Re: Another problem on the s390x builder
On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 11:46:15PM -0400, Susi Lehtola wrote: > Hi, > > > I've had a koji build running for over 6 hours, and the s390x build > still hasn't started. Are the s390x builders offline? Nope. However, a bunch of builds landed earlier today and all the big ones are taking up the s390x builders. Additionally, the LPAR is very slow due to other tasks on the same mainframe. ;( It should process through them, but it's going to take a while. ;( kevin signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ 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/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Another problem on the s390x builder
Hi, I've had a koji build running for over 6 hours, and the s390x build still hasn't started. Are the s390x builders offline? -- Susi Lehtola Fedora Project Contributor jussileht...@fedoraproject.org ___ 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/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1941705] perl-Template-Alloy-1.022 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1941705 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-Template-Alloy-1.022-1 |perl-Template-Alloy-1.022-1 |.fc35 |.fc35 |perl-Template-Alloy-1.022-1 |perl-Template-Alloy-1.022-1 |.fc34 |.fc34 |perl-Template-Alloy-1.022-1 |perl-Template-Alloy-1.022-1 |.fc33 |.fc33 ||perl-Template-Alloy-1.022-1 ||.fc32 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-fb074f5c67 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1941705] perl-Template-Alloy-1.022 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1941705 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-Template-Alloy-1.022-1 |perl-Template-Alloy-1.022-1 |.fc35 |.fc35 |perl-Template-Alloy-1.022-1 |perl-Template-Alloy-1.022-1 |.fc34 |.fc34 ||perl-Template-Alloy-1.022-1 ||.fc33 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-ea0670b16c has been pushed to the Fedora 33 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1890910] Add perl-Inline-C to EPEL8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1890910 Bug 1890910 depends on bug 1890933, which changed state. Bug 1890933 Summary: Add perl-Pegex for EPEL8 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1890933 What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA -- 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 unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1890933] Add perl-Pegex for EPEL8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1890933 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2021-04-01 01:08:06 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-EPEL-2021-2e00d1ee31 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: F35 Change proposal: RPM 4.17 (System-Wide Change proposal)
Can't wait. ___ 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/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: F35 Change proposal: RPM 4.17 (System-Wide Change proposal)
Hello:
Miro Hrončok wrote on 2021/04/01 6:45:
On 31. 03. 21 21:52, Ben Cotton wrote:
* Strict checking for unpackaged content in builds
> ...
* Many existing packages will fail to build due to the stricter
buildroot content checking. Fixing this in the packaging is always
backwards compatible. We could temporarily set
`%_unpackaged_files_terminate_build 0` in rawhide to alleviate initial
impact if necessary.
This is my main concern with this update.
tl;dr If you %exclude something and there is no other subpackage to own the
files, the build fails:
This fails:
%install
...
touch %{buildroot}/foo %{buildroot}/bar
%files
/
%exclude /foo
As the files Miro has attached shows, this affects not a few rubygems related
packages. Many rubygems related packages has: %exclude %gem_cache .
Regards,
Mamoru
___
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/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: F35 Change proposal: RPM 4.17 (System-Wide Change proposal)
On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 12:18 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek < zbys...@in.waw.pl> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 11:45:54PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 31. 03. 21 21:52, Ben Cotton wrote: > > >* Strict checking for unpackaged content in builds > > > ... > > >* Many existing packages will fail to build due to the stricter > > >buildroot content checking. Fixing this in the packaging is always > > >backwards compatible. We could temporarily set > > >`%_unpackaged_files_terminate_build 0` in rawhide to alleviate initial > > >impact if necessary. > > > > This is my main concern with this update. > > > > tl;dr If you %exclude something and there is no other subpackage to > > own the files, the build fails: > > Whaaat? What is the point of %exclude if not to exclude files from the > list? Why would rpm upstream want to break this? Seems like a completely > backwards change that will make packaging harder instead of easier. > %exclude can be used for splitting up packages, so you can do %files foo %exclude bar.so *.so %files bar bar.so If my understanding is right, the above is what rpm upstream considers correct use for %exclude. For just not packaging some files, rm at the end of %install usually works just fine (but people have also been using %exclude for that and this change would break a bunch of packages that do this. I'm unsure if it's a good thing or not). I believe the motivation for that change is brp scripts that would still see the files that are %excluded in files and possibly do wrong things. Using rm in install doesn't have that problem. -- Kalev ___ 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/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: F35 Change proposal: RPM 4.17 (System-Wide Change proposal)
On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 11:45:54PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 31. 03. 21 21:52, Ben Cotton wrote:
> >* Strict checking for unpackaged content in builds
> > ...
> >* Many existing packages will fail to build due to the stricter
> >buildroot content checking. Fixing this in the packaging is always
> >backwards compatible. We could temporarily set
> >`%_unpackaged_files_terminate_build 0` in rawhide to alleviate initial
> >impact if necessary.
>
> This is my main concern with this update.
>
> tl;dr If you %exclude something and there is no other subpackage to
> own the files, the build fails:
Whaaat? What is the point of %exclude if not to exclude files from the
list? Why would rpm upstream want to break this? Seems like a completely
backwards change that will make packaging harder instead of easier.
Zbyszek
> This fails:
>
> %install
> ...
> touch %{buildroot}/foo %{buildroot}/bar
>
> %files
> /
> %exclude /foo
___
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/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: F35 Change proposal: RPM 4.17 (System-Wide Change proposal)
On 31. 03. 21 21:52, Ben Cotton wrote:
* Strict checking for unpackaged content in builds
> ...
* Many existing packages will fail to build due to the stricter
buildroot content checking. Fixing this in the packaging is always
backwards compatible. We could temporarily set
`%_unpackaged_files_terminate_build 0` in rawhide to alleviate initial
impact if necessary.
This is my main concern with this update.
tl;dr If you %exclude something and there is no other subpackage to own the
files, the build fails:
This fails:
%install
...
touch %{buildroot}/foo %{buildroot}/bar
%files
/
%exclude /foo
This still succeeds:
%files
/
%exclude /foo
%files foo
/foo
Many packages do the former in Fedora for various different reasons, namely to,
well... exclude files from the package (and not ship them at all). Sometimes a
`rm` in %install can be used instead. Sometimes not, because the files are
needed in the %{buildroot} for %check but not needed to be shipped.
When this change was introduced upstream in November 2020, I've analyzed the
impact on Fedora packages. Bare in mind that the data is 4+ months old.
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1442#issuecomment-731554917
- 1675 packages had %exclude in the spec file
- 261 packages FTBFS for unrelated reason (incl. a very limited timeout)
- 1414 packages actually tested
- 537 packages built successfully, that is ~38%
- 877 packages failed with unpackaged files, that is ~62%, list attached
When I extrapolate the numbers to compensate the unrelated FTBFS, that's likely
more than 1000 affected Fedora packages.
