Re: Ideas and proposal for removing changelog and release fields from spec file

2020-02-24 Thread Adam Saleh
Nice, I have been trying to fight through the 'git context already missing' with pure lua rpm macros, and so far was hitting walls left and right :-) Will look at https://pagure.io/rpkg-util, might have more questions :-) Adam On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 12:20 AM clime wrote: > Hello! > > On Mon,

Re: Non-responsive maintainer: pocock

2020-02-24 Thread Artur Iwicki
On FSF Europe's mailing lists, DP's using the "daniel at pocock dot pro" address. I guess you could try messaging him using that address. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to

Re: Minimize systemd for kdump's initramfs

2020-02-24 Thread Kairui Song
On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 3:07 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 01:12:08PM +0800, Kairui Song wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 3:23 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek > > wrote: > > > On Fri, Jan 03, 2020 at 11:48:53AM +0800, Dave Young wrote: > > > > On 01/03/20 at

Re: Minimize systemd for kdump's initramfs

2020-02-24 Thread Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 01:12:08PM +0800, Kairui Song wrote: > On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 3:23 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek > wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 03, 2020 at 11:48:53AM +0800, Dave Young wrote: > > > On 01/03/20 at 11:45am, Dave Young wrote: > > > > On 01/02/20 at 09:02am, Zbigniew

Spam on closed bugzilla reports

2020-02-24 Thread Luya Tshimbalanga
Hello team, It looks like spammers use closed bug report for their ads as seen in this one: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1644013 Can someone maintaining bugzilla investigate the issue? -- Luya Tshimbalanga Fedora Design Team Fedora Design Suite maintainer

Re: Minimize systemd for kdump's initramfs

2020-02-24 Thread Kairui Song
On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 3:23 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Fri, Jan 03, 2020 at 11:48:53AM +0800, Dave Young wrote: > > On 01/03/20 at 11:45am, Dave Young wrote: > > > On 01/02/20 at 09:02am, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jan 02, 2020 at 12:21:26AM +0800, Kairui

[389-devel] 389 DS nightly 2020-02-25 - 96% PASS

2020-02-24 Thread vashirov
https://fedorapeople.org/groups/389ds/ci/nightly/2020/02/25/report-389-ds-base-1.4.3.3-20200225git3963b02.fc31.x86_64.html ___ 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to

[Bug 1781745] Co-maintainer request (to maintain EPEL8 branch)

2020-02-24 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1781745 Orion Poplawski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|---

Re: Fedora 32 Wifi Loss

2020-02-24 Thread Mark Bidewell
On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 8:59 PM Samuel Sieb wrote: > On 2/24/20 5:51 PM, Mark Bidewell wrote: > > Looks like an issue with firmware: > > > > Feb 24 20:32:51 precision7530-lan kernel: iwlwifi :6e:00.0: no > > suitable firmware found! > > Feb 24 20:32:51 precision7530-lan kernel: iwlwifi

Re: Fedora 32 Wifi Loss

2020-02-24 Thread Samuel Sieb
On 2/24/20 5:51 PM, Mark Bidewell wrote: Looks like an issue with firmware: Feb 24 20:32:51 precision7530-lan kernel: iwlwifi :6e:00.0: no suitable firmware found! Feb 24 20:32:51 precision7530-lan kernel: iwlwifi :6e:00.0: minimum version required: (null)0 Feb 24 20:32:51

Re: Fedora 32 Wifi Loss

2020-02-24 Thread Mark Bidewell
On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 4:27 PM Samuel Sieb wrote: > On 2/24/20 1:02 PM, Mark Bidewell wrote: > > Sorry if this is the wrong list for this, but since this refers to > > Fedora 32 I figured I would start here. I updated to the Fedora 32 > > Branched release and my Wifi no longer enables on the

Re: Fedora 32 Wifi Loss

2020-02-24 Thread Chris Murphy
On Mon, Feb 24, 2020, 2:03 PM Mark Bidewell wrote: > Sorry if this is the wrong list for this, but since this refers to Fedora > 32 I figured I would start here. I updated to the Fedora 32 Branched > release and my Wifi no longer enables on the 5.6 RC kernel. lspci still > shows the wireless

[EPEL-devel] Re: Looking for new maintainer: nagios, nagios-plugins, nrpe

2020-02-24 Thread Eduardo Kienetz
It would be my first time maintaining an EPEL package, but if nobody else already experienced is willing, I could probably do it with minimal supervision/hints to get started :) What has been the typical work? If they have git repos I can probably get a good understanding from the commits.

