Hi, I think the response article has one paragraph which is important to this discussion:"Since Fedora Flatpaks converts RPMs from the Fedora repositories to Flatpak applications, it is much easier to trust and audit from a Fedora Project developer and maintainer perspective. Furthermore, these
I need 2 OCaml package reviews in order to update existing packages to
the most recent versions.
ocaml-camlp-streams: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2104283
ocaml-ppx-import: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2104693
I am willing to swap reviews. (But note that I am
The various ANTLR packages will be impacted by
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Drop_i686_JDKs. The parser
generators, which are written in Java, will no longer be available on
i686. If absolutely necessary, we could continue to package the
various language runtimes for i686. That would
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2102191
--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-404b3fe119 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=2102191
--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-6300856c91 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2101193
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2100791
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Status|ON_QA
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2102191
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #5 from
I don't believe the technical details are as significant as the
systemtic change to the boundaries of trusted software maintainers.
Consider this comment, which appears to be the core justification:
Michael Catanzaro wrote:
>
> Flatpaks already take precedence over RPMs, and there are no plans
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2102191
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
--- Comment #1 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2102191
--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-e819bfd06e has been submitted as an update to Fedora 36.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-e819bfd06e
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2102191
--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-6300856c91 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 8.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-6300856c91
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2102191
--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-404b3fe119 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 35.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-404b3fe119
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
FESco previously approved a requirement that Spin/Labs owners send a
keepalive request in order to keep building the spin or lab. I have
opened Pagure issues[1] for all Spins and Labs listed on the wiki[2].
If you are the owner of one of those spins and labs, please reply in
the appropriate
FESco previously approved a requirement that Spin/Labs owners send a
keepalive request in order to keep building the spin or lab. I have
opened Pagure issues[1] for all Spins and Labs listed on the wiki[2].
If you are the owner of one of those spins and labs, please reply in
the appropriate
Michael Catanzaro writes:
> I can point you to documentation for sysprof:
> https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/sysprof#debugging-symbols
> which says that every library should be built with
> -fno-omit-frame-pointer.
Given that sysprof is a userspace program, it's not in a giant rush, so
it should
On 7/6/2022 1:05 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
* Michael Catanzaro:
On Wed, Jul 6 2022 at 08:06:45 AM -0600, Jeff Law
wrote:
If I'm understanding things correctly, the original proposal is trying
to make a very special case of profiling work better -- a case that
99.9% of Fedora users do not
Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> I can point you to documentation for sysprof:
>
> https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/sysprof#debugging-symbols
>
> which says that every library should be built with
> -fno-omit-frame-pointer.
And why is that? Do they not use libunwind, or GDB, or any other sane
Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> Problem is that in order to get good profiling results today, you need
> to rebuild all dependencies with frame pointers enabled. And that is
> not realistic. Nobody does that.
Actually, the Facebook developers, the ones who are proposing this very
Change, claim that
Marek Polacek wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 05, 2022 at 03:47:26PM -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
>> (Un)acceptable for whom?
>
> GCC maintainers in Fedora, at least.
What I do not understand is why a Change that wants to change the default
GCC flags is even under discussion at all without the buy-in
Dan Čermák wrote:
> Please never run ASAN in production workloads:
> https://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2016/02/17/9
>
> tl;dr; you'll create a local root exploit.
Oh, the joys of automagically added insecure environment variable handlers…
Good to know!
Kevin Kofler
On Wed, Jul 6, 2022 at 3:45 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
> https://github.com/systemd/systemd/pull/23924 proposes adding
> SUPPORT_END=-MM-DD to /usr/lib/os-release.
I like the concept, but
(warning, taxonomy discussion)
The announcement for os-release included
the
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> In https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2803 Artem asked for a user-visible
> notification when a Fedora stops being supported. Various proposals
> for online checks were discussed in the bug, but I think we might make
> do with something much simpler.
That will just
I've just updated the proposal with an extended description describing the use
cases enabled by frame pointers in more details. More specifically, on top of
describing the profiling use case in much more detail, I've also added a
section on BPF debugging tooling, such as bcc and bpftrace, which
Minutes:
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2022-07-06/fedora_coreos_meeting.2022-07-06-16.30.html
Minutes (text):
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2022-07-06/fedora_coreos_meeting.2022-07-06-16.30.txt
Log:
Hi,
On July 6, 2022 3:44:49 PM UTC, "Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek"
wrote:
>Hi,
>
>In https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2803 Artem asked for a user-visible
>notification when a Fedora stops being supported. Various proposals
>for online checks were discussed in the bug, but I think we might make
>do
* Michael Catanzaro:
> On Wed, Jul 6 2022 at 08:06:45 AM -0600, Jeff Law
> wrote:
>> If I'm understanding things correctly, the original proposal is trying
>> to make a very special case of profiling work better -- a case that
>> 99.9% of Fedora users do not need or care about.That seems
* Jeff Law:
> If I'm understanding things correctly, the original proposal is trying
> to make a very special case of profiling work better -- a case that
> 99.9% of Fedora users do not need or care about. That seems like a
> particularly bad cost/benefit for this proposal.
