On Wed, Oct 09, 2019 at 06:04:39AM +, Dridi Boukelmoune wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 6:45 PM Ravindra Kumar via devel
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> >
> >
> > I have removed dependency on service B from service A and all references to
> > service B. The new package works well for fresh install
On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 6:45 PM Ravindra Kumar via devel
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>
>
> I have removed dependency on service B from service A and all references to
> service B. The new package works well for fresh install (service A can be
> started normally), but it does not work for upgrades from previ
On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 1:56 PM Irina Boverman wrote:
>
> Using "BuildRequires: python%{python3_pkgversion}-devel" results in this
> error:
>
> fedpkg scratch-build
> DEBUG util.py:593: No matching package to install: 'python36-devel'
A lot of Fedora .spec files use "python3-devel" and various
OLD: Fedora-31-20191007.n.0
NEW: Fedora-31-20191008.n.1
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 3
Added packages: 1
Dropped packages:1
Upgraded packages: 101
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 871.28 KiB
Size of dropped packages:1.16 MiB
On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 12:58:21PM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 03:48:35PM -0400, Irina Boverman wrote:
> > Ok, how will I know what test results are?
>
> We will be sure to share them back here to devel and epel-devel lists.
And... smooge and I just tested this. Sadly it
On Tue, 8 Oct 2019 at 15:49, Irina Boverman wrote:
>
> Ok, how will I know what test results are?
>
> On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 2:56 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 07:54:37PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
>> > On 08. 10. 19 18:48, Irina Boverman wrote:
>> > > My build (qpid-proton
Minutes:
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-3/2019-10-08/modularity.2019-10-08-15.08.html
Minutes (text):
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-3/2019-10-08/modularity.2019-10-08-15.08.txt
Log:
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-3/2019-10-08/modularity.2019-10
On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 3:42 PM John M. Harris, Jr.
wrote:
> We could simply stop doing projects that throw wildly different versions
> of software into a single installation, which causes this issue.
>
What you don't seem to appreciate, based on your comments in this thread
and others over the p
On 10/8/19 3:30 PM, John M. Harris, Jr. wrote:
We could simply stop doing projects that throw wildly different
versions of software into a single installation, which causes this issue.
There's a word for this that I can't remember at the
moment---'producting'? I think it's related to the monor
An update of mpfr from version 3.1.6 to version 4.0.2 is about to begin in
Rawhide in a side tag:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/mpfr-4.0.2
If you see a "Rebuild for mpfr 4" commit in your package repo, then please
coordinate with me before building your package in Rawhide. If you do
On Tue, 8 Oct 2019 at 15:32, John M. Harris, Jr. wrote:
>
> We could simply stop doing projects that throw wildly different versions of
> software into a single installation, which causes this issue.
>
We could also just all quit and join potato farming cults.. they are
next to the Yak farms whi
On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 03:48:35PM -0400, Irina Boverman wrote:
> Ok, how will I know what test results are?
We will be sure to share them back here to devel and epel-devel lists.
kevin
--
>
> On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 2:56 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 07:54:37PM +0200, M
Ok, how will I know what test results are?
On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 2:56 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 07:54:37PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > On 08. 10. 19 18:48, Irina Boverman wrote:
> > > My build (qpid-proton package) cannot find pythin36-devel package, I
> > > also tried
On 10/8/19 6:04 AM, Ankur Sinha wrote:
Would anyone else have the cycles to review/update these pages in the
meantime please?
https://gcc01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.fedoraproject.org%2Fen-US%2Fquick-docs%2Fcreating-rpm-packages%2F&data=02%7C01%7Cprzemek.klosowski%
We could simply stop doing projects that throw wildly different versions of
software into a single installation, which causes this issue.
On October 8, 2019 6:23:47 PM UTC, Matthew Miller
wrote:
>On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 02:09:24PM -0400, Przemek Klosowski via devel
>wrote:
>> Having said that,
On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 07:54:37PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 08. 10. 19 18:48, Irina Boverman wrote:
> > My build (qpid-proton package) cannot find pythin36-devel package, I
> > also tried python3-devel (also not found). It appears python36 was
> > removed from EPEL 7 recently.
