Thanks for the patch. With some modifications, osl 1.11.15.0 successfully built
for all releases.
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/luya/blender-egl/build/2681425/
Here is the revised patch:
~~~
diff -Naur
OpenShadingLanguage-Release-1.11.15.0.orig/src/liboslexec/llvm_util.cpp
On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 5:59 PM Adam Williamson
wrote:
>
> Does removing fprintd-related packages or disabling fprintd-related
> services cause any difference?
No.
Removed:
2021-09-03T18:23:01-0600 DEBUG ---> Package fprintd.x86_64
1.92.0-2.fc35 will be erased
2021-09-03T18:23:01-0600 DEBUG --->
# F35 Blocker Review meeting
# Date: 2021-09-06
# Time: 16:00 UTC
# Location: #fedora-blocker-review on irc.libera.chat
Hi folks! We have 1 proposed Beta blocker, 1 proposed Final blocker, and
10 proposed Beta freeze exceptions to review, so let's have a review
meeting on Monday.
If you have
Hi folks! I'm proposing we cancel the QA meeting on Monday. I don't
have much for the agenda, and I am planning to run a blocker review
meeting, so we'll just have that instead.
If you're aware of anything it would be useful to discuss this week,
please do reply to this mail and we can go ahead
On Fri, 2021-07-30 at 18:57 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> [Bug 1988142] memtest boot entry on Fedora install media does not work
> since Fedora-Rawhide-20210728.n.3
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1988142
>
> This bug might be gcc, but also includes a note about the upstream
> being
On Fri, 2021-09-03 at 15:57 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 1:32 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
> > So it appears to be an SELinux issue. I suspect but cannot prove that
> > it's related to a number of AVCs related to DBUS that I see in
> > selinux-troubleshooter.
>
> I'm
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1976778
Upstream Release Monitoring
changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|perl-SNMP-Info-3.75 is |perl-SNMP-Info-3.76 is
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1976778
--- Comment #11 from Upstream Release Monitoring
---
An unexpected error occurred while creating the scratch build and has been
automatically reported. Sorry!
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 12:52 PM Chris Murphy wrote:
>
> Bug 2001057 - F35 boots 3x slower than F34, large time gaps in systemd journal
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2001057
>
>
> This one really has gotten my goat. I'm not finding any reason why
> it's taking this long to boot.
On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 1:32 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> So it appears to be an SELinux issue. I suspect but cannot prove that
> it's related to a number of AVCs related to DBUS that I see in
> selinux-troubleshooter.
I'm only seeing two AVC's which repeat but not a lot...
Sep 03 14:27:09
On Thu, Sep 2, 2021 at 11:31 AM Nils K wrote:
>
> I found the origin of this change to be the following commit:
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/kernel/c/b65f9ed036fca30c0684bfc6fe72d72a53e9867a?branch=f21
> (which is a revert of a revert to remove the kernel-doc subpackage).
> The commit
On 9/3/21 12:13 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
Does Fedora GRUB also contain changes that might interfere with
chainloading? I believe that some people are using it to chainload
the Windows boot loader, but maybe it only works for binaries with
signatures?
# sbsign --key MOK.priv --cert
On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 12:52 PM Chris Murphy wrote:
>
> Bug 2001057 - F35 boots 3x slower than F34, large time gaps in systemd journal
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2001057
>
>
> This one really has gotten my goat. I'm not finding any reason why
> it's taking this long to boot.
On 9/3/21 2:26 AM, Hans de Goede wrote:
It might be interesting to try and using e.g. an EFI
grub binary from Ubuntu with a:
linux /pcmemtest.efi
I created a UEFI VM running Debian 11 to try that out. It doesn't work
there, but I'm seeing in consistent results. The first time
The Go/No-Go meeting for the Early release target is Thursday!
