ABI changed in svt-vp9 0.1.1 release.
All changes
https://taskotron.fedoraproject.org/artifacts/all/6720382c-ebf1-11e9-904f-52540077ca13/tests.yml/svt-vp9-0.1.1-1.fc32.log
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an ema
Shame on Redhat for using an untested feature
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1671683
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https:/
On 10/10/19 4:57 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote:
On 10/10/19 9:23 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 03:30:40PM +0200, Robert-André Mauchin wrote:
On Thursday, 10 October 2019 04:42:57 CEST Orion Poplawski wrote:
Anyone else seeing this? If so, anyone know the reason and plans to
fix?
> On Oct 10, 2019, at 7:34 PM, Jakub Kadlcik wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> currently, there is a problem with building EPEL-8 packages because of
> DNF bugs regarding modularity (see RHBZ 1758459).
>
> The only known workaround is to use DNF with `best=False'. Even though
> it is something you don't
Lukas Ruzicka wrote:
> Just for illustration, this is what I wanted to say about it:
>
>1. Modularity should stay away from my system until I call for it ->
>now it is not the case, because modularity sneaks into users' computer
>through modular defaults that overcome the non-modular p
Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 12:28:37AM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> The problem does not only happen if the module is a non-leaf at module
>> level, but there can also be conflicts at package level, if the modules
>> bundle non-leaf packages that then conflict between the 2 mod
Hello,
currently, there is a problem with building EPEL-8 packages because of
DNF bugs regarding modularity (see RHBZ 1758459).
The only known workaround is to use DNF with `best=False'. Even though
it is something you don't really want to use longterm, we are patching
mock configs epel-8-* chroo
I continue to run into strange (at least to me) issues with modules on
EL8. RHEL8 ships a 'rhn-tools' module that ships only the "koan"
package from the cobbler srpm [1]. When this module is enabled, I
cannot install cobbler from my copr - dnf reports that 'cobbler' is
excluded.
Can someone
On 10/10/19 9:23 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 03:30:40PM +0200, Robert-André Mauchin wrote:
On Thursday, 10 October 2019 04:42:57 CEST Orion Poplawski wrote:
Anyone else seeing this? If so, anyone know the reason and plans to
fix? Thanks!
I concur, yesterday it was taking
Andreas Bierfert writes:
> On Thu, 2019-10-10 at 14:23 -0400, Robbie Harwood wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> In accordance with Fedora non-responsive maintainer policy, I'm
>> sending this message in attempt to contact Andreas Bierfert (awjb).
>>
>> Required non-responsive maintainer bug:
>> https://bug
On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 2:36 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <
zbys...@in.waw.pl> wrote:
> > So the PRs were for Rawhide, but the bug I'm trying to fix exists on all
> > supported Fedora releases. I wasn't planning on updating F29 at this
> point
> > but F30 does have a lot of life left.
> >
> > I
On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 12:39 AM Florian Weimer wrote:
> Sorry, I wasn't aware that you were trying to rebuild gcc this week. I
> spoke to Jakub about the glibc32 change, and he had no objections.
>
> It's not clear how you are handling the transition. Why do you need to
> change GCC build requi
... and that's the wrong list. My bad.
Thanks,
--Robbie
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
Hello,
In accordance with Fedora non-responsive maintainer policy, I'm sending
this message in attempt to contact Andreas Bierfert (awjb).
Required non-responsive maintainer bug:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1760528
Open unaddressed bugs (53 in total):
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/
On Thu, 2019-10-10 at 08:23 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 03:30:40PM +0200, Robert-André Mauchin wrote:
> > On Thursday, 10 October 2019 04:42:57 CEST Orion Poplawski wrote:
> > > Anyone else seeing this? If so, anyone know the reason and plans
> > > to
> > > fix? Thanks!
>
On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 12:28:37AM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > Yeah, I agree that there's a problem with non-parallel-installable modules
> > that aren't effectively leaves.
> The problem does not only happen if the module is a non-leaf at module
> level, but there can also be conflicts at pack
On 09. 10. 19 15:14, Ben Cotton wrote:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ReplaceBazaarWithBreezy
Note that this was originally discussed on the devel mailing list:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/RQW6L265IIVHUIHNXPELEFMIBQX67DLC/#TBWSCGWFSG
On 10. 10. 19 17:46, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 12:52 AM Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 09. 10. 19 22:46, Ben Cotton wrote:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Modules_In_Non-Modular_Buildroot
Enable module default streams in the buildroot repository for modular
and non-modular
On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 12:52 AM Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> On 09. 10. 19 22:46, Ben Cotton wrote:
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Modules_In_Non-Modular_Buildroot
> >
> > Enable module default streams in the buildroot repository for modular
> > and non-modular RPMs.
> >
> > == Summary ==
Il 10/10/19 16:35, Ben Cotton ha scritto:
> == Scope ==
> All packages depending on `fpc` should be rebuilt with the new `fpc`
> once it hits F32, or, if there is not enough time for that, just all
> packages built after the new `fpc` hits the buildroots.
>
> * Proposal owners:
> ** Update the `fpc
> https://pagure.io/releng/issue/8880 - Include default_modules_scm_url in
> platform 31 virtual module
platform *f32*?
Other than that, it would be nice to have more specific rules *when*
and *how* modules are checked to conform to the guidelines…
On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 10:51 PM Ben Cotton w
On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 03:30:40PM +0200, Robert-André Mauchin wrote:
> On Thursday, 10 October 2019 04:42:57 CEST Orion Poplawski wrote:
> > Anyone else seeing this? If so, anyone know the reason and plans to
> > fix? Thanks!