>
> Yes it wa
Hi,
I have removed dependency on service B from service A and all references to
service B. The new package works well for fresh install (service A can be
started normally), but it does not work for upgrades from previous versions
where service A used to depend on service B (starting service A f
On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 02:09:24PM -0400, Przemek Klosowski via devel wrote:
> Having said that, I am not sure it will solve the problem with
> ecosystems requiring specific collection of component versions (*):
> what is the expected number of required versions for each module in
> those environm
On 10/7/19 4:34 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
To me, most packages would benefit from having two streams: fast and slow.
That's the essential problem I want solved anyway. (Maybe with CentOS
Streams: fast, slow, very slow.)
The "slow" version would be updated on a careful cadence with big updates
al
On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 06:42:40PM +0100, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote:
> To be honest IMO separating aspell dictionaries is a bit illogical because
> on distribution layer language dependent resources should be described by
> %lang() and chosen on install stage by %_install_langs.
> Ergo: all "langpack" (
Using "BuildRequires: python%{python3_pkgversion}-devel" results in this
error:
fedpkg scratch-build
DEBUG util.py:593: No matching package to install: 'python36-devel'
On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 1:43 PM Sérgio Basto wrote:
> Now python 3.6 is shipped by RHEL 7.7 or Centos 7.7, the rules of [1
On 08. 10. 19 18:48, Irina Boverman wrote:
My build (qpid-proton package) cannot find pythin36-devel package, I also tried
python3-devel (also not found). It appears python36 was removed from EPEL 7
recently.
Yes it was, as it was added to RHEL 7.7.
The error is:
https://koji.fedoraproject.or
On Tue, 8 Oct 2019 at 17:15, Nikola Forró wrote:
> On Tue, 2019-10-08 at 12:22 +0200, Jindrich Novy wrote:
> > Nikola, is it intended that aspell doesn't depend on any dictionary?
> > E.g. aspell-en? Please see the email bellow.
>
> Hi,
>
> it seems it is intentional [1], this is probably the rea
Now python 3.6 is shipped by RHEL 7.7 or Centos 7.7, the rules
of [1] still valid so you should (or must ) use [2]
[2]BuildRequires: python%{python3_pkgversion}-devel
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Bkabrda/EPEL7_Python3
On Tue, 2019-10-08 at 12:48 -0400, Irina Boverman wrote:
> My build
Hi all,
Today, October 8th 2019, is an important day on the Fedora 31
schedule [1], with significant cut-offs.
Today we have the Final Freeze [2]. This means that only packages
which fix accepted blocker or freeze exception bugs [3][4][5] will be
marked as 'stable' and included in the Final compo
Hi,
On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 01:23:01PM +0100, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Oct 2019 at 12:58, wrote:
>
> > Notification time stamped 2019-10-08 11:54:56 UTC
> >
> > From 26d638db91fa316f706ea947ab076bce216ec8cc Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> > From: Phil Sutter
> > Date: Oct 08 2019 11:51:27 +
Hi all.
I wish to maintain libcutl, recently orphaned.
Ticket #8882: https://pagure.io/releng/issue/8882
--
---
Antonio Trande
Fedora Project
mailto 'sagitter at fedoraproject dot org'
GPG key: 0x6e0331dd1699e4d7
GPG key server: https://keys.openpgp.org/
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP di
My build (qpid-proton package) cannot find pythin36-devel package, I also
tried python3-devel (also not found). It appears python36 was removed from
EPEL 7 recently.
Is this still relevant:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Bkabrda/EPEL7_Python3?
Is this a temporary issue with getting python3 int
On Tue, 2019-10-08 at 12:22 +0200, Jindrich Novy wrote:
> Nikola, is it intended that aspell doesn't depend on any dictionary?
> E.g. aspell-en? Please see the email bellow.
Hi,
it seems it is intentional [1], this is probably the reason [2].
I suppose aspell could recommend aspell-en, to prevent
On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 10:17:06AM -0400, Alexander Scheel wrote:
> > What if you want to apply a bugfix (or security update) to both of those
> > packages? How would that work?
> I'm not saying it is completely solved, just that what we have left to
> do is a lot less work than trying to fix modul
Someone, could give us advice about below situation, if the new
package htslib's "/usr/lib64/libhts.so.1.9" is valid?
"1.9" is upstream software's version. "2" is ABI's version (so version).
