Fedora 29 compose report: 20180916.n.0 changes

[Fedora Branched Report]

OLD: Fedora-29-20180915.n.0
NEW: Fedora-29-20180916.n.0

= SUMMARY =
Added images:5
Dropped images:  3
Added packages:  0
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages:   6
Downgraded packages: 0

Size of added packages:  0 B
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Size of upgraded packages:   57.04 MiB
Size of downgraded packages: 0 B

Size change of upgraded packages:   45.92 KiB
Size change of downgraded packages: 0 B

= ADDED IMAGES =
Image: Container_Base docker s390x
Path: Container/s390x/images/Fedora-Container-Base-29-20180916.n.0.s390x.tar.xz
Image: Container_Minimal_Base docker s390x
Path: 
Container/s390x/images/Fedora-Container-Minimal-Base-29-20180916.n.0.s390x.tar.xz
Image: Mate live i386
Path: Spins/i386/iso/Fedora-MATE_Compiz-Live-i386-29-20180916.n.0.iso
Image: LXQt live i386
Path: Spins/i386/iso/Fedora-LXQt-Live-i386-29-20180916.n.0.iso
Image: Container_Minimal_Base docker aarch64
Path: 
Container/aarch64/images/Fedora-Container-Minimal-Base-29-20180916.n.0.aarch64.tar.xz

= DROPPED IMAGES =
Image: Scientific vagrant-virtualbox x86_64
Path: 
Labs/x86_64/images/Fedora-Scientific-Vagrant-29-20180915.n.0.x86_64.vagrant-virtualbox.box
Image: Design_suite live i386
Path: Labs/i386/iso/Fedora-Design_suite-Live-i386-29-20180915.n.0.iso
Image: Scientific vagrant-libvirt x86_64
Path: 
Labs/x86_64/images/Fedora-Scientific-Vagrant-29-20180915.n.0.x86_64.vagrant-libvirt.box

= ADDED PACKAGES =

= DROPPED PACKAGES =

= UPGRADED PACKAGES =
Package:  f29-backgrounds-29.0.0-3.fc29
Old package:  f29-backgrounds-29.0.0-2.fc29
Summary:  Fedora 29 default desktop background
RPMs: f29-backgrounds f29-backgrounds-base f29-backgrounds-extras-base 
f29-backgrounds-extras-gnome f29-backgrounds-extras-kde 
f29-backgrounds-extras-mate f29-backgrounds-extras-xfce f29-backgrounds-gnome 
f29-backgrounds-kde f29-backgrounds-mate f29-backgrounds-xfce
Size: 39.07 MiB
Size change:  1.62 KiB
Changelog:
  * Sat Sep 15 2018 Adam Williamson  - 29.0.0-3
  - Fix Plasma theme (it was pointing to F27 bits)


Package:  kde-settings-29.0-1.fc29
Old package:  kde-settings-28.0-3.fc29
Summary:  Config files for kde
RPMs: kde-settings kde-settings-plasma kde-settings-pulseaudio 
qt-settings
Size: 60.88 KiB
Size change:  324 B
Changelog:
  * Thu Sep 13 2018 Rex Dieter  - 29.0-1
  - 29.0


Package:  mdadm-4.1-rc2.0.2.fc29
Old package:  mdadm-4.1-rc2.0.1.fc29
Summary:  The mdadm program controls Linux md devices (software RAID arrays)
RPMs: mdadm
Size: 2.29 MiB
Size change:  848 B
Changelog:
  * Thu Sep 13 2018 Adam Williamson  - 4.1-rc2.0.2
  - Fix multipath check in udev rule, broke array init in F29
  - Resolves bz1628192


Package:  pygobject3-3.30.0-2.fc29
Old package:  pygobject3-3.30.0-1.fc29
Summary:  Python bindings for GObject Introspection
RPMs: pygobject3-devel python2-gobject python2-gobject-base 
python3-gobject python3-gobject-base
Size: 4.70 MiB
Size change:  824 B
Changelog:
  * Fri Sep 14 2018 Dan Hor??k  - 3.30.0-2
  - Include temporary big endian fix (#1623547)