OTOH ~500 packages are generated rubygem-* packages, automatically fixable.
I'd like to know how are the affected packages supposed to migrate to RPM 4.17
behavior, especially if they cannot remove the files in %install prior to
%check. Are they supposed to remove the files at the end of %check instead? What
if the package is build without %check?
Using `%_unpackaged_files_terminate_build 0` in entire rawhide just to
compensate this:
- is dangerous for other implications of the setting
- only postpones the problem to a later time (when we will face the same issue)
And for a more specific problem, around ~100 Python packages were affected when
tested, many of them crucial (e.g. dnf), so this problem will block the upgrade
to Python 3.10 if the change lands in Rawhide before we upgrade Python (which is
the current plan) until we fix all the affected packages (by at least adding
`%global _unpackaged_files_terminate_build 0` to them, which is a tad big
hammer, but it will be our last-resort option).
List of affected Python packages:
https://pagure.io/releng/issue/10072#comment-724315
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
afpfs-ng
akmods
annobin
antimicrox
antimicroX
appstream
argyllcms
armacycles-ad
arpwatch
asciidoc
audacious-plugin-fc
audiocd-kio
autoconf
awesome
aws
a52dec
bacula
bakefile
bamf
berusky
bless
blitz
blosc
bogl
booth
botan
calls
cantoolz
CCfits
CGAL
cloog
cockatrice
colin
compizconfig-python
conda
coturn
cowsay
cpl
crrcsim-addon-models
debian-keyring
djvulibre
dnf
docbook5-style-xsl
drupal7-active_tags
drupal7-boxes
drupal7-calendar
drupal7-cck
drupal7-cs_adaptive_image
drupal7-domain_views
drupal7-email
drupal7-file_entity_inline
drupal7-flexifilter
drupal7-i18n_boxes
drupal7-i18nviews
drupal7-languageicons
drupal7-language_switcher
drupal7-locale_auto_import
drupal7-locale_cookie
drupal7-l10n_client
drupal7-l10n_pconfig
drupal7-l10n_server
drupal7-stringoverrides
drupal7-strongarm
drupal7-theme-ninesixty
drupal7-translation_helpers
drupal7-translation_table
drupal7-transliteration
drupal7-workbench
drupal8
drush
dvdbackup
erfa
etckeeper
fbzx
fedora-packager
fence-agents
flare
flaw
fontopia
fwknop
gap-pkg-gbnp
geany
general-purpose-preprocessor
ginga
glabels
glances
glpk
glusterfs
gnome-js-common
gnote
gpaw
gpsim
grads
gsim85
gtk+extra
gutenprint
hatari
HdrHistogram_c
hexter-dssi
chipmunk
icc-profiles-openicc
icu
ikiwiki
ipython
iwd
i3
jack-audio-connection-kit
kbd
knights
kqoauth-qt5
libast
libcaca
libcdaudio
libclaw
libcsv
libdc1394
libdnet
libdrm-armada
libdsk
libdwarf
libfc14audiodecoder
libfilezilla
libgtop2
liblas
libmemcached
libnss-mysql
libnss-pgsql
liboping
liborigin
libpari23
libqmi
LibRaw
libsigrok
libspectrum
libstorj
liburing
libuser
libvdpau-va-gl
libvorbis
libyubikey
libzdb
lighttpd
lxcfs
mhash
milia
mingw-cppunit
mingw-dirac
mingw-fltk
mingw-gsm
mingw-python-lxml
mingw-python-markupsafe
mingw-qt5-qtgraphicaleffects
mingw-qt5-qtserialport
mISDN
moarvm
module-build-service
mom
mon
monitor-edid
moodle
mrtg
nbd-runner
ncmpc
nemiver
netbsd-iscsi
netmask
NetworkManager-strongswan
nfs-ganesha
nickle
nightview
numactl
numpy
ocaml-findlib
odcs
omniORBpy
openal-soft
open-vm-tools
openvpn
openwsman
orafce
osm-gps-map
ots
pacemaker
pacman
pam_mount
parallel
passenger
pcb-rnd
pcs
pen
perl-Algorithm-FastPermute
perl-Apache-Session-NoSQL
Re: F35 Change proposal: RPM 4.17 (System-Wide Change proposal)
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek writes: > On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 03:52:41PM -0400, Ben Cotton wrote: >> ** Dynamic spec generation > > Details? My guess would be that this one is meant: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1485 signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ 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/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Important to Outreachy applicants
This mail is addressed to Outreachy applicants interested in contributing or already contributing to Fedora QA Dashboard. Due to public holiday in Czech Republic mentors will not be available in these dates: * lbrabec: Apr 1 - Apr 5 * jskladan: Apr 2 - Apr 5 Lukas ___ qa-devel mailing list -- qa-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to qa-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/qa-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: F35 Change proposal: RPM 4.17 (System-Wide Change proposal)
On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 03:52:41PM -0400, Ben Cotton wrote: > ** Dynamic spec generation Details? Zbyszek ___ 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/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
CPE Weekly: 2021-03-31
Hi Everyone, Sorry for the two week gap since my last report, we had a busy time in the CPE team with the new fedora accounts deployment, our quarterly planning cycle started for Q2 and Ireland had a bank holiday mid week which *seemed* like a great idea at the time. Until no-one knew what day it was for about a week! So here I am, right at the end of Q1 with the CPE teams final weekly report for January, February and March... two days early :) If you would like to see this report and toggle to the section you are most interested in, I would suggest visiting this link https://hackmd.io/8iV7PilARSG68Tqv8CzKOQ?view and use the header bar on your left to skip to where you want to go! ## Initiative FYI Links CPE had our quarterly planning call last Thursday 26th March to prioritize our project work going into Q2 (quarter 2, which is April, May & June). Our initiative repo quarterly boards have been updated https://pagure.io/cpe/initiatives-proposal/boards/2021Q2 and our repo can be accessed here: https://pagure.io/cpe/initiatives-proposal Our 2021 Quarterly Planning timetable can also be viewed here if you are curious on when our next quarterly planning session is: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/cpe/time_tables/ And finally, details on initiative requesting/how to work with us on new projects here: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/cpe/initiatives/ Going into Q2, the CPE team will work on rpmautospec https://pagure.io/cpe/initiatives-proposal/issue/11 and aim to deliver this project within the months of April, May & June. We are starting this project on Monday 12th April and will keep you posted on where the team will track work and what IRC channel they will use for comms. You can also expect a Q1 blog post from us in the next week or two highlighting the work that the team delivered over the last quarter too. ### Misc * CentOS Dojo for May 13th & 14th CFP closes on Monday 5th April so please submit your talks asap! https://wiki.centos.org/Events/Dojo/May2021 ## Project Updates *The below updates are pulled directly from our CPE team call we have every week.