[Bug 2016582] New: perl-DateTime-TimeZone-2.51 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016582 Bug ID: 2016582 Summary: perl-DateTime-TimeZone-2.51 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-DateTime-TimeZone Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged Assignee: jples...@redhat.com Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: iarn...@gmail.com, jples...@redhat.com, perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Latest upstream release: 2.51 Current version/release in rawhide: 2.50-1.fc36 URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/DateTime-TimeZone/ Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a stable branch: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/ More information about the service that created this bug can be found at: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upstream_release_monitoring Please keep in mind that with any upstream change, there may also be packaging changes that need to be made. Specifically, please remember that it is your responsibility to review the new version to ensure that the licensing is still correct and that no non-free or legally problematic items have been added upstream. Based on the information from anitya: https://release-monitoring.org/project/2801/ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016582 ___ 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: F36 Change: Retire the NIS(+) user-space utility programs (System-Wide Change proposal)
On pe, 22 loka 2021, Ian McInerney via devel wrote:
On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 9:38 PM Ben Cotton wrote:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/retire_NIS_user_space_utils
== Summary ==
This change is about retiring the ypbind, yp-tools, and ypserv
packages, and removal of the {nis,yp}domainname user-space utility
programs from the hostname package.
== Owner ==
* Name: [[User:besser82 | Björn Esser]]
* Email: besse...@fedoraproject.org
== Detailed Description ==
Those utility programs used to be present on virtually any UNIX system
for decades, but are starting to become more and more deprecated.
Also NIS(+) is known for not being secure at all. As we are going to
[https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/drop_NIS_support_from_PAM
remove the support for NIS(+) in PAM] during this development cycle,
we also should get rid of those.
== Feedback ==
There was some discussion on
[
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/T662DD2FD3YNPTVTOPCYFQRSOQCJWCSZ/
the fedora-devel mailing-list]. Some people are reluctant about the
removal of NIS(+) user-space support, while most are okay with it as
there are more secure alternatives (LDAP, FreeIPA, etc.) available.
The FPL is +1 on doing so.
== Benefit to Fedora ==
With this change we start directing our users and developers to move
away from NIS(+) to secure alternatives like LDAP and/or FreeIPA.
== Scope ==
* Proposal owners:
** Retire the ypbind, yp-tools, and ypserv packages from Fedora.
Have you talked with the maintainers of these packages at all? I can't
recall if any of them replied in the RFC thread before, but it would be (in
my opinion) very bad form to retire a package without asking for the
maintainer's input and opinions.
(It might even be good to get one of/some of the maintainers as change
owners on this proposal as well to show they are involved in this).
-Ian
** Remove the {nis,yp}domainname user-space utility programs from the
hostname package.
* Other developers:
** Test this change.
* Release engineering: [https://pagure.io/releng/issue/10352 #10352]
* Policies and guidelines: N/A (not needed for this Change)
* Trademark approval: N/A (not needed for this Change)
* Alignment with Objectives: N/A
== Upgrade/compatibility impact ==
Users that were relying on support for NIS(+) will need to move to
secure alternatives like LDAP and/or FreeIPA.
== How To Test ==
Check whether the named utility programs are still installed on your
system after upgrading. If they are gone, everything is fine.
== User Experience ==
For some users this change may be a bit disruptive and it may require
some learning curve for switching to alternative solutions.
== Dependencies ==
There are actually no external dependencies.
This is not correct at all. FreeIPA does depend on nisdomainname utility
(part of hostname package).
SUDO depends on the correct value returned from getdomainname() in order
to support netgroups in LDAP-stored SUDO rules. Same rules are
implemented by FreeIPA and SSSD.
However, I think this is *not* deprecated technology question. Domain
name information is the part of UTS information in the kernel.
According to glibc implementation, getdomainname() pulls the domain name
from uname() syscall:
https://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=blob;f=misc/getdomain.c;h=09bb3b0e2cc214b406387294ad90b3c01e2d9a71;hb=HEAD
where 'domainname' is GNU extension. It represents a name of the domain
this host belongs to. Note that the domain name itself is not a DNS
domain name as it represents a higher abstraction level entity which can
be roughly mapped to a whole IPA or AD domain. This is how we actually
are using it in FreeIPA.
Someone has to set the domain name upon startup. So far, only
nisdomainname tool was doing that. If that is removed, then SUDO will
definitely break.
This does not require presence of NIS infrastructure but does require
properly configured NIS domain name on each client. Which means we must be
able to continue configuring NIS domain name.
== Contingency Plan ==
* Contingency mechanism: Unretire the packages and build them for Fedora
36.
* Contingency deadline: At beta freeze.
* Blocks release? Yes.
== Documentation ==
The documentation about those utility programs should be dropped, if
there even is any.
== Release Notes ==
The NIS(+) user-space utility programs have been removed from the
distribution.
--
Ben Cotton
He / Him / His
Fedora Program Manager
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:
[Bug 1807479] Upgrade perl-MooX-late to 0.100
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1807479 Ralf Corsepius changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||2016580 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016580 [Bug 2016580] Review Request: perl-Sub-HandlesVia - Alternative handles_via implementation -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1807479 ___ 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: Considering ExcludeArch: %{ix86} for webkit2gtk3
On 10/21/21 4:55 PM, Michael Catanzaro wrote: On Fri, Oct 22 2021 at 12:38:20 AM +0100, Tom Hughes wrote: Is there a reason for using gold? Maybe the default bfd linker would manage to use less memory? I will try with ld.bfd to see if that does any better. I don't remember for sure why WebKit prefers ld.gold, it's either to reduce RAM used or else to link faster, one or the other. You could also try linking with lld, which is supposed to use less resources than ld.bfd. To do this, you need to add -fuse-ld=lld -Wl,--build-id=sha1 to the linker flags. -Tom ___ 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 ___ 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: Considering ExcludeArch: %{ix86} for webkit2gtk3
On Fri, Oct 22 2021 at 12:38:20 AM +0100, Tom Hughes wrote: Is there a reason for using gold? Maybe the default bfd linker would manage to use less memory? I will try with ld.bfd to see if that does any better. I don't remember for sure why WebKit prefers ld.gold, it's either to reduce RAM used or else to link faster, one or the other. ___ 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
Should fedora workstation incude cups by default
I don't know if it did by default on rawhide (gnome). As far as I remember. ___ 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: Considering ExcludeArch: %{ix86} for webkit2gtk3
On 22/10/2021 00:25, Michael Catanzaro wrote: Hi, I'm having trouble building webkit2gtk3-2.34.1 for i686 in rawhide. An example build failure [1] looks like: /usr/bin/ld.gold: fatal error: lib/libwebkit2gtk-4.0.so.37.55.4: mmap: failed to allocate 2108254132 bytes for output file: Cannot allocate memory Any ideas? I don't believe the builder is actually running out of memory because I'm using %limit_build and because a normal OOM almost always results in a SIGKILL. This issue seems to occur reliably (I tried three builds, it died three times) and only affects rawhide and only i686. F35 is fine and all other architectures are fine. An OOM is when the total memory usage of the system builds up over time. What has happened here is that the linker has tried to allocate 2Gb at once as a single chunk and the kernel was unable to do that. Is there a reason for using gold? Maybe the default bfd linker would manage to use less memory? Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ 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
Considering ExcludeArch: %{ix86} for webkit2gtk3
Hi, I'm having trouble building webkit2gtk3-2.34.1 for i686 in rawhide. An example build failure [1] looks like: /usr/bin/ld.gold: fatal error: lib/libwebkit2gtk-4.0.so.37.55.4: mmap: failed to allocate 2108254132 bytes for output file: Cannot allocate memory Any ideas? I don't believe the builder is actually running out of memory because I'm using %limit_build and because a normal OOM almost always results in a SIGKILL. This issue seems to occur reliably (I tried three builds, it died three times) and only affects rawhide and only i686. F35 is fine and all other architectures are fine. I'll probably add an ExcludeArch and leave it for 32-bit users to deal with. Michael [1] https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=77632264 ___ 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: F36 Change: Retire the NIS(+) user-space utility programs (System-Wide Change proposal)
On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 9:38 PM Ben Cotton wrote:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/retire_NIS_user_space_utils
>
>
> == Summary ==
>
> This change is about retiring the ypbind, yp-tools, and ypserv
> packages, and removal of the {nis,yp}domainname user-space utility
> programs from the hostname package.
