[Bug 1659954] Upgrade perl-Config-Model-Itself to 2.016

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1659954

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
   Fixed In Version||perl-Config-Model-Itself-2.
   ||016-1.fc30
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
Last Closed||2018-12-19 07:58:05



-- 
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 1659954] Upgrade perl-Config-Model-Itself to 2.016

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1659954

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
   Assignee|david.hanneq...@gmail.com   |jples...@redhat.com



-- 
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 1659956] Upgrade perl-Coro to 6.54

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1659956

Petr Pisar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
   Fixed In Version||perl-Coro-6.540-1.fc30
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
Last Closed||2018-12-19 07:12:49



--- Comment #2 from Petr Pisar  ---
A bug-fix release suitable for Fedora ≥ 30.

-- 
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 1659955] Upgrade perl-Config-Perl-V to 0.31

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1659955



--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-Config-Perl-V-0.31-1.fc28 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 28.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-183c47607d

-- 
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 1659955] Upgrade perl-Config-Perl-V to 0.31

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1659955



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-Config-Perl-V-0.31-1.fc29 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 29.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-20508db6b3

-- 
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 1659955] Upgrade perl-Config-Perl-V to 0.31

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1659955

Petr Pisar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
   Fixed In Version||perl-Config-Perl-V-0.31-1.f
   ||c30



--- Comment #1 from Petr Pisar  ---
An enhancement release suitable for all Fedoras.

-- 
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 2018-12-19 - 92% PASS

[vashirov]

https://fedorapeople.org/groups/389ds/ci/nightly/2018/12/19/report-389-ds-base-1.4.0.20-20181219git00c3b7a.fc29.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: Fedora 30 System-Wide Change proposal: Remove Obsolete Scriptlets

[Jason L Tibbitts III]

> "ZJ" == Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  writes:

ZJ> I think it's pretty clear: all the standard invocations of
ZJ> scriptlets that have by replaced by transfiletriggers will be
ZJ> removed, along with the whole %post/%postun sections if its the only
ZJ> thing in them.

I do think it would be better to list exactly what is expected to be
changed (and which packages actually need which changes).

ZJ> I think that the way this should be handled is that if maintainers
ZJ> of a package want to use a single branch for F30+ and
ZJ> EPEL/RHEL/whatever, it is on them to arrange the spec file with the
ZJ> appropriate conditionals.

Well, that's what makes it tough.  You can remove the scriptlets, or you
can replace them with the various sets of macros which do nothing on
Fedora and do something on EPEL (to the extent that is even possible).
The macros needed are often context-dependent.  Certainly just removing
things is simplest but will cause the most upset.

It's not trivial to know if a maintainer insists on the single spec
approach, so it can be rather difficult to do this in an automated
fashion.  Of course it would be easy if everyone just fixed the packages
they maintain so that there's no need for automated fixup.  I'd hope
that some of that might happen if the lists of packages which need
changes are provided.  I did some of that a couple of releases ago and I
could try to do it again if someone could lengthen the day by a few
hours.

 - J<
___
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: Orphaned packages need new maintainers (will be retired in 1 week)

[Dan Čermák]

I would take over doclifter.

Miro Hrončok  writes:

