Re: Strange build failures in rawhide buildroot (cont'd) - glibc 2.33 dev snapshot?

On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 09:14:46PM +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > Sérgio, I have no idea what you're talking about here. Do you mean the > new policy to wait with a rawhide compose until the first "branched" > compose is successful and synced out? If I understand correctly, that > "policy" is e

Re: Strange build failures in rawhide buildroot (cont'd) - glibc 2.33 dev snapshot?

On Sat, 2020-08-15 at 00:46 +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote: > There's a difference between bodhi pushing a rawhide update to > "stable" and it being included in "rawhide" repositories. > Because bodhi does not compose rawhide. OK, didn't know that. thanks for the update -- Sérgio M. B. _

Re: calculating process memory usage

On 8/14/20 4:34 PM, Samuel Sieb wrote: On 8/14/20 1:52 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: /proc/pid/status VmHWM or  VmRSS + VmSwap Yes, thank you! VmHWM is not so useful for this case, but certainly for others. Comparing with the "top" numbers, the VmRSS total looks slightly high, depending on how zsw

Re: calculating process memory usage

On 8/14/20 1:52 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: /proc/pid/status VmHWM or VmRSS + VmSwap Yes, thank you! VmHWM is not so useful for this case, but certainly for others. Comparing with the "top" numbers, the VmRSS total looks slightly high, depending on how zswap factors in to the numbers. The VmSwa

[Test-Announce] 2020-08-17 @ 16:00 UTC - Fedora 33 Blocker Review Meeting

# F33 Blocker Review meeting # Date: 2020-08-17 # Time: 16:00 UTC # Location: #fedora-blocker-review on irc.freenode.net Hi folks! We have 3 proposed Beta blockers and 2 proposed Beta freeze exceptions to review, so let's have a Fedora 33 blocker review meeting on Monday! If you have time this we

[Test-Announce] Proposal to CANCEL: 2020-08-17 Fedora QA Meeting

Hi folks! I'm proposing we cancel the QA meeting for Monday. I don't have anything urgent this week. If you're aware of anything important we have to discuss this week, please do reply to this mail and we can go ahead and run the meeting. Thanks! -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC

Re: Debug doxygen generated files with different names in noarch package

On 8/14/20 1:37 PM, Richard Shaw wrote: On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 7:12 AM Rich Mattes > wrote: On Fri, Aug 14, 2020, 7:37 AM Richard Shaw mailto:hobbes1...@gmail.com>> wrote: I'm getting consistent differences across at least two versions of zipi

Re: Strange build failures in rawhide buildroot (cont'd) - glibc 2.33 dev snapshot?

On Sat, Aug 15, 2020 at 12:37 AM Sérgio Basto wrote: > > On Fri, 2020-08-14 at 21:14 +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 8:48 PM Sérgio Basto > > wrote: > > > On Fri, 2020-08-14 at 20:30 +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > > > So, I've been trying to figure out strange build f

Re: Non-responsive maintainer check for bochecha

Ah, it all makes sense now.. Mail chatting lagging a little bit, so my previous questions not actual anymore then. :) Thanks for clearing that up. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.f

Re: Non-responsive maintainer check for bochecha

Also, if upstream against about packaging, why they added packaging status badge then on their project page? Availability in distros: https://gitlab.com/BuildStream/buildstream They against only Fedora? I don't understand at all then. ___ devel mailing

Re: Strange build failures in rawhide buildroot (cont'd) - glibc 2.33 dev snapshot?

On Fri, 2020-08-14 at 21:14 +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote: > On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 8:48 PM Sérgio Basto > wrote: > > On Fri, 2020-08-14 at 20:30 +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > > So, I've been trying to figure out strange build failures in my > > > Java > > > packages when running mock with `--

Re: Non-responsive maintainer check for bochecha

On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 10:34 pm, Artem Tim wrote: Michael, this is super weird. I pushed to repos bst-external already. I see it's two months old. Thanks for creating it. :) Upstream had asked bochecha not to package bst-external because it's not stable. But since every project that uses bu

Re: Non-responsive maintainer check for bochecha

> Also note the buildstream package is mostly useless without bst-external, > which is unfortunately not packaged in Fedora because upstream requested it > not be packaged Michael, this is super weird. I pushed to repos bst-external already. And i never seen before that upstream against it.