>
>
> == Owner ==
>
> * Name: [[User:besser82 | Björn Esser]]
> * Email: besse...@fedoraproject.org
>
>
> == Detailed Description ==
> Those utility programs used to be present on virtually any UNIX system
> for decades, but are starting to become more and more deprecated.
> Also NIS(+) is known for not being secure at all. As we are going to
> [https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/drop_NIS_support_from_PAM
> remove the support for NIS(+) in PAM] during this development cycle,
> we also should get rid of those.
>
>
> == Feedback ==
> There was some discussion on
> [
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/T662DD2FD3YNPTVTOPCYFQRSOQCJWCSZ/
> the fedora-devel mailing-list]. Some people are reluctant about the
> removal of NIS(+) user-space support, while most are okay with it as
> there are more secure alternatives (LDAP, FreeIPA, etc.) available.
> The FPL is +1 on doing so.
>
>
> == Benefit to Fedora ==
> With this change we start directing our users and developers to move
> away from NIS(+) to secure alternatives like LDAP and/or FreeIPA.
>
>
> == Scope ==
> * Proposal owners:
> ** Retire the ypbind, yp-tools, and ypserv packages from Fedora.
>
Have you talked with the maintainers of these packages at all? I can't
recall if any of them replied in the RFC thread before, but it would be (in
my opinion) very bad form to retire a package without asking for the
maintainer's input and opinions.
(It might even be good to get one of/some of the maintainers as change
owners on this proposal as well to show they are involved in this).
-Ian
> ** Remove the {nis,yp}domainname user-space utility programs from the
> hostname package.
> * Other developers:
> ** Test this change.
> * Release engineering: [https://pagure.io/releng/issue/10352 #10352]
> * Policies and guidelines: N/A (not needed for this Change)
> * Trademark approval: N/A (not needed for this Change)
> * Alignment with Objectives: N/A
>
>
> == Upgrade/compatibility impact ==
> Users that were relying on support for NIS(+) will need to move to
> secure alternatives like LDAP and/or FreeIPA.
>
>
> == How To Test ==
> Check whether the named utility programs are still installed on your
> system after upgrading. If they are gone, everything is fine.
>
>
> == User Experience ==
> For some users this change may be a bit disruptive and it may require
> some learning curve for switching to alternative solutions.
>
>
> == Dependencies ==
> There are actually no external dependencies.
>
>
> == Contingency Plan ==
> * Contingency mechanism: Unretire the packages and build them for Fedora
> 36.
> * Contingency deadline: At beta freeze.
> * Blocks release? Yes.
>
>
> == Documentation ==
> The documentation about those utility programs should be dropped, if
> there even is any.
>
>
> == Release Notes ==
> The NIS(+) user-space utility programs have been removed from the
> distribution.
>
>
> --
> Ben Cotton
> He / Him / His
> Fedora Program Manager
> 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
>
___
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: F36 Change: Drop NIS(+) support from PAM (System-Wide Change proposal)
Hi -
> == Upgrade/compatibility impact ==
> Users that were relying on support for NIS(+) will need to move to
> secure alternatives like LDAP and/or FreeIPA.
> [...]
> == User Experience ==
> For some users this change may be a bit disruptive and it may require
> some learning curve for switching to alternative solutions.
> [...]
> == Documentation ==
> The documentation about sharing system users and files over NIS should
> be dropped, if there even is any.
There really ought to be tested migration scripts or at least instructions
supplied. On a test server machine, I'm playing along with docs snippets
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fedora/rawhide/system-administrators-guide/servers/Directory_Servers/
and finding contradictions ("avoid editing LDIF files within
/etc/openldap/slapd.d" then edit "/etc/openldap/slapd.d/cn=config.ldif")
and migrationtools scripts are failing this way and that.
Could the Change proponents commit to producing transition instructions
for servers & clients?
- FChE
___
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: Qt package licenses
On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 6:36 PM Jerry James wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 2:57 PM Jerry James wrote: > > I'm doing a review of a MinGW build of a Qt 6 package: > > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2009214 > > > > During the license check portion of the review, I have become > > increasingly convinced that our qt5-* and qt6-* packages have > > incorrect License fields. Currently they have "LGPLv2 with exceptions > > or GPLv3 with exceptions". I believe that most or all of them should > > have one of these two instead: > > > > - LGPLv3 or GPLv2+ > > - LGPLv3 or GPLv2+ with exceptions > > > > Could one or two of you license-minded people read through the > > comments on that bug and indicate whether you think the analysis is > > correct or not, please? > > Nine days later, I've had no takers, even after sending this message > to fedora-legal-list. I'll ask again. Would one or two individuals > interested in seeing that our packages have correct license tags > please read through my analysis and see if you agree or disagree? One > of the maintainers of the Qt packages would be ideal. Thank you, The only exception I'm aware of is the KDE Free Qt exception: https://kde.org/community/whatiskde/kdefreeqtfoundation/ This exception governs how the license is actually governed, rather than how it's executed, though I believe that's where the current license stanza comes from. -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! ___ 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: Qt package licenses
On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 2:57 PM Jerry James wrote: > I'm doing a review of a MinGW build of a Qt 6 package: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2009214 > > During the license check portion of the review, I have become > increasingly convinced that our qt5-* and qt6-* packages have > incorrect License fields. Currently they have "LGPLv2 with exceptions > or GPLv3 with exceptions". I believe that most or all of them should > have one of these two instead: > > - LGPLv3 or GPLv2+ > - LGPLv3 or GPLv2+ with exceptions > > Could one or two of you license-minded people read through the > comments on that bug and indicate whether you think the analysis is > correct or not, please? Nine days later, I've had no takers, even after sending this message to fedora-legal-list. I'll ask again. Would one or two individuals interested in seeing that our packages have correct license tags please read through my analysis and see if you agree or disagree? One of the maintainers of the Qt packages would be ideal. Thank you, -- Jerry James http://www.jamezone.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 2016542] New: perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.20211020 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016542 Bug ID: 2016542 Summary: perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.20211020 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged Assignee: jples...@redhat.com Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: iarn...@gmail.com, jples...@redhat.com, perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Latest upstream release: 5.20211020 Current version/release in rawhide: 5.20210920-1.fc36 URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/CPAN-Perl-Releases/ Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a stable branch: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/ More information about the service that created this bug can be found at: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upstream_release_monitoring Please keep in mind that with any upstream change, there may also be packaging changes that need to be made. Specifically, please remember that it is your responsibility to review the new version to ensure that the licensing is still correct and that no non-free or legally problematic items have been added upstream. Based on the information from anitya: https://release-monitoring.org/project/5881/ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016542 ___ 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 2016538] New: perl-Module-CoreList-5.20211020 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016538 Bug ID: 2016538 Summary: perl-Module-CoreList-5.20211020 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-Module-CoreList Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged Assignee: jples...@redhat.com Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: jose.p.oliveira@gmail.com, jples...@redhat.com, mspa...@redhat.com, perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org, spo...@gmail.com, st...@silug.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Latest upstream release: 5.20211020 Current version/release in rawhide: 5.20210920-1.fc36 URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Module-CoreList/ Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a stable branch: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/ More information about the service that created this bug can be found at: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upstream_release_monitoring Please keep in mind that with any upstream change, there may also be packaging changes that need to be made. Specifically, please remember that it is your responsibility to review the new version to ensure that the licensing is still correct and that no non-free or legally problematic items have been added upstream. Based on the information from anitya: https://release-monitoring.org/project/3080/ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016538 ___ 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
F36 Change: Retire the NIS(+) user-space utility programs (System-Wide Change proposal)
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/retire_NIS_user_space_utils
== Summary ==
This change is about retiring the ypbind, yp-tools, and ypserv
packages, and removal of the {nis,yp}domainname user-space utility
programs from the hostname package.