Package:  python-llfuse-1.3.5-1.fc29
Old package:  python-llfuse-1.3.3-1.fc29
Summary:  Python Bindings for the low-level FUSE API
RPMs: python2-llfuse python3-llfuse
Size: 4.06 MiB
Size change:  35.81 KiB
Changelog:
  * Tue Jun 19 2018 Miro Hron??ok  - 1.3.3-2
  - Rebuilt for Python 3.7

  * Sat Jul 14 2018 Fedora Release Engineering  - 
1.3.3-3
  - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_29_Mass_Rebuild

  * Thu Aug 30 2018 Denis Fateyev  - 1.3.5-1
  - Update to 1.3.5 release


Package:  udisks2-2.8.0-2.fc29
Old package:  udisks2-2.8.0-1.fc29
Summary:  Disk Manager
RPMs: libudisks2 libudisks2-devel udisks2 udisks2-bcache udisks2-btrfs 
udisks2-iscsi udisks2-lsm udisks2-lvm2 udisks2-zram
Size: 6.85 MiB
Size change:  6.54 KiB
Changelog:
  * Fri Sep 14 2018 Adam Williamson  - 2.8.0-2
  - Backport PR #576 to fix udev multipath device check (see RHBZ#1628192)



= DOWNGRADED PACKAGES =___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1624943] perl-Locale-Codes-3.58 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1624943



--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-Locale-Codes-3.58-1.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
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1623844] perl-PathTools-3.75 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623844

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version|perl-PathTools-3.75-1.fc30  |perl-PathTools-3.75-1.fc30
   |perl-PathTools-3.75-1.fc27  |perl-PathTools-3.75-1.fc27
   ||perl-PathTools-3.75-1.fc28



--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-PathTools-3.75-1.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
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1624943] perl-Locale-Codes-3.58 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1624943



--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-Locale-Codes-3.58-1.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 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
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1623844] perl-PathTools-3.75 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623844

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version|perl-PathTools-3.75-1.fc30  |perl-PathTools-3.75-1.fc30
   ||perl-PathTools-3.75-1.fc27
 Resolution|RAWHIDE |ERRATA



--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-PathTools-3.75-1.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 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
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

[389-devel] 389 DS nightly 2018-09-17 - 90% PASS

[vashirov]

https://fedorapeople.org/groups/389ds/ci/nightly/2018/09/17/report-389-ds-base-1.4.0.16-20180916git4881826.fc28.x86_64.html
___
389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to 389-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Heads Up: python2 is marked as deprecated

[Kevin Kofler]

Miro Hrončok wrote:
> [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Deprecating_Packages

This policy is highly impractical. Any package can be deprecated without 
notice, in some situations even without any kind of approval (if there is 
nothing using it in Fedora yet). One needs to do a repoquery to even get the 
list of deprecated packages, because they are not centrally tracked. And if 
I package or review a new package, I am now supposed to check every single 
BuildRequires (and maybe also its transitive Requires closure?) for whether 
it "Provides: deprecated()"!? There is just no way I am going to do that.

Applying this policy to a language interpreter that is used by dozens of 
useful packages that are not yet packaged for Fedora makes it even more 
impractical. Let's face it: lots and lots of upstream software will NEVER be 
ported to Python 3. Yet, it is still useful, and may be the only way to do 
what the user needs to do. Banning all that software from Fedora is doing a 
major disservice to our users!

Kevin Kofler
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: What does 141 mean?

[Tony Nelson]

On 18-09-16 17:53:08, Björn Persson wrote:

I have a Kerberos authentication problem.

On one computer running Fedora 27, I run kinit to authenticate to the
Fedora servers. After I enter my passphrase, kinit returns exit status
141. Then I run "fedpkg build", and get these error messages:

Kerberos authentication fails: (-1765328352, 'Ticket expired')
Could not execute build: Could not login to  
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/kojihub


On another computer also running Fedora 27, I run the exact same kinit
command. After I enter my passphrase, kinit returns exit status 0. I  
can

then run "fedpkg build" successfully.

There is no error message from kinit, no indication that anything is
wrong other than the exit code 141. I can't find any documentation of
exit codes from kinit. Thus I have no hint at what the problem might  
be.

Does anyone know what this code means?


No, but googling "kinit 141" leads to
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1537866
which suggests trying the kinit command twice in a row.

--

TonyN.:'   
  '  
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Heads Up: python2 is marked as deprecated

[Kevin Kofler]

Petr Viktorin wrote:
> Would *you* be interested in maintaining python2 past 2020, with no
> upstream support and 3415 dependent packages?