It became clear
It should be possible to load sd-boot directly, it picks up any kernel in
/boot/EFI/linux for me. Try loading sd-boot directly from ovmf, skipping grub.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
On Wed, Jul 6, 2022 at 2:14 PM Ben Cotton wrote:
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Preset_All_Systemd_Units_on_First_Boot
>
> This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes
> process, proposals are publicly announced in order to receive
> community feedback. This
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Preset_All_Systemd_Units_on_First_Boot
This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes
process, proposals are publicly announced in order to receive
community feedback. This proposal will only be implemented if approved
by the Fedora
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Preset_All_Systemd_Units_on_First_Boot
This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes
process, proposals are publicly announced in order to receive
community feedback. This proposal will only be implemented if approved
by the Fedora
Am 06.07.22 um 17:44 schrieb Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek:
Hi,
In https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2803 Artem asked for a user-visible
notification when a Fedora stops being supported. Various proposals
for online checks were discussed in the bug, but I think we might make
do with something much
On Wed, Jul 6 2022 at 10:05:17 AM -0700, Tom Stellard
wrote:
With the current profiling methods, are you able to at least narrow
down which libraries
applications spend the most time in? Or do you really need detailed
profile information for
every single library in order to determine where
I'm in favor.
I'm not too concerned about updates to the EOL date post-release. Most
people won't be terribly upset if we actually EOL a week or two later
than advertised (now if we EOL before the advertised date, then we
have a problem). This proposal is a good step that doesn't require
much
Le 2022-07-06 18:04, Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden a écrit :
I like the idea. It's very easy to use and because it's offline it
doesn't have any privacy considerations. The service can't be offline
either.
This idea is very elegant for offline systems with estimated SUPPORT_END
date initially
On 7/6/22 08:42, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
On Wed, Jul 6 2022 at 04:20:50 PM +0100, Jonathan Wakely
wrote:
You build locally and profile using your locally built packages.
Problem is that in order to get good profiling results today, you need to
rebuild all dependencies with frame pointers
On 7/6/22 08:20, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 at 15:57, Jeff Law wrote:
On 7/6/2022 8:20 AM, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
On Wed, Jul 6 2022 at 08:06:45 AM -0600, Jeff Law
wrote:
If I'm understanding things correctly, the original proposal is trying
to make a very special case
On 06/07/2022 17:44, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
Inhttps://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2803 Artem asked for a user-visible
notification when a Fedora stops being supported.
+1. I like this idea.
--
Sincerely,
Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.org)
On Wed, Jul 6, 2022 at 12:21 PM Lennart Poettering wrote:
>
> On Mi, 06.07.22 18:15, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek (zbys...@in.waw.pl) wrote:
>
> > I'm aware of the release schedule ;)
> > The date would only need to be set (at most) twice:
> > - once before the release of Fn
> > - after Fn+2 is
On Mi, 06.07.22 18:15, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek (zbys...@in.waw.pl) wrote:
> I'm aware of the release schedule ;)
> The date would only need to be set (at most) twice:
> - once before the release of Fn
> - after Fn+2 is released and Fn has 1 month left
> (only if Fn+2 slipped)
>
> And it's
On Wed, Jul 06, 2022 at 11:59:29AM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 6, 2022 at 11:49 AM Neal Gompa wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 6, 2022 at 11:45 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > In https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2803 Artem asked for a user-visible
> > >
On Wed, Jul 06, 2022 at 11:47:21AM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Wed, Jul 6, 2022 at 11:45 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
Hi,
In https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2803 Artem asked for a user-visible
notification when a Fedora stops being supported. Various proposals
for online checks were
On Wed, Jul 6, 2022 at 11:49 AM Neal Gompa wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 6, 2022 at 11:45 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > In https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2803 Artem asked for a user-visible
> > notification when a Fedora stops being supported. Various proposals
> > for
On Wed, Jul 6, 2022 at 11:45 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> In https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2803 Artem asked for a user-visible
> notification when a Fedora stops being supported. Various proposals
> for online checks were discussed in the bug, but I think we might make
> do
Hi,
In https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2803 Artem asked for a user-visible
notification when a Fedora stops being supported. Various proposals
for online checks were discussed in the bug, but I think we might make
do with something much simpler.
https://github.com/systemd/systemd/pull/23924
On Wed, Jul 6 2022 at 04:20:50 PM +0100, Jonathan Wakely
wrote:
You build locally and profile using your locally built packages.
