These updates, along with a couple of others I submitted 12h ago, just
appeared in my local mirror. Bodhi still shows everything as
transitioning from pending to testing and I never got a notification
about them having moved to testing. Side effect from the data center
move?
https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/51163
—
Sincerely,
William Brown
Senior Software Engineer, 389 Directory Server
SUSE Labs
___
389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FPC
meeting Thursday at 2020-06-18 16:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on
irc.freenode.net.
Local time information (via. uitime):
= Day: Thursday ==
2020-06-18 09:00 PDT US/Pacific
2020-06-18
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1848125
--- Comment #1 from d...@islenet.com ---
This is a bit more complex that I thought. In trying to move the receive/send
functions from 10026/10027 to 10036/10037 I was still being blocked by policy
until I added:
semanage port -a -t
https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/51162
—
Sincerely,
William Brown
Senior Software Engineer, 389 Directory Server
SUSE Labs
___
389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
https://fedorapeople.org/groups/389ds/ci/nightly/2020/06/18/report-389-ds-base-1.4.4.3-20200617git327147c.fc32.x86_64.html
___
389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
Hi,
On Tue, 2020-06-16 at 15:40 -0400, Ben Rosser wrote:
> Has anyone in the nodejs SIG given any thought to picking any of
> these up? Do we need some kind of Stewardship SIG-like effort to try
> and improve the state of the node.js ecosystem in Fedora? It's
> probably no secret that a lot of
The following Fedora EPEL 6 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
3 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2020-5f91ab971e
wordpress-5.1.6-1.el6
1 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2020-be517af396
tcpreplay-4.3.3-1.el6
1
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1842917
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #3 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1842921
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #5 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1841523
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1841512
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1841514
Bug 1841514 depends on bug 1841512, which changed state.
Bug 1841512 Summary: [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-Statistics-Basic
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1841512
What|Removed |Added
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1841512
Bug 1841512 depends on bug 1841508, which changed state.
Bug 1841508 Summary: [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-Number-Format
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1841508
What|Removed |Added
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1841508
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1841264
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1842891
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1842917
Bug 1842917 depends on bug 1842920, which changed state.
Bug 1842920 Summary: Add perl-AnyEvent-CacheDNS to EPEL7
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1842920
What|Removed |Added
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1842907
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1842920
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1842881
Bug 1842881 depends on bug 1842891, which changed state.
Bug 1842891 Summary: Add perl-MooseX-Types-DateTime-MoreCoercions to EPEL7
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1842891
What|Removed |Added
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1842895
Bug 1842895 depends on bug 1842907, which changed state.
Bug 1842907 Summary: Add perl-DateTime-Format-ICal to EPEL7
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1842907
What|Removed |Added
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1848198
Bug ID: 1848198
Summary: perl-Test-MemoryGrowth-0.04 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-Test-MemoryGrowth
Keywords: FutureFeature,
On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 12:05 PM Richard Shaw wrote:
>
> I didn't get any response from the EPEL list so forwarding here since the
> change was discussed here anyway...
> ---
>
> So with the discussion about moving to zram for swap on Fedora I wondered if
> it was worth taking a look at for my
On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 12:08 AM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 07:52:16PM +0200, Alexander Ploumistos wrote:
> > I remember that some time ago we were told not to use the
> > @fedoraproject.org in bugzilla, can't recall why exactly. Has this
> > changed?
>
> Nothing has changed
On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 07:52:16PM +0200, Alexander Ploumistos wrote:
> I remember that some time ago we were told not to use the
> @fedoraproject.org in bugzilla, can't recall why exactly. Has this
> changed?
Nothing has changed there.
You can make a @fedoraproject.org account, but without an
This update has been submitted to stable.
On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 12:53 PM Carl George wrote:
>
> Greetings,
>
> Per the EPEL incompatible upgrades policy [0], this is an announcement of a
> backwards incompatible update [1] of oniguruma in EPEL 7. This change was
> approved by the EPEL
On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 01:04:57PM -0500, Richard Shaw wrote:
> I didn't get any response from the EPEL list so forwarding here since the
> change was discussed here anyway...