Action summary
Accepted blockers
-
1. distribution — Fedora 35 backgrounds not present on
release-blocking desktops — ON_QA
ACTION: None
2. kde-settings — KDE needs to pick up F35 backgrounds —
On Thu, Sep 02, 2021 at 05:39:54PM -0400, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
>
> Cool. EPEL has long been a necessary part of RHEL environments, and for
> many of us RHEL would not be welcome in our production environments without
Agreed! :)
> it. I especially include components like ansible, which may
Bug 2001057 - F35 boots 3x slower than F34, large time gaps in systemd journal
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2001057
This one really has gotten my goat. I'm not finding any reason why
it's taking this long to boot. Usually the critica-chain or svg plot
exposes the culprit but not
systemd-udev-settle.service is deprecated. Please fix
multipathd.service not to pull it in.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2001058
This is not a regression, it's been around for a while with bugs that
get no action. I'm wondering if we can just pull it out of the default
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 11/205 (x86_64), 8/141 (aarch64)
New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-35-20210902.n.0):
ID: 968082 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_role_deploy_database_server
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/968082
ID: 968113
On 9/3/21 7:13 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Thu, Sep 02, 2021 at 04:58:01PM -0500, Zebediah Figura (she/her) wrote:
It's worth pointing out that we will almost certainly need a
fallback solution, if we do end up using shared libraries and
*-w64-mingw32-pkg-config. This is mainly because
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2000995
Kevin Fenzi changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|epel-release|perl-CGI-Session
OLD: Fedora-35-20210902.n.0
NEW: Fedora-35-20210903.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:5
Dropped images: 2
Added packages: 0
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 0
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 0 B
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Size of upgraded
Missing expected images:
Xfce raw-xz armhfp
Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check!
1 of 43 required test results missing
Unsatisfied gating requirements that could not be mapped to openQA tests:
MISSING: fedora.Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2.x86_64.64bit - compose.cloud_autocloud
Failed openQA
On Fri, Sep 03, 2021 at 03:44:16PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 03. 09. 21 15:12, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> >I'm running a rather mutant version of Fedora on my development server
> >with bits and pieces of Python upgraded to Rawhide. Does anyone know
> >which particular component might be
On 03. 09. 21 15:12, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
I'm running a rather mutant version of Fedora on my development server
with bits and pieces of Python upgraded to Rawhide. Does anyone know
which particular component might be printing all these annoying warnings?
Rich.
$ fedpkg verrel
:1:
I'm running a rather mutant version of Fedora on my development server
with bits and pieces of Python upgraded to Rawhide. Does anyone know
which particular component might be printing all these annoying warnings?
Rich.
$ fedpkg verrel
:1: DeprecationWarning: The distutils package is deprecated
You modifications to the Imath patch aren't working for me trying to do a
mock build so here's my untested patch for LLVM 13:
$ cat osl-llvm13.patch
Index: OpenShadingLanguage-Release-1.11.14.2/src/liboslexec/llvm_util.cpp
===
---
Testing a patch now, F_None was supposed to be OF_None and it looks like
specifying StackAlignmentOverride is no longer required (I hope) as of LLVM
13.
Thanks,
Richard
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email
On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 8:13 AM Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 02, 2021 at 04:58:01PM -0500, Zebediah Figura (she/her) wrote:
> > It's worth pointing out that we will almost certainly need a
> > fallback solution, if we do end up using shared libraries and
> > *-w64-mingw32-pkg-config.
On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 3:28 AM Luya Tshimbalanga
wrote:
> Hello team,
>
> Building the latest stable osl 1.11.15 failed on all Fedora version except
> Release 33 due to error caused by llvm 12.
> The following result from Rawhide highlight the cause:
> ~~~
>
@fedora
These are some information for upgrading to openbabel3.
@epel7
It's also opened a bugzilla ticket (#1628243) for building
openbabel-2.4.1 on epel7
Are we definitely interested?
Links of Copr projects to get srpms for testing:
openbabel3-3.1.1:
@fedora
These are some information for upgrading to openbabel3.
@epel7
It's also opened a bugzilla ticket (#1628243) for building
openbabel-2.4.1 on epel7
Are we definitely interested?
