OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20220401.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20220401.n.1
= SUMMARY =
Added images:1
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 1
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 59
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 262.85 KiB
Size of dropped packages:0
OLD: Fedora-36-20220401.n.0
NEW: Fedora-36-20220401.n.1
= SUMMARY =
Added images:1
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 0
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 0
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 0 B
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Size of upgraded
The following Fedora EPEL 8 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
6 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-e692c0b6ee
phoronix-test-suite-10.8.2-1.el8
6 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-eb750aaec6
seamonkey-2.53.11.1-1.el8
2
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2070684
--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-572049ecc9 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
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2070684
--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-dee64826ff 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
On Fri, Apr 01, 2022 at 03:27:30PM -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 01, 2022 at 10:06:35 -0700,
> Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> >
> > Short version:
> > We updated to koji 1.28.0 yesterday. It has a bug in it where it writes
> > out signed rpms as mode 0600, which prevents our sync process
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1939439
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1964649
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1964649
Bug 1964649 depends on bug 1939439, which changed state.
Bug 1939439 Summary: perl-MouseX-App-Cmd-0.30-20.fc35 FTBFS: Failed test
'Internal hashes match' at t/build_emulates_new.t line 18.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1939439
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2070025
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #2 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2070684
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #5 from
On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 5:45 PM Michel Alexandre Salim
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 05:57:52PM -, Damon Lynch wrote:
> > Greetings Fedora community, I am the developer of Rapid Photo Downloader.
> > The package for it in Fedora is about two years old, and crashes during
> > start-up
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2069285
--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-3a6a242e46 has been pushed to the Fedora 36 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
# F36 Blocker Review meeting
# Date: 2022-04-04
# Time: 16:00 UTC
# Location: #fedora-blocker-review on irc.libera.chat
Hi folks! We have 9 proposed Final blockers and 3 proposed Final freeze
exception issues to review, so let's have a review meeting on Monday.
Note, I won't be around to run this
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2071132
Bug ID: 2071132
Summary: perl-Chart-2.400.10 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-Chart
Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
Panu Matilainen kirjoitti 1.4.2022 klo 16.26:
On 3/31/22 14:10, Daniel Walsh wrote:
On 3/31/22 02:35, Carmelo Sarta wrote:
Hello there!
I've never seen this error before
`error: Plugin selinux: hook fsm_file_prepare failed`
but I would try
`dnf reinstall container-selinux`
and maybe
`dnf
On Fri, Apr 01, 2022 at 10:06:35 -0700,
Kevin Fenzi wrote:
Short version:
We updated to koji 1.28.0 yesterday. It has a bug in it where it writes
out signed rpms as mode 0600, which prevents our sync process from
syncing those things. The compose finished and tried to sync, but of
course
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 4/48 (x86_64)
ID: 1206636 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso gnome_text_editor
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1206636
ID: 1206657 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_notifications_live
URL:
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 5/229 (x86_64), 7/161 (aarch64)
New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-36-20220330.n.0):
ID: 1205838 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso install_default@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1205838
ID: 1205919 Test:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2071100
Bug ID: 2071100
Summary: perl-Locale-Maketext-1.30 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-Locale-Maketext
Keywords: FutureFeature,
> [...]
> == How To Test ==
> You can verify that a signature has been put in place by looking at
> the extended attribute by running: `getfattr -d -m security.ima
> /usr/bin/bash` (change `/usr/bin/bash` with the file to check).
Can one easily query the RPM archive for the signature blob for
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 1/15 (x86_64), 3/15 (aarch64)
New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-IoT-36-20220326.0):
ID: 1206605 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso release_identification@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1206605
ID: 1206627 Test:
Hi folks! Trying something a bit new here. I've nominated today's
Fedora 36 nightly compose for validation testing. We do this regularly
in any case, but I'm sending this out to a wider group and asking folks
to treat this nightly as it it were a release candidate, and try to
complete the *full*
Missing expected images:
Minimal raw-xz armhfp
Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check!
2 of 43 required tests failed
openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING**
below
Failed openQA tests: 17/231 (x86_64), 27/161 (aarch64)
New failures (same test not failed
kernel-5.18.0-0.rc0.20220331git787af64d05cd.13.fc37.x86_64: Cannot download,
all mirrors were already tried without success
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 10:24:38AM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > Can we get a link to the actual software stack being proposed?
> > The link in this proposal is a marketing post ...
>
> In Peter's defense, that marketing link in the summary was my suggestion --
> I wanted something that
On Fri, Apr 01, 2022 at 10:16:01AM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 01, 2022 at 06:10:03PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 01, 2022 at 10:07:39AM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > > On Fri, Apr 01, 2022 at 05:54:52PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Been
On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 10:24:38AM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> Can we get a link to the actual software stack being proposed?
> The link in this proposal is a marketing post ...
