo rpms/abi-compliance-checker on 
branch
epel7, which you are following:
7e4baacaeedfa1afee0766c11c9d84f4b4245567Richard ShawRemove gcc8 patch 
as it is no longer needed.



To view more about the commits, visit:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/abi-compliance-checker/commits/epel7
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[rpms/abi-compliance-checker] New Commits To "rpms/abi-compliance-checker" (epel7)

[pagure]

The following commits were pushed to the repo rpms/abi-compliance-checker on 
branch
epel7, which you are following:
4fd72b1b1c8fc6f0c5013f3fd5329843feb6b440Richard ShawRemove gcc8 patch 
as it is no longer needed.



To view more about the commits, visit:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/abi-compliance-checker/commits/epel7
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[rpms/abi-compliance-checker] New Commits To "rpms/abi-compliance-checker" (epel7)

[pagure]

The following commits were pushed to the repo rpms/abi-compliance-checker on 
branch
epel7, which you are following:
57e62cc83251216778a9d44d24df414eb2f509aeRichard ShawUpdate to 2.3.



To view more about the commits, visit:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/abi-compliance-checker/commits/epel7
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

marking all Python2 packages in Fedora rawhide as obsolete

[Matej Habrnal]

Hi,

today, I've received this bugzilla [1] which basically says,
ABRT breaks Fedora upgrade because there are no longer builds of ABRT's Python2 
packages in Rawhide.

Seems, there will be more such packages.
Do you plan some massive marking of Python2 packages as obsolete in Rawhide?

Matej

[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1578134
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1578368] New: perl-ExtUtils-Manifest-1.71 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1578368

Bug ID: 1578368
   Summary: perl-ExtUtils-Manifest-1.71 is available
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: perl-ExtUtils-Manifest
  Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
  Assignee: ppi...@redhat.com
  Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org, ppi...@redhat.com



Latest upstream release: 1.71
Current version/release in rawhide: 1.70-395.fc28
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/ExtUtils-Manifest/

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/2870/

-- 
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

[Bug 1578364] New: abi-compliance-checker-2.3 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1578364

Bug ID: 1578364
   Summary: abi-compliance-checker-2.3 is available
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: abi-compliance-checker
  Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
  Assignee: hobbes1...@gmail.com
  Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: hobbes1...@gmail.com, or...@nwra.com,
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org



Latest upstream release: 2.3
Current version/release in rawhide: 2.2-3.fc29
URL: https://lvc.github.io/abi-compliance-checker/

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/10/

-- 
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: /etc/profile.d/lang.sh -- still needed?

[David Kaspar [Dee'Kej]]

On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 9:45 AM, Akira TAGOH  wrote:

> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 12:41 AM, David Kaspar [Dee'Kej]
>  wrote:
> > My question was more meant in a sense "are those files still necessary"?
> :)
> > I expect they were created to deal with some problems with locale
> setting,
> > but from just looking into them it's hard for me to guess what the
> initial
> > purpose of them were... :)
>
> That is used to set up the user specific locale settings. is there any
> alternatives to take care of them instead of
> /etc/profile.d/lang.{sh,csh} ?
>

​No that I'm aware of​

, unfortunately.

I still get the feeling like we are not totally sure these scripts are
still needed nowadays. Do you think it would be too much dangerous to test
if we need still those files in Fedora via the System-wide Change? (I.e. do
the change in rawhide, see if it breaks something. fallback if necessary.)
It could at least tell us the current state of things, and maybe create a
plan on how to fix things, so they could be eventually removed at some
point.

In any case I would like to find a new home for these scripts, so they
don't "block" other work on initscripts package. And if it would turned out
we can't remove those scripts yet, at least to do some cleanup in those
scripts if possible.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: [fedora-arm] armhfp builder instability

[Fabiano Fidêncio]