Re: Ideas and proposal for removing changelog and release fields from spec file

2020-02-24 Thread clime
Hello! On Mon, 24 Feb 2020 at 17:50, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > Good Morning Everyone, > > This topic has already been discussed a few times over the past month, but > Adam > Saleh, Nils Philippsen and myself have had the opportunity to invest some time > on it with the hope of making the

Re: Looking for new maintainer: nagios, nagios-plugins, nrpe

2020-02-24 Thread Martin Jackson
I will take them - mhjacks in FAS. Any other potential comaintainers would also be welcome but I am a fan of the stack and would hate to see it disappear from the Fedora ecosystem. Thanks! > On Feb 24, 2020, at 4:21 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > > I have been maintaining nagios,

Re: Cross-arch dependencies for plugins (NSS and others)

2020-02-24 Thread James Cassell
On Mon, Feb 24, 2020, at 4:51 PM, Florian Weimer wrote: > * James Cassell: > > > On Mon, Feb 24, 2020, at 1:11 PM, Florian Weimer wrote: > >> Sometimes, users run into problems because they install nss_nis on > >> x86_64 and want to use 32-bit applications, but those do not work > >> correctly

Re: Autoclosure of review requests?

2020-02-24 Thread Fabio Valentini
On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 11:23 PM Iñaki Ucar wrote: > > On Mon, 24 Feb 2020 at 23:13, Ben Cotton wrote: > > > > In the weekly Fedora program update that I publish on > > communityblog.fedoraproject.org, I have started to include a count of the > > open package review requests. As of this

Re: Autoclosure of review requests?

2020-02-24 Thread Iñaki Ucar
On Mon, 24 Feb 2020 at 23:13, Ben Cotton wrote: > > In the weekly Fedora program update that I publish on > communityblog.fedoraproject.org, I have started to include a count of the > open package review requests. As of this moment, there are ~1300 open review > requests. Some of these were

[EPEL-devel] Looking for new maintainer: nagios, nagios-plugins, nrpe

2020-02-24 Thread Stephen John Smoogen
I have been maintaining nagios, nagios-plugins, and nrpe for a couple of years but currently I do not have much time to put towards the packages and won't until 2021 at my current rate. Last week, I emailed various people who have co-maintainer rights on the package, but haven't had anyone reply.

Looking for new maintainer: nagios, nagios-plugins, nrpe

2020-02-24 Thread Stephen John Smoogen
I have been maintaining nagios, nagios-plugins, and nrpe for a couple of years but currently I do not have much time to put towards the packages and won't until 2021 at my current rate. Last week, I emailed various people who have co-maintainer rights on the package, but haven't had anyone reply.

Want to claim vault

2020-02-24 Thread Dave Dykstra
I made a ticket (bug #1806737) for the maintainer of the existing vault package in Fedora to see if he'd be willing to give it up so it can be used for Hashicorp vault (https://vaultproject.io) and he decided to mark it EOL so I could claim it. Dave ___

Re: Cross-arch dependencies for plugins (NSS and others)

2020-02-24 Thread Nicolas Mailhot via devel
Le lundi 24 février 2020 à 22:51 +0100, Florian Weimer a écrit : > > Recommends: isn't a hard dependency? It’s a weak but not weak weak dependency :) -- Nicolas Mailhot ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an

Autoclosure of review requests?

