https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1950616
Bug ID: 1950616
Summary: perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-ECDSA-0.10 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-ECDSA
Keywords:
On Fri, 2021-04-16 at 15:49 -0600, Jerry James wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have mentioned previously on this list that I want to update
> ocaml-ocamlgraph to version 2.0.0. It has two consumers in Fedora:
> frama-c (which is ready to move to the new version) and ocaml-dose3
> (which is not).
>
>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1950578
Bug ID: 1950578
Summary: perl-version-0.9929 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-version
Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 7/37 (x86_64)
ID: 858649 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso desktop_login
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/858649
ID: 858653 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso desktop_notifications_live
URL:
Hi all,
I have mentioned previously on this list that I want to update
ocaml-ocamlgraph to version 2.0.0. It has two consumers in Fedora:
frama-c (which is ready to move to the new version) and ocaml-dose3
(which is not).
There is a new upstream location for ocaml-dose3:
On Fri, 2021-04-16 at 16:31 +, David Cantrell wrote:
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Change/CyrusSaslBerkeleyDBtoGdbm
> >
> > == Summary ==
> > cyrus-sasl package was built with libdb requirement, now it is replaced by
> > gdbm.
> >
> > == Owner ==
> > * Name: [[User:Dbelyavs| Dmitry
Let's keep our streak alive and hit target date #1 by being go on Thursday!
Action summary
Accepted blockers
-
1. sddm — logout after switch returns the user to console instead of
sddm — ON_QA
ACTION: collective to decide if FEDORA-2021-87d6b51834 is a
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1950067
Upstream Release Monitoring
changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|perl-PDL-2.036 is available |perl-PDL-2.037 is
On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 04:49:46PM +, Gary Buhrmaster wrote:
On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 4:31 PM David Cantrell wrote:
2) I'm curious why GDBM was chosen instead of something like sqlite.
I believe sasldb only supports gdbm and
ndbm as alternatives to bdb.
Ooops, my mistake. I see:
On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 01:41:41PM -, Zach Oglesby wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 9:19 AM Pierre-Yves Chibon
> > > Huh. That still exists? What a throwback!
> >
> > I sent a tweet in zoglesby's direction. He posted about a week ago, so
> > hopefully he'll see it.
> Fixed
Thanks!
On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 6:29 PM Robert-André Mauchin wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I have a dependency that is a C++ library for SIMD (called highway).
> This library requires SSE4 as its minimum required instruction set
> ("Supported targets: SSE4, AVX2, AVX-512, NEON (ARMv7 and v8), WASM
> SIMD.").
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 4/189 (x86_64), 4/127 (aarch64)
New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-34-20210415.n.0):
ID: 858248 Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso install_default@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/858248
ID: 858470 Test:
On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 4:31 PM David Cantrell wrote:
> 2) I'm curious why GDBM was chosen instead of something like sqlite.
I believe sasldb only supports gdbm and
ndbm as alternatives to bdb.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 02:04:53PM +, Alessio wrote:
> On Fri, 2021-04-16 at 15:25 +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> > Good Morning Everyone,
> >
> > When we rolled out the new AAA solution a few weeks ago, some
> > accounts have not
> > been migrated:
>
> OT
> Out of curiosity: what
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Change/CyrusSaslBerkeleyDBtoGdbm
>
> == Summary ==
> cyrus-sasl package was built with libdb requirement, now it is replaced by
> gdbm.
>
> == Owner ==
> * Name: [[User:Dbelyavs| Dmitry Belyavskiy]]
> * Email: dbelyavs(a)redhat.com
>
>
>
> == Detailed
Hello,
I have a dependency that is a C++ library for SIMD (called highway).
This library requires SSE4 as its minimum required instruction set
("Supported targets: SSE4, AVX2, AVX-512, NEON (ARMv7 and v8), WASM
SIMD."). However the minimum for Fedora is SSE2. Am I still allowed to
package
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1950061
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #2 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1950054
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #2 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1949736
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #4 from
On Wed, Apr 7, 2021 at 3:40 PM Ben Cotton wrote:
>
> I will disable the flag on Friday 16 April unless there's a good
> reason to keep it.
>
This is done. Farewell `fedora_requires_release_note` and long live
https://pagure.io/fedora-docs/release-notes/issues !
--
Ben Cotton
He / Him / His
On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 8:11 AM Nicola Sella wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I am sorry for the issue, that's my fault.
>
> I tried to release the whole stack yesterday (Thursday), but I bumped into
> some unexpected failures (unrelated to this) during the scratch build for
> dnf-plugins-core and other
On Tuesday, April 13, 2021 3:50:18 PM CEST Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Neal Gompa:
>
> > As I said previously[1], I think doing autoconf upgrades would be less
> > painful if we always did that.