* ### Fedora * F34 beta is out! * Mass reboot is scheduled for tomorrow, April 1st so please expect some issues due to this required outage * Final Freeze is due to start on Tuesday April 6th @ 1400 UTC - F34 schedule can be viewed here https://fedorapeople.org/groups/schedule/f-34/f-34-key-tasks.html ### Noggin/AAA * Fedora Accounts is out * There are still some corner case issues being worked through but users should be able to access fedora services as normal. **NOTE** you will need to reset your password if you have not already done so if you receive an Unable to call ID or some note like that. Please request a password reset and wait for the mail to land. Then follow the link and reset your password. * For any issues, please open a ticket on https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issues * The team can be found on #fedora-aaa for discussions on IRC * And please report any issues you find relating to the Noggin application in the repo https://github.com/fedora-infra/noggin **ANOTHER NOTE** Thank you so so so much to all of the members of the fedora community and wider open source communities who assisted our team last week when we were deploying the new system. Your help did not go unnoticed and unappreciated and we could not have done this work without any of you. You know who you are, and you have my and the wider teams sincerest thanks and gratitude :) ## CentOS Updates ### CentOS * Account Migration is scheduled for next Tuesday 6th April * Please read this important email from Fabian Arrotin on verifying/updating your CentOS and Fedora email address https://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/2021-March/076690.html * CentOS CI is also updating ocp.stg to 4.7.3 & will roll out to production by the end of the week if all goes well ### CentOS Stream * Centpkg is build and available in Fedora and EPEL! * MBS is being deployed * ODCS is deployed * Scripts for mass rebuild are ready * CVE Dashboard for CentOS 8 Stream is up * In short, lots of good things coming! ## Team Info ### 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 maintained, build releases, and other strategic tasks that need more dedicated time than volunteers can give. See our wiki page here for more information:https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/cpe/ As always, feedback is welcome, and we will continue to look at ways to improve the delivery and readability of this weekly report. Have a great weekend! Aoife Source: https://hackmd.io/8iV7PilARSG68Tqv8CzKOQ?view -- Aoife Moloney Product Owner Community Platform Engineering Team Red Hat EMEA Communications House Cork Road Waterford ___ devel mailing list --
F35 Change proposal: RPM 4.17 (System-Wide Change proposal)
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/RPM-4.17 == Summary == Update RPM to the [https://rpm.org/wiki/Releases/4.17.0 4.17] release. == Owner == * Name: [[User:pmatilai|Panu Matilainen]] * Email: [pmati...@redhat.com] == Detailed Description == RPM 4.17 contains numerous improvements over previous versions * More robust install failure handling * Many macro improvements, in particular much improved Lua integration * Strict checking for unpackaged content in builds * Libraries no longer need executable permission for dependency generation and is automatically removed for non-executable libraries * Long needed transaction APIs enhancements * Improved documentation * Tentative (planned but not committed as of this writing) ** Split debugedit to its own project and package ** Split language-specific packaging aids to separate projects (Python, Perl, Ocaml...) ** Dynamic spec generation The plan is to get 4.17-alpha into rawhide as early as possible (during April) to sort out any initial rough edges long before the general feature deadline rush. Final version is expected to be released well in time before F35 beta. == Benefit to Fedora == See description for overall benefits, but in particular: * All users benefit from the more robust installation * Packaging sanity wrt libraries * Macro authors will have a much saner experience creating complex macros in Lua * DNF for the enhanced transaction APIs == Scope == * Proposal owners: ** Rebase RPM ** Assist with dealing with incompatibilities * Other developers: ** Test new release, report issues and bugs ** Adjust packaging to adhere to the strict buildroot content checking * Release engineering: [https://pagure.io/releng/issue/10072 #10072] * Policies and guidelines: ** Guidelines have nothing on unpackaged contents in buildroot, so don't necessarily need updating. Many packages will fail to build because of the stricter checking though: with rpm >= 4.17 unpackaged content is not permitted in the buildroot at all. ** Libraries no longer need to be executable for dependency generation, and executable bit will in fact be removed if invalidly set on a library. Guidelines only have a vague "executable if appropriate" mention so it does not *need* changing but could now be clarified/tightened if desired. * Trademark approval: N/A (not needed for this Change) * Alignment with Objectives: no relation to current objectives == Upgrade/compatibility impact == * Many existing packages will fail to build due to the stricter buildroot content checking. Fixing this in the packaging is always backwards compatible. We could temporarily set `%_unpackaged_files_terminate_build 0` in rawhide to alleviate initial impact if necessary. * Rpm no longer implicitly creates databases on read-only access, this may require changes to existing scripts/tooling. Ensuring mock/dnf works is a pre-requisite to landing this change into rawhide, and will be handled, one way or the other, by the rpm maintainers. == How To Test == Rpm receives a thorough and constant testing via every single package build, system installs and updates. New features can be tested specifically as per their documentation. == User Experience == The user-experience remains largely as-is, but install failures are handled more gracefully. == Dependencies == * dnf and/or mock will likely need some adjusting for the lack of implicit database creation. If necessary, rpm maintainers will provide patches prior to landing this change. * soname bump is not expected so rebuilds should not be required == Contingency Plan == * Contingency mechanism: Revert back to RPM 4.16, but the risk of having to do should be negligible * Contingency deadline: Beta freeze * Blocks release? No == Documentation == Work-in-progress release notes at https://rpm.org/wiki/Releases/4.17.0 and reference manual at https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/blob/master/doc/manual/index.md -- Ben Cotton He / Him / His Senior Program Manager, Fedora & CentOS Stream Red Hat TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis ___ 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/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Dist-git issues?
On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 03:08:33PM +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > On 31/03/21 13:51 +, Gwyn Ciesla via devel wrote: > > Yes. https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/9816 > > And > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/5KZBG5ARPD7MIKVHJSFSNO6VE4YPEFGA/ > and https://status.fedoraproject.org/ It should all be working as of a few hours ago. (I've been fighting fires all morning and am just getting to replying to mailing list emails, which is another good reason to report things in a ticket or look for a ticket about them instead of just posting to the list ) kevin signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ 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/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Has dist-git changed/broken in the last few hours?