2020-02-24 Thread Ben Cotton
In the weekly Fedora program update that I publish on communityblog.fedoraproject.org, I have started to include a count of the open package review requests. As of this moment, there are ~1300 open review requests. Some of these were opened in 2006. The usual Bugzilla housekeeping (branching, EOL

Re: Cross-arch dependencies for plugins (NSS and others)

2020-02-24 Thread Florian Weimer
* James Cassell: > On Mon, Feb 24, 2020, at 1:11 PM, Florian Weimer wrote: >> Sometimes, users run into problems because they install nss_nis on >> x86_64 and want to use 32-bit applications, but those do not work >> correctly because nss_nis.i686 is not installed. I think we have an >>

Re: Cross-arch dependencies for plugins (NSS and others)

2020-02-24 Thread James Cassell
On Mon, Feb 24, 2020, at 1:11 PM, Florian Weimer wrote: > Sometimes, users run into problems because they install nss_nis on > x86_64 and want to use 32-bit applications, but those do not work > correctly because nss_nis.i686 is not installed. I think we have an > opportunity here to improve the

Re: Fedora 32 Wifi Loss

2020-02-24 Thread Samuel Sieb
On 2/24/20 1:02 PM, Mark Bidewell wrote: Sorry if this is the wrong list for this, but since this refers to Fedora 32 I figured I would start here. I updated to the Fedora 32 Branched release and my Wifi no longer enables on the 5.6 RC kernel. lspci still shows the wireless card by the is no

Re: Ideas and proposal for removing changelog and release fields from spec file

2020-02-24 Thread Miroslav Suchý
Dne 24. 02. 20 v 18:13 Miro Hrončok napsal(a): > Can we please have a "git is the only source of truth" version of this? I.e. > "Compute the release field from the number > of commits since the last version change" in the document. It seem to only > have one con (breaks if two builds are >

Fedora 32 Wifi Loss

2020-02-24 Thread Mark Bidewell
Sorry if this is the wrong list for this, but since this refers to Fedora 32 I figured I would start here. I updated to the Fedora 32 Branched release and my Wifi no longer enables on the 5.6 RC kernel. lspci still shows the wireless card by the is no wifi section in Gnome settings and ip addr

Orphaning nimbus-jose-jwt

2020-02-24 Thread Sandro Bonazzola
Hi, nimbus-jose-jwt was previously used by oVirt project and this dependency is no longer needed there in supported ovirt versions. The package has open CVEs (*Bug 1764792* - CVE-2019-17195

Re: OCaml 4.10.0 build in Fedora 32 and 33

2020-02-24 Thread Jerry James
On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 1:57 AM Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > * z3 - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1792740 Actually, z3 should build. I checked in a workaround. The bug is still open to remind me to figure out and fix the real problem. > coq and friends failed last time, but I

[389-devel] please review: Issue 50909 - nsDS5ReplicaId cant be set to the old value it had before

2020-02-24 Thread Mark Reynolds
https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/50910 -- 389 Directory Server Development Team ___ 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:

[Bug 1806724] New: perl-HTTP-Message-6.22 is available

2020-02-24 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1806724 Bug ID: 1806724 Summary: perl-HTTP-Message-6.22 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-HTTP-Message Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged

Re: Cross-arch dependencies for plugins (NSS and others)

2020-02-24 Thread Nicolas Chauvet
Le lun. 24 févr. 2020 à 19:12, Florian Weimer a écrit : > > Sometimes, users run into problems because they install nss_nis on > x86_64 and want to use 32-bit applications, but those do not work > correctly because nss_nis.i686 is not installed. I think we have an > opportunity here to improve

Re: Ideas and proposal for removing changelog and release fields from spec file

2020-02-24 Thread Miro Hrončok
On 24. 02. 20 19:30, Nicolas Mailhot via devel wrote: Le lundi 24 février 2020 à 18:13 +0100, Miro Hrončok a écrit : On 24. 02. 20 17:48, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: However, for the release field, we are struggling a little bit more, two options are more appealing to us: Can we please have a

Non-responsive maintainer: pocock

2020-02-24 Thread Dakota Williams via devel
Does anyone know how to contact maintainer pocock? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1806708 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1790674 Thanks, Dakota ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an

Re: Cross-arch dependencies for plugins (NSS and others)

2020-02-24 Thread Florian Weimer
* Josh Stone: > On 2/24/20 10:11 AM, Florian Weimer wrote: >> If we add this to nss_nis.spec: >> >> %ifarch x86_64 >> Recommends: (nss_nis(x86-32) if glibc(x86-32)) >> %endif >> >> then when the user installs nss_nis after glibc.i686, they will get both >> packages, as expected. >> >>

Re: Cross-arch dependencies for plugins (NSS and others)

2020-02-24 Thread Josh Stone
On 2/24/20 10:11 AM, Florian Weimer wrote: > If we add this to nss_nis.spec: > > %ifarch x86_64 > Recommends: (nss_nis(x86-32) if glibc(x86-32)) > %endif > > then when the user installs nss_nis after glibc.i686, they will get both > packages, as expected. > > Unfortunately, it does not work if

Re: Temporary package rollback by using Version: +really.