Yet, I just see NO practical alternative to SOMEBODY doing just that. It 
just needs to be done, just as with GTK+ 1 and 2, and Qt 3 and 4. (Yes, all 
those are still in Fedora.)

We CANNOT just drop half of the distribution just because upstream 
arbitrarily decided to desupport its widely used language interpreter in 
favor of an incompatible new major version.

Kevin Kofler
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Build ID conflict?!?

[Jerry James]

On Sun, Sep 16, 2018 at 3:02 PM Richard Shaw  wrote:
> Working on a new package and tried to install it only to get:
>
> Error: Transaction check error:
>   file /usr/lib/.build-id/67/7d4bdbbde390cc49fddb539cceb06ccb80efd6 from 
> install of ft8call-0.6.4-1.fc28.x86_64 conflicts with file from package 
> hamlib-3.2-1.fc28.x86_64
>   file /usr/lib/.build-id/dc/0fdb3cc1c3d70f4eee314404d00591091eb879 from 
> install of ft8call-0.6.4-1.fc28.x86_64 conflicts with file from package 
> hamlib-3.2-1.fc28.x86_64
>
> It does build against hamlib...

That probably means that ft8call copied a library or binary from
hamlib.  Check your ft8call buildroot for a duplicate with hamlib.
-- 
Jerry James
http://www.jamezone.org/
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

What does 141 mean?

[Björn Persson]

I have a Kerberos authentication problem.

On one computer running Fedora 27, I run kinit to authenticate to the
Fedora servers. After I enter my passphrase, kinit returns exit status
141. Then I run "fedpkg build", and get these error messages:

Kerberos authentication fails: (-1765328352, 'Ticket expired')
Could not execute build: Could not login to 
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/kojihub

On another computer also running Fedora 27, I run the exact same kinit
command. After I enter my passphrase, kinit returns exit status 0. I can
then run "fedpkg build" successfully.

There is no error message from kinit, no indication that anything is
wrong other than the exit code 141. I can't find any documentation of
exit codes from kinit. Thus I have no hint at what the problem might be.
Does anyone know what this code means?

Björn Persson


pgpdleNlN8ja1.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signatur
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Build ID conflict?!?

[Richard Shaw]

First time I've run into this...

Working on a new package and tried to install it only to get:

Error: Transaction check error:
  file /usr/lib/.build-id/67/7d4bdbbde390cc49fddb539cceb06ccb80efd6 from
install of ft8call-0.6.4-1.fc28.x86_64 conflicts with file from package
hamlib-3.2-1.fc28.x86_64
  file /usr/lib/.build-id/dc/0fdb3cc1c3d70f4eee314404d00591091eb879 from
install of ft8call-0.6.4-1.fc28.x86_64 conflicts with file from package
hamlib-3.2-1.fc28.x86_64

It does build against hamlib...

Thanks,
Richard
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Possibly non-responsive maintainer: hguemar

[Miro Hrončok]

On 16.9.2018 21:43, Rex Dieter wrote:

Miro Hrončok wrote:


On 16.9.2018 14:42, Haïkel wrote:

The policy mention that you have to try contacting the maintainer
*first*,


As a side note, where exactly does it mention that? (Note that it comes
as a reasonable thing to do, but I don't see it in the policy.)


It does explicitly say to contact maintainer, documented via bugzilla,
at least 3 times over the course of at least 3 weeks.

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_nonresponsive_package_maintainers#Outline


I meant contacting the maintainer outside bugzilla. I.e. make point 0) 
"E-mail the maintainer directly."


--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Fedora Rawhide-20180916.n.0 compose check report

[Fedora compose checker]

No missing expected images.