> The following packages are orphaned and will be retired when they
> are orphaned for six weeks, unless someone adopts them. If you know for sure
> that the package should be retired, please do so now with a proper reason:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_remove_a_package_at_end_of_life
>
> Note: If you received this mail directly you (co)maintain one of the 
> affected packages or a package that depends on one. Please adopt the 
> affected package or retire your depending package to avoid broken 
> dependencies, otherwise your package will be retired when the affected 
> package gets retired.
>
> Unorphan or unretire packages at https://pagure.io/releng/issues
>
> Full breakdown of dependent packages is at:
>
> https://churchyard.fedorapeople.org/orphans.txt
>
> Note: This procedure is now restarted and I will start retiring packages 
> that have been orphaned for 6+ weeks in 1 week from now, will be sending 
> e-mails like this each week. Each package will be announced at least 3 
> times before retirement.
> (The backlog should be done in a week, I will then pause for the holiday 
> season).
>
> Full list from two weeks ago is preserved at:
>
> https://churchyard.fedorapeople.org/orphans-1w.txt
> https://churchyard.fedorapeople.org/orphans-2w.txt
>
> Orphaned packages:
>
> Canna orphan 57 weeks ago
> NetPIPE cicku, fale, orphan 61 weeks ago
> OpenTK orphan 27 weeks ago
> PyXB lef, mmahut, orphan 10 weeks ago
> Pyrex alexl, caolanm, johnp, orphan, rhughes, rstrode, ssp 10 weeks ago
> Quake2 orphan 71 weeks ago
> RepetierHost orphan 27 weeks ago
> VLGothic-fonts orphan 71 weeks ago
> adonthell orphan 33 weeks ago
> aldusleaf-crimson-text-fonts i18n-team, orphan 21 weeks ago
> almas-mongolian-title-fonts orphan 71 weeks ago
> apigen orphan 44 weeks ago
> archimedes chitlesh, orphan 8 weeks ago
> ascii-design cicku, fale, orphan 61 weeks ago
> ath_info orphan 42 weeks ago
> aws-shell fale, orphan 64 weeks ago
> balloontip orphan 49 weeks ago
> bluecove orphan 2 weeks ago
> blueman orphan 2 weeks ago
> bonesi cicku, fale, orphan 61 weeks ago
> bouml orphan, raphgro 0 weeks ago
> bouml-doc orphan, raphgro 0 weeks ago
> brightnessctl fale, orphan 64 weeks ago
> cclive orphan 62 weeks ago
> cdm orphan 71 weeks ago
> cf-sorts-mill-goudy-fonts orphan 71 weeks ago
> doclifter mariobl, orphan 47 weeks ago
> dojo orphan 17 weeks ago
> dreamchess-tools orphan 21 weeks ago
> eclipse-xpand orphan 22 weeks ago
> eclipse-xtext orphan 22 weeks ago
> eclipse-xtext-antlr-generator eclipse-sig, mbooth, orphan 22 weeks ago
> ecryptfs-simple orphan, raphgro 0 weeks ago
> editarea orphan 62 weeks ago
> emacs-mew orphan 26 weeks ago
> emacs-verilog-mode chitlesh, orphan 8 weeks ago
> evopop-gtk-theme orphan 26 weeks ago
> evopop-icon-theme orphan 26 weeks ago
> exonerate orphan 10 weeks ago
> f2py orphan 71 weeks ago
> fbset orphan 71 weeks ago
> fedora-review-plugin-java msrb, orphan 11 weeks ago
> fotowall orphan 71 weeks ago
> fped chitlesh, orphan 8 weeks ago
> freehdl chitlesh, orphan 8 weeks ago
> freehoo orphan 71 weeks ago
> freemind orphan 9 weeks ago
> frepple orphan 71 weeks ago
> gaim-gadugadu orphan 71 weeks ago
> gausssum cicku, orphan 58 weeks ago
> gds2pov chitlesh, orphan 8 weeks ago
> geda-gaf chitlesh, orphan 8 weeks ago
> ghc-fgl orphan, petersen 61 weeks ago
> ghc-hgettext orphan, pwithnall 48 weeks ago
> ghc-pcap orphan, pwithnall 48 weeks ago
> ghc-setlocale orphan, pwithnall 48 weeks ago
> git-bugzilla orphan 38 weeks ago
> gmusicbrowser orphan 38 weeks ago
> gnome-pie orphan 17 weeks ago
> gnome-shell-extension-calc orphan 62 weeks ago
> gnome-shell-extension-fedmsg orphan 62 weeks ago
> gnu-smalltalk laxathom, orphan, s4504kr 10 weeks ago
> gnudiff orphan 49 weeks ago
> gobby orphan 71 weeks ago
> golang-github-AudriusButkevicius-kcp-go go-sig, jchaloup, orphan 7 weeks ago
> golang-github-AudriusButkevicius-pfilter go-sig, orphan 7 weeks ago
> golang-github-calmh-luhn go-sig, jchaloup, orphan 7 weeks ago
> golang-github-ccding-go-stun go-sig, jchaloup, orphan 7 weeks ago
> golang-github-cznic-b go-sig, jchaloup, orphan 7 weeks ago
> golang-github-cznic-fileutil go-sig, jchaloup, orphan 7 weeks ago
> golang-github-cznic-golex go-sig, jchaloup, orphan 7 weeks ago
> golang-github-cznic-internal go-sig, jchaloup, orphan 7 weeks ago
> golang-github-cznic-lex go-sig, jchaloup, orphan 7 weeks ago
> golang-github-cznic-lexer go-sig, jchaloup, orphan 7 weeks ago
> golang-github-cznic-lldb go-sig, jchaloup, orphan 7 weeks ago
> golang-github-cznic-mathutil go-sig, jchaloup, orphan 7 weeks ago
> golang-github-cznic-ql go-sig, jchaloup, orphan 7 weeks ago
> golang-github-cznic-sortutil go-sig, jchaloup, orphan 7 weeks ago
> golang-github-cznic-strutil go-sig, jchaloup, orphan 7 weeks ago
> golang-github-cznic-zappy go-sig, jchaloup, orphan 7 weeks ago
> golang-github-docopt-docopt-go orphan 26 weeks ago
> golang-github-edsrzf-mmap-go go-sig, jchaloup, 

