'It's a trap!' :D
On 8/27/20 5:13 PM, Ben Cotton wrote:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Python_Upstream_Architecture_Names
>
> == Summary ==
> Use CPython upstream architecture naming in Fedora's Python ecosystem
> (mostly in filenames) instead of the previously patched Fedora names.
>
https://fedorapeople.org/groups/389ds/ci/nightly/2020/08/28/report-389-ds-base-1.4.4.4-20200827git52a09ce.fc32.x86_64.html
___
389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 9/181 (x86_64)
New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-33-20200826.n.0):
ID: 649776 Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso desktop_background
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/649776
Old failures (same test failed in
OLD: Fedora-33-20200826.n.0
NEW: Fedora-33-20200827.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:2
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 1
Dropped packages:5
Upgraded packages: 3
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 114.10 MiB
Size of dropped packages:5.95 MiB
Size
On Thu, 2020-08-27 at 11:13 -0400, Ben Cotton wrote:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/OptimizeSquashFS
>
> == Summary ==
> Improve compression ratio of SquashFS filesystem on the installation
> media.
>
...
>
> Based on the results above, I'd suggest selecting the following
> ''optimal
Hi Adam,
On 8/27/20 2:18 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
Unfortunately, as Jam isn't a release-blocking image, it can't by
definition block the Beta release. Even if it doesn't build at all.
As Neal suggested, I'd recommend requesting the fix be backported to
our Koji by filing a ticket with the
On Wed, 2020-08-26 at 19:07 -0700, Erich Eickmeyer wrote:
> HI all,
>
> Since the release of Koji 1.22, there has been a bug [1] blocking any
> Fedora Jam 33 or Rawhide iso images from being spun. As you can imagine,
> this is making me quite nervous. As it turns out, I'm waiting for Koji
>
On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 11:12 AM kevin wrote:
>
> On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 02:50:39PM -0300, Pablo Sebastián Greco wrote:
> >
> > On 21/8/20 19:06, Troy Dawson wrote:
>
> > > C) Drop playground. Say it was an interesting experiment and we
> > > learned stuff, but shut it down.
> > > (and clean up
Dear all,
You are kindly invited to the meeting:
EPEL Steering Committee on 2020-08-28 from 21:00:00 to 22:00:00 UTC
At freenode@fedora-meeting
The meeting will be about:
This is the weekly EPEL Steering Committee Meeting.
A general agenda is the following:
#meetingname EPEL
#topic
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1872870
--- Comment #5 from Tim Jackson ---
Thanks!
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1872760
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #3 from
https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/51252
--
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:
On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 6:11 PM Adam Williamson
wrote:
>
> Basic networking
>
> It must be possible to establish both IPv4 and IPv6 network connections
> using DHCP and static addressing. The default network configuration
> tools for the console and for release-blocking desktops must
On Thu, 2020-08-27 at 14:21 +0200, Lukas Javorsky wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> I've run into the compilation problem in the Galera package
> This problem occurs only on f33 and higher tho.
>
> Here is build performed on Fedora 32:
> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=50232504
>
>
Forwarding here in case you don't follow the devel-announce / devel lists.
Please, keep the discussion on the devel list.
Forwarded Message
Subject: F34 Change: Python Upstream Architecture Names (Self-Contained Change)
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2020 11:13:25 -0400
From: Ben Cotton
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1873195
Bug ID: 1873195
Summary: perl-Catalyst-Plugin-Session-State-Cookie-0.18 is
available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Python_Upstream_Architecture_Names
== Summary ==
Use CPython upstream architecture naming in Fedora's Python ecosystem
(mostly in filenames) instead of the previously patched Fedora names.
For example, have
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/OptimizeSquashFS
== Summary ==
Improve compression ratio of SquashFS filesystem on the installation media.
== Owner ==
* Name: [[User:bkhomuts|Bohdan Khomutskyi]]
* Email: bkhom...@redhat.com
== Detailed Description ==
As of Fedora 31, the
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/OptimizeSquashFS
== Summary ==
Improve compression ratio of SquashFS filesystem on the installation media.
== Owner ==
* Name: [[User:bkhomuts|Bohdan Khomutskyi]]
* Email: bkhom...@redhat.com
== Detailed Description ==
As of Fedora 31, the
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Python_Upstream_Architecture_Names
== Summary ==
Use CPython upstream architecture naming in Fedora's Python ecosystem
(mostly in filenames) instead of the previously patched Fedora names.
For example, have
The following Fedora EPEL 8 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
15 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2020-c2936180ed
ansible-2.9.12-1.el8
The following builds have been pushed to Fedora EPEL 8 updates-testing
aqbanking-6.1.4-1.el8
gnucash-4.1-2.el8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1843866
--- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2020-4a08a623d2 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 32.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-4a08a623d2
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1872870
--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2020-4fec85b1f3 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1872870
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #3 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1869096
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-List-Compare-0.55-1.fc |perl-List-Compare-0.55-1.fc
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1869106
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-Importer-0.026-1.fc33 |perl-Importer-0.026-1.fc33
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1869795
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-libwww-perl-6.47-1.fc3 |perl-libwww-perl-6.47-1.fc3
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1869106
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Fixed In
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1869096
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Fixed In
On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 9:42 AM Mohan Boddu wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 1:53 PM kevin wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 07:18:49PM +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> > >
> > > Hrm. It looks like at least some of those issues were transient, yes.