Failed openQA tests: 6/132 (x86_64), 2/24 (i386), 1/2 (arm)

New failures (same test did not fail in Rawhide-20180914.n.0):

ID: 280994  Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_repository_nfs_variation
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/280994
ID: 281003  Test: x86_64 Everything-boot-iso install_default@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/281003
ID: 281072  Test: x86_64 universal install_delete_partial@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/281072
ID: 281120  Test: i386 universal upgrade_2_desktop_32bit
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/281120
ID: 281126  Test: i386 universal install_scsi_updates_img
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/281126

Old failures (same test failed in Rawhide-20180914.n.0):

ID: 281016  Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso 
desktop_notifications_postinstall
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/281016
ID: 281032  Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_notifications_postinstall
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/281032
ID: 281035  Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_update_graphical
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/281035
ID: 281038  Test: arm Minimal-raw_xz-raw.xz 
install_arm_image_deployment_upload
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/281038

Soft failed openQA tests: 6/132 (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-20180914.n.0):

ID: 281007  Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso install_default@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/281007

Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Rawhide-20180914.n.0):

ID: 281000  Test: i386 Server-boot-iso install_default
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/281000
ID: 281001  Test: i386 Server-dvd-iso install_default
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/281001
ID: 281077  Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_desktop_64bit
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/281077
ID: 281079  Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_server_domain_controller
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/281079
ID: 281099  Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_2_desktop_64bit
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/281099
ID: 281100  Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_2_desktop_encrypted_64bit
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/281100
ID: 281110  Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_desktop_encrypted_64bit
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/281110
ID: 281121  Test: i386 universal upgrade_desktop_32bit
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/281121

Passed openQA tests: 120/132 (x86_64), 19/24 (i386)

New passes (same test did not pass in Rawhide-20180914.n.0):

ID: 281017  Test: x86_64 Workstation-boot-iso install_default
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/281017
ID: 281020  Test: x86_64 Workstation-boot-iso install_default@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/281020
ID: 281023  Test: i386 Workstation-boot-iso install_default
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/281023
ID: 281025  Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso install_default@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/281025
ID: 281117  Test: i386 universal install_blivet_xfs
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/281117

Skipped openQA tests: 1 of 158

Installed system changes in test x86_64 Server-boot-iso install_default@uefi: 
System load changed from 1.08 to 1.26
Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/280293#downloads
Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/280975#downloads

Installed system changes in test x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_default_upload: 
System load changed from 1.24 to 1.54
Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/280295#downloads
Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/280977#downloads

Installed system changes in test x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_default@uefi: 
System load changed from 1.32 to 1.97
Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/280296#downloads
Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/280978#downloads

Installed system changes in test i386 Server-dvd-iso install_default: 
1 packages(s) added since previous compose: pigz
Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/280319#downloads
Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/281001#downloads

Installed system changes in test x86_64 Workstation-live-iso 
install_default_upload: 
Average CPU usage changed from 16.17619048 to 32.79047619
Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/280324#downloads
Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/281006#downloads

Installed system changes in test x86_64 Workstation-live-iso 
install_default@uefi: 
System load changed from 1.85 to 2.25
Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/280325#downloads
Current test data: 

Fedora 29 Beta 1.3 compose check report

[Fedora compose checker]

No missing expected images.

Failed openQA tests: 3/132 (x86_64), 1/24 (i386), 1/2 (arm)

ID: 280858  Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso 
desktop_notifications_postinstall
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/280858
ID: 280874  Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_notifications_postinstall
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/280874
ID: 280877  Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_update_graphical
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/280877
ID: 280880  Test: arm Minimal-raw_xz-raw.xz 
install_arm_image_deployment_upload
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/280880
ID: 280965  Test: i386 universal install_blivet_ext3
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/280965

Soft failed openQA tests: 1/132 (x86_64), 2/24 (i386)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)

ID: 280842  Test: i386 Server-boot-iso install_default
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/280842
ID: 280843  Test: i386 Server-dvd-iso install_default
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/280843
ID: 280921  Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_server_domain_controller
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/280921

Passed openQA tests: 128/132 (x86_64), 21/24 (i386)

Skipped openQA tests: 1 of 158
-- 
Mail generated by check-compose:
https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Possibly non-responsive maintainer: hguemar

[Rex Dieter]

Rex Dieter wrote:

> Miro Hrončok wrote:
> 
>> On 16.9.2018 14:42, Haïkel wrote:
>>> The policy mention that you have to try contacting the maintainer
>>> *first*,
>> 
>> As a side note, where exactly does it mention that? (Note that it comes
>> as a reasonable thing to do, but I don't see it in the policy.)
> 
> It does explicitly say to contact maintainer, documented via bugzilla,
> at least 3 times over the course of at least 3 weeks.

OK, I can't count, but you get the idea.