Package bear got mixed with bear-factory, erlang-bear and bear-devel

[Dan Čermák]

Hi list,

I have discovered a very weird problem with the package bear on
apps.fedoraproject.org: it got somehow mixed with the (completely
unrelated) packages erlang-bear, bear-devel and bear-factory.

A little bit of background:
- bear is a new package (for which I am the maintainer)
- previously the name was taken by a game engine, which its maintainer
  kindly renamed to bear-factory
- bear-devel are afaik the development files of the game engine before
  it got renamed to bear-factory
- erlang-bear has nothing to do with the other packages, beside sharing
  a part of the name

A few days ago I requested bear to be unorphaned and assigned to me,
which has happened. I have imported the sources successfully and
triggered a build on rawhide.
However, the system registered that as a build of erlang-bear (but
called it just "bear"), which means that I probably just broke the
updates of erlang-bear on Rawhide (sorry!).

My actual question: what is going on? How do I get out of this mess?


Thanks in advance,

Dan


signature.asc
Description: PGP 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

Re: Automating Package Review (Was: fedora-review -- do we have a maintainer?)

[Sérgio Basto]

On Tue, 2018-12-18 at 15:16 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 3:10 PM Sérgio Basto 
> wrote:
> > 
> > Hi, (sorry for duplicates I sent from wrong email before)
> > 
> > Nothing happened last week .
> > 
> > Can you add me to https://pagure.io/FedoraReview/ and to
> > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/fedora-review please .
> > 
> > My fas user is sergiomb , people want revert mock configurations of
> > RPMFusion because is not working with current release , we have a
> > non
> > functional fedora-review in repos , so IMHO this is the most urgent
> > task to do .
> > 
> 
> It doesn't matter at the moment. Currently I can't merge *any* PRs in
> fedora-review, due to a bug in Pagure[1].
> 
> I've already got three PRs slated for merge, and once those are out,
> I'll make a release.
> 
> [1]: https://pagure.io/pagure/issue/4142

Friend let me do the work, for that I need acls . 

Thanks
-- 
Sérgio M. B.
___
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: Automating Package Review (Was: fedora-review -- do we have a maintainer?)

[Neal Gompa]

On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 3:10 PM Sérgio Basto  wrote:
>
> Hi, (sorry for duplicates I sent from wrong email before)
>
> Nothing happened last week .
>
> Can you add me to https://pagure.io/FedoraReview/ and to
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/fedora-review please .
>
> My fas user is sergiomb , people want revert mock configurations of
> RPMFusion because is not working with current release , we have a non
> functional fedora-review in repos , so IMHO this is the most urgent
> task to do .
>

It doesn't matter at the moment. Currently I can't merge *any* PRs in
fedora-review, due to a bug in Pagure[1].

I've already got three PRs slated for merge, and once those are out,
I'll make a release.

[1]: https://pagure.io/pagure/issue/4142


-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
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: Automating Package Review (Was: fedora-review -- do we have a maintainer?)

[Sérgio Basto]

Hi, (sorry for duplicates I sent from wrong email before)

Nothing happened last week .

Can you add me to https://pagure.io/FedoraReview/ and to
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/fedora-review please . 

My fas user is sergiomb , people want revert mock configurations of
RPMFusion because is not working with current release , we have a non
functional fedora-review in repos , so IMHO this is the most urgent
task to do .