>
> I concur, yesterday it was taking around a minute to get an answ
Hello,
We had a rather short meeting where I quickly ran over the agenda. A few
action items are pending, so we'll work on those:
===
#fedora-neuro: NeuroFedora - 2019-10-10
===
Meeting started by FranciscoD at 15:01:56 UTC
On 10. 10. 19 16:15, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
On Wed, 9 Oct 2019 at 19:56, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 10. 10. 19 1:44, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
On Wed, 9 Oct 2019 at 18:46, Miro Hrončok wrote:
What I miss in the description is:
1. How does this thing actually work? is there an additi
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20191009.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20191010.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:2
Dropped images: 3
Added packages: 13
Dropped packages:1
Upgraded packages: 64
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 46.87 MiB
Size of dropped packages
Is there a COPR available for testing?
hedgewars just released 1.0 and I need to see if I have any issues with the
new compiler stack, especially since it looks like I won't need ExcludeArch
anymore.
Thanks,
Richard
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists
> So despite providing zero feedback here, this was voted at the modularity
> meeting:
>
> * Tagging Module Defaults into non-modular repo (sgallagh, 15:41:37)
>* AGREED: We disagree with merging default streams into the main repo
> as non-modular packages. Our approach is to implement a
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Free_Pascal_Compiler_3.2.0
== Summary ==
Update the Free Pascal Compiler used within Fedora to version 3.2.0,
once it is published, and enable building (previously unsupported)
AArch64 and ppc64le packages using the compiler.
== Owners ==
* Name: [[User:suve
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 5/153 (x86_64), 1/2 (arm)
New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-31-20191009.n.0):
ID: 466566 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso apps_startstop
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/466566
ID: 466618 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_ser
No missing expected images.
Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check!
2 of 45 required tests failed, 2 results missing
openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING**
below
Unsatisfied gating requirements that could not be mapped to openQA tests:
FAILED: compose.clo
On Wed, 9 Oct 2019 at 19:56, Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> On 10. 10. 19 1:44, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> > On Wed, 9 Oct 2019 at 18:46, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> >>
> >
> >> What I miss in the description is:
> >>
> >> 1. How does this thing actually work? is there an additional repository
> >> compos
On Thu, 2019-10-10 at 14:06 +, Sergey Avseyev wrote:
> mypaint
is not retired you can take the onwership
--
Sérgio M. B.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
F
Is it too late to restore maintenance of mypaint? I've just fixed all
issues, and only about to push last patch, but cannot do it unfortunately
anymore.
--
Sergey Avseyev
El lun., 7 ene. 2019 a las 7:59, Miro Hrončok ()
escribió:
> The following packages are orphaned and will be retired when th
OLD: Fedora-31-20191009.n.0
NEW: Fedora-31-20191010.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:2
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 0
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 0
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 0 B
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Size of upgraded
On Thursday, 10 October 2019 04:42:57 CEST Orion Poplawski wrote:
> Anyone else seeing this? If so, anyone know the reason and plans to
> fix? Thanks!
I concur, yesterday it was taking around a minute to get an answer from the
server.
___
devel mail
Hi,
Phil Sutter writes:
> 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 Su
On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 8:46 AM Jared K. Smith
wrote:
> I will open a Rel-Eng ticket for unretirement once the package has been
> re-reviewed.
>
>
The package has been re-reviewed and re-approved, and I have opened the
rel-eng ticket at https://pagure.io/releng/issue/8891.
--
Jared Smith
On 07. 10. 19 11:39, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 06. 10. 19 23:52, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Sun, Oct 06, 2019 at 09:00:18PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
It says: package python3-3.7.4-5.fc31.armv7hl is excluded
I don't know why would it be. How do i debug why it gets excluded?
Only python36 and python38
On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 3:53 AM Chris Murphy wrote:
>
> Release criterion
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_31_Final_Release_Criteria#Xen_DomU
>
> Bug since Fedora 30 also affects Fedora 31 and has been proposed as a
> Fedora 31 blocker bug
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=170370
* Florian Weimer:
> * Jerry James:
>
>> On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 8:25 PM Jerry James wrote:
>>> The previous build managed to grab the last build of glibc32 for
>>> s390x, it seems. I'm going to assume that this means that s390x
>>> should be removed from the multilib_64_arches variable in the gcc
> > Anyone else seeing this? If so, anyone know the reason and plans to fix?
> > Thanks!
>
> You'll have to be more specific than this, there has been some work put
> recently
> on its database which led to some improvements so if you still find koji slow,
> you'll have to provide some more infor
On Wed, Oct 09, 2019 at 08:42:57PM -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> Anyone else seeing this? If so, anyone know the reason and plans to fix?
> Thanks!
You'll have to be more specific than this, there has been some work put recently
on its database which led to some improvements so if you still fin
On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 12:46:00AM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 09. 10. 19 22:46, Ben Cotton wrote:
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Modules_In_Non-Modular_Buildroot
> >
> > Enable module default streams in the buildroot repository for modular
> > and non-modular RPMs.
> >
> > == Sum
On Wed, Oct 09, 2019 at 08:50:44PM -0500, Richard Shaw wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 3:54 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <
> zbys...@in.waw.pl> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 08:32:47AM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > > >
> > > >Those are fairly substantial changes, but time is of essence
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FPC
meeting Thursday at 2019-10-10 16:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on
irc.freenode.net.
Local time information (via. uitime):
= Day: Thursday ==
2019-10-10 09:00 PDT US/Pacific
2019-10-10
45 matches
Mail list logo