On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 03:11:31PM +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 01:52:16PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > > > $ git pull --rebase > > fatal: '/rpms/libguestfs' does not appear to be a git repository > > fatal: Could not read from remote repository. > > > > Please make sure you have the correct access rights > > and the repository exists. > > > > $ git remote get-url origin > > ssh://rjo...@pkgs.fedoraproject.org/rpms/libguestfs > > > I can reproduce. Something is odd. > Looking into it and updated status.fp.o It should all be back working now... but we are working on a more permanent fix. Sorry for the trouble. kevin signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ 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/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Offering strongswan for (co)maintaining
Hi Petr, On Wed, 2021-03-31 at 14:12 +0200, Petr Menšík wrote: > Hello, > > strongswan and NetworkManager-strongswan packages were passed to me > from > previous maintainer. I admit I have little experience with them and > do > not run any service based on them. Because IPSsec is quite complex > technology, I am looking for help with its maintenance. I was always > using OpenVPN based solutions myself, so I guess I am not the best > person as main admin. I would like to transfer main admin to anyone > doing a good job, not not immediately. That is why I haven't orphaned > it > already. > We use this at work, could you add these FASes? - salimma (Michel) - dcavalca (Davide Cavalca) Davide did a PR for strongswan recently. Likewise, we don't want to be main admins immediately either, but would like to help comaintaining. We can channel requests from the internal team that directly uses it. Best regards, -- Michel Alexandre Salim profile: https://keyoxide.org/mic...@michel-slm.name signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ 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/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Fedora-IoT-34-20210331.0 compose check report
No missing expected images. Failed openQA tests: 3/15 (aarch64), 1/16 (x86_64) New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-IoT-34-20210329.0): ID: 838515 Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_rpmostree_rebase@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/838515 Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-IoT-34-20210329.0): ID: 838506 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso base_services_start URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/838506 ID: 838512 Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_clevis@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/838512 ID: 838517 Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso base_services_start@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/838517 Soft failed openQA tests: 1/16 (x86_64) (Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug) Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-IoT-34-20210329.0): ID: 838495 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_clevis URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/838495 Passed openQA tests: 14/16 (x86_64), 12/15 (aarch64) Installed system changes in test aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso install_default_upload@uefi: System load changed from 0.31 to 0.19 Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/835542#downloads Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/838510#downloads -- 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.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Stuck build
On 31/03/21 18:46 +0200, Dan Horák wrote: On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 17:42:48 +0100 "Richard W.M. Jones" wrote: On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 05:29:33PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=64923615 > > This build has been sat in the "free" state for an hour or two. Could > this be related to the dist-git issue from earlier? Actually everything looks like it's stuck ... https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/builds there is a rebuild for fixed libstdc++ in progress right now, with 300+ tasks in the queue Sorry :-( There's only one more build queued, and then I think mine will start to drain out and make room for others. ___ 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/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Stuck build
On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 17:42:48 +0100 "Richard W.M. Jones" wrote: > On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 05:29:33PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=64923615 > > > > This build has been sat in the "free" state for an hour or two. Could > > this be related to the dist-git issue from earlier? > > Actually everything looks like it's stuck ... > > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/builds there is a rebuild for fixed libstdc++ in progress right now, with 300+ tasks in the queue Dan ___ 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/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Stuck build
On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 05:29:33PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=64923615 > > This build has been sat in the "free" state for an hour or two. Could > this be related to the dist-git issue from earlier? Actually everything looks like it's stuck ... https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/builds Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com virt-top is 'top' for virtual machines. Tiny program with many powerful monitoring features, net stats, disk stats, logging, etc. http://people.redhat.com/~rjones/virt-top ___ 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/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Stuck build
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=64923615 This build has been sat in the "free" state for an hour or two. Could this be related to the dist-git issue from earlier? Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com Fedora Windows cross-compiler. Compile Windows programs, test, and build Windows installers. Over 100 libraries supported. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MinGW ___ 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/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Fedora-IoT-35-20210331.0 compose check report
Missing expected images: Iot dvd x86_64 Iot dvd aarch64 Failed openQA tests: 2/16 (x86_64), 3/15 (aarch64) New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-IoT-35-20210328.0): ID: 838359 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_rpmostree_overlay URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/838359 Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-IoT-35-20210328.0): ID: 838357 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso base_services_start URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/838357 ID: 838363 Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_clevis@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/838363 ID: 838368 Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso base_services_start@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/838368 ID: 838372 Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_rpmostree_overlay@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/838372 Soft failed openQA tests: 1/16 (x86_64) (Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug) Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-IoT-35-20210328.0): ID: 838346 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_clevis URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/838346 Passed openQA tests: 12/15 (aarch64), 13/16 (x86_64) New passes (same test not passed in Fedora-IoT-35-20210328.0): ID: 838362 Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso podman@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/838362 ID: 838367 Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_zezere_server@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/838367 ID: 838374 Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso podman_client@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/838374 ID: 838375 Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_zezere_ignition@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/838375 Installed system changes in test x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso install_default@uefi: 2 services(s) added since previous compose: redboot-auto-reboot.service, redboot-task-runner.service Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/833712#downloads Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/838345#downloads Installed system changes in test x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso install_default_upload: Used mem changed from 189 MiB to 169 MiB 2 services(s) added since previous compose: redboot-auto-reboot.service, redboot-task-runner.service System load changed from 0.18 to 0.30 Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/833711#downloads Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/838347#downloads Installed system changes in test aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso install_default_upload@uefi: Used mem changed from 206 MiB to 183 MiB 2 services(s) added since previous compose: redboot-auto-reboot.service, redboot-task-runner.service System load changed from 0.79 to 0.38 Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/833727#downloads Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/838361#downloads -- 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.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Dist-git issues?
On 31/03/21 13:51 +, Gwyn Ciesla via devel wrote: Yes. https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/9816 And https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/5KZBG5ARPD7MIKVHJSFSNO6VE4YPEFGA/ and https://status.fedoraproject.org/ ___ 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/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Dist-git issues?
Yes. https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/9816 -- Gwyn Ciesla she/her/hers in your fear, seek only peace in your fear, seek only love -d. bowie Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email. ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On Wednesday, March 31, 2021 8:49 AM, Richard Shaw wrote: > I'm trying to clone a repo but it's failing like it doesn't exist: > > $ fedpkg clone OpenImageIO OIIO-test > Cloning into 'OIIO-test'... > fatal: '/rpms/OpenImageIO' does not appear to be a git repository > fatal: Could not read from remote repository. > > Please make sure you have the correct access rights > and the repository exists. > Could not execute clone: Failed to execute command. > > Is this a known issue at the moment? > > Thanks, > Richard signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ 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/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Dist-git issues?