== Owner ==
* Name: [[User:besser82 | Björn Esser]]
* Email: besse...@fedoraproject.org
== Detailed Description ==
Those utility programs used to be present on virtually any UNIX system
for decades, but are starting to become more and more deprecated.
Also NIS(+) is known for not being secure at all. As we are going to
[https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/drop_NIS_support_from_PAM
remove the support for NIS(+) in PAM] during this development cycle,
we also should get rid of those.
== Feedback ==
There was some discussion on
[https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/de...@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/T662DD2FD3YNPTVTOPCYFQRSOQCJWCSZ/
the fedora-devel mailing-list]. Some people are reluctant about the
removal of NIS(+) user-space support, while most are okay with it as
there are more secure alternatives (LDAP, FreeIPA, etc.) available.
The FPL is +1 on doing so.
== Benefit to Fedora ==
With this change we start directing our users and developers to move
away from NIS(+) to secure alternatives like LDAP and/or FreeIPA.
== Scope ==
* Proposal owners:
** Retire the ypbind, yp-tools, and ypserv packages from Fedora.
** Remove the {nis,yp}domainname user-space utility programs from the
hostname package.
* Other developers:
** Test this change.
* Release engineering: [https://pagure.io/releng/issue/10352 #10352]
* Policies and guidelines: N/A (not needed for this Change)
* Trademark approval: N/A (not needed for this Change)
* Alignment with Objectives: N/A
== Upgrade/compatibility impact ==
Users that were relying on support for NIS(+) will need to move to
secure alternatives like LDAP and/or FreeIPA.
== How To Test ==
Check whether the named utility programs are still installed on your
system after upgrading. If they are gone, everything is fine.
== User Experience ==
For some users this change may be a bit disruptive and it may require
some learning curve for switching to alternative solutions.
== Dependencies ==
There are actually no external dependencies.
== Contingency Plan ==
* Contingency mechanism: Unretire the packages and build them for Fedora 36.
* Contingency deadline: At beta freeze.
* Blocks release? Yes.
== Documentation ==
The documentation about those utility programs should be dropped, if
there even is any.
== Release Notes ==
The NIS(+) user-space utility programs have been removed from the distribution.
--
Ben Cotton
He / Him / His
Fedora Program Manager
Red Hat
TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis
___
devel-announce mailing list -- devel-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-announce-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-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
F36 Change: Drop NIS(+) support from PAM (System-Wide Change proposal)
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/drop_NIS_support_from_PAM == Summary == This change is about dropping user-authentication using NIS(+) from PAM. == Owner == * Name: [[User:besser82 | Björn Esser]] * Email: besse...@fedoraproject.org * Name: [[User:ipedrosa | Iker Pedrosa]] * Email: ipedr...@redhat.com == Detailed Description == NIS(+) was introduced by Sun/Oracle to easily share files and system users between UNIX-alike systems within the same network, and has been around for some decades. Its simplicity though opens a variety of possible security issues, like not being able the verify whether the shared information is actually correct and/or trustworthy. That said, and with several more secure options (LDAP, Kerberos, Samba, etc.) to achieve the same goal, we should at least remove support for NIS for user authentication. == Feedback == There was some discussion on [https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/de...@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/T662DD2FD3YNPTVTOPCYFQRSOQCJWCSZ/ the fedora-devel mailing-list]. Some people are reluctant about the removal of NIS(+) support from PAM, while most are okay with it as there are more secure alternatives (LDAP, FreeIPA, etc.) available. == Benefit to Fedora == With this change we start directing our users and developers to move away from NIS(+) to secure alternatives like LDAP and/or FreeIPA. == Scope == * Proposal owners: ** Adapt the pam spec file to build without support for NIS(+). ** Communicate the removal of the PAM configuration for user-authentication using NIS with the authselect maintainers; also offer assistance to implement the needed changes. * Other developers: ** Apply the pull-request to the authselect package. ** Test this change. * Release engineering: [https://pagure.io/releng/issue/10351 #10351] * Policies and guidelines: N/A (not needed for this Change) * Trademark approval: N/A (not needed for this Change) * Alignment with Objectives: N/A == Upgrade/compatibility impact == Users that were relying on support for NIS(+) will need to move to secure alternatives like LDAP and/or FreeIPA. == How To Test == There is no need to test, as when configure switch is removed, support is dropped. == User Experience == For some users this change may be a bit disruptive and it may require some learning curve for switching to alternative solutions. == Dependencies == * The authselect package needs to be updated to drop its PAM configuration for user-authentication using NIS. * Apart from that there are actually no rpms, that directly depend on the change of the functionality of the affected PAM module. == Contingency Plan == * Contingency mechanism: Revert the changes made to the affected packages and rebuild them. * Contingency deadline: At beta freeze. * Blocks release? Yes. == Documentation == The documentation about sharing system users and files over NIS should be dropped, if there even is any. == Release Notes == Support for NIS(+) has been dropped from PAM. Users, who are currently using NIS(+) to share UNIX users / groups within a network, should migrate their setups to use LDAP or some other secure service providing comparable functionalities before updating to Fedora 36. -- Ben Cotton He / Him / His Fedora Program Manager Red Hat TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis ___ devel-announce mailing list -- devel-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-announce-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-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
F36 Change: Retire the NIS(+) user-space utility programs (System-Wide Change proposal)
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/retire_NIS_user_space_utils
== Summary ==
This change is about retiring the ypbind, yp-tools, and ypserv
packages, and removal of the {nis,yp}domainname user-space utility
programs from the hostname package.
== Owner ==
* Name: [[User:besser82 | Björn Esser]]
* Email: besse...@fedoraproject.org
== Detailed Description ==
Those utility programs used to be present on virtually any UNIX system
for decades, but are starting to become more and more deprecated.
Also NIS(+) is known for not being secure at all. As we are going to
[https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/drop_NIS_support_from_PAM
remove the support for NIS(+) in PAM] during this development cycle,
we also should get rid of those.
== Feedback ==
There was some discussion on
[https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/T662DD2FD3YNPTVTOPCYFQRSOQCJWCSZ/
the fedora-devel mailing-list]. Some people are reluctant about the
removal of NIS(+) user-space support, while most are okay with it as
there are more secure alternatives (LDAP, FreeIPA, etc.) available.
The FPL is +1 on doing so.
== Benefit to Fedora ==
With this change we start directing our users and developers to move
away from NIS(+) to secure alternatives like LDAP and/or FreeIPA.
== Scope ==
* Proposal owners:
** Retire the ypbind, yp-tools, and ypserv packages from Fedora.
** Remove the {nis,yp}domainname user-space utility programs from the
hostname package.
* Other developers:
** Test this change.
* Release engineering: [https://pagure.io/releng/issue/10352 #10352]
* Policies and guidelines: N/A (not needed for this Change)
* Trademark approval: N/A (not needed for this Change)
* Alignment with Objectives: N/A
== Upgrade/compatibility impact ==
Users that were relying on support for NIS(+) will need to move to
secure alternatives like LDAP and/or FreeIPA.
== How To Test ==
Check whether the named utility programs are still installed on your
system after upgrading. If they are gone, everything is fine.
== User Experience ==
For some users this change may be a bit disruptive and it may require
some learning curve for switching to alternative solutions.
== Dependencies ==
There are actually no external dependencies.