In Peter's defense, that marketing link in the summary was my suggestion --
I wanted something that (relatively)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2069285
--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-d64cc63744 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
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2061468
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #4 from
On Fri, Apr 01, 2022 at 06:10:03PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 01, 2022 at 10:07:39AM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 01, 2022 at 05:54:52PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > >
> > > Been waiting a couple of hours I think.
> >
> > There's nothing in the queue
On Fri, Apr 01, 2022 at 06:11:46PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 01, 2022 at 06:10:03PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 01, 2022 at 10:07:39AM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > > On Fri, Apr 01, 2022 at 05:54:52PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Been
On Fri, Apr 01, 2022 at 06:10:03PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 01, 2022 at 10:07:39AM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 01, 2022 at 05:54:52PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > >
> > > Been waiting a couple of hours I think.
> >
> > There's nothing in the queue
On Fri, Apr 01, 2022 at 10:07:39AM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 01, 2022 at 05:54:52PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> >
> > Been waiting a couple of hours I think.
>
> There's nothing in the queue waiting:
>
> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/kojira/queue
>
> What repo were you
On Fri, Apr 01, 2022 at 05:54:52PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>
> Been waiting a couple of hours I think.
There's nothing in the queue waiting:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/kojira/queue
What repo were you waiting for and what package?
kevin
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Fri, Apr 01, 2022 at 11:22:34AM -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> Today's rawhide compose is taking a long time to sync on the primary
> mirrors. It has been a mix of the update from the 28th and the one for today
> for at least a couple hours. That is much longer than normal.
> Did something
On Fri, Apr 01, 2022 at 06:22:47PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi,
...snip...
I don't think we should ever allow force pushes in dist git repos.
Even aside detecting if something has been built, you basically screw up
the repo for everyone else who has work in progress against it.
> 2. Or if
On Fri, 1 Apr 2022 18:22:47 +0200
Hans de Goede wrote:
> On 4/1/22 18:09, Ondrej Mosnacek wrote:
> >> Context switches for maintainers are expensive! And while I don't
> >> personally think the "oops fixup" commits are a problem, a "PR
> >> with CI" workflow doesn't get rid of them by any means.
On Thu, Mar 31, 2022 at 06:19:06AM -0500, Ron Olson wrote:
> I submitted some builds yesterday and didn’t get any emails,
> and at least as of 6:18 CDT every link I click on the main webpage replies
> with “server is offline”.
This was likely during our scheduled outage.
> On Fri, Apr 1, 2022 at 4:27 PM Robbie Harwood wrote:
>
> Why not this then:
>
> - fedpkg commit -sc && fedpkg scratch-build --srpm && fedpkg push
> &&
> fedpkg build
>
> Yes, it'll still take longer, but you won't need to context switch
> unless the scratch build fails (which would make you
Been waiting a couple of hours I think.
Rich.
--
Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com
virt-p2v converts physical machines to virtual machines. Boot with a
live CD or over the
On Fri, Apr 1, 2022 at 12:47 PM Vascom wrote:
>
> What about KDE spin crashes because of non stable sddm?
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2066304
>
> This made F36 KDE fully unfunctional.
You can nominate bugs for blocker status at
What about KDE spin crashes because of non stable sddm?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2066304
This made F36 KDE fully unfunctional.
пт, 1 апр. 2022 г., 19:40 Ben Cotton :
> F36 Final freeze begins Tuesday 5 April. We are currently targeting
> the early target date (2022-04-19),
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2066942
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
F36 Final freeze begins Tuesday 5 April. We are currently targeting
the early target date (2022-04-19), which means we'd want to have
blockers fixed by 11 April in order to provide time for validation
testing prior to the Go/No-go meeting on 14 April.
Action summary
Accepted
On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 06:51:06PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> Oh, I was just assuming it was. Yes, if it's not critpath, it can be
> submitted by the maintainer or a proven packager once it has 1 karma.
> (You don't actually need to edit the threshold, you can just use the
> bodhi CLI).
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2069285
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #4 from
Today's rawhide compose is taking a long time to sync on the primary mirrors.
It has been a mix of the update from the 28th and the one for today for
at least a couple hours. That is much longer than normal.
Did something fail part way through?