Re: Non-responsive maintainer check for bochecha

On Sat, Aug 15, 2020 at 12:20 AM Neal Gompa wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 6:03 PM Michael Catanzaro > wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > I believe Mathieu is temporarily unavailable. If you don't hear back > > soon, it makes sense to proceed with nonresponsive maintainer procedure > > if you wa

Re: EarlyOOM +ZRAM Only

On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 3:04 PM Sergio Belkin wrote: > > Good question this the output of he last lines of smem -c "name swap" -s swap > -k -t > > kaccess 4.1M > kded54.5M > cadmus 5.0M > konsole 5.4M > xdg-de

Re: Non-responsive maintainer check for bochecha

On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 6:03 PM Michael Catanzaro wrote: > > > Hi, > > I believe Mathieu is temporarily unavailable. If you don't hear back > soon, it makes sense to proceed with nonresponsive maintainer procedure > if you want to take over the buildstream package, or ask a > provenpackager to hel

Re: Non-responsive maintainer check for bochecha

Hi, I believe Mathieu is temporarily unavailable. If you don't hear back soon, it makes sense to proceed with nonresponsive maintainer procedure if you want to take over the buildstream package, or ask a provenpackager to help. (Also note the buildstream package is mostly useless without b

CPE WEekly: 2020-08-14

--- title: CPE Weekly status email tags: CPE Weekly, email --- # CPE Weekly: 2020-08-14 Background: The Community Platform Engineering group, or CPE for short, is the Red Hat team combining IT and release engineering from Fedora and CentOS. Our goal is to keep core servers and services running and

Re: EarlyOOM +ZRAM Only

El vie., 14 ago. 2020 a las 16:32, Chris Murphy () escribió: > On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 12:42 PM Sergio Belkin wrote: > > > > 2 comments: > > - I don't use disk-based swap, only zram. > > - It happened again, and in this case there is no Virtual Machine nor > Zoom app running: > > ago 14 15:08:37

Re: calculating process memory usage

On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 2:29 PM Samuel Sieb wrote: > > On 8/14/20 11:41 AM, Sergio Belkin wrote: > > Perhaps this ps_mem snippet is useful: > > > Private + Shared = RAM used Program > > > > > > > > 294.8 MiB + 4.7 MiB = 299.4 MiB telegram-desktop.bin > > 290.3 MiB + 22.

Non-responsive maintainer check for bochecha

Hi. Anyone know how to contact Mathieu Bridon [FAS name: bochecha]? 'buildstream' package need urgent update. Related bug reports: - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1868983 - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1821245 - PR with fix: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/buildstr

Re: calculating process memory usage

On 8/14/20 11:41 AM, Sergio Belkin wrote: Perhaps this ps_mem snippet is useful: 294.8 MiB +   4.7 MiB = 299.4 MiB       telegram-desktop.bin 290.3 MiB +  22.1 MiB = 312.4 MiB       rocketchat-desktop (5) 323.8 MiB +   9.5 MiB = 333.2 MiB       kwin_x11 (9) 344.5 MiB +   1.4 MiB = 345.8 Mi

Re: Strange build failures in rawhide buildroot (cont'd) - glibc 2.33 dev snapshot?

On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 1:29 PM Jerry James wrote: > I added "exit 1" to the end of %install in one of the affected OCaml > packages, so that I could inspect the contents of > /builddir/build/BUILDROOT in the mock chroot. The files all have the > correct permissions. Yet when the binary RPM is g

Re: EarlyOOM +ZRAM Only

On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 12:42 PM Sergio Belkin wrote: > > 2 comments: > - I don't use disk-based swap, only zram. > - It happened again, and in this case there is no Virtual Machine nor Zoom > app running: > ago 14 15:08:37 dublin.ireland.home earlyoom[888]: sending SIGTERM to process > 2052260

Re: Strange build failures in rawhide buildroot (cont'd) - glibc 2.33 dev snapshot?