== Contingency Plan ==
* Contingency mechanism: Unretire the packages and build them for Fedora 36.
* Contingency deadline: At beta freeze.
* Blocks release? Yes.
== Documentation ==
The documentation about those utility programs should be dropped, if
there even is any.
== Release Notes ==
The NIS(+) user-space utility programs have been removed from the distribution.
--
Ben Cotton
He / Him / His
Fedora Program Manager
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
F36 Change: Drop NIS(+) support from PAM (System-Wide Change proposal)
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/drop_NIS_support_from_PAM == Summary == This change is about dropping user-authentication using NIS(+) from PAM. == Owner == * Name: [[User:besser82 | Björn Esser]] * Email: besse...@fedoraproject.org * Name: [[User:ipedrosa | Iker Pedrosa]] * Email: ipedr...@redhat.com == Detailed Description == NIS(+) was introduced by Sun/Oracle to easily share files and system users between UNIX-alike systems within the same network, and has been around for some decades. Its simplicity though opens a variety of possible security issues, like not being able the verify whether the shared information is actually correct and/or trustworthy. That said, and with several more secure options (LDAP, Kerberos, Samba, etc.) to achieve the same goal, we should at least remove support for NIS for user authentication. == Feedback == There was some discussion on [https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/T662DD2FD3YNPTVTOPCYFQRSOQCJWCSZ/ the fedora-devel mailing-list]. Some people are reluctant about the removal of NIS(+) support from PAM, while most are okay with it as there are more secure alternatives (LDAP, FreeIPA, etc.) available. == Benefit to Fedora == With this change we start directing our users and developers to move away from NIS(+) to secure alternatives like LDAP and/or FreeIPA. == Scope == * Proposal owners: ** Adapt the pam spec file to build without support for NIS(+). ** Communicate the removal of the PAM configuration for user-authentication using NIS with the authselect maintainers; also offer assistance to implement the needed changes. * Other developers: ** Apply the pull-request to the authselect package. ** Test this change. * Release engineering: [https://pagure.io/releng/issue/10351 #10351] * Policies and guidelines: N/A (not needed for this Change) * Trademark approval: N/A (not needed for this Change) * Alignment with Objectives: N/A == Upgrade/compatibility impact == Users that were relying on support for NIS(+) will need to move to secure alternatives like LDAP and/or FreeIPA. == How To Test == There is no need to test, as when configure switch is removed, support is dropped. == User Experience == For some users this change may be a bit disruptive and it may require some learning curve for switching to alternative solutions. == Dependencies == * The authselect package needs to be updated to drop its PAM configuration for user-authentication using NIS. * Apart from that there are actually no rpms, that directly depend on the change of the functionality of the affected PAM module. == Contingency Plan == * Contingency mechanism: Revert the changes made to the affected packages and rebuild them. * Contingency deadline: At beta freeze. * Blocks release? Yes. == Documentation == The documentation about sharing system users and files over NIS should be dropped, if there even is any. == Release Notes == Support for NIS(+) has been dropped from PAM. Users, who are currently using NIS(+) to share UNIX users / groups within a network, should migrate their setups to use LDAP or some other secure service providing comparable functionalities before updating to Fedora 36. -- Ben Cotton He / Him / His Fedora Program Manager 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: Fedora Linux 35 Final blocker review summary
Tomorrow's email today, since Friday is a "recharge day" at Red Hat.
We're now officially in "late" territory. The new target is target
date #2 (2 November), which means we'd want a new release candidate
compose by Tuesday evening.
Action summary
Accepted blockers
-
1. fedora-third-party — The switch for Fedora Third Party repositories
does not switch them on. — VERIFIED
ACTION: None
2. plasma-discover — Discover doesn't seem to find any RPM packages,
neither locally installed nor in RPM repos (but just under en_US
locale) — MODIFIED
ACTION: QA to verify update FEDORA-2021-1949dabf93
3. fedora-third-party — GNOME Software does not always show packages
from third party repos if enabled via gnome-initial-setup — NEW
ACTION: Maintainers to fix issue
4. kbd — systemd-vconsole-setup.service fails on an arabic system — NEW
ACTION: Maintainers to fix issue
5. LiveCD - KDE — The KDE LiveCD 35 RC does not boot in basic graphics
mode. — NEW
ACTION: Maintainers to fix issue
6. plasma-discover — Install/Remove buttons are cropped, the text is
off-screen — VERIFIED
ACTION: None
Proposed blockers
-
1. kernel — Fedora 35 aarch64 cloud image based openstack VM hangs — NEW
ACTION: Maintainers to diagnose and fix issue
Bug-by-bug detail
=
Accepted blockers
-
1. fedora-third-party —
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2001837 — VERIFIED
The switch for Fedora Third Party repositories does not switch them on.
Enabling third party repos failed, which was sort of fixed in
gnome-initial-setup-41~rc-3.fc35. Fixed in FEDORA-2021-d3cb1609c8.
2. plasma-discover —
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2011333 — MODIFIED
Toggling repo in Discover doesn't redraw the checkbox, confusing users
(but just under en_US locale)
When clicking on the checkbox, repo enablement is toggled, but that is
not reflected in the UI. This could lead to users putting the repos in
an undesired state. Update FEDORA-2021-1949dabf93 contains a fix that
appears to fix this.
3. fedora-third-party —
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016510 — NEW
GNOME Software does not always show packages from third party repos if
enabled via gnome-initial-setup
Packages provided by third-party repositories sometimes are not shown
in Software if the repo was added via gnome-initial-setup and
PackageKit has not been refreshed (by timer or by adding additiona
repos after install). This is a spinoff of 2001837.
4. kbd — https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2015972 — NEW
systemd-vconsole-setup.service fails on an arabic system
The systemd-vconsole-setup service fails, however no functional defect
has been discovered. This appears to be because the 'ara' console
layout appears in xxb, but not in kdb-{misc,legacy}
5. LiveCD - KDE — https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016310 — NEW
The KDE LiveCD 35 RC does not boot in basic graphics mode.
Booting with basic graphics mode on a BIO system ends up with a black
screen. The system does not responsd to Esc, but does to
`Ctrl+Alt+Del`. In EFI mode, it works as expected.
6. plasma-discover —
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2015491 — VERIFIED
Install/Remove buttons are cropped, the text is off-screen
The button labels were off-screen, leaving users to guess that they're
clicking the right button. Update FEDORA-2021-1949dabf93 contains a
verified fix.
Proposed blockers
-
1. kernel — https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2011928 — NEW
Fedora 35 aarch64 cloud image based openstack VM hangs
OpenStack aarch64 VMs hang on boot. With the same kernel, this does
not happen on F34 cloud images but does happen on F34 installs from
the Everything media, so this may implicate the BTRFS change. Work to
diagnose this is ongoing, but reproduction seems elusive. We're
working with Vexxhost to see if they can provide additional
troubleshooting help.
