Hello.
I am building python-cassandra-driver in Koji and my last two attempts
failed on s390x with error: URLError: Connection refused>
I found also other builds with the same issue:
* https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=32919248
* https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?
Le mardi 19 février 2019 à 18:04 +, Raphael Groner a écrit :
>
> Although, I doubt in general that any automagic with dependency
> generators brings a huge benefit in the long run.
That depends on the amount of deps the language uses. Human
handcrafting is always better but it does not scale
On Tuesday, February 19, 2019 11:46:16 PM EST Michal Novotny wrote:
> Hello!
>
> maybe you know that around April 2018, there was an announcement that
> libravatar service (a service for serving user avatars) is shutting
> down:
> https://blog.libravatar.org/posts/Libravatar.org_is_shutting_down_o
Hello!
maybe you know that around April 2018, there was an announcement that
libravatar service (a service for serving user avatars) is shutting
down:
https://blog.libravatar.org/posts/Libravatar.org_is_shutting_down_on_2018-09-01/
This raised a big wave of interest in the service and in keeping
A new Fedora Atomic Host update is available via an OSTree update:
Version: 29.20190219.0
Commit(x86_64): d00adf110907f93f6cdd05deda0e2878c9bd71c74e0c4c2e9a5250d2f4cc8868
Commit(aarch64):
b87cb9e59aa668ea0e79c3d2e7c017a340c03dcf79a2f7756fedddb3831ca74e
Commit(ppc64le):
33ee5adfd3e33c8e03ad460c7
Hi,
Richard Shaw wrote:
> Out of curiosity I took a look at abipkgdiff that's provided by the
> libabigail package and it's a python wrapper around abipkgdiff. I'm a
> little rusty on Python but I could probably use that as a very nice
> starting point...
>
> The next question is what package wou
Hi,
On Tue, 19 Feb 2019 at 09:21, Mohan Boddu wrote:
>
> Hello All,
>
> Fedora 30 will be branched from rawhide today as per the Fedora 30
> schedule[1]. The process takes about a day and everything should be ready by
> tomorrow. You can still be able to build packages normally until then, but
On Tue, 2019-02-19 at 10:43 -0500, Randy Barlow wrote:
> https://github.com/fedora-infra/bodhi/issues/3024
Bodhi 3.13.2 has been deployed to production just now, which should
address the above issue. You should again be able to associate bugs
with updates. Apologies for the issue!
signature.asc
On 19. 02. 19 22:37, Ben Cotton wrote:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/BINUTILS_GOLD
== Summary ==
Move the GOLD linker from the main binutils package into its own sub-package.
The wiki page seems weird. Everything is one level off.
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 4:40 PM Neal Gompa wrote:
> This looks like a Fedora 31 change, not a Fedora 30 change?
>
That is correct. I am going back to sleep now.
--
Ben Cotton
Fedora Program Manager
TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis
___
devel mailing l
I've got a 100% reproducible crash[1] with Firefox on Wayland, but
I've run into a brick wall getting it properly reported.
Neither coredumpctl nor abrt even report a crash, so no coredump file
exists. I was advised in my bug report that abrt doesn't provide
useful information anyway [1], so I sho
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 4:38 PM Ben Cotton wrote:
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/BINUTILS_GOLD
>
This looks like a Fedora 31 change, not a Fedora 30 change?
--
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lis
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/BINUTILS_GOLD
== Summary ==
Move the GOLD linker from the main binutils package into its own sub-package.
== Owner ==
* Name: Nick Clifton [https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Nickc]
* Email: ni...@redhat.com
== Detailed Description ==
The GOLD linker is cu
On 19. 02. 19 20:00, Barry Scott wrote:
Sorry this was supposed to go only to Kevin.
Actually, it's perfect that this went to devel.
Everybody knows what's going on.
The true spirit of open source and open collaboration. Please, keep doing this.
Good luck with packaging, Barry!
--
Miro Hrončo
> I'm the debhelper maintainer
>
> where are your packages submissions ? (can you add me please )
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=gnu-config
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=strip-nondeterminism
I CC'd you just now. According to Neal we may not need to package GNU
config, l
On Tue, 2019-02-19 at 20:00 +0100, Dridi Boukelmoune wrote:
> > TLDR , apt-rpm should be retired because nobody use it since more
> > than
> > 10 years .
> >
> > I maintain a lot of debian package in Fedora but apt-debian still
> > not
> > on Official repos you can get it from my devel corp repo
According to the Fedora 30 schedule[1], today is the deadline for
changes to be in a testable state. If your change is ready to be
tested, please set the status in the tracker bug to MODIFIED. If you
know your change will not be ready for Fedora 30, you can set the
version to rawhide and notify me.
