No missing expected images.
Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check!
1 of 43 required tests failed
openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING**
below
Failed openQA tests: 15/171 (x86_64), 1/2 (arm)
New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20200316.
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 5/171 (x86_64), 1/2 (arm)
New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-32-20200316.n.0):
ID: 549253 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_cockpit_updates
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/549253
ID: 549259 Test: x86_64 Everything-
On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 7:32 PM Adam Williamson
wrote:
>
> The trigger for this line of thinking was this comment I ran across
> this morning:
>
> https://www.phoronix.com/forums/forum/phoronix/latest-phoronix-articles/1166100-fedora-32-beta-released-with-earlyoom-by-default-gnome-3-36-desktop?p=1
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20200316.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20200317.n.1
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 4
Added packages: 10
Dropped packages:3
Upgraded packages: 157
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 20.41 MiB
Size of dropped packages
On 3/17/20 9:43 AM, Richard Shaw wrote:
I'll take fail2ban but I wouldn't mind someone with more firewall
experience helping me out with it.
Thanks,
Richard
Thanks, I've added you to the package.
--
Orion Poplawski
Manager of NWRA Technical Systems 720-772-5637
NWRA, Boulder/CoRA
On 3/17/20 5:27 AM, Hans de Goede wrote:
Hi,
On 3/1/20 10:30 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote:
I have too many packages that I am the maintainer for and need help.
If you would like to help out by either becoming a co-maintainer or
becoming the primary maintainer, please let me know. The full list
On Tue, 2020-03-17 at 22:24 +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 17. 03. 20 19:01, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > Some specific ideas: FESCo and/or the Council should be taking a
> > stronger lead here.
>
> What is your idea of FESCo stronger lead here?
>
> I just want to say that for the past year at FES
On 17. 03. 20 19:01, Adam Williamson wrote:
Some specific ideas: FESCo and/or the Council should be taking a
stronger lead here.
What is your idea of FESCo stronger lead here?
I just want to say that for the past year at FESCo, I got a strong impression
that we heavily really on what Fedora P
Thanks Adam for bringing this up, I don't want to give big
explanations on the topics, but I just want to mention a few things
here:
On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 2:01 PM Adam Williamson
wrote:
>
> So, today is the Fedora 32 Beta release date. If you examine the
> release announcement:
>
> https://fedo
On 3/17/20 2:01 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
Hey Adam,
>
> 3) CoreOS - CoreOS is just a *whole* other thing. It is not built like
> the rest of Fedora at all. It's not built as Pungi composes, whatever
> compose process it does have doesn't run alongside our other compose
> processes or output
Thank you & Kevin for the quick fix! It is solved!
On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 7:23 PM Mohan Boddu wrote:
> A short history of why it happened, when we lift the freeze, we check
> if all the packages that are in the stable tag are the latest builds,
> if not, we tag the latest builds into koji stabl
Confirmed, that gcc builds a working chromium. Thank you so much.
Tom
On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 6:39 AM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 02, 2020 at 08:57:46AM -0500, Tom Callaway wrote:
> > Wait, I know that $TOPIC is scary, come back.
> >
> > Chromium has this chunk of code (in
> > third_part
On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 2:01 PM Adam Williamson
wrote:
>
> (many, many words. All of which are reasonable)
>
I, too, have been a little frustrated with the state of Silverblue and
CoreOS. It's not clear to me how much they're supposed to be a part of
the normal Fedora release process and how much
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1655461
Upstream Release Monitoring
changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|w3c-markup-validator-20.3.1 |w3c-markup-validator-20.3
$ sudo dnf system-upgrade download --releasever=32
Before you continue ensure that your system is fully upgraded by running
"dnf --refresh upgrade". Do you want to continue [y/N]: y
Adobe Systems Incorporated
7.0 kB/s | 2.9 kB 00:00
Fedora 32 openh264 (From Cisco) - x86_64
4.