--
Ben Cotton
He / Him / His
Fedora Program Manager
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
[Bug 2015011] Upgrade perl-CHI to 0.61
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2015011 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-c6dfeceb27 has been pushed to the Fedora 35 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2021-c6dfeceb27` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-c6dfeceb27 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2015011 ___ 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 2016223] perl-CBOR-XS-1.84 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016223 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-e157f497ec has been pushed to the Fedora 35 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2021-e157f497ec` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-e157f497ec See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016223 ___ 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
Fedora Linux 35 Final is NO-GO
Due to outstanding blocker bugs[1], F35 Final RC1 was declared NO-GO in today's Go/No-Go meeting[2]. The next Fedora Linux 35 Final Go/No-Go meeting[3] will be held at 1700 UTC on Thursday 28 October in #fedora-meeting. We will aim for the "target date #2" milestone of 2 November. The release schedule[4] has been updated accordingly. [1] https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/milestone/35/final/buglist [2] https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2021-10-21/f35-final-go_no_go-meeting.2021-10-21-17.00.html [3] https://calendar.fedoraproject.org/meeting/10102/ [4] https://fedorapeople.org/groups/schedule/f-35/f-35-key-tasks.html -- Ben Cotton He / Him / His Fedora Program Manager Red Hat TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis ___ devel-announce mailing list -- devel-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-announce-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-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Test-Announce] Fedora Linux 35 Final is NO-GO
Due to outstanding blocker bugs[1], F35 Final RC1 was declared NO-GO in today's Go/No-Go meeting[2]. The next Fedora Linux 35 Final Go/No-Go meeting[3] will be held at 1700 UTC on Thursday 28 October in #fedora-meeting. We will aim for the "target date #2" milestone of 2 November. The release schedule[4] has been updated accordingly. [1] https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/milestone/35/final/buglist [2] https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2021-10-21/f35-final-go_no_go-meeting.2021-10-21-17.00.html [3] https://calendar.fedoraproject.org/meeting/10102/ [4] https://fedorapeople.org/groups/schedule/f-35/f-35-key-tasks.html -- Ben Cotton He / Him / His Fedora Program Manager Red Hat TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis ___ test-announce mailing list -- test-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-announce-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/test-annou...@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
[Bug 1980682] Upgrade perl-Data-GUID to 0.050
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1980682 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version||perl-Data-GUID-0.050-1.fc34 Resolution|--- |ERRATA Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Last Closed||2021-10-21 16:52:54 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-418ea72cb3 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 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. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1980682 ___ 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 2015011] Upgrade perl-CHI to 0.61
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2015011 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |MODIFIED --- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-56adb1fa43 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 34. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-56adb1fa43 --- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-c6dfeceb27 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 35. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-c6dfeceb27 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2015011 ___ 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 2015011] Upgrade perl-CHI to 0.61
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2015011 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |MODIFIED --- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-56adb1fa43 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 34. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-56adb1fa43 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2015011 ___ 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
[EPEL-devel] Fedora EPEL 7 updates-testing report
The following Fedora EPEL 7 Security updates need testing: Age URL 34 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-f005e1b879 debmirror-2.35-1.el7 3 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-db87395a9d fail2ban-0.11.2-3.el7 The following builds have been pushed to Fedora EPEL 7 updates-testing python-schema-0.7.3-1.el7 Details about builds: python-schema-0.7.3-1.el7 (FEDORA-EPEL-2021-1c641acec1) Simple data validation library Update Information: Build for EPEL7 ChangeLog: References: [ 1 ] Bug #2007493 - Please build python-schema for EPEL7 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007493 ___ epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to epel-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/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: HEADS UP: geos-3.10.0 soname bump
I just built python-shapely 1.8~rc2 for Rawhide/F36, which fixes
compatibility with geos 3.10.0.
This should be a compatible update from 1.7.x, and I used a COPR to
confirm that there are no new problems in its dependent packages as a
result of the update.
On 10/21/21 11:33, Sandro Mani wrote:
On 21.10.21 10:49, Sandro Mani wrote:
Hi
I'm updating to {mingw-,}-geos-3.10.0 in rawhide, I'll be submitting
builds to the f36-build-side-47045 side tag. I'll rebuild the
following dependencies:
gdal-3.3.2-2.fc36.src.rpm
GMT-6.1.1-7.fc36.src.rpm
grass-7.8.5-10.fc36.src.rpm
librttopo-1.1.0-4.fc35.src.rpm
libspatialite-5.0.1-8.fc35.src.rpm
mapserver-7.6.4-2.fc35.src.rpm
osgearth-2.10.2-12.fc35.src.rpm
osgearth-2.7-34.fc35.src.rpm
php-geos-1.0.0-20.fc35.src.rpm
player-3.1.0-36.fc35.src.rpm
postgis-3.1.4-1.fc36.src.rpm
python-basemap-1.2.2-6.fc35.src.rpm
python-cartopy-0.20.1-1.fc36.src.rpm
python-shapely-1.7.1-12.fc35.src.rpm
qgis-3.20.3-1.fc36.src.rpm
R-rgeos-0.5.5-5.fc35~bootstrap.src.rpm
spatialite-gui-2.1.0-0.9.beta1.fc36.src.rpm
vfrnav-20201231-14.fc36.src.rpm
mingw-librttopo-1.1.0-2.fc35.src.rpm
mingw-libspatialite-5.0.1-6.fc35.src.rpm
mingw-python-shapely-1.7.1-5.fc35.src.rpm
This is done now, except for python-shapely which will be updated
shortly [1].
Sandro
[1] https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-shapely/pull-request/8
___
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
___
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-35-20211021.n.0 compose check report
No missing expected images. Failed openQA tests: 9/204 (x86_64), 4/132 (aarch64) New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-35-20211020.n.0): ID: 1036402 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_role_deploy_domain_controller URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036402 ID: 1036407 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_realmd_join_kickstart URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036407 ID: 1036409 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso realmd_join_cockpit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036409 ID: 1036426 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso evince URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036426 ID: 1036459 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_notifications_postinstall URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036459 ID: 1036499 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso install_default_upload@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036499 ID: 1036529 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso install_blivet_resize_lvm@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036529 ID: 1036548 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz desktop_browser@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036548 ID: 1036584 Test: x86_64 universal support_server URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036584 ID: 1036601 Test: x86_64 universal install_iscsi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036601 ID: 1036673 Test: aarch64 universal install_blivet_software_raid@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036673 Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-35-20211020.n.0): ID: 1036405 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso realmd_join_sssd URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036405 ID: 1036452 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso apps_startstop URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036452 Soft failed openQA tests: 3/132 (aarch64), 4/204 (x86_64) (Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug) New soft failures (same test not soft failed in Fedora-35-20211020.n.0): ID: 1036544 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz gedit@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036544 Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-35-20211020.n.0): ID: 1036433 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso gedit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036433 ID: 1036472 Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso evince URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036472 ID: 1036473 Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso gedit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036473 ID: 1036482 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036482 ID: 1036540 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz install_arm_image_deployment_upload@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036540 ID: 1036557 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036557 Passed openQA tests: 101/132 (aarch64), 191/204 (x86_64) New passes (same test not passed in Fedora-35-20211020.n.0): ID: 1036498 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso anaconda_help@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036498 ID: 1036543 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz desktop_terminal@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036543 ID: 1036590 Test: x86_64 universal install_asian_language URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036590 ID: 1036605 Test: x86_64 universal install_xfs@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036605 ID: 1036642 Test: aarch64 universal install_simple_free_space@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036642 ID: 1036646 Test: aarch64 universal install_asian_language@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036646 Skipped non-gating openQA tests: 24 of 336 Installed system changes in test x86_64 Server-boot-iso install_default: System load changed from 0.03 to 0.14 Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1035038#downloads Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036357#downloads Installed system changes in test x86_64 Workstation-live-iso install_default@uefi: System load changed from 0.25 to 0.41 Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1035111#downloads Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036430#downloads Installed system changes in test x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso install_default_upload: Used mem changed from 968 MiB to 1093 MiB Used swap changed from 6 MiB to 5 MiB Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1035144#downloads Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036463#downloads Installed system changes in test aarch64 Server-boot-iso install_default@uefi: System load changed from 0.28 to 0.09 Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1035173#downloads Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036492#downloads -- Mail generated by check-compose: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose
[Bug 2016223] perl-CBOR-XS-1.84 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016223 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-30e361f341 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2021-30e361f341` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-30e361f341 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016223 ___ 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 1829902] Upgrade perl-Algorithm-Dependency to 1.112
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1829902 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Fixed In Version||perl-Algorithm-Dependency-1 ||.112-1.fc34 Last Closed||2021-10-21 16:52:50 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-afa95e1cc4 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 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. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1829902 ___ 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 1917521] Upgrade perl-Calendar-Simple to 2.0.1
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1917521 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Fixed In Version||perl-Calendar-Simple-2.0.1- ||1.fc34 Last Closed||2021-10-21 16:52:52 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-2ff97582b0 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 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. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1917521 ___ 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
Fedora-IoT-35-20211021.0 compose check report
No missing expected images. Failed openQA tests: 1/15 (aarch64) Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-IoT-35-20211018.0): ID: 1036714 Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_clevis@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036714 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-35-20211018.0): ID: 1036694 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_clevis URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036694 Passed openQA tests: 15/16 (x86_64), 14/15 (aarch64) New passes (same test not passed in Fedora-IoT-35-20211018.0): ID: 1036699 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso base_services_start URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036699 -- 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: HEADS UP: geos-3.10.0 soname bump
On 21.10.21 10:49, Sandro Mani wrote:
Hi
I'm updating to {mingw-,}-geos-3.10.0 in rawhide, I'll be submitting
builds to the f36-build-side-47045 side tag. I'll rebuild the
following dependencies:
gdal-3.3.2-2.fc36.src.rpm
GMT-6.1.1-7.fc36.src.rpm
grass-7.8.5-10.fc36.src.rpm
librttopo-1.1.0-4.fc35.src.rpm
libspatialite-5.0.1-8.fc35.src.rpm
mapserver-7.6.4-2.fc35.src.rpm
osgearth-2.10.2-12.fc35.src.rpm
osgearth-2.7-34.fc35.src.rpm
php-geos-1.0.0-20.fc35.src.rpm
player-3.1.0-36.fc35.src.rpm
postgis-3.1.4-1.fc36.src.rpm
python-basemap-1.2.2-6.fc35.src.rpm
python-cartopy-0.20.1-1.fc36.src.rpm
python-shapely-1.7.1-12.fc35.src.rpm
qgis-3.20.3-1.fc36.src.rpm
R-rgeos-0.5.5-5.fc35~bootstrap.src.rpm
spatialite-gui-2.1.0-0.9.beta1.fc36.src.rpm
vfrnav-20201231-14.fc36.src.rpm
mingw-librttopo-1.1.0-2.fc35.src.rpm
mingw-libspatialite-5.0.1-6.fc35.src.rpm
mingw-python-shapely-1.7.1-5.fc35.src.rpm
This is done now, except for python-shapely which will be updated
shortly [1].