2020-02-24 Thread Kevin Fenzi
On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 03:26:57PM +0100, Sandro Mani wrote: > > On 24.02.20 14:30, Sandro Mani wrote: > > > > On 24.02.20 14:21, Neal Gompa wrote: > > > But removing the dependency just restores it to the level of accuracy > > > it had before the introduction of that dependency. > > That's a

Re: Include non-RPM content in buildroot

2020-02-24 Thread Kevin Fenzi
On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 02:46:02PM +0100, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote: > On 24.02.2020 13:41, Miroslav Suchý wrote: > > Yes. But it is only rpm-build what cannot access network. Mock itself can > > access network. > > Mock is using Internet connection only for downloading metadata and >

Re: OCaml 4.10.0 build in Fedora 32 and 33

2020-02-24 Thread Kevin Fenzi
On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 10:27:44AM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote: > On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 9:57 AM Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > > > OCaml 4.10.0 was released over the weekend. > > > > We currently have OCaml 4.10.0 beta 1 in Rawhide. It's not that far > > away from 4.10.0. Unfortunately since

Re: Ideas and proposal for removing changelog and release fields from spec file

2020-02-24 Thread Nicolas Mailhot via devel
Le lundi 24 février 2020 à 18:13 +0100, Miro Hrončok a écrit : > On 24. 02. 20 17:48, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > However, for the release field, we are struggling a little bit > > more, two options > > are more appealing to us: > > Can we please have a "git is the only source of truth" version

Cross-arch dependencies for plugins (NSS and others)

2020-02-24 Thread Florian Weimer
Sometimes, users run into problems because they install nss_nis on x86_64 and want to use 32-bit applications, but those do not work correctly because nss_nis.i686 is not installed. I think we have an opportunity here to improve the system administrator experience with reasonable effort. If we

Re: Ideas and proposal for removing changelog and release fields from spec file

2020-02-24 Thread Igor Gnatenko
On Mon, Feb 24, 2020, 18:38 Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 24. 02. 20 17:48, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > However, for the release field, we are struggling a little bit more, two > options > > are more appealing to us: > > Can we please have a "git is the only source of truth" version of this? > I.e.

Re: Ideas and proposal for removing changelog and release fields from spec file

2020-02-24 Thread Miro Hrončok
On 24. 02. 20 17:48, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: However, for the release field, we are struggling a little bit more, two options are more appealing to us: Can we please have a "git is the only source of truth" version of this? I.e. "Compute the release field from the number of commits since

Fedora-32-20200224.n.0 compose check report

2020-02-24 Thread Fedora compose checker
No missing expected images. Failed openQA tests: 79/171 (x86_64), 1/2 (arm) New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-32-20200223.n.0): ID: 526398 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_vncconnect_client URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/526398 ID: 526453 Test: x86_64

Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2020-02-24)

2020-02-24 Thread Petr Šabata
= #fedora-meeting-1: FESCO (2020-02-24) = Meeting started by contyk at 15:00:04 UTC. The full logs are available at https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2020-02-24/fesco.2020-02-24-15.00.log.html . Meeting

Ideas and proposal for removing changelog and release fields from spec file

2020-02-24 Thread Pierre-Yves Chibon
Good Morning Everyone, This topic has already been discussed a few times over the past month, but Adam Saleh, Nils Philippsen and myself have had the opportunity to invest some time on it with the hope of making the packager's life simpler as well as making it easier to build automation around

Review request: starlark

2020-02-24 Thread Alejandro Saez Morollon
Hi everyone Starlark is a Python dialect for configuration purposes written in Go that can be used as a library. In fact, Delve has it as dependency, which by the way I want to upgrade to the latest version. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1803223 Thanks! -- Alejandro