I'm trying to clone a repo but it's failing like it doesn't exist: $ fedpkg clone OpenImageIO OIIO-test Cloning into 'OIIO-test'... fatal: '/rpms/OpenImageIO' does not appear to be a git repository fatal: Could not read from remote repository. Please make sure you have the correct access rights and the repository exists. Could not execute clone: Failed to execute command. Is this a known issue at the moment? Thanks, Richard ___ 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/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Fedora-Rawhide-20210331.n.0 compose check report
No missing expected images. Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check! 3 of 43 required tests failed openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING** below Failed openQA tests: 11/178 (x86_64), 17/127 (aarch64) New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20210330.n.0): ID: 837819 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_freeipa_replication_master URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/837819 ID: 837820 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_freeipa_replication_replica URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/837820 ID: 837823 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_role_deploy_domain_controller **GATING** URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/837823 ID: 837832 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso realmd_join_sssd **GATING** URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/837832 ID: 837844 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso realmd_join_cockpit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/837844 ID: 837850 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_freeipa_replication_client URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/837850 ID: 837851 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_realmd_join_kickstart **GATING** URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/837851 ID: 837914 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso install_vncconnect_client@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/837914 ID: 837919 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso install_vncconnect_server@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/837919 ID: 837979 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 base_selinux@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/837979 ID: 838093 Test: aarch64 universal upgrade_server_domain_controller@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/838093 ID: 838104 Test: aarch64 universal upgrade_realmd_client@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/838104 Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20210330.n.0): ID: 837837 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso modularity_tests URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/837837 ID: 837881 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_notifications_postinstall URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/837881 ID: 837885 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso apps_startstop URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/837885 ID: 837902 Test: aarch64 Minimal-raw_xz-raw.xz release_identification@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/837902 ID: 837903 Test: aarch64 Minimal-raw_xz-raw.xz base_system_logging@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/837903 ID: 837904 Test: aarch64 Minimal-raw_xz-raw.xz base_update_cli@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/837904 ID: 837905 Test: aarch64 Minimal-raw_xz-raw.xz base_services_start@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/837905 ID: 837906 Test: aarch64 Minimal-raw_xz-raw.xz base_selinux@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/837906 ID: 837907 Test: aarch64 Minimal-raw_xz-raw.xz base_service_manipulation@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/837907 ID: 837908 Test: aarch64 Minimal-raw_xz-raw.xz base_reboot_unmount@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/837908 ID: 837923 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso install_vnc_server@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/837923 ID: 837939 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso install_vnc_client@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/837939 ID: 837944 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso modularity_tests@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/837944 ID: 837986 Test: x86_64 universal install_asian_language URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/837986 ID: 838061 Test: aarch64 universal install_asian_language@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/838061 ID: 838091 Test: aarch64 universal upgrade_minimal_64bit@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/838091 Soft failed openQA tests: 44/127 (aarch64), 68/178 (x86_64) (Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug) New soft failures (same test not soft failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20210330.n.0): ID: 838060 Test: aarch64 universal install_mirrorlist_graphical@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/838060 ID: 838099 Test: aarch64 universal install_kickstart_nfs@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/838099 Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20210330.n.0): ID: 837800 Test: x86_64 Server-boot-iso install_default URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/837800 ID: 837801 Test: x86_64 Server-boot-iso install_default@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/837801 ID: 837807 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_default@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/837807 ID: 837808 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_vncconnect_client URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/837808 ID: 837812 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_default_upload URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/837812 ID: 837814 Test: x86_64
Re: Rebuilding packages that use std::call_once from libstdc++
On 31/03/21 14:25 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: On 31/03/21 15:00 +0200, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote: On 31.03.2021 11:45, Jonathan Wakely wrote: But I can start the same rebuilds in rawhide now to avoid the version skew. Please merge your commit from f34 instead of doing another one: fedpkg switch-branch rawhide git merge f34 Yes, obviously. You need a push here, before the build. fedpkg build --nowait ___ 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/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Rebuilding packages that use std::call_once from libstdc++
On 31/03/21 15:00 +0200, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote: On 31.03.2021 11:45, Jonathan Wakely wrote: But I can start the same rebuilds in rawhide now to avoid the version skew. Please merge your commit from f34 instead of doing another one: fedpkg switch-branch rawhide git merge f34 Yes, obviously. fedpkg build --nowait ___ 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/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Rebuilding packages that use std::call_once from libstdc++
Hi, Jonathan Wakely writes: > On 31/03/21 11:46 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: >>I do not see such symbol references for dotnet5.0. I have > > Agreed, I downloaded dotnet-runtime-5.0-5.0.4-1.fc34.x86_64.rpm and > checked it too (although not the other subpackages in that build). > >>double-checked that dotnet5.0 is part of the scanned set. > > Great, thanks! Agreed: thanks for looking into this! Omair -- PGP Key: B157A9F0 (http://pgp.mit.edu/) Fingerprint = 9DB5 2F0B FD3E C239 E108 E7BD DF99 7AF8 B157 A9F0 ___ 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/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Has dist-git changed/broken in the last few hours?
On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 01:52:16PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > $ git pull --rebase > fatal: '/rpms/libguestfs' does not appear to be a git repository > fatal: Could not read from remote repository. > > Please make sure you have the correct access rights > and the repository exists. > > $ git remote get-url origin > ssh://rjo...@pkgs.fedoraproject.org/rpms/libguestfs I can reproduce. Something is odd. Looking into it and updated status.fp.o Pierre ___ 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/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Rebuilding packages that use std::call_once from libstdc++
On 31.03.2021 11:45, Jonathan Wakely wrote: But I can start the same rebuilds in rawhide now to avoid the version skew. Please merge your commit from f34 instead of doing another one: fedpkg switch-branch rawhide git merge f34 fedpkg build --nowait -- Sincerely, Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.org) ___ 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/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Rebuilding packages that use std::call_once from libstdc++
On 30.03.2021 18:13, Jonathan Wakely wrote: Package maintainers should not need to do anything, but will see a %release bump and a rebuild. In future, please commit to rawhide branch too. I want to keep my Git history linear to avoid any merge conflicts between branches. Also pushing the new build to f34 will break the upgrade path. -- Sincerely, Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.org) ___ 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/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Has dist-git changed/broken in the last few hours?