Sandro
[1] https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-shapely/pull-request/8
___
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 2016223] perl-CBOR-XS-1.84 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016223 --- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-e157f497ec has been submitted as an update to Fedora 35. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-e157f497ec -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016223 ___ 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 2016223] perl-CBOR-XS-1.84 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016223 --- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-30e361f341 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 34. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-30e361f341 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016223 ___ 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
Fedora 35 compose report: 20211021.n.0 changes
OLD: Fedora-35-20211020.n.0 NEW: Fedora-35-20211021.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:0 Dropped images: 1 Added packages: 0 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 4 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 0 B Size of dropped packages:0 B Size of upgraded packages: 120.62 MiB Size of downgraded packages: 0 B Size change of upgraded packages: 54.80 KiB Size change of downgraded packages: 0 B = ADDED IMAGES = = DROPPED IMAGES = Image: Server raw-xz aarch64 Path: Server/aarch64/images/Fedora-Server-35-20211020.n.0.aarch64.raw.xz = ADDED PACKAGES = = DROPPED PACKAGES = = UPGRADED PACKAGES = Package: freeipa-4.9.7-2.fc35 Old package: freeipa-4.9.7-1.fc35 Summary: The Identity, Policy and Audit system RPMs: freeipa-client freeipa-client-common freeipa-client-epn freeipa-client-samba freeipa-common freeipa-python-compat freeipa-selinux freeipa-server freeipa-server-common freeipa-server-dns freeipa-server-trust-ad python3-ipaclient python3-ipalib python3-ipaserver python3-ipatests Size: 8.46 MiB Size change: -8.61 KiB Changelog: * Fri Oct 15 2021 Rob Crittenden - 4.9.7-2 - Make Dogtag return XML for ipa cert-find (#2014658) Package: gnome-software-41.0-6.fc35 Old package: gnome-software-41.0-5.fc35 Summary: A software center for GNOME RPMs: gnome-software gnome-software-devel gnome-software-rpm-ostree Size: 10.63 MiB Size change: 15.67 KiB Changelog: * Tue Oct 19 2021 Milan Crha - 41.0-6 - Resolves: #2012863 (gs-installed-page: Change section on application state change) Package: plasma-discover-5.23.0-2.fc35 Old package: plasma-discover-5.23.0-1.fc35 Summary: KDE and Plasma resources management GUI RPMs: plasma-discover plasma-discover-flatpak plasma-discover-libs plasma-discover-notifier plasma-discover-offline-updates plasma-discover-packagekit plasma-discover-rpm-ostree plasma-discover-snap Size: 41.19 MiB Size change: 11.26 KiB Changelog: * Mon Oct 18 2021 Adam Williamson - 5.23.0-2 - Backport several upstream fixes for various source state issues: Flatpak: show correct remote state, fix deleting disabled remotes (#2011291) Redraw checkbox correctly when enabling/disabling fwupd remotes (#2011333) Package: qt5-qtdeclarative-5.15.2-8.fc35 Old package: qt5-qtdeclarative-5.15.2-7.fc35 Summary: Qt5 - QtDeclarative component RPMs: qt5-qtdeclarative qt5-qtdeclarative-devel qt5-qtdeclarative-examples qt5-qtdeclarative-static Size: 60.34 MiB Size change: 36.49 KiB Changelog: * Mon Oct 18 2021 Adam Williamson - 5.15.2-8 - Backport Qt review #372646 to partially fix #2011774 = DOWNGRADED PACKAGES = ___ 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 2016223] perl-CBOR-XS-1.84 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016223 Petr Pisar changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version||perl-CBOR-XS-1.84-1.fc36 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED --- Comment #1 from Petr Pisar --- A bug-fix release suitable for Fedora ≥ 34. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016223 ___ 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
Fedora-Rawhide-20211021.n.0 compose check report
Missing expected images: Xfce raw-xz armhfp Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check! 1 of 43 required tests failed openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING** below Failed openQA tests: 4/206 (x86_64), 11/141 (aarch64) New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20211020.n.0): ID: 1035951 Test: x86_64 Server-boot-iso install_default@uefi **GATING** URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1035951 ID: 1036049 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_update_graphical URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036049 ID: 1036057 Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso anaconda_help URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036057 ID: 1036095 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso anaconda_help@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036095 ID: 1036098 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso install_blivet_btrfs_preserve_home_uefi@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036098 ID: 1036100 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso server_remote_logging_server@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036100 ID: 1036120 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso server_remote_logging_client@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036120 ID: 1036156 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz evince@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036156 ID: 1036262 Test: aarch64 universal install_delete_partial@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036262 ID: 1036265 Test: aarch64 universal install_serial_console@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036265 ID: 1036292 Test: aarch64 universal install_addrepo_metalink_graphical@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036292 Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20211020.n.0): ID: 1036047 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso apps_startstop URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036047 ID: 1036135 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso server_cockpit_basic@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036135 ID: 1036150 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz gedit@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036150 ID: 1036291 Test: aarch64 universal upgrade_minimal_64bit@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036291 Soft failed openQA tests: 2/141 (aarch64), 4/206 (x86_64) (Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug) New soft failures (same test not soft failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20211020.n.0): ID: 1036146 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz install_arm_image_deployment_upload@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036146 Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20211020.n.0): ID: 1036028 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso gedit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036028 ID: 1036067 Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso evince URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036067 ID: 1036068 Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso gedit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036068 ID: 1036073 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036073 ID: 1036163 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036163 Passed openQA tests: 198/206 (x86_64), 128/141 (aarch64) New passes (same test not passed in Fedora-Rawhide-20211020.n.0): ID: 1035977 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_blivet_lvm_ext4@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1035977 ID: 1035982 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_role_deploy_database_server URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1035982 ID: 1035987 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_database_client URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1035987 