Problem is that in order to get good profiling results today, you need
to rebuild all dependencies with frame pointers enabled. And that is
not realistic. Nobody
On Tue, 5 Jul 2022 at 23:15, Kevin Kofler via devel
wrote:
>
> Stephen Smoogen wrote:
> > Hyperbole aside, it isn't a joke. Looking at the chain we see a common
> > problem where subversion relies on java-11-openjdk and without it is going
> > to cause a lot of packages to be removed. Either
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 at 15:57, Jeff Law wrote:
>
>
>
> On 7/6/2022 8:20 AM, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 6 2022 at 08:06:45 AM -0600, Jeff Law
> > wrote:
> >> If I'm understanding things correctly, the original proposal is trying
> >> to make a very special case of profiling work
On Mi, 06.07.22 16:13, Gerd Hoffmann (kra...@redhat.com) wrote:
> grub2 doesn't find it. Support not implemented?
afics grub2 upstream has no native support for boot loader spec
stuff. (or has that changed?)
The fedora version of grub2 implements a flavour of type #1 boot loader spec
entries
On 06/07/2022 16:20, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
But all Fedora users benefit from performance improvements implemented
as a result of profiling.
I don't think so. Only the proposal owners will get benefit.
--
Sincerely,
Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.org)
I am looking for someone to review adding fuse2fs to only epel7:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2104533
It is already a standard part of e2fsprogs everywhere else.
Let me know what you would like me to review in return.
Dave
___
devel
On 7/6/2022 8:20 AM, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
On Wed, Jul 6 2022 at 08:06:45 AM -0600, Jeff Law
wrote:
If I'm understanding things correctly, the original proposal is trying
to make a very special case of profiling work better -- a case that
99.9% of Fedora users do not need or care about.
On Wed, Jul 6 2022 at 08:06:45 AM -0600, Jeff Law
wrote:
If I'm understanding things correctly, the original proposal is trying
to make a very special case of profiling work better -- a case that
99.9% of Fedora users do not need or care about.That seems like a
particularly bad cost/benefit
On Mon, Jul 04, 2022 at 03:59:25PM +0200, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > https://raw.githubusercontent.com/keszybz/mkosi-initrd-talk/main/mkosi-initrd.pdf
>
> Hmm. Nice ideas (reproducible initrds, yay!), but it feels more like
> being at proof-of-concept state. mkosi going fetch stuff
On 7/6/22 04:37, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Di, 05.07.22 22:35, Dusty Mabe (du...@dustymabe.com) wrote:
>
>> On 6/25/22 15:06, Vipul Siddharth wrote:
>>> This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes
>>> process, proposals are publicly announced in order to receive
>>>
On Wed, Jul 6 2022 at 09:26:44 AM -0400, Marek Polacek
wrote:
I think you may be underestimating how much even 1% matters.
For Fedora Workstation, the primary concern should be to make sure
sysprof works nicely. That's our profiling tool, and it currently
doesn't work well at all with
On 7/6/2022 7:26 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
On Tue, Jul 05, 2022 at 03:47:26PM -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
On Tue, Jul 5, 2022 at 3:40 PM Marek Polacek wrote:
Maybe not, but even ~1% is still an unacceptable slowdown. It would take
about a year for the compiler to catch up.
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 07:59:08 -0400
Stephen Smoogen wrote:
> Thank you for your pointers. I have reflected on my original email and
> agree I made several mistakes in that email:
> I did not know the size of the bug problem.
> I did not investigate why the bugs were filed.
> I approached this as a
Dear maintainers,
I have retired python-contextlib2 on rawhide, for details please read
the link.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2019014
BR,
Ali
-
Intel Finland Oy
Registered Address: PL 281, 00181 Helsinki
On Tue, Jul 05, 2022 at 03:47:26PM -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 5, 2022 at 3:40 PM Marek Polacek wrote:
>
> >
> > Maybe not, but even ~1% is still an unacceptable slowdown. It would take
> > about a year for the compiler to catch up.
> >
> >
> (Un)acceptable for whom?
GCC
Thanks Luya! I've landed rocm-opencl in rawhide, with epel8/9 and Fedora 36
pending :)
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
i can give it a shot but not sure i am the best for long term
maintainer. happy to test and share diffs if i get to them too. i cant
test more than the pve package for what its worth.
On 2022-06-29 15:02, Carl George wrote:
Correct, a fence-agents-epel package is probably the best choice
On Tue, 5 Jul 2022 at 18:16, Kevin Kofler via devel <
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> Stephen Smoogen wrote:
> > Hyperbole aside, it isn't a joke. Looking at the chain we see a common
> > problem where subversion relies on java-11-openjdk and without it is
> going
> > to cause a lot of
Hello, I can take the rest thank you.