Thanks 


On Tue, 2018-12-11 at 16:36 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 10:30 AM Sérgio Basto <
> ser...@serjux.com> wrote:
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > Any news ?
> > 
> > "But I guess nothing's getting released, for some reason? fedora-
> > review has been on version 0.6.1 since May 2016; all package
> > activity since then has been housekeeping rebuilds. "
> > 
> > may you add me as admin to Fedora-review package ? to release a new
> > version .
> > 
> 
> There's really one remaining thing for a new release of FedoraReview:
> porting to Python 3. There's a WIP PR here:
> https://pagure.io/FedoraReview/pull-request/312
> 
> If it doesn't budge this week, I'm hoping to take a crack at it in
> the
> next week or so and try to pull it over the finish line.
> 
> -- 
> 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
> ___
> 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
-- 
Sérgio M. B.
___
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: packages for chat limited repo

[Scott Talbert]

On Tue, 18 Dec 2018, Cătălin George Feștilă wrote:


I try to install gyachi.x86_64 but I got errors.
A full search gives just some packages, I don't know if this is a bug
or a repo limited area. see my output.

root@desk mythcat]# dnf install gyachi.x86_64
Last metadata expiration check: 0:16:07 ago on Tue 18 Dec 2018 07:33:15 PM EET.
Error:
Problem: conflicting requests
 - nothing provides libjavascriptcoregtk-1.0.so.0()(64bit) needed by
gyachi-1.2.11-14.fc24.x86_64
 - nothing provides libwebkitgtk-1.0.so.0()(64bit) needed by
gyachi-1.2.11-14.fc24.x86_64
 - nothing provides libjasper.so.1()(64bit) needed by
gyachi-1.2.11-14.fc24.x86_64


gyachi hasn't been built successfully since F24:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=5764

It ought to be retired.

Scott___
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

packages for chat limited repo

[Cătălin George Feștilă]

I try to install gyachi.x86_64 but I got errors.
A full search gives just some packages, I don't know if this is a bug
or a repo limited area. see my output.

root@desk mythcat]# dnf install gyachi.x86_64
Last metadata expiration check: 0:16:07 ago on Tue 18 Dec 2018 07:33:15 PM EET.
Error:
 Problem: conflicting requests
  - nothing provides libjavascriptcoregtk-1.0.so.0()(64bit) needed by
gyachi-1.2.11-14.fc24.x86_64
  - nothing provides libwebkitgtk-1.0.so.0()(64bit) needed by
gyachi-1.2.11-14.fc24.x86_64
  - nothing provides libjasper.so.1()(64bit) needed by
gyachi-1.2.11-14.fc24.x86_64

[root@desk mythcat]# dnf search chat
Last metadata expiration check: 0:18:23 ago on Tue 18 Dec 2018 07:53:20 PM EET.
= Summary & Name Matched: chat =
sugar-chat.noarch : Chat client for Sugar
hexchat-devel.i686 : Development files for hexchat
hexchat-devel.x86_64 : Development files for hexchat
weechat-devel.i686 : Development files for weechat
weechat-devel.x86_64 : Development files for weechat
rubygem-hipchat.noarch : Ruby library to interact with HipChat
rubygem-hipchat-doc.noarch : Documentation for rubygem-hipchat
hexchat.x86_64 : A popular and easy to use graphical IRC (chat) client
hexchat.i686 : A popular and easy to use graphical IRC (chat) client
hexchat.x86_64 : A popular and easy to use graphical IRC (chat) client
pidgin-groupchat-typing-notifications.x86_64 : Adds typing notifications for
 : group chats in Pidgin
== Name Matched: chat ==
weechat.i686 : Portable, fast, light and extensible IRC client
weechat.x86_64 : Portable, fast, light and extensible IRC client
perl-Chatbot-Eliza.noarch : Implementation of the Eliza algorithm
 Summary Matched: chat =
BitchX.x86_64 : IrcII chat client
epic.x86_64 : An ircII chat client
murmur.x86_64 : Mumble voice chat server
ktp-text-ui.i686 : Telepathy text chat handler
ktp-text-ui.x86_64 : Telepathy text chat handler
mumble.x86_64 : Voice chat suite aimed at gamers
ytalk.x86_64 : A chat program for multiple users
ytalk.x86_64 : A chat program for multiple users
bitlbee.i686 : IRC to other chat networks gateway
bitlbee.x86_64 : IRC to other chat networks gateway
polari.x86_64 : Internet Relay Chat client for GNOME
talk.x86_64 : Talk client for one-on-one Internet chatting
talk-server.x86_64 : The talk server for one-on-one Internet chatting
gyachi.x86_64 : A Yahoo! chat client with Webcam and voice support
perl-Net-IRC.noarch : Perl interface to the Internet Relay Chat protocol
pidgin-logviewer.x86_64 : User-friendly and intuitive chat log viewer for Pidgin
texlive-unitn-bimrep.noarch : A bimonthly report class for the PhD School of
: Materials, Mechatronics and System Engineering
___
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