Re: Turning off keys.fedoraproject.org

2020-02-24 Thread Björn Persson
Neal Gompa wrote: >We may want to replace it with a simple Web Key Directory server: For anyone who is interested, this possibility is being explored here: https://github.com/fedora-infra/securitas/issues/118 Björn Persson pgppK6uk4DhSr.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signatur

REMINDER: Fedora 32 Code complete (100% complete) deadline tomorrow

2020-02-24 Thread Ben Cotton
According to the Fedora 32 schedule[]1, the deadline for Changes to be in a code complete (100% complete) state is *tomorrow* 25 February. At this time, all Changes should be fully implemented and tracker bugs set to the ON_QA state. [1]

Fedora-IoT-32-20200224.0 compose check report

2020-02-24 Thread Fedora compose checker
Missing expected images: Iot dvd x86_64 Iot dvd aarch64 Failed openQA tests: 2/8 (x86_64) Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-IoT-32-20200223.0): ID: 526568 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso install_default_upload URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/526568 ID: 526569 Test:

REMINDER: Fedora 32 Code complete (100% complete) deadline tomorrow

2020-02-24 Thread Ben Cotton
According to the Fedora 32 schedule[]1, the deadline for Changes to be in a code complete (100% complete) state is *tomorrow* 25 February. At this time, all Changes should be fully implemented and tracker bugs set to the ON_QA state. [1]

Fedora 32 compose report: 20200224.n.0 changes

2020-02-24 Thread Fedora Branched Report
OLD: Fedora-32-20200223.n.0 NEW: Fedora-32-20200224.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:1 Dropped images: 0 Added packages: 0 Dropped packages:4 Upgraded packages: 32 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 0 B Size of dropped packages:1.76 MiB Size

Non-responsive maintainer: normunds

2020-02-24 Thread Scott Talbert
Does anyone know how to contact maintainer normunds? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1806619 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1797039 Thanks, Scott ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an

[Bug 1806619] New: Non-responsive maintainer check for normunds

2020-02-24 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1806619 Bug ID: 1806619 Summary: Non-responsive maintainer check for normunds Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component:

[Bug 1797039] Please build perl-Data-Validate-IP for EPEL8

2020-02-24 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1797039 --- Comment #4 from Jitka Plesnikova --- The requests were invalidated because I am not a maintainer. I can only make changes to current branches. You can start non-responsive maintainer process because normunds last login in FAS was

Re: Help needed to fix FTBFS (gcc-10 caused failures)

2020-02-24 Thread Robin Lee
On Sun, Feb 23, 2020 at 11:50 PM Mukundan Ragavan wrote: > > Hi all, > > I have two packages that fail to build from source. As far as I can tell > from the build logs, they are gcc-10 failures. The typical "extern" > solution does not work me (or, I am not adding 'extern' at the correct >

Re: Help needed to fix FTBFS (gcc-10 caused failures)

2020-02-24 Thread Dridi Boukelmoune
> Having -Wall and -Wextra with -Werror is the perfect footgun, since > you’re at the mercy of whatever compiler is being used. Get yourself a > manageable set of warnings and make those fatal instead. That's what we do at $DAYJOB and we are happy whenever a new gcc or clang release finds new

[EPEL-devel] Re: Missing httpd-itk for CentOS 8

2020-02-24 Thread Troy Dawson
I can see you've already found at least part of the answer, but I'm going to answer anyway so other can see. Packages in the EPEL-8 repository are volunteered by Fedora packagers via requests by interested users. If a package you are looking for is not there, please look at

Fedora-Rawhide-20200224.n.0 compose check report

2020-02-24 Thread Fedora compose checker
No missing expected images. Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check! 19 of 43 required tests failed, 9 results missing openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING** below Failed openQA tests: 74/171 (x86_64), 1/2 (arm) Old failures (same test failed in

Re: New Release Freeze Times

2020-02-24 Thread Mohan Boddu
We didn't pick the time at random, 14:00 UTC is the time when Fedora release gets out. We thought if we are changing the time, we should align it with the only other time constrained task, that is, Fedora release. 00:00 UTC is definitely confusing for some people as they complained about it, but