On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 1:15 PM Fabio Valentini wrote: > Sérgio, I have no idea what you're talking about here. Do you mean the > new policy to wait with a rawhide compose until the first "branched" > compose is successful and synced out? If I understand correctly, that > "policy" is enforced by b

Re: Strange build failures in rawhide buildroot (cont'd) - glibc 2.33 dev snapshot?

On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 8:48 PM Sérgio Basto wrote: > > On Fri, 2020-08-14 at 20:30 +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > So, I've been trying to figure out strange build failures in my Java > > packages when running mock with `--enablerepo local`. > > > > First I thought java-11-openjdk update might

Re: Strange build failures in rawhide buildroot (cont'd) - glibc 2.33 dev snapshot?

On Fri, 2020-08-14 at 20:30 +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote: > So, I've been trying to figure out strange build failures in my Java > packages when running mock with `--enablerepo local`. > > First I thought java-11-openjdk update might be to blame, but now I > found another "unrelated" issue: > > O

Re: EarlyOOM +ZRAM Only

El vie., 14 ago. 2020 a las 9:28, Przemek Klosowski via devel (< devel@lists.fedoraproject.org>) escribió: > On 8/14/20 7:33 AM, John M. Harris Jr wrote: > > On Wednesday, August 12, 2020 1:16:34 PM MST Przemek Klosowski via devel > > wrote: > >> > >> This is weird---your swap was 100% full, and r

Strange build failures in rawhide buildroot (cont'd) - glibc 2.33 dev snapshot?

So, I've been trying to figure out strange build failures in my Java packages when running mock with `--enablerepo local`. First I thought java-11-openjdk update might be to blame, but now I found another "unrelated" issue: OCaml packages built with dune and `--enablerepo local` right now produce

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: hundred percent cpu load

On 8/14/20 9:15 AM, Wells, Roger K. via devel wrote: On 8/14/20 8:45 AM, Przemek Klosowski via devel wrote: On 8/14/20 8:33 AM, Wells, Roger K. via devel wrote: That was not the cause. Now when it happens I have only three tasks running at 100% (same ones as reported earlier). Everything else, ker

Re: Debug doxygen generated files with different names in noarch package

On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 7:12 AM Rich Mattes wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 14, 2020, 7:37 AM Richard Shaw wrote: > >> >> I'm getting consistent differences across at least two versions of zipios >> and the offending arches seem to always be s390x and ppc64le. >> >> BuildError: The following noarch packa

Re: Unannounced soname bump: libreport

On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 11:14:59AM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 11:12 AM Fabio Valentini wrote: > > > > On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 5:01 PM Michael Schwendt > > wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, 14 Aug 2020 16:37:28 +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > > > > > > > As a side note, the upd

Strange Java package build failures (Error in scriptlet ?)

Hi everybody, Since ~2 days ago, the rawhide koji buildroot has exhibited some *really weird* issues when building Java packages with maven (when building packages locally with "mock -r fedora-rawhide-x86_64 --enablerepo local foo.src.rpm"). During installation of the build dependencies, some ran

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: hundred percent cpu load

On 20-08-14 09:14:51, Wells, Roger K. via devel wrote: On 8/14/20 8:45 AM, Przemek Klosowski via devel wrote: So, what is kernel doing? what does your system log say? type 'dmesg' or 'journalctl -e' and look at the end of the data. The following repeats at the end of journalctl: In the last

Re: Non-responsive maintainer check: spike

On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 4:52 PM spike wrote: > > Hi Fabio, > > Contacting me should be somewhat straight forward through the email address > associated with my user id in FAS or through IRC. Let me know how I can help. > > Cheers We have resolved this issue on bugzilla: https://bugzilla.redhat.c

Re: Unannounced soname bump: libreport

On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 11:12 AM Fabio Valentini wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 5:01 PM Michael Schwendt wrote: > > > > On Fri, 14 Aug 2020 16:37:28 +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > > > > > As a side note, the update now has arch specific BuildRequires, so the > > > > SRPM > > > > cannot be