On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 1:06 PM, Peter Robinson  wrote:
> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 12:02 PM, Florian Weimer  wrote:
>> Lately, I've seen quite a few spurious build failures.  Random SIGBUS is
>> particularly common, and gcc reports that it cannot reproduce the SIGBUS in
>> a second compilation, which usually points to a kernel/hardware issue.
>>
>> The latest problem was a hang during a build (on
>> buildvm-armv7-07.arm.fedoraproject.org), with this kernel:
>>
>> Linux buildvm-armv7-07.arm.fedoraproject.org 4.16.6-302.fc28.armv7hl+lpae #1
>> SMP Tue May 1 23:15:35 UTC 2018 armv7l armv7l armv7l GNU/Linux
>>
>> This affects multiple builders, so I suspect a kernel issue, not dying
>> hardware because AFAIK, the machines are independent.
>>
>> The issue also affects copying out the log files for Koji, so they probably
>> do not show the actual place of the hang.
>
> There's a stability issue post upgrade, the upgrades moved the
> underlying hypervisors to RHEL 7.5 and the build VMs to Fedora 28 at
> the same time, the issue is known and is being investigated/worked
> upon.
>

As I'm facing what seems to be the very same issue
(https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=26957996), I'd
like to ask whether there's a ticket/bug/issue opened for this that I
could follow and get some notification when it's solved.

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


Best Regards,
-- 
Fabiano Fidêncio
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[389-devel] Please review: Issue 49684 - AC_PROG_CC clobbers CFLAGS set by --enable-debug

[Viktor Ashirov]

https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49684

https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/49690


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to 389-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Removing python2-tox (second attempt)

[Miro Hrončok]

On 8.5.2018 02:43, Miro Hrončok wrote:
I see no point of offering the tox module to import and I would like to 
get rid of it. I'll merge the PRs in ~1 week and then I'll remove 
python2-tox once again. Please let me know if you think this is breaking 
anything.


I will now merge all the remaining PRs and remove python2-tox.

--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: [fedora-arm] armhfp builder instability

[Peter Robinson]

On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 12:02 PM, Florian Weimer  wrote:
> Lately, I've seen quite a few spurious build failures.  Random SIGBUS is
> particularly common, and gcc reports that it cannot reproduce the SIGBUS in
> a second compilation, which usually points to a kernel/hardware issue.
>
> The latest problem was a hang during a build (on
> buildvm-armv7-07.arm.fedoraproject.org), with this kernel:
>
> Linux buildvm-armv7-07.arm.fedoraproject.org 4.16.6-302.fc28.armv7hl+lpae #1
> SMP Tue May 1 23:15:35 UTC 2018 armv7l armv7l armv7l GNU/Linux
>
> This affects multiple builders, so I suspect a kernel issue, not dying
> hardware because AFAIK, the machines are independent.
>
> The issue also affects copying out the log files for Koji, so they probably
> do not show the actual place of the hang.

There's a stability issue post upgrade, the upgrades moved the
underlying hypervisors to RHEL 7.5 and the build VMs to Fedora 28 at
the same time, the issue is known and is being investigated/worked
upon.

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

armhfp builder instability

[Florian Weimer]

Lately, I've seen quite a few spurious build failures.  Random SIGBUS is 
particularly common, and gcc reports that it cannot reproduce the SIGBUS 
in a second compilation, which usually points to a kernel/hardware issue.


The latest problem was a hang during a build (on 
buildvm-armv7-07.arm.fedoraproject.org), with this kernel:


Linux buildvm-armv7-07.arm.fedoraproject.org 
4.16.6-302.fc28.armv7hl+lpae #1 SMP Tue May 1 23:15:35 UTC 2018 armv7l 
armv7l armv7l GNU/Linux


This affects multiple builders, so I suspect a kernel issue, not dying 
hardware because AFAIK, the machines are independent.


The issue also affects copying out the log files for Koji, so they 
probably do not show the actual place of the hang.


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

[rpms/perl-Net-LibIDN] New Commits To "rpms/perl-Net-LibIDN" (master)

[pagure]

The following commits were pushed to the repo rpms/perl-Net-LibIDN on branch
master, which you are following:
53c88cb43964475de301418030ecfb6ebae9198dPaul HowarthRebuild for libidn 
1.35



To view more about the commits, visit:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Net-LibIDN/commits/master
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1578182] perl-SOAP-Lite-1.27 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1578182



--- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-SOAP-Lite-1.27-1.fc28 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 28.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-3ac808c810

-- 
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/perl-SOAP-Lite] New Commits To "rpms/perl-SOAP-Lite" (f28)

[pagure]

The following commits were pushed to the repo rpms/perl-SOAP-Lite on branch
f28, which you are following:
74ca5c618048c2921c200507605b2aa491b5cafaJan Pazdziora1578182 - Rebase 
to upstream version 1.27.