Re: Schedule for Mondays's FESCo Meeting (2020-02-24)

2020-02-24 Thread Petr Šabata
Sure. On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 2:01 PM Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > > Le 2020-02-24 13:37, Petr Šabata a écrit : > > Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the > > FESCo meeting Monday at 15:00UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on > > irc.freenode.net. > > Hi, > > Can you please add >

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20200224.n.0 changes

2020-02-24 Thread Fedora Rawhide Report
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20200223.n.0 NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20200224.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:1 Dropped images: 0 Added packages: 3 Dropped packages:4 Upgraded packages: 63 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 30.58 MiB Size of dropped packages

Re: Temporary package rollback by using Version: +really.

2020-02-24 Thread Sandro Mani
On 24.02.20 14:30, Sandro Mani wrote: On 24.02.20 14:21, Neal Gompa wrote: But removing the dependency just restores it to the level of accuracy it had before the introduction of that dependency. That's a good point, I've asked upstream if that is actually the case or whether the dependency

Re: Non-responsive maintainer check for libffi maintainer

2020-02-24 Thread Jeff Law
On Mon, 2020-02-24 at 13:02 +, devel- requ...@lists.fedoraproject.org wrote: > > Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2020 12:10:49 +0100 > From: Miro Hrončok > Subject: Re: Non-responsive maintainer check for libffi maintainer > To: Anthony Green > Cc: Development discussions related to Fedora > >

Re: Help needed to fix FTBFS (gcc-10 caused failures)

2020-02-24 Thread Ernestas Kulik
On Sun, 2020-02-23 at 20:04 +, Dridi Boukelmoune wrote: > On Sun, Feb 23, 2020 at 3:49 PM Mukundan Ragavan < > nonamed...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > I have two packages that fail to build from source. As far as I can > > tell > > from the build logs, they are gcc-10 failures. The

Re: Non-responsive maintainer check for libffi maintainer

2020-02-24 Thread Christopher Engelhard
On 2/24/2020 1:46 AM, Anthony Green wrote: >I would be very happy if somebody could pick up the libffi packaging > responsibility from me. I'd be happy to adopt libffi, but given that I am a VERY new packager and this is a pretty core package, I think it would be best if someone with a bit

Re: Temporary package rollback by using Version: +really.

2020-02-24 Thread Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
On 24.02.2020 14:30, Sandro Mani wrote: > That's a good point, I've asked upstream if that is actually the case or > whether the dependency replaced previous logic which would also need to > be restored to get the same level of accuracy. You can just revert some upstream commits by downstream

Re: Include non-RPM content in buildroot

2020-02-24 Thread Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
On 24.02.2020 13:41, Miroslav Suchý wrote: > Yes. But it is only rpm-build what cannot access network. Mock itself can > access network. Mock is using Internet connection only for downloading metadata and packages from repositories. Then it use systemd-nspawn to create a protected isolated

Re: Temporary package rollback by using Version: +really.

2020-02-24 Thread Sandro Mani
On 24.02.20 14:21, Neal Gompa wrote: But removing the dependency just restores it to the level of accuracy it had before the introduction of that dependency. That's a good point, I've asked upstream if that is actually the case or whether the dependency replaced previous logic which would also

Re: Temporary package rollback by using Version: +really.

2020-02-24 Thread Neal Gompa
On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 8:21 AM Sandro Mani wrote: > > > On 24.02.20 14:14, Neal Gompa wrote: > > You can do that trick, it'll even kind of work. But we don't typically > > do this. That said, why not just patch it to remove the non-free > > dependency, even if it weakens the functionality a bit?

Fedora-IoT-33-20200224.0 compose check report

2020-02-24 Thread Fedora compose checker
Missing expected images: Iot dvd x86_64 Iot dvd aarch64 Failed openQA tests: 2/8 (x86_64) Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-IoT-33-20200221.0): ID: 526387 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso install_default_upload URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/526387 ID: 526388 Test:

Re: Temporary package rollback by using Version: +really.