Re: Unannounced soname bump: libreport

On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 5:01 PM Michael Schwendt wrote: > > On Fri, 14 Aug 2020 16:37:28 +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > > > As a side note, the update now has arch specific BuildRequires, so the > > > SRPM > > > cannot be rebuilt on anything but . > > > > > > https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/

Re: Unannounced soname bump: libreport

On Fri, 14 Aug 2020 16:37:28 +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > As a side note, the update now has arch specific BuildRequires, so the SRPM > > cannot be rebuilt on anything but . > > > > https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/package/libreport?collection=f33 > > Aaaw ... stuff like this makes me sad

Re: Non-responsive maintainer check: spike

Hi Fabio, Contacting me should be somewhat straight forward through the email address associated with my user id in FAS or through IRC. Let me know how I can help. Cheers On 14.08.20 16:12, Fabio Valentini wrote: > Hi everybody, > > The Java package stack cleanup process continues, and I need

Re: Unannounced soname bump: libreport

On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 4:32 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 14. 08. 20 2:10, Adam Williamson wrote: > > A new build of libreport was done for all releases today by mfabik: > > > > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1592551 > > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID

Re: Unannounced soname bump: libreport

On 14. 08. 20 2:10, Adam Williamson wrote: A new build of libreport was done for all releases today by mfabik: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1592551 https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1592550 https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1592524

Non-responsive maintainer check: spike

Hi everybody, The Java package stack cleanup process continues, and I need to do another non-responsive maintainer check, this time for: spike. I have opened the corresponding non-responsive-check bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1868943 There's a growing list of bugs that are op

Re: Help needed with new pcl: cloudcompare FTBFS

On 14. 08. 20 15:44, Orion Poplawski wrote: On 8/14/20 4:09 AM, Miro Hrončok wrote: Hello Rich, Orion. I see you've managed to build pcl that was updated to 1.11 2 months ago but only built recently for Fedora 33+: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/pcl/commits/master cloudcompare now FTBF

Re: Help needed with new pcl: cloudcompare FTBFS

On 8/14/20 4:09 AM, Miro Hrončok wrote: Hello Rich, Orion. I see you've managed to build pcl that was updated to 1.11 2 months ago but only built recently for Fedora 33+: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/pcl/commits/master cloudcompare now FTBFS: https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/packag

Fedora 33 compose report: 20200814.n.0 changes

OLD: Fedora-33-20200813.n.2 NEW: Fedora-33-20200814.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:1 Dropped images: 2 Added packages: 6 Dropped packages:44 Upgraded packages: 171 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 2.38 MiB Size of dropped packages:264.55 MiB

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: hundred percent cpu load

On 8/14/20 8:45 AM, Przemek Klosowski via devel wrote: On 8/14/20 8:33 AM, Wells, Roger K. via devel wrote: That was not the cause. Now when it happens I have only three tasks running at 100% (same ones as reported earlier). Everything else, kerneloops, shutdown via power switch, etc, is as before

Re: Help needed with new pcl: cloudcompare FTBFS

> Hello Rich, Orion. > > I see you've managed to build pcl that was updated to 1.11 2 months ago but > only > built recently for Fedora 33+: > > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/pcl/commits/master > > > cloudcompare now FTBFS: > > > https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/package/cloudcompare?c

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: hundred percent cpu load

On 8/14/20 8:33 AM, Wells, Roger K. via devel wrote: That was not the cause. Now when it happens I have only three tasks running at 100% (same ones as reported earlier). Everything else, kerneloops, shutdown via power switch, etc, is as before. Could you repost to the list with more info? I thi

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: hundred percent cpu load

On 8/13/20 4:44 PM, Wells, Roger K. via devel wrote: > On 8/13/20 4:28 PM, Przemek Klosowski via devel wrote: >> On 8/13/20 4:12 PM, Wells, Roger K. via devel wrote: >>> I'll do something to disable it. >> Oh, just thougth I'd mention---what I'd do would be >> >> locate sadc <- hopefully this

Re: EarlyOOM +ZRAM Only

On 8/14/20 7:33 AM, John M. Harris Jr wrote: On Wednesday, August 12, 2020 1:16:34 PM MST Przemek Klosowski via devel wrote: This is weird---your swap was 100% full, and ram almost full, and yet killing 4GB VirtualBox didn't seem to free up memory. I suspect some sort of measurement or reportin