$ git pull --rebase fatal: '/rpms/libguestfs' does not appear to be a git repository fatal: Could not read from remote repository. Please make sure you have the correct access rights and the repository exists. $ git remote get-url origin ssh://rjo...@pkgs.fedoraproject.org/rpms/libguestfs Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com virt-df lists disk usage of guests without needing to install any software inside the virtual machine. Supports Linux and Windows. http://people.redhat.com/~rjones/virt-df/ ___ 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/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: ask to test latest systemd build for systemd-resolved problems
On Sun, Mar 28, 2021 at 09:58:08AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Sat, 2021-03-27 at 09:06 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 09:06:14PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > > > On Fri, 2021-03-26 at 17:39 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > > > On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 08:42:51AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > > > > > Can you do a Koji scratch build? This is easier for me to test in > > > > > openQA (I already have the tooling set up to schedule tests on scratch > > > > > builds, it cannot do it for COPR builds). Thanks! > > > > > > > > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=64648010 > > > > Should be done in about half an hour. > > > > > > D'oh, sorry, should've been more specific - a scratch build for F34 (or > > > F33) would be better. I can't easily run tests on a Rawhide scratch > > > build (as we don't run the update tests on Rawhide). > > > > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=64671982 (f34) > > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=64672016 (f33) > > Tested and looks OK: > https://openqa.stg.fedoraproject.org/tests/overview?distri=fedora=34=Kojitask-64671982-NOREPORT=2 > one test failed for unrelated reasons, I'm re-running it now. Thanks! I pushed systemd-248-fc3[45] with pretty much the same code (+ some changes not directly related to dns). Zbyszek ___ 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/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Offering strongswan for (co)maintaining
Hello, strongswan and NetworkManager-strongswan packages were passed to me from previous maintainer. I admit I have little experience with them and do not run any service based on them. Because IPSsec is quite complex technology, I am looking for help with its maintenance. I was always using OpenVPN based solutions myself, so I guess I am not the best person as main admin. I would like to transfer main admin to anyone doing a good job, not not immediately. That is why I haven't orphaned it already. I would like to keep commit access for a while, but I would share at least commit access with anyone willing to improve those packages. Especially someone using they (almost) everyday would be ideal maintainer. Regards, Petr -- Petr Menšík PGP: DFCF908DB7C87E8E529925BC4931CA5B6C9FC5CB OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ 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/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Request Mail
confidence.pete...@gmail.com ___ qa-devel mailing list -- qa-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to qa-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/qa-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Proposal to fail builds if RPATH is found in Fedora 35
On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 01:24:02PM -0400, Charalampos Stratakis wrote: > usnic-tools honli RPATH had been removed from build usnic-tools-1.1.2.1-8.fc35 . thanks ___ 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/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Fedora rawhide compose report: 20210331.n.0 changes
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20210330.n.0 NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20210331.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:9 Dropped images: 3 Added packages: 5 Dropped packages:10 Upgraded packages: 71 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 5.13 MiB Size of dropped packages:173.35 MiB Size of upgraded packages: 1.56 GiB Size of downgraded packages: 0 B Size change of upgraded packages: 16.77 MiB Size change of downgraded packages: 0 B = ADDED IMAGES = Image: Xfce live x86_64 Path: Spins/x86_64/iso/Fedora-Xfce-Live-x86_64-Rawhide-20210331.n.0.iso Image: Everything boot ppc64le Path: Everything/ppc64le/iso/Fedora-Everything-netinst-ppc64le-Rawhide-20210331.n.0.iso Image: SoaS live x86_64 Path: Spins/x86_64/iso/Fedora-SoaS-Live-x86_64-Rawhide-20210331.n.0.iso Image: Cloud_Base raw-xz ppc64le Path: Cloud/ppc64le/images/Fedora-Cloud-Base-Rawhide-20210331.n.0.ppc64le.raw.xz Image: Cloud_Base qcow2 ppc64le Path: Cloud/ppc64le/images/Fedora-Cloud-Base-Rawhide-20210331.n.0.ppc64le.qcow2 Image: Container_Minimal_Base docker ppc64le Path: Container/ppc64le/images/Fedora-Container-Minimal-Base-Rawhide-20210331.n.0.ppc64le.tar.xz Image: LXQt live x86_64 Path: Spins/x86_64/iso/Fedora-LXQt-Live-x86_64-Rawhide-20210331.n.0.iso Image: Python_Classroom live x86_64 Path: Labs/x86_64/iso/Fedora-Python-Classroom-Live-x86_64-Rawhide-20210331.n.0.iso Image: Mate live x86_64 Path: Spins/x86_64/iso/Fedora-MATE_Compiz-Live-x86_64-Rawhide-20210331.n.0.iso = DROPPED IMAGES = Image: Scientific_KDE live x86_64 Path: Labs/x86_64/iso/Fedora-Scientific_KDE-Live-x86_64-Rawhide-20210330.n.0.iso Image: Silverblue dvd-ostree x86_64 Path: Silverblue/x86_64/iso/Fedora-Silverblue-ostree-x86_64-Rawhide-20210330.n.0.iso Image: Astronomy_KDE live x86_64 Path: Labs/x86_64/iso/Fedora-Astronomy_KDE-Live-x86_64-Rawhide-20210330.n.0.iso = ADDED PACKAGES = Package: crypto-1.0.0-2.20210330git837705e.fc35 Summary: Simple AES/DES encryption and SHA1/SHA2 hashing library RPMs:crypto-devel Size:232.28 KiB Package: decnumber-3.68.0-2.20210330gitda66509.fc35 Summary: ANSI C General Decimal Arithmetic Library RPMs:decnumber-devel decnumber-doc Size:1.22 MiB Package: ghc-hosc-0.18.1-1.fc35 Summary: Haskell Open Sound Control RPMs:ghc-hosc ghc-hosc-devel ghc-hosc-doc ghc-hosc-prof Size:3.40 MiB Package: rust-cryptoki-sys-0.1.0-1.fc35 Summary: FFI wrapper around the PKCS #11 API RPMs:rust-cryptoki-sys+bindgen-devel rust-cryptoki-sys+default-devel rust-cryptoki-sys+generate-bindings-devel rust-cryptoki-sys-devel Size:58.58 KiB Package: sdl-telnet-1.0.0-2.20210330git2aca101.fc35 Summary: Simple RFC-compliant TELNET implementation RPMs:sdl-telnet-devel Size:232.06 KiB = DROPPED PACKAGES = Package: dionaea-0.7.0-9.fc33 Summary: Low interaction honeypot RPMs:dionaea dionaea-doc python3-dionaea Size:3.37 MiB Package: fillets-ng-data-1.0.1-14.fc34 Summary: Game data files for Fish Fillets Next Generation RPMs:fillets-ng-data Size:136.23 MiB Package: flexdock-1.2.4-14.fc33 Summary: Docking framework for Java Swing GUI apps RPMs:flexdock Size:411.18 KiB Package: quvi-0.9.5-15.fc33 Summary: Command line tool for parsing video download links RPMs:quvi Size:442.81 KiB Package: rubygem-raindrops-0.13.0-18.fc33 Summary: Real-time stats for preforking Rack servers RPMs:rubygem-raindrops rubygem-raindrops-doc Size:1.56 MiB Package: rust-block-cipher-0.7.1-3.fc34 Summary: Traits for description of block ciphers RPMs:rust-block-cipher+blobby-devel rust-block-cipher+default-devel rust-block-cipher+dev-devel rust-block-cipher+std-devel rust-block-cipher-devel Size:47.73 KiB Package: rust-stream-cipher-0.4.1-4.fc34 Summary: Stream cipher traits RPMs:rust-stream-cipher+blobby-devel rust-stream-cipher+block-cipher-devel rust-stream-cipher+default-devel rust-stream-cipher+dev-devel rust-stream-cipher+std-devel rust-stream-cipher-devel Size:59.35 KiB Package: sump-analyzer-0.8-5.fc33 Summary: SUMP Logic Analyzer Client RPMs:sump-analyzer Size:123.54 KiB Package: trac-privateticketsplugin-2.0.2-0.22.svn5073.fc34 Summary: Trac extension to allow users to view only related tickets RPMs:trac-privateticketsplugin Size:14.62 KiB Package: xiphos-4.2.1-7.fc34 Summary: Bible study and research tool RPMs:xiphos Size:31.11 MiB = UPGRADED PACKAGES = Package: anaconda-35.10-1.fc35 Old package: anaconda-35.9-1.fc35 Summary: Graphical system installer RPMs: anaconda anaconda-core anaconda-dracut anaconda-gui anaconda-install-env-deps anaconda-install-img-deps anaconda-live anaconda-tui anaconda-widgets anaconda-widgets-devel Size: 22.28 MiB Size change: 44.13 KiB Changelog: * Tue Mar 30 2021 Martin Kolman - 35.10-1 - Update unit test for GetDracutArguments for FCoE (rvykydal) - Make failure in generating of dracut arguments for iSCSI device non-fatal
