[Test-Announce] [Fedora Test Week] Kernel 5.6 Test Week Results

Aloha Testers! Thanks a lot for everyone who participated in the Kernel 5.6 Test Week last week[0]. The Test Week was very successful, and we've got: 259 tests ran who actually submitted results. 54 of those were with the newer 5.6.3 kernel showing the advantage of this being a test week. 10 of t

[Test-Announce] Fedora 32 Candidate RC-1.4 Available Now!

According to the schedule [1], Fedora 32 Candidate RC-1.4 is now available for testing. Please help us complete all the validation testing! For more information on release validation testing, see: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Release_validation_test_plan Test coverage information for the curr

FedoraRespin-31-updates-20200420.0 compose check report

No missing expected images. Failed openQA tests: 4/37 (x86_64) ID: 581662 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso apps_startstop URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/581662 ID: 581674 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso desktop_login URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/581674 ID:

Fedora-IoT-33-20200420.0 compose check report

Missing expected images: Iot dvd x86_64 Iot dvd aarch64 Passed openQA tests: 8/8 (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

Re: Call for testers for rpmautospec in staging

Note: I'm subscribed to the list, there's no need to CC me. :) On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 11:45:17AM +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > Hi, > > Another solution would be to just save the state from which autobump is > computed in the srpm, and bump from this state at the rpmbuild level. How would tha

Re: fedpkg clone fails with Permission denied (publickey).

On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 11:11:39AM +0200, Pavel Zhukov wrote: > Hi, > > I've changed my FAS ssh key and it's not updated for a few hours > (fedorapeople and pkgs both have an old one). Should I report the > issue somewhere? Yes, you should report it to infrastructure: https://pagure.io/fedora-i

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20200420.n.0 changes

OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20200419.n.0 NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20200420.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:0 Dropped images: 3 Added packages: 1 Dropped packages:2 Upgraded packages: 56 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 122.61 KiB Size of dropped packages

Re: Previous awesome background images

On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 10:46 AM Máirín Duffy wrote: > > > On 17. 04. 20 16:07, Kamil Paral wrote: > > https://blog.linuxgrrl.com/2018/03/06/fedora-28s-desktop-background-design/ > > > > I am sad we haven't followed the pattern. (However I don't know the > > reasoning > > for stopping that.) > >

Re: Previous awesome background images

On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 12:46 PM Máirín Duffy wrote: > > > On 17. 04. 20 16:07, Kamil Paral wrote: > > https://blog.linuxgrrl.com/2018/03/06/fedora-28s-desktop-background-design/ > > > > I am sad we haven't followed the pattern. (However I don't know the > > reasoning > > for stopping that.) > >

Re: f32-backgrounds look like crap

On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 9:10 AM Benson Muite wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 17, 2020, at 4:02 PM, Leigh Scott wrote: > > > Hi Leigh, > > > > > > > > > Do you think you could please use nicer language? There's no need to > > > use words like that to describe other people's work in the community. > > > > T

Re: Previous awesome background images

On 4/20/20 11:54 AM, James Cassell wrote: On Mon, Apr 20, 2020, at 12:46 PM, Máirín Duffy wrote: On 17. 04. 20 16:07, Kamil Paral wrote: https://blog.linuxgrrl.com/2018/03/06/fedora-28s-desktop-background-design/ I am sad we haven't followed the pattern. (However I don't know the reasoning for

Re: Previous awesome background images

On 20. 04. 20 18:46, Máirín Duffy wrote: On 17. 04. 20 16:07, Kamil Paral wrote: https://blog.linuxgrrl.com/2018/03/06/fedora-28s-desktop-background-design/ I am sad we haven't followed the pattern. (However I don't know the reasoning for stopping that.) That's not true, we didn't stop the pat

Re: Previous awesome background images

On Mon, Apr 20, 2020, at 12:46 PM, Máirín Duffy wrote: > > On 17. 04. 20 16:07, Kamil Paral wrote: > > https://blog.linuxgrrl.com/2018/03/06/fedora-28s-desktop-background-design/ > > > > I am sad we haven't followed the pattern. (However I don't know the > > reasoning > > for stopping that.) >

Re: Previous awesome background images

> On 17. 04. 20 16:07, Kamil Paral wrote: > https://blog.linuxgrrl.com/2018/03/06/fedora-28s-desktop-background-design/ > > I am sad we haven't followed the pattern. (However I don't know the reasoning > for stopping that.) That's not true, we didn't stop the pattern. F32 is G for Goffman. F was

Fedora 32 compose report: 20200420.n.0 changes

OLD: Fedora-32-20200419.n.0 NEW: Fedora-32-20200420.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:0 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

Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2020-04-20)

= #fedora-meeting-1: FESCO (2020-04-20) = Meeting started by mhroncok at 15:00:03 UTC. The full logs are available at https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2020-04-20/fesco.2020-04-20-15.00.log.html . Meeting

Re: fedpkg broken (pycurl issue?)