> ---
>
> So with the discussion about moving to zram for swap on Fedora I wondered
> if it was worth taking a look at
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1846149
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #13 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1846509
--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2020-1c4961b88b has been pushed to the Fedora 31 testing repository.
In short time you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1846147
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #9 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1846148
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #14 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1846729
--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2020-b8ab59e2b6 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 testing repository.
In short time you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade
On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 at 20:47, Igor Raits
wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA512
>
> On Wed, 2020-06-17 at 20:38 +0200, Andy Mender wrote:
> > Howdy everyone!
> >
> > Some time ago we discussed the misuse of the make %{?_smp_mflags}
> > construct
> > and that one should switch
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Wed, 2020-06-17 at 20:38 +0200, Andy Mender wrote:
> Howdy everyone!
>
> Some time ago we discussed the misuse of the make %{?_smp_mflags}
> construct
> and that one should switch to %build_make. I tried that and all of my
> COPR
> builds failed
Howdy everyone!
Some time ago we discussed the misuse of the make %{?_smp_mflags} construct
and that one should switch to %build_make. I tried that and all of my COPR
builds failed completely. Here's a log from one of them:
On Tue, 16 Jun 2020 at 07:10, Igor Raits
wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA512
>
> On Tue, 2020-06-16 at 02:21 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > Ben Cotton wrote:
> > > == Summary ==
> > > %cmake macro will be adjusted (-B
> > > parameter)
> > > to use separate build folder
On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 at 14:05, Richard Shaw wrote:
>
> I didn't get any response from the EPEL list so forwarding here since the
> change was discussed here anyway...
The EPEL list really isn't for these sorts of OS level discussions..
most of the people on it are usually php/perl/python level
I didn't get any response from the EPEL list so forwarding here since the
change was discussed here anyway...
---
So with the discussion about moving to zram for swap on Fedora I wondered
if it was worth taking a look at for my CentOS 8 machine.
I noticed that there was a build in Koji but it
I remember that some time ago we were told not to use the
@fedoraproject.org in bugzilla, can't recall why exactly. Has this
changed?
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 09:37:42AM +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 05:15:17PM -0400, Christopher wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 11:10 AM Pierre-Yves Chibon
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 11:05:00AM -0400, Christopher wrote:
> > > >Why aren't the
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1848125
Bug ID: 1848125
Summary: amavisd fails to start in multiple port config
Product: Fedora
Version: 32
Hardware: x86_64
OS: Linux
Status: NEW
Component:
On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 6:30 PM Ben Rosser wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 5:38 PM Jared K. Smith
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 3:41 PM Ben Rosser wrote:
> >>
> >> So... this is a lot of node.js packages, and I haven't really seen any
> >> discussion of this on the lists. And at
On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 5:38 PM Jared K. Smith wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 3:41 PM Ben Rosser wrote:
>>
>> So... this is a lot of node.js packages, and I haven't really seen any
>> discussion of this on the lists. And at least some of these are possibly
>> important for other nodejs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1848088
Bug ID: 1848088
Summary: perl-DBD-Pg-3.13.0 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-DBD-Pg
Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 2:49 PM Aoife Moloney wrote:
> # DataCentre Move Update: 2020-06-17
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> I hope you are all having a good week! I would like to give you some
> updates on the Data Centre Move project that some members of the CPE
> team have been involved in over the last
On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 5:41 AM Igor Raits
wrote:
>
> %if (0%{?rhel} && 0%{?rhel}) <= 8 || (0%{?fedora} && 0%{?fedora} <= 32)
>
Yes, I have written such spec file lines, and while
they are correct, they tend to be ugly to parse for
humans.
While I know it is personal preference, I tend to
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1847803
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1847730
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends On||1848027
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1818509
--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2020-a726a87414 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 32.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-a726a87414
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1803711
--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2020-a726a87414 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 32.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-a726a87414
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 11:56:52AM +0200, Kamil Paral wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 2:47 PM Michael Catanzaro
> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 2:03 pm, Kamil Paral wrote:
> > > The person proposing this Change should supply some video showcasing
> > > this, or a very detailed
On Tue, 2020-06-16 at 15:09 +0200, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 01:59:48PM +0200, Michael J. Baars wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Since it's awfully quiet on the initscripts-devel mailing list.