> >
> > [1]:
> >
The following Fedora EPEL 7 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
13 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-dda757d4a5
libopenmpt-0.5.7-1.el7
10 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-93d78fa1a6
perl-Net-CIDR-Lite-0.22-1.el7
7
The following Fedora EPEL 8 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
13 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-4ceb7b7897
libopenmpt-0.5.7-1.el8
10 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-125be1ea97
perl-Net-CIDR-Lite-0.22-1.el8
7
On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 1:39 AM Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> I'm getting emails saying I need to visit:
>
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/ocaml-devel.lists.fedoraproject.org/held_messages
>
> to approve messages, but when I go there (after logging in) I only see:
>
> 403 Forbidden
On Fri, 2021-04-16 at 15:25 +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> Good Morning Everyone,
>
> When we rolled out the new AAA solution a few weeks ago, some
> accounts have not
> been migrated:
OT
Out of curiosity: what happens if I register a new account on the new
AAA with one of these usernames?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1950383
Bug ID: 1950383
Summary: please build perl-Archive-Extract for EPEL 8
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-Archive-Extract
Assignee:
> On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 9:19 AM Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> Huh. That still exists? What a throwback!
>
> I sent a tweet in zoglesby's direction. He posted about a week ago, so
> hopefully he'll see it.
Fixed
___
devel mailing list --
OLD: Fedora-34-20210415.n.0
NEW: Fedora-34-20210416.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:2
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 0
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 1
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 0 B
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Size of upgraded
On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 9:19 AM Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
>
> zoglesby is maintainer of rpms/publican-fedora
>
Huh. That still exists? What a throwback!
>
> Does anyone know how to contact them?
>
I sent a tweet in zoglesby's direction. He posted about a week ago, so
hopefully he'll see it.
--
On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 11:26:24AM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
Hijacking this thread originally about
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Autoconf_271
What is the current thinking in Fedora about always running
"autoreconf -i" during builds that use autotools?
I think we are likely to
Good Morning Everyone,
When we rolled out the new AAA solution a few weeks ago, some accounts have not
been migrated:
- Accounts that have been set inactive by their owner
- Accounts that are disabled
- Accounts marked as spam
This resulted in some packager accounts not being migrated.
As a
Good Morning Everyone,
When we rolled out the new AAA solution a few weeks ago, some accounts have not
been migrated:
- Accounts that have been set inactive by their owner
- Accounts that are disabled
- Accounts marked as spam
This resulted in some packager accounts not being migrated.
As a
Good Morning Everyone,
The packagers listed here have been receiving a daily email asking them to
either adjust their bugzilla or their FAS account so the email address in FAS
matches an existing bugzilla account.
Having a bugzilla account is mandatory per:
Hello,
I am sorry for the issue, that's my fault.
I tried to release the whole stack yesterday (Thursday), but I bumped
into some unexpected failures (unrelated to this) during the scratch
build for dnf-plugins-core and other packages, so I decided to wait
until today for the plugins as I
Hello everyone,
I write this mail to let you know about the very recent developments that took
place which led to the revamp of the previous Fedora Websites, as the new
Fedora Websites and Apps team as well as to invite you to our weekly meetings
that helps shape our objective. You can find
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1950067
Upstream Release Monitoring
changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|perl-PDL-2.035 is available |perl-PDL-2.036 is
On 15.04.2021 23:05, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
Which one exactly is more than 100 GiB?
Chromium.
--
Sincerely,
Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.org)
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1950294
Bug ID: 1950294
Summary: perl-PPIx-Regexp-0.080 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-PPIx-Regexp
Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1950061
--- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2021-642fd21e78 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 34.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-642fd21e78
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
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-32-20210415.0):
ID: 858087 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1950067
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1950061
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
Fixed In Version|
jplesnik merged a pull-request against the project: `perl-Number-Fraction` that
you are following.
Merged pull-request:
``
test
``
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Number-Fraction/pull-request/1
___
perl-devel mailing list --
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1950245
Martin Cermak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1950245
Bug ID: 1950245
Summary: possible packaging problem in perl
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl
Assignee: jples...@redhat.com
jplesnik opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-Number-Fraction`
that you are following:
``
test
``
To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Number-Fraction/pull-request/1
___
perl-devel mailing list --
On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 10:27:58PM +0200, Dan Čermák wrote:
> Dear OCaml devs & packagers,
>
> thanks to the work of smoodge and the infra team, I am proud to announce
> the resurrection of the ocaml-devel list!
>
> It should be now available again for subscription in hyperkitty [1]
I'm getting
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1950054
--- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2021-017531d87f has been submitted as an update to Fedora 34.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-017531d87f
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
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-33-20210415.0):
ID: 858073 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1950054
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
Fixed In Version|
jplesnik merged a pull-request against the project: `perlbrew` that you are
following.
Merged pull-request:
``
Tests
``
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perlbrew/pull-request/1
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1950061
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Doc Type|---
jplesnik opened a new pull-request against the project: `perlbrew` that you are
following:
``
Tests
``
To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perlbrew/pull-request/1
___
perl-devel mailing list --
On Wed, Apr 07, 2021 at 04:32:29PM -0400, Ben Cotton wrote:
> == Detailed Description ==
> This change switches the default backend Key-Value DB used by sasldb
> plugin from BerkeleyDB to GDBM and provides a migration tool for
> automatic conversion from old to new format.
To clarify: will both
https://fedorapeople.org/groups/389ds/ci/nightly/2021/04/16/report-389-ds-base-2.0.4-20210416gitee3196c10.fc33.x86_64.html
___
389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
56 matches
Mail list logo