```
sh-5.0# ls -l /usr/lib64/libhts.so*
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 13 Oct 2 23:50 /usr/lib64/libhts.so ->
Matthew Miller writes:
> On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 03:20:21PM -0400, Alexander Scheel wrote:
>
>>> And where is the software for those containers coming from? Some
>>> container registry like Docker Hub? One of the main points of
>>> Modularity is to provide a trusted source of software to install
On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 1:35 AM Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 10/8/19 8:03 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 04:34:28PM -0400, Scott Talbert wrote:
> >> On Mon, 7 Oct 2019, Richard Shaw wrote:
> >>
> >>> I am in the midst of updating the freecad package in two major w
- Original Message -
> From: "Matthew Miller"
> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 8, 2019 9:18:29 AM
> Subject: Re: Modularity and the system-upgrade path
>
> On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 08:08:56PM -0400, Alexander Scheel wrote:
> > > Without modular
Petr, I am sorry to hear of your health problems. I hope you recover soon.
I have been following this situation but have little time to spend on this.
I personally use mercurial and depend on extensions: evolve and hg-git. I
have been quiet while working on getting these extensions ported.
S
On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 02:06:06AM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Sure, I fully understand the theoretical benefits to be had from Modularity
> (though I still think that this is much more useful for LTS distributions
> such as RHEL or CentOS than for Fedora). The issue is that it all breaks
> dow
On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 08:08:56PM -0400, Alexander Scheel wrote:
> > Without modularity, RPM doesn't offer a good way to choose between different
> > versions of the same thing. One can squash version numbers into the name,
> > which covers some use cases, but also becomes unwieldy and loses the _
- Original Message -
> From: "Vít Ondruch"
> To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Sent: Tuesday, October 8, 2019 1:10:18 PM
> Subject: Re: Has fedpkg + dist-git replaced rpmbuild for building new/local
> packages?
>
>
>
>
> Dne 08. 10. 19 v 12:04 Ankur Sinha napsal(a):
>
>
>
> On
On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 13:03:48 +0300, Panu Matilainen wrote:
>
>
> Look, I'm no more in love with the traditional layout than anybody, I'm just
> saying changing the default is not as simple as you'd like to think. Anybody
> wanting to work on changing the default is welcome to propose it upstream
On 08. 10. 19 14:04, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 08. 10. 19 13:53, Peter Robinson wrote:
bzr (bazaar) FTBFS and is orphaned.
I have a Python 3 replacement called breezy (brz) ready, but it has some
problems with remote repositories on Python 3.8, so I was not ready to build it,
obsolete bzr and have
Hi,
On Tue, 8 Oct 2019 at 12:58, wrote:
> Notification time stamped 2019-10-08 11:54:56 UTC
>
> From 26d638db91fa316f706ea947ab076bce216ec8cc Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Phil Sutter
> Date: Oct 08 2019 11:51:27 +
> Subject: iproute-5.3.0-2
>
>
> - ifcfg script uses killall, therefore r
On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 13:10:18 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>
>
> I'll add this to the docs pages when I find time. It can go in the
> "prepare your system" section:
>
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/quick-docs/creating-rpm-packages/#preparing-your-system-to-create-rpm-packages
>
On 08. 10. 19 13:53, Peter Robinson wrote:
bzr (bazaar) FTBFS and is orphaned.
I have a Python 3 replacement called breezy (brz) ready, but it has some
problems with remote repositories on Python 3.8, so I was not ready to build it,
obsolete bzr and have a broken alternative.
However, bzr now a
> bzr (bazaar) FTBFS and is orphaned.
>
> I have a Python 3 replacement called breezy (brz) ready, but it has some
> problems with remote repositories on Python 3.8, so I was not ready to build
> it,
> obsolete bzr and have a broken alternative.
>
> However, bzr now also fails to install, so it ca
On 08. 10. 19 13:19, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 5:40 AM Miro Hrončok wrote:
Hello,
bzr (bazaar) FTBFS and is orphaned.
I have a Python 3 replacement called breezy (brz) ready, but it has some
problems with remote repositories on Python 3.8, so I was not ready to build it,
obsole
On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 5:40 AM Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> Hello,
> bzr (bazaar) FTBFS and is orphaned.