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

[smooge]

Dear all,

You are kindly invited to the meeting:
   EPEL Steering Co on 2018-12-19 from 18:00:00 to 19:00:00 GMT
   At freenode@fedora-meeting

The meeting will be about:
This is the weekly EPEL Steering Committee Meeting. Agenda is in the 
https://infinote.fedoraproject.org/cgit/infinote/tree/epel-meeting-next 


Source: https://apps.fedoraproject.org/calendar/meeting/9364/

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

Re: Multilib inconsistencies between fedora/updates/updates-testing composes

[Dennis Gilmore]

https://pagure.io/releng/issue/4084 its an issue that has existed for
nearly a decade and not been solved. Time was not taken to fixing it
after we disabled installing multilib by default as there was no
reports of it for years.

Dennis

El mié, 12-12-2018 a las 11:32 +0100, Florian Weimer escribió:
> We have seen reports that glibc-headers.i686 comes and goes from the
> x86_64 updates compose.  Previously, we have seen this only for the
> updates-testing compose: 
> 
> This leads to a very bad update experience.  Users file bugs against
> the
> glibc package, but I don't think we can do anything on our side, at
> least not until we know what the actual compose bug is and what
> triggers
> it.
> 
> Thanks,
> Florian
> ___
> 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


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
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: RFC: make fedora-release archful and add some provides

[Dennis Gilmore]

El vie, 14-12-2018 a las 20:33 +0100, Igor Gnatenko escribió:
> Hello folks,
> 
> for long time we have problem if you have some arch-specific
> BuildRequires, you still get one src.rpm from one of arches (not sure
> how koji chooses that one) which might not work for your
> architecture.
> 
> For example if you have following in spec:
> %ifarch %{ldc_arches}
> BuildRequires: ldc
> %endif
> 
> And the src.rpm is taken by koji from x86_64 (included in
> %{ldc_arches}), then you won't be able to run `dnf builddep foo`,
> because it will complain that ldc package is missing.

Can you please be clearer in the problem you are seeing? When
rebuilding srpms, the correct thing to do always is rebuild the srpm
first for the target arch. If I am reading your proposal correctly you
could no longer use macros to define arches. Instead you would have to
have the list of arches embedded in every spec file. The reason that
macros were used in this case was to ensure that all packages were
updated when supported arches changed. So while you could still use the
macro for Exclude/ExclusiveArch lines. You could not when it came
enabling some functionality on a subset of arches.  How many packages
are we talking about?

Dennis


> PROPOSAL:
> 1. make fedora-release archful
> 2. add Provides: system-architecture($arch) to fedora-release, where
> $arch is architecture name
> 3. use Requires: (foo if (system-architecture(x86_64) or
> system-architecture(i686))) in packages
> 
> What do you think? Any suggestions are welcome!
> 
> --
> -Igor Gnatenko
> ___
> 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


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
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

Summary for Monday's FESCo Meeting (2018-12-17)

[Petr Šabata]

=
#fedora-meeting-1: FESCO (2018-12-17)
=


Meeting started by maxamillion at 15:05:25 UTC. The full logs are
available at
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2018-12-17/fesco.2018-12-17-15.05.log.html
.



Meeting summary
---
* init process  (maxamillion, 15:05:25)

* Follow Up Business  (maxamillion, 15:09:49)

* #2020 Firefox is switching from gcc to clang/llvm  (maxamillion,
  15:09:52)
  * LINK: https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2020   (maxamillion, 15:09:52)
  * AGREED: : Revisit "Firefox is switching from gcc to clang/llvm"
after the new year (+1: 6 -1:0, +0:0)  (maxamillion, 15:19:21)

* New Business  (maxamillion, 15:19:26)

* #2021 F30 Change: Migrate Python-based Nautilus extensions to Python 3
  (maxamillion, 15:20:14)
  * LINK: https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2021   (maxamillion, 15:20:14)
  * AGREED: Wait until more information is provided as per
https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2021#comment-545919 (+1:6, -1:0, +0:0)
(maxamillion, 15:25:58)

* Next week's chair  (maxamillion, 15:26:18)
  * ACTION: bowlofeggs to chair next meeting  (maxamillion, 15:30:05)

* Open Floor  (maxamillion, 15:30:18)

Meeting ended at 15:38:12 UTC.