ID: 1036037 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_notifications_live URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036037 ID: 1036045 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_login URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036045 ID: 1036070 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 base_services_start@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036070 ID: 1036071 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 base_package_install_remove@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036071 ID: 1036074 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 base_selinux@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036074 ID: 1036075 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 base_service_manipulation@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036075 ID: 1036196 Test: x86_64 universal install_asian_language URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036196 ID: 1036252 Test: aarch64 universal install_asian_language@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036252 ID: 1036260 Test: aarch64 universal support_server@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036260 ID: 1036272 Test: aarch64 universal install_iscsi@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1036272 Installed system changes in
[Bug 2016417] New: perl-Mojolicious-9.22 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016417 Bug ID: 2016417 Summary: perl-Mojolicious-9.22 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-Mojolicious Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged Assignee: emman...@seyman.fr Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: emman...@seyman.fr, perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org, robinlee.s...@gmail.com, yan...@declera.com Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Latest upstream release: 9.22 Current version/release in rawhide: 9.21-1.fc36 URL: https://metacpan.org/release/Mojolicious Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a stable branch: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/ More information about the service that created this bug can be found at: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upstream_release_monitoring Please keep in mind that with any upstream change, there may also be packaging changes that need to be made. Specifically, please remember that it is your responsibility to review the new version to ensure that the licensing is still correct and that no non-free or legally problematic items have been added upstream. Based on the information from anitya: https://release-monitoring.org/project/5966/ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016417 ___ 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 2016223] perl-CBOR-XS-1.84 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016223 Petr Pisar changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value CC|de...@fateyev.com, | |ppi...@redhat.com | -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016223 ___ 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
Fedora rawhide compose report: 20211021.n.0 changes
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20211020.n.0 NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20211021.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:0 Dropped images: 3 Added packages: 0 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 76 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 0 B Size of dropped packages:0 B Size of upgraded packages: 7.76 GiB Size of downgraded packages: 0 B Size change of upgraded packages: 2.09 MiB Size change of downgraded packages: 0 B = ADDED IMAGES = = DROPPED IMAGES = Image: Python_Classroom live x86_64 Path: Labs/x86_64/iso/Fedora-Python-Classroom-Live-x86_64-Rawhide-20211020.n.0.iso Image: Container_Minimal_Base docker ppc64le Path: Container/ppc64le/images/Fedora-Container-Minimal-Base-Rawhide-20211020.n.0.ppc64le.tar.xz Image: Python_Classroom raw-xz aarch64 Path: Labs/aarch64/images/Fedora-Python-Classroom-Rawhide-20211020.n.0.aarch64.raw.xz = ADDED PACKAGES = = DROPPED PACKAGES = = UPGRADED PACKAGES = Package: adb-enhanced-2.5.12-1.fc36 Old package: adb-enhanced-2.5.11-1.fc36 Summary: Tool for Android testing and development RPMs: adb-enhanced Size: 7.35 MiB Size change: 335 B Changelog: * Wed Oct 20 2021 Fabian Affolter - 2.5.12-1 - Update to latest upstream release 2.5.12 (closes rhbz#2014826) Package: ansible-lint-1:5.2.1-1.fc36 Old package: ansible-lint-1:5.2.0-1.fc36 Summary: Best practices checker for Ansible RPMs: python3-ansible-lint Size: 196.13 KiB Size change: 317 B Changelog: * Wed Oct 20 2021 Parag Nemade - 1:5.2.1-1 - Update to 5.2.1 version (#2015831) Package: atomic-queue-0-0.5.20211020gitee3d91c.fc36 Old package: atomic-queue-0-0.4.20211019gitdfd2cbe.fc36 Summary: C++ lockless queue RPMs: atomic-queue-devel Size: 135.57 KiB Size change: 46.07 KiB Changelog: * Wed Oct 20 2021 Benjamin A. Beasley 0-0.5 - Update to ee3d91c: fix RHBZ#1994598, fix RHBZ#1994599 Package: awscli-1.21.0-1.fc36 Old package: awscli-1.20.65-1.fc36 Summary: Universal Command Line Environment for AWS RPMs: awscli Size: 2.11 MiB Size change: 277 B Changelog: * Wed Oct 20 2021 Gwyn Ciesla - 1.21.0-1 - 1.21.0 Package: bout++-4.4.0-4.fc36 Old package: bout++-4.4.0-3.fc36 Summary: Library for the BOUndary Turbulence simulation framework RPMs: bout++-common bout++-doc bout++-mpich bout++-mpich-devel bout++-openmpi bout++-openmpi-devel python3-bout++ python3-bout++-mpich python3-bout++-openmpi Size: 18.27 MiB Size change: 195 B Changelog: * Wed Oct 20 2021 Antonio Trande 4.4.0-4 - Rebuild for sundials-5.8.0 Package: cairomm-1.14.2-20.fc36 Old package: cairomm-1.14.2-19.fc36 Summary: C++ API for the cairo graphics library RPMs: cairomm cairomm-devel cairomm-doc Size: 2.15 MiB Size change: 1.13 KiB Changelog: * Wed Oct 20 2021 Benjamin A. Beasley 1.14.2-20 - Bump release and rebuild (close RHBZ#2015257) Package: dialect-1.4.1-1.fc36 Old package: dialect-1.4.0-1.fc36 Summary: A translation app for GNOME based on Google Translate RPMs: dialect Size: 135.80 KiB Size change: 0 B Changelog: * Wed Oct 20 2021 Lyes Saadi - 1.4.1-1 - Updating to 1.4.1 Package: dolfin-2019.1.0.post0-23.fc36 Old package: dolfin-2019.1.0.post0-22.fc36 Summary: FEniCS computational backend and problem solving environment RPMs: dolfin dolfin-devel dolfin-doc python3-dolfin Size: 16.99 MiB Size change: -871 B Changelog: * Wed Oct 20 2021 Antonio Trande - 2019.1.0.post0-23 - Rebuild for sundials-5.8.0 Package: dummy-test-package-gloster-0-5353.fc36 Old package: dummy-test-package-gloster-0-5330.fc36 Summary: Dummy Test Package called Gloster RPMs: dummy-test-package-gloster Size: 327.79 KiB Size change: 1.36 KiB Changelog: * Wed Oct 20 2021 packagerbot - 0-5331 - rebuilt * Wed Oct 20 2021 packagerbot - 0-5332 - rebuilt * Wed Oct 20 2021 packagerbot - 0-5333 - rebuilt * Wed Oct 20 2021 packagerbot - 0-5334 - rebuilt * Wed Oct 20 2021 packagerbot - 0-5335 - rebuilt * Wed Oct 20 2021 packagerbot - 0-5336 - rebuilt * Wed Oct 20 2021 packagerbot - 0-5337 - rebuilt * Wed Oct 20 2021 packagerbot - 0-5338 - rebuilt * Wed Oct 20 2021 packagerbot - 0-5339 - rebuilt * Wed Oct 20 2021 packagerbot - 0-5340 - rebuilt * Wed Oct 20 2021 packagerbot - 0-5341 - rebuilt * Wed Oct 20 2021 packagerbot - 0-5342 - rebuilt * Wed Oct 20 2021 packagerbot - 0-5343 - rebuilt * Wed Oct 20 2021 packagerbot - 0-5344 - rebuilt * Wed Oct 20 2021 packagerbot - 0-5345 - rebuilt * Wed Oct 20 2021 packagerbot - 0-5346 - rebuilt * Wed Oct 20 2021 packagerbot - 0-5347 - rebuilt * Wed Oct 20 2021 packagerbot - 0-5348 - rebuilt * Wed Oct 20 2021 packagerbot - 0-5349 - rebuilt * Thu Oct 21 2021 packagerbot - 0-5350
CPE Weekly Update – Week of October 18th – 22nd