>
> But why this email? The log you presented shows:
>
> a) distccd not starting because
# DataCentre Move Update: 2020-06-17
Hi everyone,
I hope you are all having a good week! I would like to give you some
updates on the Data Centre Move project that some members of the CPE
team have been involved in over the last few months.
As you are probably aware at this point, the Fedora
# DataCentre Move Update: 2020-06-17
Hi everyone,
I hope you are all having a good week! I would like to give you some
updates on the Data Centre Move project that some members of the CPE
team have been involved in over the last few months.
As you are probably aware at this point, the Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1818509
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |MODIFIED
CC|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1803711
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |MODIFIED
Fixed In Version|
On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 10:23:30PM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
> The solution to this problem should be quite evident and that is to archive
> the "retired" components as flatpaks ( if the component is a desktop app )
> or a as container ( if it's a server application or application stack
On Wed, 17 Jun 2020, Dan Horák wrote:
"J. Scheurich" wrote:
Hi,
I updated white_dune with creating a source.rpm,
$ fedpkg clone wdune
$ fedpkg import source.rpm
$ fedpkg commit
$ fedpkg push
$ fedpkg build
but i get the following problem
If you take a look inside the root.log of the build task here:
https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/4647/45824647/root.log, you
will see the actual error that is being reported. It appears that a
depoendency of the package (aqsis-core) cannot be installed due to an issue
with how it is
On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 13:03:07 +0200
"J. Scheurich" wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I updated white_dune with creating a source.rpm,
>
> $ fedpkg clone wdune
> $ fedpkg import source.rpm
> $ fedpkg commit
> $ fedpkg push
> $ fedpkg build
>
> but i get the following problem
>
>
Hi,
I updated white_dune with creating a source.rpm,
$ fedpkg clone wdune
$ fedpkg import source.rpm
$ fedpkg commit
$ fedpkg push
$ fedpkg build
but i get the following problem
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=45824536 ->
On 17. 06. 20 14:31, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Quoting the original email which started this sub-thread:
Dne 15. 06. 20 v 22:10 Ben Cotton napsal(a):
We install/keep fedora-repos-modular by default, users (admins) can
uninstall it if desired. No defaults are changed
How you manage to have it
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1829980
Xavier Bachelot changed:
What|Removed |Added
Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1829977
Xavier Bachelot changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||needinfo?(tremble@tremble.o
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1829981
Xavier Bachelot changed:
What|Removed |Added
Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1829990
Xavier Bachelot changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||needinfo?(rc040203@freenet.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=183
Xavier Bachelot changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||needinfo?(rc040203@freenet.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1829997
Xavier Bachelot changed:
What|Removed |Added
Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1829995
Xavier Bachelot changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||needinfo?(tremble@tremble.o
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1829984
Xavier Bachelot changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||needinfo?(tremble@tremble.o
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1829982
Xavier Bachelot changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||needinfo?(tremble@tremble.o
Dne 16. 06. 20 v 14:46 Michael Catanzaro napsal(a):
> On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 2:03 pm, Kamil Paral wrote:
>> The person proposing this Change should supply some video showcasing
>> this, or a very detailed description, otherwise people will have very
>> varying ideas of how this works and looks.
Dne 16. 06. 20 v 14:38 Christopher Engelhard napsal(a):
> I can't speak to the implementation of this, but I am in favour of the
> approach in general, with one caveat: I think it is important to
> implement this in a way that makes it possible for users to keep
> *individual* retired packages
Dne 17. 06. 20 v 9:15 Till Hofmann napsal(a):
>
> On 6/16/20 9:56 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>> Also, I wonder what is wrong with "dnf autoremove", which is supposed to
>> remove unused leaf packages, which were not explicitly installed?