Re: Rebuilding packages that use std::call_once from libstdc++
On 31/03/21 11:46 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: * Omair Majid: Hi, Jonathan Wakely writes: Due to an unplanned ABI break that I caused in libstdc++, I will soon start to rebuild the packages listed below. This rebuild will remove references to some symbols in libstdc++.so which do not work as intended, and so will not be present in the final gcc-11.1.0 release. See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1937698 for reference. Package maintainers should not need to do anything, but will see a %release bump and a rebuild. dotnet3.1 I am bit surprised that dotnet3.1 is in that list but not dotnet5.0. Is there some way I can confirm whether a package (like dotnet5.0) is affected or not? For dotnet3.1, I see /usr/lib64/dotnet/host/fxr/3.1.13/libhostfxr.so /usr/lib64/dotnet/shared/Microsoft.NETCore.App/3.1.13/libhostpolicy.so as affected. They contain references to _ZNSt9once_flag11_M_activateEv or _ZNSt9once_flag9_M_finishEb. These two symbols are the critical symbols to check for; they indicate a need for a rebuild. I do not see such symbol references for dotnet5.0. I have Agreed, I downloaded dotnet-runtime-5.0-5.0.4-1.fc34.x86_64.rpm and checked it too (although not the other subpackages in that build). double-checked that dotnet5.0 is part of the scanned set. Great, thanks! ___ 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/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Rebuilding packages that use std::call_once from libstdc++
* Omair Majid: > Hi, > > Jonathan Wakely writes: > >> Due to an unplanned ABI break that I caused in libstdc++, I will soon >> start to rebuild the packages listed below. This rebuild will remove >> references to some symbols in libstdc++.so which do not work as >> intended, and so will not be present in the final gcc-11.1.0 release. >> >> See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1937698 for reference. >> >> Package maintainers should not need to do anything, but will see a >> %release bump and a rebuild. > >> dotnet3.1 > > I am bit surprised that dotnet3.1 is in that list but not dotnet5.0. > > Is there some way I can confirm whether a package (like dotnet5.0) is > affected or not? For dotnet3.1, I see /usr/lib64/dotnet/host/fxr/3.1.13/libhostfxr.so /usr/lib64/dotnet/shared/Microsoft.NETCore.App/3.1.13/libhostpolicy.so as affected. They contain references to _ZNSt9once_flag11_M_activateEv or _ZNSt9once_flag9_M_finishEb. These two symbols are the critical symbols to check for; they indicate a need for a rebuild. I do not see such symbol references for dotnet5.0. I have double-checked that dotnet5.0 is part of the scanned set. Thanks, Florian ___ 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/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Rebuilding packages that use std::call_once from libstdc++
On 31/03/21 09:10 +0200, Nicolas Chauvet wrote: Le mar. 30 mars 2021 à 18:13, Jonathan Wakely a écrit : Due to an unplanned ABI break that I caused in libstdc++, I will soon start to rebuild the packages listed below. This rebuild will remove references to some symbols in libstdc++.so which do not work as intended, and so will not be present in the final gcc-11.1.0 release. See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1937698 for reference. Can you explain why only the f34 branch would be affected ? Rawhide is also affected. I'm going to do it for rawhide too, I should have said that, sorry. Also this is a problem if you only bump the f34 branch and not the rawhide one, as package EVR will be lower on rawhide... F34 is more urgent, as it's close to release and we don't want dependencies on those symbols present in the final release. For that reason, I was planning to do all the F34 rebuilds first, then rawhide. But I can start the same rebuilds in rawhide now to avoid the version skew. ___ 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/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Rebuilding packages that use std::call_once from libstdc++
* Nicolas Chauvet: > Le mar. 30 mars 2021 à 18:13, Jonathan Wakely > a écrit : >> >> Due to an unplanned ABI break that I caused in libstdc++, I will soon >> start to rebuild the packages listed below. This rebuild will remove >> references to some symbols in libstdc++.so which do not work as >> intended, and so will not be present in the final gcc-11.1.0 release. >> >> See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1937698 for reference. > > Can you explain why only the f34 branch would be affected ? Both rawhide and f34 branches need to be rebuilt. Thanks, Florian ___ 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/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Rebuilding packages that use std::call_once from libstdc++
On 30/03/21 18:24 -0400, Omair Majid wrote: Hi, Jonathan Wakely writes: Due to an unplanned ABI break that I caused in libstdc++, I will soon start to rebuild the packages listed below. This rebuild will remove references to some symbols in libstdc++.so which do not work as intended, and so will not be present in the final gcc-11.1.0 release. See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1937698 for reference. Package maintainers should not need to do anything, but will see a %release bump and a rebuild. dotnet3.1 I am bit surprised that dotnet3.1 is in that list but not dotnet5.0. If that's a new-ish package it might not be present in Florian's database of packages that he searched for uses of the bad symbols. Another possibility is that it wasn't rebuilt during the window when those symbols were in libstdc++.so, or it has already been rebuilt with the new GCC that fixes the problem. Or maybe it just doesn't use std::call_once in the new version. Is there some way I can confirm whether a package (like dotnet5.0) is affected or not? You can check if any binaries in your package depend on either ofthe two symbols listed in the bugzilla report above: _ZNSt9once_flag11_M_activateEv _ZNSt9once_flag9_M_finishEb You can use objdump -T or nm -D on the binary and grep for the symbols, e.g. nm -D libfoo.so | grep _ZNSt9once_flag If it should have been in my list then please let me know, or just bump+build it yourself. ___ 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/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Fedora-Cloud-32-20210331.0 compose check report
No missing expected images. Soft failed openQA tests: 1/7 (x86_64), 1/7 (aarch64) (Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug) Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-32-20210330.0): ID: 837734 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/837734 ID: 837741 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/837741 Passed openQA tests: 6/7 (aarch64), 6/7 (x86_64) New passes (same test not passed in Fedora-Cloud-32-20210330.0): ID: 837742 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 base_system_logging@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/837742 -- 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.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Disable bodhi auto-update creation on rawhide?