To view more about the commits, visit:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-SOAP-Lite/commits/f28
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[rpms/perl-SOAP-Lite] New Commits To "rpms/perl-SOAP-Lite" (master)

[pagure]

The following commits were pushed to the repo rpms/perl-SOAP-Lite on branch
master, which you are following:
74ca5c618048c2921c200507605b2aa491b5cafaJan Pazdziora1578182 - Rebase 
to upstream version 1.27.



To view more about the commits, visit:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-SOAP-Lite/commits/master
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Fedora Media Writer for macOS, is not signed?

[Jiri Eischmann]

Chris Murphy píše v Pá 11. 05. 2018 v 16:42 -0600:
> Hi,
> 
> The Fedora Media Writer for macOS at getfedora.org is not signed. I
> filed this bug a couple weeks ago but somehow lost track of it, and
> also it's possibly not the right location for the bug report as it
> relates to what's offered on getfedora.org
> 
> As I mention in the bug, it's not a big deal to use the work around
> for unsigned binaries when testing. But today I tested both the macOS
> and Windows versions available on getfedora.org, the macOS version is
> not signed, the Windows version is signed by Red Hat Inc.
> 
> https://github.com/FedoraQt/MediaWriter/issues/163
> 
> Is this this a releng issue I should file a separate bug for?

Yes, this is a releng issue, the developer (Martin Bříza)
doesn't sign the binaries. He only provides the code and it's built and
signed by Fedora releng.

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

[Bug 1577941] Upgrade perl-XML-FeedPP to 0.95

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1577941

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
   Fixed In Version||perl-XML-FeedPP-0.95-1.fc29
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
   Assignee|extras-orphan@fedoraproject |jples...@redhat.com
   |.org|
Last Closed||2018-05-15 04:10:53



-- 
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/perl-XML-FeedPP] New Commits To "rpms/perl-XML-FeedPP" (master)

[pagure]

The following commits were pushed to the repo rpms/perl-XML-FeedPP on branch
master, which you are following:
93807087415923f3261e42c904c5dc591bffe3b7Jitka Plesnikova0.95 bump



To view more about the commits, visit:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-XML-FeedPP/commits/master
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: /etc/profile.d/lang.sh -- still needed?

[Akira TAGOH]

On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 12:41 AM, David Kaspar [Dee'Kej]
 wrote:
> My question was more meant in a sense "are those files still necessary"? :)
> I expect they were created to deal with some problems with locale setting,
> but from just looking into them it's hard for me to guess what the initial
> purpose of them were... :)

That is used to set up the user specific locale settings. is there any
alternatives to take care of them instead of
/etc/profile.d/lang.{sh,csh} ?

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

Re: Taskotron test failures (dist.rpmlint)

[Kamil Paral]

On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 1:39 PM, Alexander Ploumistos <
alex.ploumis...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> Well, rpmlint is the one that failed and only on two arches, that's why I
> wanted it to be run again, just in case something was off the first time. I
> thought that if library-without-ldconfig-postin were a valid error, it
> should appear on all arches.
>

We only run it for primary arches, so it did appear on all. I'll try to
make it clearer in the log.


>
> > Running rpmlint locally should provide the same results. We're simply
> running the tool, and adding a config file if present in distgit:
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Taskotron/Tasks/dist.rpmlint
>
> Using rpmlint-1.10-12.fc28 on the source rpm and e.g. all the x86_64 rpms I
> only get this warning:
> cmpfit-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
> 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
>

For some reason rpmlint-1.10-7.fc28.noarch was used. I'll investigate.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: /etc/profile.d/lang.sh -- still needed?

[Jens-Ulrik Petersen]

On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 12:19 AM, David Kaspar [Dee'Kej]  wrote:

> does anybody know if the files /etc/profile.d/lang.{csh,sh} are still used
> these days, and what for?
> Do we still need them in Fedora?
>

They are needed for example to not run Asian and Middle Eastern locales on
the console, which does not support fonts for their characters.

Also for ~/.i18n though dunno if anyone still uses that - I think it is the
only way to override one's locale easily to a non-UTF-8 encoding for
example.

Do you see any problem with them?

Should they be installed by default these days?
>

Yes

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