Hi everyone, This is a weekly report from the CPE (Community Platform Engineering) Team. If you have any questions or feedback, please respond to this report or contact us on #redhat-cpe channel on libera.chat (https://libera.chat/). If you wish to read in form of blog post, check the post on Fedora community blog: https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/cpe-weekly-update-week-of-october-18th-22nd/ # Highlights of the week ## Infrastructure & Release Engineering Goal of this Initiative --- Purpose of this team is to take care of day to day business regarding CentOS and Fedora Infrastructure and Fedora release engineering work. It’s responsible for services running in Fedora and CentOS infrastructure and preparing things for the new Fedora release (mirrors, mass branching, new namespaces etc.). The ARC (which is a subset of the team) investigates possible initiatives that CPE might take on. Update -- ### Fedora Infra * Fixed fasjson in stg (was stuck on a image pull) * Added 200GB to ostree netapp volume * Retired iddev and simple-koji-ci cloud instances * Declared the sssd bug fixed (hadn’t happened in 2 weeks) ### CentOS Infra including CentOS CI * Stream 9 available in CI (x86_64 only though) * Newer python-cicolient * Duffy2 hotfix for paramiko issue with el9 * Exploring options for secureboot for SIGs * Deploying Duffy Dev Lab for initiative * Business as usual (new tags created for SIGs, ….) ### Release Engineering * Updated critpath packages for all releases * F35 final RC request landed * Compose is finished with incomplete state armhfp container aarch64 KDE and failed ## CentOS Stream Goal of this Initiative --- This initiative is working on CentOS Stream/Emerging RHEL to make this new distribution a reality. The goal of this initiative is to prepare the ecosystem for the new CentOS Stream. Updates --- * Work continues on Content Resolver buildroot support * We're now running repoclosure before we sync to the mirrors ## Datanommer/Datagrepper V.2 Goal of this Initiative --- The datanommer and datagrepper stacks are currently relying on fedmsg which we want to deprecate. These two applications need to be ported off fedmsg to fedora-messaging. As these applications are 'old-timers' in the fedora infrastructure, we would also like to look at optimizing the database or potentially redesigning it to better suit the current infrastructure needs. For a phase two, we would like to focus on a DB overhaul. Updates --- * Import crashed because of a database schema design decision that didn’t account for the size of our messages, it's fixed and the import started again because the schema update on existing data would take a lot of time too. ETA is back to 70 days. ## CentOS Duffy CI Goal of this Initiative --- Duffy is a system within CentOS CI Infra which allows tenants to provision and access bare metal resources of multiple architectures for the purposes of CI testing. We need to add the ability to checkout VMs in CentOS CI in Duffy. We have OpenNebula hypervisor available, and have started developing playbooks which can be used to create VMs using the OpenNebula API, but due to the current state of how Duffy is deployed, we are blocked with new dev work to add the VM checkout functionality. Updates --- * Took stock and decided to rewrite * Cleaned up branches * Boilerplate work Kindest regards, CPE 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: Fedora 32 System-Wide Change proposal: iptables-nft-default
On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 3:23 AM Phil Sutter wrote: > Hi! > > On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 01:40:35PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > > On Wed, 2021-10-20 at 18:39 +0200, Brian (bex) Exelbierd wrote: > [...] > > > AIUI, we made the change to use iptables-nft as the default with F32. > We > > > also decided that existing iptables-legacy users shouldn't be moved to > > > iptables-nft during an upgrade. > > > > > > However, I think that new installations are still defaulting to > > > iptables-legacy. The group "Common NetworkManager Submodules" pulls in > > > `iptables` which seems to pull in iptables-legacy by default. > > > > > > This feels like an oversight and should be fixed. Is this correct? > > I just had a bright moment! It told me to check fedora-comps: Indeed the > above issue was reported[1] and fixed[2] for F35. > Thank you for catching the update is already in the works. Does this also remove iptables-compat? I gather from its description it should have been removed by now. I also can't help but wonder what the impact of this change will be on OSTree users. Will they be force upgraded from iptables to nftables through the removal? regards, bex > > > I agree we should probably change that, but I'm not sure it's so > > straightforward...I just ran an F35 install (Workstation package set > > installed from Server netinst, as it happens) and it got iptables-nft, > > not iptables-legacy. I'll have a look at a live instance later. > > I take this as an unintended verification of said fix. :) > > Thanks, Phil > > [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1957346 > [2] > https://pagure.io/fedora-comps/c/9d4f353233619f36f03f6c78331cc4246e12a7c3?branch=main > ___ > 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 > -- Did this email arrive after work for you? Stop reading it and enjoy some work/life balance. Brian "bex" Exelbierd (he/him/his) Community Business Owner, RHEL Product Management @bexelbie | http://www.winglemeyer.org bexel...@redhat.com ___ 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-34-20211021.0 compose check report
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-34-20211020.0): ID: 1035942 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1035942 ID: 1035943 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1035943 Passed openQA tests: 7/8 (aarch64), 7/8 (x86_64) New passes (same test not passed in Fedora-Cloud-34-20211020.0): ID: 1035944 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 base_service_manipulation@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1035944 -- 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: Converting montserrat spec to new version
Have you managed to get this to work, or what is the particular issue? Seeing "%fontmeta" in there reminds me of the unbreaking which I did back then for adf-accanthis-fonts. The upshot was that a packager suggested new font packaging macros which required a change in rpm (or base macros, don't remember), moved some font packages to the new macros and then rage-quit when the rpm changes were not accepted, leaving some font packages in a state of FTBFS. I unbroke the package above by undoing some changes, (maybe unnecessarily) removing %fontmeta, undong some %expand-magic and adding back "-a" to a few calls. I would hope that the current template leads to a working font spec for a simple font, but the templates might be from that mentioned phase, and I haven't checked whether the rpm side ever got changed. Maybe take this to font SIG? ___ 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
HEADS UP: geos-3.10.0 soname bump
Hi
I'm updating to {mingw-,}-geos-3.10.0 in rawhide, I'll be submitting
builds to the f36-build-side-47045 side tag. I'll rebuild the following
dependencies:
gdal-3.3.2-2.fc36.src.rpm
GMT-6.1.1-7.fc36.src.rpm
grass-7.8.5-10.fc36.src.rpm
librttopo-1.1.0-4.fc35.src.rpm
libspatialite-5.0.1-8.fc35.src.rpm
mapserver-7.6.4-2.fc35.src.rpm
osgearth-2.10.2-12.fc35.src.rpm
osgearth-2.7-34.fc35.src.rpm
php-geos-1.0.0-20.fc35.src.rpm
player-3.1.0-36.fc35.src.rpm
postgis-3.1.4-1.fc36.src.rpm
python-basemap-1.2.2-6.fc35.src.rpm
python-cartopy-0.20.1-1.fc36.src.rpm
python-shapely-1.7.1-12.fc35.src.rpm
qgis-3.20.3-1.fc36.src.rpm
R-rgeos-0.5.5-5.fc35~bootstrap.src.rpm
spatialite-gui-2.1.0-0.9.beta1.fc36.src.rpm
vfrnav-20201231-14.fc36.src.rpm
mingw-librttopo-1.1.0-2.fc35.src.rpm
mingw-libspatialite-5.0.1-6.fc35.src.rpm
mingw-osgearth-2.10.2-12.fc35.src.rpm
mingw-python-shapely-1.7.1-5.fc35.src.rpm
Thanks
Sandro
___
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-33-20211021.0 compose check report
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-33-20211020.0): ID: 1035810 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1035810 ID: 1035811 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1035811 Passed openQA tests: 7/8 (x86_64), 7/8 (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