Re: Debug doxygen generated files with different names in noarch package

On Fri, Aug 14, 2020, 7:37 AM Richard Shaw wrote: > I tried to get the subject as concise as possible :) > > I'm getting consistent differences across at least two versions of zipios > and the offending arches seem to always be s390x and ppc64le. > > BuildError: The following noarch package built

[Improvement Proposal] listing of keyboard layouts in anaconda

Hi, Please refer: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1158370 (list major common keyboard layouts first) An attempt could be made to determine major keyboard layouts from langtable[1] and place them up in the order[2]. Which may help users find them with a lesser scroll. thoughts? th

Re: Help needed with new pcl: cloudcompare FTBFS

On 14. 08. 20 12:39, Qiyu Yan wrote: Miro Hrončok 于2020年8月14日周五 下午6:09写道： Hello Rich, Orion. I see you've managed to build pcl that was updated to 1.11 2 months ago but only built recently for Fedora 33+: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/pcl/commits/master cloudcompare now FTBFS: https

Re: EarlyOOM +ZRAM Only

On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 7:34 AM John M. Harris Jr wrote: > > On Wednesday, August 12, 2020 1:16:34 PM MST Przemek Klosowski via devel > wrote: > > On 8/12/20 2:27 PM, Sergio Belkin wrote: > > > > > Hi! > > > I 've just had a problem using EarlyOOM + ZRAM. I haven't a disk-based > > > swap partitio

Debug doxygen generated files with different names in noarch package

I tried to get the subject as concise as possible :) I'm getting consistent differences across at least two versions of zipios and the offending arches seem to always be s390x and ppc64le. BuildError: The following noarch package built differently on different architectures: zipios-doc-2.2.1.0-5.

Re: EarlyOOM +ZRAM Only

On Wednesday, August 12, 2020 1:16:34 PM MST Przemek Klosowski via devel wrote: > On 8/12/20 2:27 PM, Sergio Belkin wrote: > > > Hi! > > I 've just had a problem using EarlyOOM + ZRAM. I haven't a disk-based > > swap partition. > > I was using mainly Zoom (desktop app) + Firefox + VirtualBox (De

Re: Help needed with new pcl: cloudcompare FTBFS

Miro Hrončok 于2020年8月14日周五 下午6:09写道： > > Hello Rich, Orion. > > I see you've managed to build pcl that was updated to 1.11 2 months ago but > only > built recently for Fedora 33+: > > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/pcl/commits/master > > > cloudcompare now FTBFS: > > > https://koschei.fedorap

Help needed with new pcl: cloudcompare FTBFS

Hello Rich, Orion. I see you've managed to build pcl that was updated to 1.11 2 months ago but only built recently for Fedora 33+: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/pcl/commits/master cloudcompare now FTBFS: https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/package/cloudcompare?collection=f33 In file i

Bringing fcitx5 to Fedora, and Review Swap

Hello all, I am going to bring fcitx5 to fedora, fcitx5 is the next generation for fcitx and upstream decided to treat fcitx and fcitx5 as a different project (different git repo, different file paths and names and configuration files). So, like most other distro do, I think we are going to treat

Pinta failed to build on f33/armv7hl

Hi guys, I tried to update pinta to the latest upstream version. It built fine except than on f33/armv7hl: https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/1530/49241530/build.log I have no idea why. Can someone please help? Thanks! Andrea ___ devel

Re: What is the real value of Release and %changelog metadata?

On 13.08.2020 15:08, Pavel Raiskup wrote: > "Release: 1%{?dist}%{?buildtag}" I have a better solution - automatically bump Release on every official build. Additional tags are not good. > %changelog > * This package doesn't provide changelog metadata, check it online > https://src.fedoraproject.

Re: What is the real value of Release and %changelog metadata?

On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 03:08:50PM +0200, Pavel Raiskup wrote: > Release tag problem/proposal > > > Let's stop requiring Release bumps for each build. And let's put an > additional tag into Release, like proposed in [4]: > > "Release: 1%{?dist}%{?buildtag}" > >