2020-02-24 Thread Sandro Mani
On 24.02.20 14:14, Neal Gompa wrote: You can do that trick, it'll even kind of work. But we don't typically do this. That said, why not just patch it to remove the non-free dependency, even if it weakens the functionality a bit? I suppose licensecheck is mostly used for package reviews, so it

Open NeuroFedora Meeting: 1600 UTC on Tuesday, 25th February

2020-02-24 Thread Aniket Pradhan
Hey there! You are invited to attend the next Open NeuroFedora team meeting this week on Tuesday at 1600UTC in #fedora-neuro on IRC (Freenode): https://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=#fedora-neuro You can convert the meeting time to your local time using: $ date --date='TZ="UTC" 1600 next Tue'

Re: Temporary package rollback by using Version: +really.

2020-02-24 Thread Neal Gompa
On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 8:11 AM Sandro Mani wrote: > > Hi > > Get ship a working licensecheck again in rawhide (stuck at v3.0.39 due to > later versions requiring a non-free library), I need to temporarily downgrade > perl-Regexp-Pattern-License, which was since updated to a version which isn't

Re: Include non-RPM content in buildroot

2020-02-24 Thread Jakub Cajka
- Original Message - > From: "Fabio Valentini" > To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" > > Sent: Friday, February 21, 2020 4:46:52 PM > Subject: Re: Include non-RPM content in buildroot > > On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 3:58 PM Martin Sehnoutka wrote: > > > > Hi, > > Hi! > > I

Temporary package rollback by using Version: +really.

2020-02-24 Thread Sandro Mani
Hi Get ship a working licensecheck again in rawhide (stuck at v3.0.39 due to later versions requiring a non-free library), I need to temporarily downgrade perl-Regexp-Pattern-License, which was since updated to a version which isn't compatible with licensecheck-3.0.39 anymore. This is a

Re: Schedule for Mondays's FESCo Meeting (2020-02-24)

2020-02-24 Thread Nicolas Mailhot via devel
Le 2020-02-24 13:37, Petr Šabata a écrit : Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FESCo meeting Monday at 15:00UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on irc.freenode.net. Hi, Can you please add https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2344 to the list since FESCO arbitration was requested

Re: Include non-RPM content in buildroot

2020-02-24 Thread Miroslav Suchý
Dne 24. 02. 20 v 11:17 Vitaly Zaitsev via devel napsal(a): > All packages must be build with disabled network access to ensure, that > it use packaged dependencies and not downloaded from outside. Yes. But it is only rpm-build what cannot access network. Mock itself can access network. In other

Schedule for Mondays's FESCo Meeting (2020-02-24)

2020-02-24 Thread Petr Šabata
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FESCo meeting Monday at 15:00UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on irc.freenode.net. To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto or run: date -d '2020-02-24 15:00 UTC' Links to all issues to be

[Bug 1806302] perl-Promises-1.04 is available

2020-02-24 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1806302 Jitka Plesnikova changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Fixed In Version|

[Bug 1806215] perl-experimental-0.021 is available

2020-02-24 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1806215 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-3b9be5a93a has been submitted as an update to Fedora 30. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-3b9be5a93a -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list

[Bug 1806215] perl-experimental-0.021 is available

2020-02-24 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1806215 --- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-bca9e6da6e has been submitted as an update to Fedora 31. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-bca9e6da6e -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list

[Bug 1806215] perl-experimental-0.021 is available

2020-02-24 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1806215 Petr Pisar changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-experimental-0.021-1.f |perl-experimental-0.021-1.f

[Bug 1806215] perl-experimental-0.021 is available

2020-02-24 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1806215 Petr Pisar changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |MODIFIED

Re: Non-responsive maintainer check for libffi maintainer

2020-02-24 Thread Miro Hrončok
On 24. 02. 20 1:46, Anthony Green wrote: I would be very happy if somebody could pick up the libffi packaging responsibility from me. Suggestion: Try announcing on devel list that you are seeking co-maintainers (from a separate thread). If that doesn't help, orphan the package and see who

Re: Include non-RPM content in buildroot

2020-02-24 Thread Ankur Sinha
On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 10:11:47 -0500, Randy Barlow wrote: > On 2/21/20 9:57 AM, Martin Sehnoutka wrote: > > Every time there is a new release it would automatically synchronize our > > own Fedora-specific registry, which would in turn be accessible in > > buildroot. > > One thing that comes to my