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 09:48:19 -0800, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On 2/19/19 2:49 AM, Ankur Sinha wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > While going through the NeuroFedora package reviews, I was wondering if
> > it were OK for us to use the documentation related fields in Bugzilla to
> > mark that we need to update o
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 7:08 PM Tomasz Kłoczko wrote:
>
> On Tue, 19 Feb 2019 at 11:11, Dridi Boukelmoune
> wrote:
> [..]
>>
>> Apt is a mix of C, Perl and C++ code, so I would be reassured if I
>> could have a C++ co-maintainer too. I'm only a C developer so if
>> something goes wrong outside o
Sorry this was supposed to go only to Kevin.
Barry
___
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 Guideli
> TLDR , apt-rpm should be retired because nobody use it since more than
> 10 years .
>
> I maintain a lot of debian package in Fedora but apt-debian still not
> on Official repos you can get it from my devel corp repo [1]
> My goal is make a system where rpm produce deb files , to allow Debian
>
> On 18 Feb 2019, at 18:08, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> On 2/15/19 5:56 AM, Barry Scott wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On 13 Feb 2019, at 13:52, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 5, 2019 at 10:01 AM Stephen Gallagher
>>> wrote:
I've been maintaining this for several years since the main
> For what it's worth, this was a terrible lede for this email. And
I couldn't help it, my inner prankster insisted :)
> having worked extensively with both package managers, I can sincerely
> tell you both are ugly as hell, but rpm is less ugly than dpkg.
Yes, I'm not saying that rpm is perfect
On Tue, 19 Feb 2019 at 11:11, Dridi Boukelmoune
wrote:
[..]
> Apt is a mix of C, Perl and C++ code, so I would be reassured if I
> could have a C++ co-maintainer too. I'm only a C developer so if
> something goes wrong outside of the C realm that would be helpful.
>
Doesn't matter in what kind o
Hi,
maybe you already noticed, there's a project called pipreqs that parses python
code for import statements. We've already a review request:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1665749
Although, I doubt in general that any automagic with dependency generators
brings a huge benefit in
On 2/19/19 2:49 AM, Ankur Sinha wrote:
> Hello,
>
> While going through the NeuroFedora package reviews, I was wondering if
> it were OK for us to use the documentation related fields in Bugzilla to
> mark that we need to update our documentation at
> https://neuro.fedoraproject.org. Is it OK if w
On 2/18/19 3:05 PM, Ken Dreyer wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 2:48 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>>
>> On 2/18/19 12:56 PM, Kaleb Keithley wrote:
>>> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-1c53f1a6c8
>>> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-6a2e72916a
>>>
>>> Would someone pl
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 12:16 PM Sérgio Basto wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2019-02-19 at 08:21 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 7:40 AM Sérgio Basto
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, 2019-02-19 at 11:03 +0100, Dridi Boukelmoune wrote:
> > > > Greetings packagers,
> > > >
> > > > I know how
On Tue, 2019-02-19 at 08:21 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 7:40 AM Sérgio Basto
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 2019-02-19 at 11:03 +0100, Dridi Boukelmoune wrote:
> > > Greetings packagers,
> > >
> > > I know how important RPM is to the Fedora Project, but it breaks
> > > everythin
Hello fellow Fedora people!
I'm sorry to say, but Bodhi has a problem associating bugs with updates
right now:
https://github.com/fedora-infra/bodhi/issues/3024
For the moment, you should be able to create updates if you avoid
adding bugs to them. I am working on a fix, and I apologize for the
i
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 4:26 PM Petr Pisar wrote:
> On 2019-02-18, Ben Cotton wrote:
> > Let's take graphene as an example.
> >
> > Spec file contains:
> >
> > %package devel
> > Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}
> > %package tests
> > Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{rel
On 2019-02-18, Ben Cotton wrote:
> Let's take graphene as an example.
>
> Spec file contains:
>
> %package devel
> Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}
> %package tests
> Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}
>
>
> What we see when we build RPMs is:
> * graphene-devel requ
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 8:26 AM Mohan Boddu wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> Fedora 30 will be branched from rawhide today as per the Fedora 30
> schedule[1]. The process takes about a day and everything should be ready
> by tomorrow. You can still be able to build packages normally until then,
> but afte
Hello All,
Fedora 30 will be branched from rawhide today as per the Fedora 30
schedule[1]. The process takes about a day and everything should be ready
by tomorrow. You can still be able to build packages normally until then,
but after the mass branching rawhide and F31 will be separated.
We will
Out of curiosity I took a look at abipkgdiff that's provided by the
libabigail package and it's a python wrapper around abipkgdiff. I'm a
little rusty on Python but I could probably use that as a very nice
starting point...