On 20. 04. 20 15:59, Neal Becker wrote: Maybe the problem is that my local pycurl is not compatible with fedpkg? fedpkg fedpkg Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/bin/fedpkg", line 11, in load_entry_point('fedpkg==1.38', 'console_scripts', 'fedpkg')() File "/home/nbecker/.

Re: fedpkg broken (pycurl issue?)

On Monday, April 20, 2020 3:59:59 PM CEST Neal Becker wrote: > Maybe the problem is that my local pycurl is not compatible with fedpkg? The more important problem is that your local pycurl is not compatible with libcurl, which is exactly what the error message is telling you, isn't it? I would su

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: Sqlite RpmDB

On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 02:40:36PM +0300, Panu Matilainen wrote: > On 4/20/20 1:07 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > >On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 10:38:18AM +0300, Panu Matilainen wrote: > >>On 4/17/20 5:09 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > >>>[Service] > >>>Type=oneshot > >>>ExecStart=rp

[EPEL-devel] Re: Cannot retire epel7 package

On 4/20/20 4:25 AM, Miro Hrončok wrote: On 20. 04. 20 12:13, Miro Hrončok wrote: On 20. 04. 20 6:09, Orion Poplawski wrote: zabbix22 (epel7)]$ fedpkg retire 'Zabbix 2.2 is no longer maintained upstream' Fedora release (epel7) is in state 'current' - retire operation is not allowed. Sounds li

fedpkg broken (pycurl issue?)

Maybe the problem is that my local pycurl is not compatible with fedpkg? fedpkg fedpkg Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/bin/fedpkg", line 11, in load_entry_point('fedpkg==1.38', 'console_scripts', 'fedpkg')() File "/home/nbecker/.local/lib/python3.7/site-packages/pkg_resou

Re: Modularity Survey

John M. Harris Jr wrote: > Let's be honest, this doesn't even really make sense for RHEL. I agree that the current design of Modularity is inherently flawed (because it allows version conflicts to happen that cannot be resolved by the user), but in the context of RHEL, I can see where the demand

Re: Co-Maintainers wanted for python-lockfile EPEL branches

On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 9:51 AM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 20. 04. 20 13:45, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > and it seems I > > can't even figure out how to determine which EPEL packages require > > python*-lockfile. > > Take the attached repo files. > > They are good for repoquery, adapted from epel-r

Re: Co-Maintainers wanted for python-lockfile EPEL branches

On 20. 04. 20 13:45, Fabio Valentini wrote: and it seems I can't even figure out how to determine which EPEL packages require python*-lockfile. Take the attached repo files. They are good for repoquery, adapted from epel-release. They don't have -testing repos, but -testingx, so you don't acc

Re: Co-Maintainers wanted for python-lockfile EPEL branches

On 20. 04. 20 15:24, Troy Dawson wrote: On a RHEL8 machine, doing a dnf repoquery --whatrequires python3-lockfile dnf repoquery --whatrequires python2-lockfile Shows that the following depend on it duplicity python3-fedora pungi-legacy I haven't checked EPEL7 yet. $ repoquery --

Re: Co-Maintainers wanted for python-lockfile EPEL branches

On a RHEL8 machine, doing a dnf repoquery --whatrequires python3-lockfile dnf repoquery --whatrequires python2-lockfile Shows that the following depend on it duplicity python3-fedora pungi-legacy I haven't checked EPEL7 yet. On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 4:46 AM Fabio Valentini wrote: > > Hi

boost package in fedora

Will Boost ever be updated on Fedora again? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1558278 ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://d

Fedora-Cloud-31-20200420.0 compose check report

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

Re: Fedpkg: (scratch)-build forked repo directly in Koji

On Mon, 20 Apr 2020 at 14:24, Vít Ondruch wrote: > > > Dne 20. 04. 20 v 13:52 Ondrej Nosek napsal(a): > > > > On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 11:42 AM Vít Ondruch wrote: >> >> >> Dne 20. 04. 20 v 1:31 Ondrej Nosek napsal(a): >> >> Thanks for answers, comment in the text follows. >> >> On Tue, Apr 14, 202

Re: Fedpkg: (scratch)-build forked repo directly in Koji

Dne 20. 04. 20 v 13:52 Ondrej Nosek napsal(a): > > > On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 11:42 AM Vít Ondruch > wrote: > > > Dne 20. 04. 20 v 1:31 Ondrej Nosek napsal(a): >> Thanks for answers, comment in the text follows. >> >> On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 12:16 PM clime >

Orphaned package istatd

Hi, I just orphaned istatd since it is not actively maintained anymore. Have a nice day, -- Lorenzo Dalrio ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct

Re: Fedpkg: (scratch)-build forked repo directly in Koji

On Mon, 20 Apr 2020 at 13:54, Ondrej Nosek wrote: > > > > On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 11:42 AM Vít Ondruch wrote: >> >> >> Dne 20. 04. 20 v 1:31 Ondrej Nosek napsal(a): >> >> Thanks for answers, comment in the text follows. >> >> On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 12:16 PM clime wrote: >>> >>> On Tue, 14 Apr 2

Re: Fedpkg: (scratch)-build forked repo directly in Koji

On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 11:42 AM Vít Ondruch wrote: > > Dne 20. 04. 20 v 1:31 Ondrej Nosek napsal(a): > > Thanks for answers, comment in the text follows. > > On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 12:16 PM clime wrote: > >> On Tue, 14 Apr 2020 at 12:05, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> > >> > >> > Dne 14. 04. 20 v 0:13

Co-Maintainers wanted for python-lockfile EPEL branches

Hi everybody, I took over python-lockfile some time ago because it was FTBFS in fedora / orphaned at the time, but it's a dependency of some of my packages. However, I have zero interest in maintaining the EPEL branches of that package, because I have no packages in EPEL myself, and it seems I ca

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: Sqlite RpmDB

On 4/20/20 1:07 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 10:38:18AM +0300, Panu Matilainen wrote: On 4/17/20 5:09 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 04:48:11PM +0300, Panu Matilainen wrote: On 3/26/20 1:32 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:

Re: f32-backgrounds look like crap

On 2020-04-19 22:26, Peter Oliver wrote: Well, I don't see how it makes sense to deliberately create a low-quality image with no technical need (nor technical benefits such as size saving). I'd suggest it's for roughly the same reason that people still paint paintings when, nowadays, they coul

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: Sqlite RpmDB

On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 10:38:18AM +0300, Panu Matilainen wrote: > On 4/17/20 5:09 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > >On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 04:48:11PM +0300, Panu Matilainen wrote: > >>On 3/26/20 1:32 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > >>>On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 01:16:22PM +0200, Pan

Re: Modularity Survey

Le lundi 13 avril 2020 à 13:34 -0400, Matthew Miller a écrit : > On Sat, Apr 11, 2020 at 01:30:57PM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > That is another major concern, that decisions made by Fedora for > > Fedora > > users depend more and more on input from people (and companies) who > > are NOT > > Fe

Re: Orphaning soundtracker

Hello, On 2020-04-09 16:10, Erich Eickmeyer wrote: > Hi all, > > soundtracker is FTBFS and is basically gnome 1 software that > necro-limped along like a zombie for a few years (read: decades). As it > FTBFS and is dead upstream, I believe it's suffering bitrot so it's > probably time to let it d

Re: Call for testers for rpmautospec in staging

Hi, Another solution would be to just save the state from which autobump is computed in the srpm, and bump from this state at the rpmbuild level. As long as the previous counter value is available computing a new one is just a few lines of lua macro code That would remove any adherence to koji, m

Re: Fedpkg: (scratch)-build forked repo directly in Koji

Dne 20. 04. 20 v 1:31 Ondrej Nosek napsal(a): > Thanks for answers, comment in the text follows. > > On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 12:16 PM clime > wrote: > > On Tue, 14 Apr 2020 at 12:05, Vít Ondruch > wrote: > > > > > >

Re: python3dist provides

On 19. 04. 20 18:01, Jerry James wrote: On Sun, Apr 19, 2020 at 10:00 AM Miro Hrončok wrote: On 19. 04. 20 17:49, Miro Hrončok wrote: On 19. 04. 20 17:09, Miro Hrončok wrote: I'll send a PR shortly. Finishing the commit message... https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-nb2plots/pull-req

Re: fedpkg clone fails with Permission denied (publickey).

Hi, I've changed my FAS ssh key and it's not updated for a few hours (fedorapeople and pkgs both have an old one). Should I report the issue somewhere? Thank you On Sun, Mar 29, 2020 at 8:35 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > On Sun, Mar 29, 2020 at 12:32:33PM -0500, Richard Shaw wrote: > > Long story s

Fedora-Cloud-30-20200420.0 compose check report

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

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: Sqlite RpmDB

On 4/17/20 5:09 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 04:48:11PM +0300, Panu Matilainen wrote: On 3/26/20 1:32 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 01:16:22PM +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote: Right. I realize %posttrans is not a good idea. But *s

Announcement: taking over classloader-leak-test-framework

Hi, announcing taking over classloader-leak-test-framework, as it is needed by postgresql-jdbc., which I am maintainer of. Best regards, Ondrej Dubaj ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@list

Re: [SONAME bump] json-c-0.14 (libjson-c.so.4 -> 5)

Am Sonntag, den 19.04.2020, 18:22 +0200 schrieb Björn 'besser82' Esser: > gluster-block is currently FTBFS for some reason related to the > glusterfs package [2]. The reason for gluster-block has been FTBFS was fixed [1]. There was a clash between config.h in the build-tree and located in /usr/i