A short history of why it happened, when we lift the freeze, we check
if all the packages that are in the stable tag are the latest builds,
if not, we tag the latest builds into koji stable tag. We do this
because, bodhi doesn't follow the latest build order while pushing
updates, so, an older vers
So, today is the Fedora 32 Beta release date. If you examine the
release announcement:
https://fedoramagazine.org/announcing-the-release-of-fedora-32-beta/
and the current state of the download site:
https://getfedora.org/
there are three fairly significant things entirely missing. Those three
I'm on Fedora 32 Beta now:
1. Took a few hours
2. Some Error message packed from Modular Repo
3. Other Packed Problem
About it these steps before with the following command:
sudo dnf system-upgrade download --releasever=32 --skip-broken --best
--allowerasing
All working now
See my first post:
Il 16/03/20 21:30, Fabio Valentini ha scritto:
>
> Any suggestions what we could do to make sure f32 updates aren't
> forgotten after the beta freeze?
>
Ideally, I think that Bodhi should not allow someone to create an update
with a build which nvr is higher than what is available in a later
rele
> > 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_
On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 11:44:28PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> 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://fed
I'll take fail2ban but I wouldn't mind someone with more firewall
experience helping me out with it.
Thanks,
Richard
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code o
https://www.redhat.com/sysadmin/speeding-container-buildah
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/c
Dne 17. 03. 20 v 14:24 Pierre-Yves Chibon napsal(a):
> On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 01:25:03PM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>> Dne 17. 03. 20 v 11:58 Pierre-Yves Chibon napsal(a):
>>> Good Morning Everyone,
>>>
>>> A little while ago[1], we integrated anitya in dist-git itself, allowing to
>>> stop using
Fedora 32 Beta Released
--
The Fedora Project is pleased to announce the immediate availability
of Fedora 32 Beta, the next step towards our planned Fedora 32 release
at the end of April.
Download the prerelease from our Get Fedora site:
* Get Fedora 32 Beta Workst
For information, we will be enabling the cf_type field in Bugzilla for
Fedora products. This allows bugs to be set as bugs, feature requests,
etc. Whether you choose to do anything with it on your components is
up to you.
This is being done at the request to improve process for mirroring
certain F
On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 02:26:18PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 17. 03. 20 14:14, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 01:23:59PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > > On 17. 03. 20 11:58, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> > > > Together with Karsten Hopp we worked on integrating this func
On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 02:14:46PM +0100, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> If you are logged in and on a package where you have admin rights, there
> should
> be an "update" button underneath, clicking it makes a pop-up (a modal) appear,
> in which you can update the settings.
>
> > > The overrides in
On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 01:17:13PM +0100, Petr Lautrbach wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 11:58:40AM +0100, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> > Good Morning Everyone,
> >
> > A little while ago[1], we integrated anitya in dist-git itself, allowing to
> > stop using fedora-scm-request's[2] git repository
On 17. 03. 20 14:14, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 01:23:59PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 17. 03. 20 11:58, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
Together with Karsten Hopp we worked on integrating this functionality on
pagure-dist-git[3], thus allowing to get rid entirely of the git
On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 01:25:03PM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>
> Dne 17. 03. 20 v 11:58 Pierre-Yves Chibon napsal(a):
> > Good Morning Everyone,
> >
> > A little while ago[1], we integrated anitya in dist-git itself, allowing to
> > stop using fedora-scm-request's[2] git repository to store this i
On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 01:23:59PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 17. 03. 20 11:58, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> > Together with Karsten Hopp we worked on integrating this functionality on
> > pagure-dist-git[3], thus allowing to get rid entirely of the git repository
> > at
> > fedora-scm-request
On 3/17/20 7:00 AM, Frantisek Zatloukal wrote:
I am trying to rebuild mozjs68 in F32[0] (passed in rawhide just fine[1]), which
buildrequires clang and llvm. However, clang and llvm versions mismatch in F32
buildroot:
clang x86_64 10.0.0-0.2.*rc1*.fc32
llvm
Dne 17. 03. 20 v 11:58 Pierre-Yves Chibon napsal(a):
> Good Morning Everyone,
>
> A little while ago[1], we integrated anitya in dist-git itself, allowing to
> stop using fedora-scm-request's[2] git repository to store this information.