Action Items

* bowlofeggs to chair next meeting


Action Items, by person
---
* bowlofeggs
  * bowlofeggs to chair next meeting


People Present (lines said)
---
* maxamillion (32)
* bowlofeggs (21)
* zodbot (16)
* zbyszek (11)
* jforbes (9)
* nirik (8)
* jsmith (6)
* bukaj (2)
* bcotton (1)
* tyll (0)
* sgallagh (0)
* contyk (0)


signature.asc
Description: PGP 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

Re: Fedora 30 System-Wide Change proposal: Remove Obsolete Scriptlets

[Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek]

On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 11:31:46AM -0800, Japheth Cleaver wrote:
> On 12/12/2018 2:20 PM, Ben Cotton wrote:
> >https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/RemoveObsoleteScriptlets
> >
> >== Summary ==
> >Remove scriptlets which are not needed anymore (ldconfig,
> >gtk-update-icon-cache, etc.).
> >
> >*snip*
> >
> >== Upgrade/compatibility impact ==
> >Installed F30 RPMs on F28/EL6/EL7 might not work although it is not 
> >supported.
> >
> There's not much description in the link about what's actually going
> to happen here and what's being removed from .specs.

I think it's pretty clear: all the standard invocations of scriptlets
that have by replaced by transfiletriggers will be removed, along with
the whole %post/%postun sections if its the only thing in them.

> Is there going to to be any attempt at coordination of this with
> EPEL? Or, if these are already macros in the .specs, has there been
> thought given to simply changing some of these to no-op macros in
> Fedora instead of removing them entirely?

I think that the way this should be handled is that if maintainers of
a package want to use a single branch for F30+ and EPEL/RHEL/whatever,
it is on them to arrange the spec file with the appropriate conditionals.

Then, scripts implementing this should only touch those packages which
have the scriptlet in the *binary* package. I.e. filter the list of
packages to update by actual 'rpm -qp --scripts' output.

There are multiple mechanism to achieve this:
- general %if checks
- %ldconfig_scriptlets and similar that evaluate to %nil
  ({?ldconfig}, %ldconfig_post, %ldconfig_postun)

Such division of labour makes it possible for the Change owner to
implement this in reasonable time, but still allows individual maintainers
to implement their custom solutions.

Zbyszek
___
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

[EPEL-devel] There will be no meeting 2018-12-19, 2018-12-26, 2019-01-02

[Stephen John Smoogen]

This is a reminder that with most people on the steering committee not
being around that there will be no meetings until 2019-01-09

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

[Bug 1659954] Upgrade perl-Config-Model-Itself to 2.016

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1659954

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Summary|Upgrade |Upgrade
   |perl-Config-Model-Itself to |perl-Config-Model-Itself to
   |2.015   |2.016



-- 
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

Re: Agenda for Tuesday's Modularity Working Group Meeting (2018-12-18)

[Nils Philippsen]

Obviously, this should be for today, 2018-12-18.

On Tue, 2018-12-18 at 15:54 +0100, Nils Philippsen wrote:
> (Sorry for sending this so late.)
> 
> Find below a list of topics which are planned to be discussed in the
> Fedora Modularity Working Group meeting on Tuesday at 15:00 UTC in
> #fedora-meeting-3 on irc.freenode.net.
> 
> To find out when this is in your local time zone, check the Fedora
> Calendar (if you've set it and are logged in):
>   https://apps.fedoraproject.org/calendar/modularity/#m5249
> 
> Alternatively, to convert UTC to your local time zone, take a look at
>   http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto
> 
> or run:
>   date -d 'Tuesday 15:00 UTC'
> 
> Links to all issues below can be found at:
>   https://pagure.io/modularity/report/meeting_agenda
> 
> = Discussed and Voted =
> Modularity WG Charter Review
> https://pagure.io/modularity/issue/118
> https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/teams/modularity_wg/modularity_wg.2018-12-11-15.02.log.html
> (+3, 0, -0)
> 
> We'll skip the WG meetings scheduled for 2018-12-25 and 2019-01-01
> because many people are absent.
> https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/teams/modularity_wg/modularity_wg.2018-12-11-15.02.log.html
> (+3, 0, -0)
> 
> = Followups =
> #topic #112 Discussion: Module lifecycles 
> https://pagure.io/modularity/issue/112
> 
> #topic #115 Discussion: Stream branch ownership for packages &
> modules
> https://pagure.io/modularity/issue/115
> 
> = New business =
> #topic #119 Modularity WG Charter (contd.)
> https://pagure.io/modularity/issue/119
> 
> = Open Floor =
> 
> For more complete details, please visit each individual
> issue.  The report of the agenda items can be found at
> https://pagure.io/modularity/report/meeting_agenda
> 
> If you would like to add something to this agenda, you can file a new
> issue at https://pagure.io/modularity/issues, or bring it up at the
> end
> of the meeting during the open floor topic. Note that the meeting is
> one hour long and issues we don't get around to discussing may be
> deferred until the following meeting.
> 
-- 
Nils Philippsen"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to
Software Engineer   purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither
Red Hat Liberty nor Safety."  --  Benjamin Franklin, 1759
PGP fingerprint:C4A8 9474 5C4C ADE3 2B8F  656D 47D8 9B65 6951 3011
___
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