--rex
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Possibly non-responsive maintainer: hguemar

[Rex Dieter]

Miro Hrončok wrote:

> On 16.9.2018 14:42, Haïkel wrote:
>> The policy mention that you have to try contacting the maintainer
>> *first*,
> 
> As a side note, where exactly does it mention that? (Note that it comes
> as a reasonable thing to do, but I don't see it in the policy.)

It does explicitly say to contact maintainer, documented via bugzilla,
at least 3 times over the course of at least 3 weeks.

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_nonresponsive_package_maintainers#Outline

-- Rex
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Possibly non-responsive maintainer: hguemar

[Miro Hrončok]

On 16.9.2018 14:42, Haïkel wrote:

The policy mention that you have to try contacting the maintainer
*first*,


As a side note, where exactly does it mention that? (Note that it comes 
as a reasonable thing to do, but I don't see it in the policy.)


I think we should actually make this the step 0. of the policy.


--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20180916.n.0 changes

[Fedora Rawhide Report]

OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20180914.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20180916.n.0

= SUMMARY =
Added images:2
Dropped images:  1
Added packages:  1
Dropped packages:1
Upgraded packages:   36
Downgraded packages: 0

Size of added packages:  51.00 KiB
Size of dropped packages:58.39 KiB
Size of upgraded packages:   7.29 GiB
Size of downgraded packages: 0 B

Size change of upgraded packages:   224.11 MiB
Size change of downgraded packages: 0 B

= ADDED IMAGES =
Image: Cloud_Base raw-xz s390x
Path: Cloud/s390x/images/Fedora-Cloud-Base-Rawhide-20180916.n.0.s390x.raw.xz
Image: Cloud_Base qcow2 s390x
Path: Cloud/s390x/images/Fedora-Cloud-Base-Rawhide-20180916.n.0.s390x.qcow2

= DROPPED IMAGES =
Image: Container_Base docker s390x
Path: 
Container/s390x/images/Fedora-Container-Base-Rawhide-20180914.n.0.s390x.tar.xz

= ADDED PACKAGES =
Package: compat-rust-serde_derive-1.0.58-1.fc30
Summary: Macros 1.1 implementation of #[derive(Serialize, Deserialize)]
RPMs:compat-rust-serde_derive-devel
Size:51.00 KiB


= DROPPED PACKAGES =
Package: ari-backup-1.0.12-8.fc29
Summary: A helpful wrapper around rdiff-backup
RPMs:ari-backup
Size:58.39 KiB


= UPGRADED PACKAGES =
Package:  abrt-2.10.10-5.fc30
Old package:  abrt-2.10.10-4.fc29
Summary:  Automatic bug detection and reporting tool
RPMs: abrt abrt-addon-ccpp abrt-addon-coredump-helper 
abrt-addon-kerneloops abrt-addon-pstoreoops abrt-addon-upload-watch 
abrt-addon-vmcore abrt-addon-xorg abrt-atomic abrt-cli abrt-cli-ng 
abrt-console-notification abrt-dbus abrt-desktop abrt-devel abrt-gui 
abrt-gui-devel abrt-gui-libs abrt-libs abrt-plugin-bodhi abrt-plugin-machine-id 
abrt-plugin-sosreport abrt-retrace-client abrt-tui python3-abrt 
python3-abrt-addon python3-abrt-container-addon python3-abrt-doc
Size: 9.16 MiB
Size change:  -430.32 KiB
Changelog:
  * Sat Sep 15 2018 Adam Williamson  - 2.10.10-5
  - Backport fix for RHBZ #1629408 (failed gdb backtrace generation)
  - Backport fix for deprecated function use (broke build)
  - Backport fix for argument error in harvest_vmcore
  - Backport fix for missing parameter translations in abrt-hook-ccpp


Package:  aoetools-36-16.fc30
Old package:  aoetools-36-14.fc28
Summary:  ATA over Ethernet Tools
RPMs: aoetools
Size: 329.48 KiB
Size change:  -27.50 KiB
Changelog:
  * Thu Jul 12 2018 Fedora Release Engineering  - 
36-15
  - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_29_Mass_Rebuild

  * Sat Sep 15 2018 Filipe Rosset  - 36-16
  - rebuilt to fix FTBFS + spec cleanup


Package:  chromium-69.0.3497.92-1.fc30
Old package:  chromium-68.0.3440.106-4.fc30
Summary:  A WebKit (Blink) powered web browser
RPMs: chrome-remote-desktop chromedriver chromium chromium-common 
chromium-headless chromium-libs chromium-libs-media
Size: 782.95 MiB
Size change:  27.16 MiB
Changelog:
  * Wed Sep 05 2018 Tom Callaway  - 69.0.3497.81-1
  - update to 69.0.3497.81