>
> I have a Python 3 replacement called breezy (brz) ready, but it has some
> problems with remote repositories on Python 3.8, so I was not ready to build
> it,
> obsolete bzr and have a broken al
Dne 08. 10. 19 v 12:04 Ankur Sinha napsal(a):
> On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 12:21:05 +0300, Panu Matilainen wrote:
>> Yup. If you prefer working in a dist-git like layout, just configure rpm do
>> behave that way. One possibility is simply:
>>
>> %_topdir %{getenv:PWD}
>> %_sourcedir %{_topdir}
>> %
Adding Nikola.
Nikola, is it intended that aspell doesn't depend on any dictionary? E.g.
aspell-en? Please see the email bellow.
Thanks,
Jindrich
On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 5:14 PM Tomasz Kłoczko
wrote:
> On Mon, 7 Oct 2019 at 15:30, Jindrich Novy wrote:
> [..]
>
>> BTW mc.
>>> Also I do not und
On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 12:21:05 +0300, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> Yup. If you prefer working in a dist-git like layout, just configure rpm do
> behave that way. One possibility is simply:
>
> %_topdir %{getenv:PWD}
> %_sourcedir %{_topdir}
> %_specdir %{_topdir}
> %_srcrpmdir %{_topdir}
>
On 10/8/19 12:45 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 08. 10. 19 v 11:21 Panu Matilainen napsal(a):
On 10/8/19 11:54 AM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
On Tuesday, 08 October 2019 at 08:34, Vít Ondruch wrote:
[...]
2) fedpkg would not be needed if rpmbuild would be sanely able to do
something li
On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 09:07:14 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 12:38:21AM +0100, Ankur Sinha wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 20:40:07 +0200, Aleksandra Fedorova wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I think we are talking about different things.
> > >
> > >
On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 10:57:14 +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> Dne 08. 10. 19 v 1:38 Ankur Sinha napsal(a):
> > to link to the "How to create a GNU Hello world package" which focuses
> > on building the rpm only and not the rest of the process. This is here:
> > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/q
Dne 08. 10. 19 v 11:21 Panu Matilainen napsal(a):
> On 10/8/19 11:54 AM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
>> On Tuesday, 08 October 2019 at 08:34, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>> [...]
>>> 2) fedpkg would not be needed if rpmbuild would be sanely able to do
>>> something like `fedpkg --release master s
Hello,
bzr (bazaar) FTBFS and is orphaned.
I have a Python 3 replacement called breezy (brz) ready, but it has some
problems with remote repositories on Python 3.8, so I was not ready to build it,
obsolete bzr and have a broken alternative.
However, bzr now also fails to install, so it cannot
On 10/8/19 11:54 AM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
On Tuesday, 08 October 2019 at 08:34, Vít Ondruch wrote:
[...]
2) fedpkg would not be needed if rpmbuild would be sanely able to do
something like `fedpkg --release master srpm` but even so basic think
requires either shuffling with file
On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 12:38:21AM +0100, Ankur Sinha wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 20:40:07 +0200, Aleksandra Fedorova wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> >
> >
> > I think we are talking about different things.
> >
> > It all depends on which question the doc is trying to answer.
>
> So, there are two diff
Dne 08. 10. 19 v 1:38 Ankur Sinha napsal(a):
to link to the "How to create a GNU Hello world package" which focuses
on building the rpm only and not the rest of the process. This is here:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/quick-docs/create-hello-world-rpm/
Unless there are strong objections,
On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 08:32:47AM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 10/8/19 8:03 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> >On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 04:34:28PM -0400, Scott Talbert wrote:
> >>On Mon, 7 Oct 2019, Richard Shaw wrote:
> >>
> >>>I am in the midst of updating the freecad package in two m
On Tuesday, 08 October 2019 at 08:34, Vít Ondruch wrote:
[...]
> 2) fedpkg would not be needed if rpmbuild would be sanely able to do
> something like `fedpkg --release master srpm` but even so basic think
> requires either shuffling with files on FS or specifying million of
> working directories.
It seems that the biggest issue with the documentation you have is the
`fedpkg` and I agree, we should not recommend it. Instead of `fedpkg`,
this should be used to create the SRPM:
~~~
$ rpmbuild --define "_sourcedir `pwd`" -bs package.spec
~~~
However, from this point, the mock should be us
60 matches
Mail list logo