FAS: aekoroglu
On 06/07/2022 11:50, Simon de Vlieger wrote:
you may or may not know, I have been maintaining python-django for quite
some time in the past, some time as part of my job. My role changed and
I really can not dedicate Django the time it
Missing expected images:
Minimal raw-xz armhfp
Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check!
9 of 43 required tests failed
openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING**
below
Failed openQA tests: 56/236 (x86_64), 15/165 (aarch64)
New failures (same test not failed
On 06/07/2022 10:50, Simon de Vlieger wrote:
I don't know if I can apply as I am a relatively new maintainer but I'd like to
help out by taking over the following packages:
- python-django-robots
- python-django-pagination
- python-django-contact-form
My FAS username is: `supakeen`.
Hi
On Wed, Jul 6, 2022 at 2:49 AM Peter Boy wrote:
>
> I very much appreciate the work to support the various SBC devices like
> Raspberry Pi and workalikes. But I'm a little lost with this proposal.
>
> > Am 05.07.2022 um 23:16 schrieb Ben Cotton :
> > The work around Raspberry Pi 4 has been on
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2104311
Paul Howarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
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-35-20220705.0):
ID: 1316936 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL:
Kevin Kofler via devel writes:
> Fabio Valentini wrote:
>> And if we say this argument is valid, then should we also build all our
>> packages with ASAN / TSAN / etc. instrumentation, as well?
>
> And ASAN would actually have tangible benefits for end users, namely
> preventing some memory bug
Hey Matthias,
On Wed, Jul 6, 2022, at 9:29 AM, Matthias Runge wrote:
> On 19/04/2022 15:00, Matthias Runge wrote:
>> Hello there,
>>
>
> Re-iterating on this email, also including de...@lists.fp.o
>
>> you may or may not know, I have been maintaining python-django for quite
>> some time in the
On Di, 05.07.22 22:35, Dusty Mabe (du...@dustymabe.com) wrote:
> On 6/25/22 15:06, Vipul Siddharth wrote:
> > This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes
> > process, proposals are publicly announced in order to receive
> > community feedback. This proposal will only be
Miro Hrončok wrot
Done. But maybe the Fedora maintainers were never interested in EPEL?
Should the assignee be set to orphan instead?
Thanks Miro!
The main assignees for both packages have pushed EPEL builds before, so
they have at least had interest in the past.
--
Jamie Nguyen
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-36-20220705.0):
ID: 1316920 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL:
On 19/04/2022 15:00, Matthias Runge wrote:
Hello there,
Re-iterating on this email, also including de...@lists.fp.o
you may or may not know, I have been maintaining python-django for quite
some time in the past, some time as part of my job. My role changed and
I really can not dedicate
On 19/04/2022 15:00, Matthias Runge wrote:
Hello there,
Re-iterating on this email, also including de...@lists.fp.o
you may or may not know, I have been maintaining python-django for quite
some time in the past, some time as part of my job. My role changed and
I really can not dedicate
Ben Cotton wrote:
On Tue, Jul 5, 2022 at 2:34 AM Jamie Nguyen wrote:
Could someone please set the Bugzilla Assignee for EPEL for both
packages to match the main Bugzilla Assignee?
It looks like you're still the EPEL assignee in dist-git. I could make
the change in Bugzilla, but it will get
I very much appreciate the work to support the various SBC devices like
Raspberry Pi and workalikes. But I'm a little lost with this proposal.
> Am 05.07.2022 um 23:16 schrieb Ben Cotton :
> The work around Raspberry Pi 4 has been on going for a number of
> years, but we've never officially
I can join bleachbit as a co-maintainer.
A.FI.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
On 05/07/2022 21:15, Matthias Clasen wrote:
And I doubt that you'd be able to notice a 'smaller than 1% slowdown' on
your system.
4% slowdown is unacceptable.
At least for Fedora Workstation, being
a useful system for developers with working debugging and profiling tools
should have some
On Tue, 2022-07-05 at 23:29 -0400, Chris Murphy wrote:
> >
> > Fedora CoreOS is unique in that by default nodes are automatically updated.
> > We let the exact content
> > set that we are going to ship to our `stable` stream bake in our `testing`
> > stream for ~two weeks. This
> > allows
Hello,
I can take bleachbit, musecore, python-djvulibre and lector, thanks
On 05/07/2022 22:09, Audrey Toskin wrote:
I should have done this a long time ago; I don't have the time or energy to
maintain my packages anymore
If anyone is interested in any of these, you're welcome to take them.
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20220704.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20220706.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:5
Dropped images: 9
Added packages: 12
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 158
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 12.64 MiB
Size of dropped packages:0
84 matches
Mail list logo