Dne 31. 03. 21 v 10:09 Vít Ondruch napsal(a): Dne 30. 03. 21 v 17:07 Ian McInerney napsal(a): Is there a way I can disable the creation of updates automatically in Bodhi for builds I submit to rawhide? I find it very inconvenient because it means I can't add the appropriate bugzilla references/description to the update when I submit package updates that need them. BTW you should be able to edit the updates to add the BZs references. Vít Sure you can add them. If you added e.g. ` Resolves: rhbz#12345678` into the change log, Bodhi will list such ticket into the update. https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rubygem-shindo/c/b33d9cc74c0080cc99cdc28fc5aa987410a4b773?branch=rawhide https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-cf2365267e While this does not answer your question, this is superior to your issue I hope ;) Vít I would prefer the behavior of branched releases where I have to make the update myself. Thanks, -Ian ___ devel mailing list --devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email todevel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct:https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines:https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives:https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure ___ 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/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ 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/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Disable bodhi auto-update creation on rawhide?
Dne 30. 03. 21 v 17:07 Ian McInerney napsal(a): Is there a way I can disable the creation of updates automatically in Bodhi for builds I submit to rawhide? I find it very inconvenient because it means I can't add the appropriate bugzilla references/description to the update when I submit package updates that need them. Sure you can add them. If you added e.g. ` Resolves: rhbz#12345678` into the change log, Bodhi will list such ticket into the update. https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rubygem-shindo/c/b33d9cc74c0080cc99cdc28fc5aa987410a4b773?branch=rawhide https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-cf2365267e While this does not answer your question, this is superior to your issue I hope ;) Vít I would prefer the behavior of branched releases where I have to make the update myself. Thanks, -Ian ___ 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/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ 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/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Display a message on the console while upgrading a package
I won't comment on if this is good or bad idea, but have you tried to
use `%{echo:...}` [1]?
Vít
[1] https://rpm.org/user_doc/macros.html
Dne 30. 03. 21 v 19:11 Robert-André Mauchin napsal(a):
Hello,
Following a change in the config file of a program, I'd like to
display a message to my users to indicate they need to update the
config file with the new one. I try "echo" in the update scriptlet:
%postun
if [ "$1" -ge "1" ] ; then # Upgrade
dnscrypt-proxy -service install --config
%{_sysconfdir}/dnscrypt-proxy/dnscrypt-proxy.toml
echo 'Since version 2.0.45, some of the configuration files have
been renamed.
Please merge your config to
/etc/dnscrypt-proxy/dnscrypt-proxy.toml.rpmnew then
replace dnscrypt-proxy.toml with that file.
Read /usr/share/doc/dnscrypt-proxy/ChangeLog to merge files
accordingly.'
fi
But it doesn't work as expected. Is there a way to transmit that
message to my users?
Best regards,
Robert-André
___
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/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
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/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Fedora-Cloud-33-20210331.0 compose check report
No missing expected images. Failed openQA tests: 1/7 (aarch64) New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-Cloud-33-20210330.0): ID: 837676 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 base_update_cli@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/837676 Soft failed openQA tests: 1/7 (x86_64), 1/7 (aarch64) (Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug) Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-33-20210330.0): ID: 837667 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/837667 ID: 837674 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/837674 Passed openQA tests: 6/7 (x86_64), 5/7 (aarch64) -- 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.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: selinux-policy package versioning change
On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 9:04 AM Zdenek Pytela wrote: > The freeze is on Tuesday, the plan is Monday, or after GA if it fails for > some reason. > Beware that bodhi is active for Fedora 34, so the update would need to receive necessary karma to be actually pushed before the freeze (I think the final pre-freeze push is happening around 2/3 PM CET on Tuesday?). -- Best regards / S pozdravem, František Zatloukal Quality Engineer Red Hat ___ 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/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Rebuilding packages that use std::call_once from libstdc++
Le mar. 30 mars 2021 à 18:13, Jonathan Wakely a écrit : > > Due to an unplanned ABI break that I caused in libstdc++, I will soon > start to rebuild the packages listed below. This rebuild will remove > references to some symbols in libstdc++.so which do not work as > intended, and so will not be present in the final gcc-11.1.0 release. > > See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1937698 for reference. Can you explain why only the f34 branch would be affected ? Also this is a problem if you only bump the f34 branch and not the rawhide one, as package EVR will be lower on rawhide... Thanks. ___ 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/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: selinux-policy package versioning change
On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 4:14 AM Chris Murphy wrote: > On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 1:56 PM Zdenek Pytela wrote: > > > We do not expect any impact to end users neither to developers unless > the exact version was used somewhere. If there are no objections, we will > make the change in a week time. > > Final freeze begins a week from today. Even though the change is > intended to be transparent, I wonder if it's better to make sure the > change happens before freeze rather than appearing in an update after > release with a different versioning scheme on released media (ISOs and > images, etc). > > I mention it now because for whatever reason some things that were > stable already in the hours before beta freeze actually didn't make it > onto beta composes. > The freeze is on Tuesday, the plan is Monday, or after GA if it fails for some reason. > > -- > Chris Murphy > ___ > selinux mailing list -- seli...@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to selinux-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/seli...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure > -- Zdenek Pytela Security SELinux team ___ 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/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: selinux-policy package versioning change
On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 12:19 AM James Cassell wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 30, 2021, at 3:56 PM, Zdenek Pytela wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 10:45 PM justina colmena ~biz > > wrote: > > > I'm still a little bit confused about the SELinux targeted policy > > > "development" process versus the actual "roll-out," implementation, > and > > > deployment not only to Fedora on the deskop, but to various > distributions of > > > "CentOS" or commercial installations of Red Hat Enterprise Linux > (RHEL) "in > > > the cloud" especially on OpenVZ or other shared-kernel virtualization > > > technologies as the case may be for businesses and end users who might > > > otherwise benefit from SELinux Mandatory Access Control policies built > in to > > > the Linux kernel. > > Most of the development happens in the rawhide github branch and > > selected commits subsequently go to stable Fedora releases as well as > > to Centos Stream and RHEL. There is no package difference between > > various Fedora editions and spins for the same version. > > Would the RHEL 9 package have version 34 under this scheme? > RHEL 9 inherits packages from Fedora 34 now, so yes. > V/r, > James Cassell > ___ > 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/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure > -- Zdenek Pytela Security SELinux team ___ 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/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[389-devel] 389 DS nightly 2021-03-31 - 95% PASS
https://fedorapeople.org/groups/389ds/ci/nightly/2021/03/31/report-389-ds-base-2.0.3-20210331gitecd7e71d1.fc33.x86_64.html ___ 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: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[rpms/perl-Net-Netmask] PR #1: Tests
jplesnik merged a pull-request against the project: `perl-Net-Netmask` that you are following. Merged pull-request: `` Tests `` https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Net-Netmask/pull-request/1 ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