Agenda for Tuesday's Modularity Working Group Meeting (YYYY-MM-DD)

[Nils Philippsen]

(Sorry for sending this so late.)

Find below a list of topics which are planned to be discussed in the
Fedora Modularity Working Group meeting on Tuesday at 15:00 UTC in
#fedora-meeting-3 on irc.freenode.net.

To find out when this is in your local time zone, check the Fedora
Calendar (if you've set it and are logged in):
  https://apps.fedoraproject.org/calendar/modularity/#m5249

Alternatively, to convert UTC to your local time zone, take a look at
  http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto

or run:
  date -d 'Tuesday 15:00 UTC'

Links to all issues below can be found at:
  https://pagure.io/modularity/report/meeting_agenda

= Discussed and Voted =
Modularity WG Charter Review
https://pagure.io/modularity/issue/118
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/teams/modularity_wg/modularity_wg.2018-12-11-15.02.log.html
(+3, 0, -0)

We'll skip the WG meetings scheduled for 2018-12-25 and 2019-01-01
because many people are absent.
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/teams/modularity_wg/modularity_wg.2018-12-11-15.02.log.html
(+3, 0, -0)

= Followups =
#topic #112 Discussion: Module lifecycles 
https://pagure.io/modularity/issue/112

#topic #115 Discussion: Stream branch ownership for packages & modules
https://pagure.io/modularity/issue/115

= New business =
#topic #119 Modularity WG Charter (contd.)
https://pagure.io/modularity/issue/119

= Open Floor =

For more complete details, please visit each individual
issue.  The report of the agenda items can be found at
https://pagure.io/modularity/report/meeting_agenda

If you would like to add something to this agenda, you can file a new
issue at https://pagure.io/modularity/issues, or bring it up at the end
of the meeting during the open floor topic. Note that the meeting is
one hour long and issues we don't get around to discussing may be
deferred until the following meeting.

-- 
Nils Philippsen"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to
Software Engineer   purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither
Red Hat Liberty nor Safety."  --  Benjamin Franklin, 1759
PGP fingerprint:C4A8 9474 5C4C ADE3 2B8F  656D 47D8 9B65 6951 3011


___
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: Orphaned packages need new maintainers (will be retired in 1 week)

[Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek]

On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 01:13:05PM +, Dave Love wrote:
> Miro Hrončok  writes:
> 
> > On 18. 12. 18 11:22, Dave Love wrote:
> >>> loveshack: makedepf90
> >>
> >> I don't think that's the case now.  dl_poly used it, but I've removed
> >> the dependency and I wonder why it's showing up with a threat (I assume)
> >> to remove dl_poly.
> >
> > Indeed:
> >
> > Depending on: makedepf90 (1), status change: 2017-10-06 (62 weeks ago)
> > dl_poly (maintained by: loveshack)
> > dl_poly-1.10-1.fc30.src requires makedepf90 = 2.8.8-15.fc29
> >
> >
> > That is because
> > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/dl_poly/c/b39e9ea3ac097d85e6574c1167088c8c3d68031b?branch=master
> > was never built and the metadata are taken from the repos.
> 
> Does that mean we actually have to rebuild things to prevent them
> getting removed?

This is being discussed in the fesco ticket starting at
https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/1970#comment-546480.
It seems that the policy will become to open a FTBFS bug (or possibly
wait for the mass rebuild, since we have one coming up), and let the
usual FTBFS policy take over. So if the package builds, there should
be no issue. If it FTBFS, the package will be retired after some time.