  * Wed Sep 12 2018 Tom Callaway  - 69.0.3497.92-1
  - update to 69.0.3497.92


Package:  clamtk-5.26-1.fc30
Old package:  clamtk-5.25-5.fc29
Summary:  Easy to use graphical user interface for Clam anti virus
RPMs: clamtk
Size: 211.45 KiB
Size change:  56 B
Changelog:
  * Sat Sep 15 2018 Dave M.  - 5.26-1
  - Updated to release 5.26.


Package:  device-mapper-multipath-0.7.7-5.gitef6d98b.fc30
Old package:  device-mapper-multipath-0.7.7-4.gitef6d98b.fc29
Summary:  Tools to manage multipath devices using device-mapper
RPMs: device-mapper-multipath device-mapper-multipath-devel 
device-mapper-multipath-libs kpartx libdmmp libdmmp-devel
Size: 3.06 MiB
Size change:  -258.24 KiB
Changelog:
  * Fri Sep 14 2018 Benjamin Marzinski  0.7.7-5.gitef6d98b
  - Add Conflicts for mdadm < 4.1-rc2.0.2 and udisks2 < 2.8.0-2
* Multipath udev rule update from 0.7.7-1 is incompatible with older 
versions
  (bz #1628192)


Package:  diffoscope-100-1.fc30
Old package:  diffoscope-98-2.fc29
Summary:  In-depth comparison of files, archives, and directories
RPMs: diffoscope
Size: 285.07 KiB
Size change:  3.04 KiB
Changelog:
  * Sat Sep 15 2018 Zbigniew J??drzejewski-Szmek  - 100-1
  - Update to latest version
  - Fix reference to file-magic (#1583331)


Package:  eccodes-2.8.2-4.fc30
Old package:  eccodes-2.8.2-2.fc30
Summary:  WMO data format decoding and encoding
RPMs: eccodes eccodes-data eccodes-devel eccodes-doc
Size: 5.95 MiB
Size change:  72 B
Changelog:
  * Sat Sep 15 2018 Jos de Kloe  - 2.8.2-3
  - Explicitely disable python in cmake call and use ctest3 rather than ctest
to ensure the build runs on EPEL-7 as well

  * Sat Sep 15 2018 Jos de Kloe  - 2.8.2-4
  - add Excludearch for aarch64 on epel7


Package:  eclipse-1:4.9.0-1.fc30
Old package:  eclipse-1:4.9.0-0.4.fc30
Summary:  An open, extensible IDE
RPMs: eclipse-contributor-tools e

[Test-Announce] Fedora 29 Candidate Beta-1.3 Available Now!

[rawhide]

According to the schedule [1], Fedora 29 Candidate Beta-1.3 is now
available for testing. Please help us complete all the validation
testing! For more information on release validation testing, see:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Release_validation_test_plan

Test coverage information for the current release can be seen at:
https://www.happyassassin.net/testcase_stats/29

You can see all results, find testing instructions and image download
locations, and enter results on the Summary page:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_29_Beta_1.3_Summary

The individual test result pages are:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_29_Beta_1.3_Installation
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_29_Beta_1.3_Base
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_29_Beta_1.3_Server
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_29_Beta_1.3_Cloud
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_29_Beta_1.3_Desktop
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_29_Beta_1.3_Security_Lab

All Beta priority test cases for each of these test pages [2] must
pass in order to meet the Beta Release Criteria [3].

Help is available on #fedora-qa on irc.freenode.net [4], or on the
test list [5].

Current Blocker and Freeze Exception bugs:
http://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/current

[1] http://fedorapeople.org/groups/schedule/f-29/f-29-quality-tasks.html
[2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Release_validation_test_plan
[3] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_29_Beta_Release_Criteria
[4] irc://irc.freenode.net/fedora-qa
[5] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/t...@lists.fedoraproject.org/
___
test-announce mailing list -- test-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to test-announce-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Possibly non-responsive maintainer: hguemar

[Haïkel]

Le dim. 16 sept. 2018 à 11:27, Fabio Valentini  a écrit :
>
> Hi everybody,
>
> There are many open bugs assigned to hguemar, which he is not
> responding to at all. According to a quick bugzilla query, he doesn't
> seem to have responded to any of the bugs assigned to him since
> October 2017 (!).
>

Erm, I have been quite active in august on bugzilla, for instance, I
helped fixing many python3 FTBFS.