Re: epel8: BuildrootError: could not init mock buildroot

2020-02-24 Thread Mattias Ellert
tor 2020-01-30 klockan 17:42 -0800 skrev Kevin Fenzi: > On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 07:57:22AM -0500, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > > On Thu, 30 Jan 2020 at 06:06, Jiri Kucera wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > > > when doing `fedpkg scratch-build --target epel8-candidate --srpm > > >

Re: Non-responsive maintainer: devrim (gdal, proj, geos)

2020-02-24 Thread Sandro Mani
On 12.02.20 10:23, Sandro Mani wrote: Hi Devrim Please keep me as co-maintainer. I'm already maintaining these packages in the upstream repository (https://yum.PostgreSQL.org) with more options there, and I'd like to keep things in sync as much as possible. Thanks for your reply. I read

Re: Include non-RPM content in buildroot

2020-02-24 Thread Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
On 24.02.2020 10:55, Miroslav Suchý wrote: > Additionally, even when the build in Koji (or Mock in general) is offline, > the dependencies are installed with internet > enabled. If you teach Mock how to call native crate/rubygem/.. before the > actual build start, you will have most of the >

Re: Include non-RPM content in buildroot

2020-02-24 Thread Miroslav Suchý
Dne 21. 02. 20 v 15:57 Martin Sehnoutka napsal(a): > This process is unfortunately not fully automated and therefore requires a > certain amount of human effort. This is an important sentence. Let's save it for later as [1] > The proposal itself is fairly simple: Let’s stop packaging all Go and

[Bug 1806473] New: perl-Gtk3-0.036-2.fc33 FTBFS: Can't find information for method TreeModel::sort_new_with_model at t/overrides.t line 466.

2020-02-24 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1806473 Bug ID: 1806473 Summary: perl-Gtk3-0.036-2.fc33 FTBFS: Can't find information for method TreeModel::sort_new_with_model at t/overrides.t line 466. Product: Fedora

Re: OCaml 4.10.0 build in Fedora 32 and 33

2020-02-24 Thread Fabio Valentini
On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 9:57 AM Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > OCaml 4.10.0 was released over the weekend. > > We currently have OCaml 4.10.0 beta 1 in Rawhide. It's not that far > away from 4.10.0. Unfortunately since building beta 1, Fedora 32 was > forked from Rawhide so we now have the beta

[Bug 1797333] perl-Scalar-List-Utils-1.54 is available

2020-02-24 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1797333 Jan Pazdziora changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Resolution|---

Looking for co-maintainer for xmedcon and deps: will help learn packaging and sponsor

2020-02-24 Thread Ankur Sinha
Hi, I'm looking for a co-maintainer to help me maintain (and keep) xmedcon in Fedora. It is a commonly used open source medical image conversion toolkit: https://xmedcon.sourceforge.io/ I will help you learn packaging and will also help you get sponsored to the packager group. The idea is that

[Bug 1805790] perl-Alien-pkgconf-0.16 is available

2020-02-24 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805790 --- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-d5736fb6fd has been submitted as an update to Fedora 31. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-d5736fb6fd --- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System ---

[Bug 1805790] perl-Alien-pkgconf-0.16 is available

2020-02-24 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805790 Petr Pisar changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED Fixed In Version|

OCaml 4.10.0 build in Fedora 32 and 33

2020-02-24 Thread Richard W.M. Jones
OCaml 4.10.0 was released over the weekend. We currently have OCaml 4.10.0 beta 1 in Rawhide. It's not that far away from 4.10.0. Unfortunately since building beta 1, Fedora 32 was forked from Rawhide so we now have the beta 1 build in Fedora 32 as well. Hopefully the plan is as follows: (1)

[Bug 1805790] perl-Alien-pkgconf-0.16 is available

2020-02-24 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805790 Petr Pisar changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED

Fedora-Cloud-31-20200224.0 compose check report

2020-02-24 Thread Fedora compose checker
No missing expected images. Passed openQA tests: 1/1 (x86_64) -- Mail generated by check-compose: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to

  1   2   >