> > > However, two issues are still left:
On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 1:53 PM kevin wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 07:18:49PM +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> >
> > Hrm. It looks like at least some of those issues were transient, yes.
> > However, two issues are still left:
> >
> > - libdkimpp-2.0.0-6.fc33 is tagged with f33 and f34 but
On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 02:21:03PM +0200, Lukas Javorsky wrote:
> I've run into the compilation problem in the Galera package
> This problem occurs only on f33 and higher tho.
>
> Here is build performed on Fedora 32:
> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=50232504
>
> And here is
On Thu, 27 Aug 2020 14:21:03 +0200
Lukas Javorsky wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> I've run into the compilation problem in the Galera package
> This problem occurs only on f33 and higher tho.
>
> Here is build performed on Fedora 32:
> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=50232504
>
>
On Thu, 27 Aug 2020 14:21:03 +0200
Lukas Javorsky wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> I've run into the compilation problem in the Galera package
> This problem occurs only on f33 and higher tho.
>
> Here is build performed on Fedora 32:
> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=50232504
>
>
On 27.08.20 13:27, Muneendra Kumar M via devel wrote:
> Hi Josey,
> Will the below steps work to upgrade the package for epel7.
Epel works just like any other Fedora branch, so unless there are
differences in dependencies on CentOS/RHEL vs Fedora (doesn't seem to be
the case, as you already have
Hi folks,
I've run into the compilation problem in the Galera package
This problem occurs only on f33 and higher tho.
Here is build performed on Fedora 32:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=50232504
And here is the same build, but on Fedora 33:
In theory, it should be fine, but opinion from someone, who works with epel
regularly would be better.
Josef Ridky
Software Engineer
Core Services Team
Red Hat Czech, s.r.o.
- Original Message -
| From: "Muneendra Kumar M via devel"
| To: "Josef Ridky"
| Cc: "Development discussions
Hi Josey,
Will the below steps work to upgrade the package for epel7.
Please let me know if there is any issue.
fedpkg clone fctxpd
cd fctxpd/
git branch
fedpkg switch-branch epel7
git branch
git merge master
fedpkg push
fedpkg build
Regards,
Muneendra.
-Original Message-
From: Muneendra
Hi Josey,
Thanks for sharing the info and I was able to fix the issue and upgrade the
package to FC34.
How do I upgrade my package to EPEL 7 and EPEL 8 which still has old version
of package(fctxpd-0.1-1.20190813gitc195e67.el8).
Any help here will be great.
Release Stable versionFedora
fedpkg provided you task URL, where you can find all logs related to current
build.
In your case, taks URL is
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=50235166
Under this URL, you find links to sub-builds of your package (sub-build mean
your package built for specific architecture -
Hi Josey,
Thanks for pointing out the issue.
I fixed the issue and it build successfully.
Thanks for your quick help.
Regards,
Muneendra.
-Original Message-
From: Muneendra Kumar M [mailto:muneendra.ku...@broadcom.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2020 3:50 PM
To: 'Josef Ridky' ;
No missing expected images.
Passed openQA tests: 7/7 (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
Hi Josey,
But the src.rpm has a fctxpd-ccbaf3a.tar.gz and fctxpd.spec.
And when we extract fctxpd-ccbaf3a.tar.gz it has
bsn-fc-txpd-ccbaf3a0cbadaaef727bcb53c1ac543fa049.
Can you please let me know whether iam missing something.
And how did u see the below error.
/var/tmp/rpm-tmp.0K14Wz:
Take a look at build.log that is available at provided koji URL.
/var/tmp/rpm-tmp.0K14Wz: line 39: cd:
bsn-fc-txptd-ccbaf3a0cbadaaef727bcb53c1ac543fa049: No such file or directory
That's the reason of your build failure.
Josef Ridky
Software Engineer
Core Services Team
Red Hat Czech,
Hi Jonathan,
As per the below guidelines I tried the below steps but iam getting the
below error when I run fedpkg scratch-build --srpm.
And how can I see the error logs?
Could you please let me know what went wrong.
fedpkg clone fctxpd
cd fctxpd
edited the spec file
fedpkg srpm
fedpkg
No missing expected images.
Soft failed openQA tests: 1/7 (x86_64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)
Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-32-20200826.0):
ID: 649130 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1872760
--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2020-d8d22e28eb has been submitted as an update to Fedora 33.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-d8d22e28eb
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1872760
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |MODIFIED
Fixed In Version|
48 matches
Mail list logo