> Particularly important to me are the FTBFS reports for libgda, which
> has last been successfully built on f24 (!):
> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=2321
>
> Since then, the package is essentially broken, and there are several FTBFS 
> bugs.
>
> for f26: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1423852
> for f28: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1556039
> for f29: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1604587
>
> The maintainer has not responded to any of these bugs despite multiple
> comments and needinfo requests. He also has not touched the libgda
> dist-git repository in 5 years according to the commit log.
>

Surprising for a project that had its last stable in 2015 and was
mostly dead since.
I hadn't touched it for a while, as it got updated regularly by the
desktop team.

> There are also other bugzilla bugs where other people have tried to
> reach him, without success, for example:
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1560212
>

Incorrect, I did answer and yes I forgot about this.
Did you ask for access? No

> Additionally, several of his packages failed the f29 mass rebuild, and
> the bug reports have been sitting there unacknowledged:
>
> python-yolk: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1606007
> python-sexy: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1605903

These needs co-maintainers, sexy should have been retired long ago,
I kept them around as other packages depends on it.
Again, if you want perms, just ask!


> python-setproctitle: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1605902
> python-ldappool: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1605745
> python-daiquiri: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1605649

I missed these as they were not in the python37 FTBFS tracker.
I'll get them fixed today.

> plotmm: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1605479

Needs a co-maintainer

> gtksourceviewmm3: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1604292

This one has co-maintainers and was actively attended by the desktop team.

> glom: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1604130
>

Co-maintainers are welcome, otherwise, I'll deprecate that.

> Does anybody know how to contact Haïkel Guémar (hguemar), or has heard
> from him recently? According to fedora-active-user, he is - somewhat -
> active? If not, I will continue the non-responsive maintainer process
> according to the Policy.
>
> Fabio

The policy mention that you have to try contacting the maintainer
*first*, you never sent me an email or pinged me on irc.
I don't like this kind of passive-aggressive approach, had you
contacted me, we would have sorted this out quickly, co-maintainers
are welcome.

One more thing, when you want to contact someone in the project =>
@fedoraproject.org should always work.

Regards,
H.

> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives: 
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Orphan/retire gogoc

[J. Randall Owens]

I should have added, it's currently FTBFS, and has been since F25, so
any potential adapters would have to deal with that. It needs at least a
BuildRequires removed or updated, and a patch for the printf change of
that time, so you'd have to be able to fix at least that much.

On 16/09/2018 11:15, J. Randall Owens wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> gogoc is dead to the world upstream (the gogo6.com site is now a
> nutritional supplement pusher!), and without gogo6's servers, gogoc is
> fairly useless. It's still possible it could be used to TSP tunnel
> through one's own servers to get IPv6, but as far as I know, there
> aren't any more tunnel services out there that use it.
> 
> So, if someone would find it worthwhile to keep it around for their own
> tunnelling needs, feel free to pick it up. Otherwise, I'll retire it in
> two weeks.

-- 
J. Randall Owens | http://www.GhiaPet.net/
GhiaPix Photography | http://www.GhiaPix.com/



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Orphan/retire gogoc

[J. Randall Owens]

Hello,

gogoc is dead to the world upstream (the gogo6.com site is now a
nutritional supplement pusher!), and without gogo6's servers, gogoc is
fairly useless. It's still possible it could be used to TSP tunnel
through one's own servers to get IPv6, but as far as I know, there
aren't any more tunnel services out there that use it.

So, if someone would find it worthwhile to keep it around for their own
tunnelling needs, feel free to pick it up. Otherwise, I'll retire it in
two weeks.

-- 
J. Randall Owens | http://www.GhiaPet.net/



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Possibly non-responsive maintainer: hguemar

[Fabio Valentini]

Hi everybody,

There are many open bugs assigned to hguemar, which he is not
responding to at all. According to a quick bugzilla query, he doesn't
seem to have responded to any of the bugs assigned to him since
October 2017 (!).