Zbyszek
___
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 1659476] Upgrade perl-Test-CheckManifest to 1.38

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1659476

Ralf Corsepius  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |NOTABUG
Last Closed||2018-12-18 14:24:52



--- Comment #1 from Ralf Corsepius  ---
This upstream release is broken and not in a shape to be included into Fedora.

-- 
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

Re: Orphaned packages need new maintainers (will be retired in 1 week)

[Dave Love]

Miro Hrončok  writes:

> On 18. 12. 18 11:22, Dave Love wrote:
>>> loveshack: makedepf90
>>
>> I don't think that's the case now.  dl_poly used it, but I've removed
>> the dependency and I wonder why it's showing up with a threat (I assume)
>> to remove dl_poly.
>
> Indeed:
>
> Depending on: makedepf90 (1), status change: 2017-10-06 (62 weeks ago)
>   dl_poly (maintained by: loveshack)
>   dl_poly-1.10-1.fc30.src requires makedepf90 = 2.8.8-15.fc29
>
>
> That is because
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/dl_poly/c/b39e9ea3ac097d85e6574c1167088c8c3d68031b?branch=master
> was never built and the metadata are taken from the repos.

Does that mean we actually have to rebuild things to prevent them
getting removed?
___
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: Orphaned packages need new maintainers (will be retired in 1 week)

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

On Tuesday, 18 December 2018 at 11:29, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 18. 12. 18 11:22, Dave Love wrote:
> > > loveshack: makedepf90
> > 
> > I don't think that's the case now.  dl_poly used it, but I've removed
> > the dependency and I wonder why it's showing up with a threat (I assume)
> > to remove dl_poly.
> 
> Indeed:
> 
> Depending on: makedepf90 (1), status change: 2017-10-06 (62 weeks ago)
>   dl_poly (maintained by: loveshack)
>   dl_poly-1.10-1.fc30.src requires makedepf90 = 2.8.8-15.fc29
> 
> 
> That is because 
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/dl_poly/c/b39e9ea3ac097d85e6574c1167088c8c3d68031b?branch=master
> was never built and the metadata are taken from the repos.

For a bit of history behind makedepf90, it was a bundled build
depencency for cp2k for a couple of releases, but they switched to
another implementation, so it was no longer required. Also, makedepf90
upstream is not active as far as I remember.

Regards,
Dominik
-- 
Fedora   https://getfedora.org  |  RPM Fusion  http://rpmfusion.org
There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and
oppression to develop psychic muscles.
-- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan
___
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: Orphaned packages need new maintainers (will be retired in 1 week)

[Miro Hrončok]

On 18. 12. 18 11:22, Dave Love wrote:

loveshack: makedepf90


I don't think that's the case now.  dl_poly used it, but I've removed
the dependency and I wonder why it's showing up with a threat (I assume)
to remove dl_poly.


Indeed:

Depending on: makedepf90 (1), status change: 2017-10-06 (62 weeks ago)
dl_poly (maintained by: loveshack)
dl_poly-1.10-1.fc30.src requires makedepf90 = 2.8.8-15.fc29


That is because 
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/dl_poly/c/b39e9ea3ac097d85e6574c1167088c8c3d68031b?branch=master 
was never built and the metadata are taken from the repos.

--
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

[Bug 1659953] Upgrade perl-Config-Model to 2.131

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1659953

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
   Fixed In Version||perl-Config-Model-2.131-1.f
   ||c30
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
Last Closed||2018-12-18 09:25:08



-- 
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

Re: Fedora Hardware portal

[Andrey Ponomarenko]

30.11.2018, 01:58, "Matthew Miller" :
> On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 04:57:33PM +0300, Andrey Ponomarenko wrote:
>>  https://github.com/linuxhw/hw-probe (various packages are available:
>>  AppImage, Snap, Flatpak, Docker, RPM, etc.). The tool is intended to
>
> Have you considered packaging this directly in Fedora? That would make it a
> lot easier for users to just run the program.
>

Pending updates:

f28: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-87931d1bc0
f29: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-780496d498

Please vote to achieve stable threshold.

el6/el7: waiting for hwinfo/libx86emu 
(https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/hwinfo/pull-requests, 
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/libx86emu/pull-requests)

Thank you.
___
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 1659953] Upgrade perl-Config-Model to 2.131

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1659953

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
   Assignee|david.hanneq...@gmail.com   |jples...@redhat.com



-- 
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