Links of Copr projects to get srpms for testing:
openbabel3-3.1.1:
On Fri, Sep 03, 2021 at 01:13:13PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 02, 2021 at 04:58:01PM -0500, Zebediah Figura (she/her) wrote:
> > It's worth pointing out that we will almost certainly need a
> > fallback solution, if we do end up using shared libraries and
> >
On Thu, Sep 02, 2021 at 04:58:01PM -0500, Zebediah Figura (she/her) wrote:
> It's worth pointing out that we will almost certainly need a
> fallback solution, if we do end up using shared libraries and
> *-w64-mingw32-pkg-config. This is mainly because Fedora, as far as I
> can tell, is unusual in
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20210902.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20210903.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:5
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 7
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 71
Downgraded packages: 1
Size of added packages: 9.87 MiB
Size of dropped packages:0 B
On Thu, Sep 02, 2021 at 12:11:43PM -0500, Zebediah Figura (she/her) wrote:
> On 9/2/21 12:08 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> >* Zebediah Figura:
> >
> >>(2) If we use dynamic libraries, should dependencies be included in
> >>the main wine package, or packaged separately?
> >
> >Aren't many of them
Depending on what you want to achieve, mupdf and its tools may be an option.
Back then I switched impressive from pdftk to mupdf/mutool. It has python
bindings, too.
As for a "swiss army knife" command line utility, qpdf is very versatile if you
don't mind the learning curve. There is a gui
On Thu, Sep 2, 2021 at 10:41 PM Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 2, 2021 at 11:23 AM Leigh Griffin wrote:
>
>> Hey everyone,
>>
>> Just a quick mail to let folks know that from October 1st, the CPE team
>> will be working towards supporting the EPEL community. We just posted a
>>
On Fri, Sep 03, 2021 09:38:44 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 03, 2021 at 10:26:07AM +0100, Ankur Sinha wrote:
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > Would anyone like to swap reviews please? I'd like to get python-pathos
> > reviewed. It is required to update python-SALib to the latest
V Fri, Sep 03, 2021 at 11:29:05AM +0200, Marius Schwarz napsal(a):
> Am 03.09.21 um 10:37 schrieb Petr Pisar:
> >
> >
> > > Fedora Update Notification
> > > FEDORA-2021-2b65aac5d5
> > > 2021-09-02 23:52:43.161269
> >
No missing expected images.
Soft failed openQA tests: 1/8 (x86_64), 1/8 (aarch64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)
Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-34-20210902.0):
ID: 967483 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL:
On Fri, Sep 03, 2021 at 10:26:07AM +0100, Ankur Sinha wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> Would anyone like to swap reviews please? I'd like to get python-pathos
> reviewed. It is required to update python-SALib to the latest release
> (and fix its FTI/FTBFS).
>
>
Am 03.09.21 um 10:37 schrieb Petr Pisar:
Fedora Update Notification
FEDORA-2021-2b65aac5d5
2021-09-02 23:52:43.161269
Name :
Hi,
On 8/30/21 9:35 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
> On 8/30/21 12:08 PM, Hans de Goede wrote:
>>
>> I checked the entry on a Windows multiboot system and it does not have the
>> "insmod chain" line, maybe droppint that helps?
>
>
> Same result. GRUB returns immediately to its menu. I'm certain
Hi folks,
Would anyone like to swap reviews please? I'd like to get python-pathos
reviewed. It is required to update python-SALib to the latest release
(and fix its FTI/FTBFS).
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2000598
It should be a relatively straight forward review. It uses the new
V Fri, Sep 03, 2021 at 10:07:14AM +0200, Marius Schwarz napsal(a):
> just noticed:
>
>
> Fedora Update Notification
> FEDORA-2021-2b65aac5d5
> 2021-09-02 23:52:43.161269
>
Hello team,
Building the latest stable osl 1.11.15 failed on all Fedora version except
Release 33 due to error caused by llvm 12.
The following result from Rawhide highlight the cause:
~~~
/builddir/build/BUILD/OpenShadingLanguage-Release-1.11.15.0/src/liboslexec/llvm_util.cpp:
In member
just noticed:
Fedora Update Notification
FEDORA-2021-2b65aac5d5
2021-09-02 23:52:43.161269
Name : ansible-pcp
Product : Fedora 33
No missing expected images.
Soft failed openQA tests: 1/8 (x86_64), 1/8 (aarch64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)
Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-33-20210902.0):
ID: 967467 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2000702
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version||perl-Sys-Virt-7.7.0-1.fc36
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2000702
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|berra...@redhat.com,|
51 matches
Mail list logo