Particularly important to me are the FTBFS reports for libgda, which
has last been successfully built on f24 (!):
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=2321

Since then, the package is essentially broken, and there are several FTBFS bugs.

for f26: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1423852
for f28: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1556039
for f29: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1604587

The maintainer has not responded to any of these bugs despite multiple
comments and needinfo requests. He also has not touched the libgda
dist-git repository in 5 years according to the commit log.

There are also other bugzilla bugs where other people have tried to
reach him, without success, for example:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1560212

Additionally, several of his packages failed the f29 mass rebuild, and
the bug reports have been sitting there unacknowledged:

python-yolk: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1606007
python-sexy: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1605903
python-setproctitle: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1605902
python-ldappool: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1605745
python-daiquiri: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1605649
plotmm: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1605479
gtksourceviewmm3: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1604292
glom: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1604130

Does anybody know how to contact Haïkel Guémar (hguemar), or has heard
from him recently? According to fedora-active-user, he is - somewhat -
active? If not, I will continue the non-responsive maintainer process
according to the Policy.

Fabio
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Am I allowed to package this?

[Hans de Goede]

Hi,

On 14-09-18 20:03, Simo Sorce wrote:

On Fri, 2018-09-14 at 19:37 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:

Hi,

On 09/13/2018 07:59 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:

On Thu, 2018-09-13 at 16:07 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:

Hi,

On 10-09-18 14:40, Abhiram Kuchibhotla wrote:

According to the LICENSE file in their git repo, the code in the repo seems to 
be gplv2. Not sure if that proves anything. I'll do the licensecheck -r later 
and update you guys.

On Mon 10 Sep, 2018, 6:08 PM Richard Shaw, mailto:hobbes1...@gmail.com>> wrote:

  On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 7:27 AM Rex Dieter mailto:rdie...@math.unl.edu>> wrote:

  Jan Rybar wrote:

   > Hi Abhiram,
   >
   > you can make COPR. No one asks, no harm done, everyone's happy.

  I don't think copr is appropriate either,
  https://docs.pagure.org/copr.copr/user_documentation.html#faq

  To me, makes it pretty clear that if it can't be in fedora, it can't 
be in
  copr either.


  You need to go through the code (maybe use licensecheck -r to help) to 
see if all the code is acceptable. If so I'll defer to Neal on the COPR 
acceptability. Another alternative is until formal support is added to the 
kernel you can look at packaging it in RPM Fusion. If it's truly FOSS but just 
not acceptable because it's a kernel module it can go in the Free repository. 
If it's using proprietary code (even if the project is GPL licensed) then as 
long as it's redistributable, it can go in the Non-Free repository.



This looks like a standard realtek driver which realtek creates for Android 
devices
or some such. The code is not pretty (I really wish realtek would start 
contributing
proper drivers to the mainline kernel) but it usually is all GPL licensed, 
except
for the firmware for the NIC. I don't see firmware in the git repo, so the code
may need to be adjusted to use the kernels firmware-load mechanism (I assume
it has the firmware embedded atm).

The firmware files themselves may be distributed under this license:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/firmware/linux-firmware.git/tree/LICENCE.rtlwifi_firmware.txt

Note I did not check the files in the git repo, I just took a quick peek
that it is a "standard" out of tree realtek driver.

Also IANAL and TINLA.


I also have to use this driver for a USB dongle that works very well
... when I remember to check dkms didn't fail to build on kernel
upgrade ...

There is no firmware needed apparently, but my dongle doesn't work with
driver 5.2 which is the latest, so maybe a firmware is needed but the
driver itself doesn't load it ?

It would be really nice to have this driver in the kernel though as a
huge amount of cheap dongles use this chipset family, what would be the
process to get it in ?


You can submit it for inclusion into drivers/staging, there are already
some realtek drivers for other chipsets there for similar reasons.

Real inclusion would require a complete rewrite of the driver mostly.


Sigh, and I guess there is no party (beyond Realtek) with enough
interest/time to do that ...


Well for some older chips Jes Sorensen did a new driver from scratch using
the GPL-ed Realtek code as hardware documentation, so it is possible for
a community member to do this if it itches hard enough for them.

You could reach out the Jes and ask him how much work this was and if
he perhaps can write a blog post or 2 (or 3) to summarize his experience
with this.

Regards,

Hans





Simo.


___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org