> On my system, it removed grub2-efi and made the system
Dne 17. 06. 20 v 0:21 Miro Hrončok napsal(a):
> On 16. 06. 20 11:57, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>> Not mentioned that weak dependencies are disabled in Mock.
>
> I don't understand why would the user need fedora-repos-modular
> automatically pulled into mock when they install fedora-repos there.
> Could
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1803711
Xavier Bachelot changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|needinfo?(xavier@bachelot.o |
|rg)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1803711
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||needinfo?(xavier@bachelot.o
On 17. 06. 20 12:01, Dridi Boukelmoune wrote:
== How To Test ==
Install Fedora 33 (any edition or flavor), check that modular repos
are still installed and enabled by default.
Update to Fedora 33 (from Fedora 31 or 32), check that modular repos
are still installed and enabled by default.
Check
On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 2:30 PM Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 3:48 PM Ben Cotton wrote:
> >
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Fedora-Retired-Packages
> >
> > == Summary ==
> > All retired packages are obsoleted by `fedora-retired-packages`.
> >
>
> This whole process is
> == How To Test ==
> Install Fedora 33 (any edition or flavor), check that modular repos
> are still installed and enabled by default.
>
> Update to Fedora 33 (from Fedora 31 or 32), check that modular repos
> are still installed and enabled by default.
>
> Check that you can remove the
On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 2:47 PM Michael Catanzaro
wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 2:03 pm, Kamil Paral wrote:
> > The person proposing this Change should supply some video showcasing
> > this, or a very detailed description, otherwise people will have very
> > varying ideas of how this works
On 6/17/20 1:19 AM, Carl George wrote:
> I just orphaned the python-mitogen package. I packaged it for my last
> job but I no longer use it and I'm not interested in maintaining it
> anymore. As best I can tell, nothing else in the distribution
> requires or build requires it. It's up for grabs
On 6/17/20 11:03 AM, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote:
>
> Zdenek have kind of question: why there are so many patches in the
> hplip package?
> Is it any problem with accepting Fedora patches by source tree maintainer?
Yes, it is - HP upstream is unresponsive in most bugfix cases.
> Is there any git or other
On Tue, 16 Jun 2020 at 14:09, Zdenek Dohnal wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm HPLIP maintainer in Fedora and I would like to ask *the users which
> have HP printers which needed their HP plugin to test the scratch build*
> of new hplip.
>
> HPLIP released a new version 3.20.6, where most models, which
Hi Tomasz,
thank you for testing!
Unfortunately, IMO hpcups still loads the plugin... I checked the code
and hpcups doesn't look into models.dat - it loads the plugin either
way, entry in models.dat seems to be checked only during print queue
installation :( .
I have the same experience with
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1847730
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Doc Type|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1803711
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jples...@redhat.com
--- Comment
On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 05:15:17PM -0400, Christopher wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 11:10 AM Pierre-Yves Chibon
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 11:05:00AM -0400, Christopher wrote:
> > >Why aren't the packager accounts linked to their FAS account alias?
> > >
On 6/16/20 9:56 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Also, I wonder what is wrong with "dnf autoremove", which is supposed to
> remove unused leaf packages, which were not explicitly installed?
On my system, it removed grub2-efi and made the system unbootable. So
I'm not sure running this as part of the
On 6/17/20 8:41 AM, Igor Raits wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Wed, 2020-06-17 at 01:38 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
James Cassell wrote:
If you're doing this, might I suggest reversing the condition so
the new
way is in the "else" part, hence "default"?
The problem
On Tuesday, 16 June 2020 03.41.09 WEST Neal Gompa wrote:
> CMake themselves do not recommend doing in-source builds (and they've
> already warned that this will eventually stop working). Meson doesn't
> even permit it. These days, Autotools is the weird exception that
> mostly mandates in-source
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1842917
--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2020-63e20981ea has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 7.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2020-63e20981ea
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1842917
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1842892
--- Comment #1 from Petr Pisar ---
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/25774
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
perl-devel mailing list
95 matches
Mail list logo