The next question is what package would the wrapper go in? I think the
nat
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 7:40 AM Sérgio Basto wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2019-02-19 at 11:03 +0100, Dridi Boukelmoune wrote:
> > Greetings packagers,
> >
> > I know how important RPM is to the Fedora Project, but it breaks
> > everything downstream and we'd be better off using DPKG as we should
> > have fr
On Tue, 2019-02-19 at 11:03 +0100, Dridi Boukelmoune wrote:
> Greetings packagers,
>
> I know how important RPM is to the Fedora Project, but it breaks
> everything downstream and we'd be better off using DPKG as we should
> have from day one.
>
> I'm calling this initiative fedpkg: Fedora Embrac
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 7:06 AM Leigh Scott wrote:
>
> > Greetings packagers,
> >
> > I know how important RPM is to the Fedora Project, but it breaks
> > everything downstream and we'd be better off using DPKG as we should
> > have from day one.
> >
> > I'm calling this initiative fedpkg: Fedora
> Greetings packagers,
>
> I know how important RPM is to the Fedora Project, but it breaks
> everything downstream and we'd be better off using DPKG as we should
> have from day one.
>
> I'm calling this initiative fedpkg: Fedora Embraces DPKG.
>
> A bit of background here: I build both RPMs an
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 11:51:25 +, Ankur Sinha wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 11:38:15 +, Peter Robinson wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > > For one of my packages, doxygen is crashing on aarch64 (and not on any
> > > other arch). Any ideas/tips on how to fix this?
> >
> > Is the package name secret? M
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 11:38:15 +, Peter Robinson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > For one of my packages, doxygen is crashing on aarch64 (and not on any
> > other arch). Any ideas/tips on how to fix this?
>
> Is the package name secret? More details are always good here. There's
> generally no issues with d
On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 11:30 PM Vít Ondruch wrote:
> As long as we have no idea if the other maintainers are active, I am
> strongly against the automation. I've been there. Followed nor
> responsive policy just to find out later that instead of orphaning the
> package, next inactive maintainer
Hi,
> For one of my packages, doxygen is crashing on aarch64 (and not on any
> other arch). Any ideas/tips on how to fix this?
Is the package name secret? More details are always good here. There's
generally no issues with doxygen in general on aarch64.
> ...
> Patching output file 570/631
> BUI
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 5:05 AM Dridi Boukelmoune
wrote:
>
> Greetings packagers,
>
> I know how important RPM is to the Fedora Project, but it breaks
> everything downstream and we'd be better off using DPKG as we should
> have from day one.
>
> I'm calling this initiative fedpkg: Fedora Embraces
On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 4:36 PM Dridi Boukelmoune
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 9:21 PM Ben Cotton wrote:
> >
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/BuildRequires_Generators
> >
> > = BuildRequires Generators =
> >
> > == Summary ==
> > Add possibility to generate build-time dependencies
Hello,
For one of my packages, doxygen is crashing on aarch64 (and not on any
other arch). Any ideas/tips on how to fix this?
...
Patching output file 570/631
BUILDSTDERR: Patching output file 57malloc_consolidate(): invalid chunk size
BUILDSTDERR: /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.YZzKpD: line 38: 6804 Aborted
Hello,
While going through the NeuroFedora package reviews, I was wondering if
it were OK for us to use the documentation related fields in Bugzilla to
mark that we need to update our documentation at
https://neuro.fedoraproject.org. Is it OK if we:
- set a docs contact
- set doc type
- set doc t
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 11:20 AM Emmanuel Seyman wrote:
>
> * Dridi Boukelmoune [19/02/2019 11:03] :
> >
> > Three of those packages are heavy on Perl code, and I'm not a Perl
> > Monk. I tried to CC perl-sig as per the guidelines [1] (also tried with
> > the mailing list address) but bugzilla rep
* Dridi Boukelmoune [19/02/2019 11:03] :
>
> Three of those packages are heavy on Perl code, and I'm not a Perl
> Monk. I tried to CC perl-sig as per the guidelines [1] (also tried with
> the mailing list address) but bugzilla replied kindly:
>
> CC: perl-sig did not match anything
The Perl S
Greetings packagers,
I know how important RPM is to the Fedora Project, but it breaks
everything downstream and we'd be better off using DPKG as we should
have from day one.
I'm calling this initiative fedpkg: Fedora Embraces DPKG.
A bit of background here: I build both RPMs and DEBs for $DAYJOB
On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 9:21 PM Ben Cotton wrote:
== Dependencies ==
RPM changes are needed. Will be handled by Proposal Owners.
As with the other rpm change proposal, this change was submitted without
prior communication with the primary rpm maintainers, so I think a
clarification is i
On 2/18/19 10:19 PM, Ben Cotton wrote:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/BuildRequires_Generators
= BuildRequires Generators =
== Summary ==
Add possibility to generate build-time dependencies within RPM spec
file and teach RPM and mock how to handle this.
== Owner ==
* Name: [[User:ignat
52 matches
Mail list logo