>
> However, this git repository is still being used to store
On 17. 03. 20 11:58, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
Together with Karsten Hopp we worked on integrating this functionality on
pagure-dist-git[3], thus allowing to get rid entirely of the git repository at
fedora-scm-request[2].
Thank You both \o/
This work has been deployed in staging today. We wo
On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 11:58:40AM +0100, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> Good Morning Everyone,
>
> A little while ago[1], we integrated anitya in dist-git itself, allowing to
> stop using fedora-scm-request's[2] git repository to store this information.
>
> However, this git repository is still bei
Good Morning Everyone,
A little while ago[1], we integrated anitya in dist-git itself, allowing to
stop using fedora-scm-request's[2] git repository to store this information.
However, this git repository is still being used to store bugzilla overrides
(i.e.: default assignee on bugzilla ticket w
Hi,
I am trying to rebuild mozjs68 in F32[0] (passed in rawhide just fine[1]),
which buildrequires clang and llvm. However, clang and llvm versions
mismatch in F32 buildroot:
clang x86_64 10.0.0-0.2.*rc1*.fc32
llvmx86_64 10.0.0-0.1.*rc2*.fc32
which seems to
Dne 17. 03. 20 v 10:55 Alexander Bokovoy napsal(a):
> On ti, 17 maalis 2020, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>>
>> Dne 16. 03. 20 v 18:15 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a):
>>> On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 10:38:07AM +, Paul Howarth wrote:
On Mon, 16 Mar 2020 11:22:40 +0100
Vít Ondruch wrote:
> I always thou
Hi,
On 3/1/20 10:30 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote:
I have too many packages that I am the maintainer for and need help. If you
would like to help out by either becoming a co-maintainer or becoming the
primary maintainer, please let me know. The full list follows. Many of these
I just made the
On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 11:45:10AM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 12:46 AM Peter Hutterer
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 09:30:51PM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> > > Hi everybody,
> > >
> > > It's that time of the semi-year again, and I again found multiple
> >
On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 12:46 AM Peter Hutterer
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 09:30:51PM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> > Hi everybody,
> >
> > It's that time of the semi-year again, and I again found multiple
> > instances of packages that have updates for rawhide and f31/f30, but
> > no bo
On 17. 03. 20 1:17, Ondrej Nosek wrote:
Hi all,
a new version fedpkg-1.38 is released.
Currently, Fedora 30, 31, 32 and Rawhide packages are in the stable repository,
feel free to try other waiting distributions (el6, epel7) in Bodhi.
Release description:
Feature documentation, changelog and
On 3/16/20 6:25 PM, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 11:24 AM Ben Cotton wrote:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Sqlite_Rpmdb
== Summary ==
Change format of the RPM database from Berkeley DB to a new Sqlite format.
== Owner ==
* Name: [[User:pmatilai| Panu Matilainen]] [[User:
On ti, 17 maalis 2020, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 16. 03. 20 v 18:15 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a):
On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 10:38:07AM +, Paul Howarth wrote:
On Mon, 16 Mar 2020 11:22:40 +0100
Vít Ondruch wrote:
I always thought that one should not call `rpm` during rpmbuild.
Nevertheless I am not s
Dne 16. 03. 20 v 18:15 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a):
> On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 10:38:07AM +, Paul Howarth wrote:
>> On Mon, 16 Mar 2020 11:22:40 +0100
>> Vít Ondruch wrote:
>>> I always thought that one should not call `rpm` during rpmbuild.
>>> Nevertheless I am not sure what was the reason? Probab
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 devel-le...@lists.fedorap
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 devel-le...@lists.fedorap
On Mon, Mar 2, 2020, at 12:30 AM, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> I have too many packages that I am the maintainer for and need help. If
> you would like to help out by either becoming a co-maintainer or
> becoming the primary maintainer, please let me know. The full list
> follows. Many of these I
49 matches
Mail list logo