___
Hi,
On 4/1/22 18:09, Ondrej Mosnacek wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 1, 2022 at 4:27 PM Robbie Harwood wrote:
>> Kamil Dudka writes:
>>
>>> On Friday, April 1, 2022 12:51:36 PM CEST Michael J Gruber wrote:
>>>
- check whether the "new object name" is descendant of
(contains) "old build object
Hi,
On 4/1/22 18:09, Kamil Dudka wrote:
> On Friday, April 1, 2022 5:45:38 PM CEST Hans de Goede wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> While fixing a hedgewars F36 bug, the f37/rawhide build of the
>> fixed pkg is failing:
>>
>> In both F36 and F37 the invocation is:
>>
>> /usr/bin/cmake -S . -B
On Friday, April 1, 2022 5:45:38 PM CEST Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> While fixing a hedgewars F36 bug, the f37/rawhide build of the
> fixed pkg is failing:
>
> In both F36 and F37 the invocation is:
>
> /usr/bin/cmake -S . -B redhat-linux-build
> -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS_RELEASE:STRING=-DNDEBUG
>
On Fri, Apr 1, 2022 at 4:27 PM Robbie Harwood wrote:
> Kamil Dudka writes:
>
> > On Friday, April 1, 2022 12:51:36 PM CEST Michael J Gruber wrote:
> >
> >> - check whether the "new object name" is descendant of
> >> (contains) "old build object name" (rather than "old object name", which
> >>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2065018
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-DateTime-TimeZone-2.52 |perl-DateTime-TimeZone-2.52
Hi All,
While fixing a hedgewars F36 bug, the f37/rawhide build of the
fixed pkg is failing:
In both F36 and F37 the invocation is:
/usr/bin/cmake -S . -B redhat-linux-build
-DCMAKE_C_FLAGS_RELEASE:STRING=-DNDEBUG
-DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS_RELEASE:STRING=-DNDEBUG
On Friday, April 1, 2022 4:26:36 PM CEST Robbie Harwood wrote:
> Kamil Dudka writes:
> > On Friday, April 1, 2022 12:51:36 PM CEST Michael J Gruber wrote:
> >> - check whether the "new object name" is descendant of
> >> (contains) "old build object name" (rather than "old object name", which
> >>
Kamil Dudka writes:
> On Friday, April 1, 2022 12:51:36 PM CEST Michael J Gruber wrote:
>
>> - check whether the "new object name" is descendant of
>> (contains) "old build object name" (rather than "old object name", which
>> would forbid any force push)
>> This would allow to rewrite a branch
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 this in form of a blog post, check the
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Signed_RPM_Contents
== Summary ==
We want to add signatures to individual files that are part of shipped RPMs.
These signatures will use the Linux IMA (Integrity Measurement
Architecture) scheme, which means they can be used to enforce runtime
policies to
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Signed_RPM_Contents
== Summary ==
We want to add signatures to individual files that are part of shipped RPMs.
These signatures will use the Linux IMA (Integrity Measurement
Architecture) scheme, which means they can be used to enforce runtime
policies to
On 3/31/22 14:10, Daniel Walsh wrote:
On 3/31/22 02:35, Carmelo Sarta wrote:
Hello there!
I've never seen this error before
`error: Plugin selinux: hook fsm_file_prepare failed`
but I would try
`dnf reinstall container-selinux`
and maybe
`dnf reinstall podman`
There seems to be an error
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2070684
--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-572049ecc9 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 34.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-572049ecc9
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2070684
--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-dee64826ff has been submitted as an update to Fedora 35.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-dee64826ff
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
It will probably be next week sometime but I plan to update Rawhide at
least.
The following packages are affected and will be rebuilt in a side-tag:
blender
calligra
freecad
Thanks,
Richard
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064753
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2070684
--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-119b7b03f0 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 36.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-119b7b03f0
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2070684
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version||perl-Chart-2.400.5-1.fc37
OLD: Fedora-36-20220330.n.0
NEW: Fedora-36-20220401.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 1
Added packages: 4
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 164
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 556.73 KiB
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Size
Hi everybody,
I don't have any use for rubygem-request_store, therefore I have
orphaned it.
Vít
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
On Friday, April 1, 2022 12:51:36 PM CEST Michael J Gruber wrote:
> Hi there
>
> I know why we do not allow to force push to dist-git in the rpms namespace,
You can easily do force pushes in your own fork. Rewriting the authoritative
branches in the official repositories is problematic for too
Hi there
I know why we do not allow to force push to dist-git in the rpms namespace, but
I am wondering whether we can implement this more in line with the reason:
dist-git has to be a permanent record for the "source" (spec etc.) against
which a package is built, but currently we deny pushing
Has anyone seen or knows how to contact hno? hno maintains electrum and
is unresponsive on bugs, PRs and direct e-mails.
He seems to be unresponsive for other packages as well:
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-34-20220331.0):
ID: 1205298 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL:
Am 31.03.22 um 23:38 schrieb Neal Gompa:
Hey all,
Earlier this week, the Fedora Workstation WG discussed a ticket
brought to us asking for a GUI-based rescue/recovery environment[1].
While we all agreed in principle that such a thing would be a very
good thing to have, we don't really know how
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2070684
--- Comment #1 from Petr Pisar ---
A bug-fix release suitable for all Fedoras.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2070684
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 1/8 (x86_64)
New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-Cloud-35-20220331.0):
ID: 1205282 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1205282
Soft failed openQA tests: 1/8 (aarch64)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2070684
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
76 matches
Mail list logo
