Sandro kirjoitti 25.8.2022 klo 1.05:
On 8/24/22 23:43, Otto Liljalaakso wrote:
It looks like a commit was queuing in a pull request for a long time,
then merged after other things had happened in rawhide. Probably a more
correct Git date to use in %changelog would be the commit date instead
On 24. 08. 22 22:53, Alasdair G Kergon wrote:
On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 09:50:59PM +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote:
I think some of those *-team / *-sig / *-maint pseudo-group users are
outdated. Most of them probably pre-date the existence of actual
groups, so they are probably all ancient. For
going to revert the brokenness in f38 after it branches off, is ever a
good idea.
Please revert the change and wait for the devel list and FESCo
discussion of the topic before implementing it again.
Ack, will do promptly. My bad.
Reverted in crypto-policies-20220824-2.git2187e9c.fc38,
sorry
On 8/24/22 04:07, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
Orion Poplawski wrote:
Does this break ABI?
Yes. They changed functions to take 64-bit integers instead of 32-bit ones.
When called by code compiled against a previous version, the upper half will
be garbage. On some architectures (depending on
i dont need them but wasnt sure if required for epel to keep things
complete and similar to the base package. how did you want me to change
the names? i left it the same as in the original spec file, and named
this one -epel after previous discussion on list
On 2022-08-24 17:13, Troy Dawson
I'm sure having all the fence agents in one package is nice for you, but if
someone has both Fedora and RHEL based machines, they would appreciate the
packages having the same naming conventions.
This is looking pretty good.
I'll do some poking about for the man pages. How badly do you want the
On 8/24/22 23:43, Otto Liljalaakso wrote:
Sandro kirjoitti 24.8.2022 klo 23.50:
Yes, after I talked to him he became aware of the dependency between the
two packages and adopted flare as well.
AFAIK, both packages have been updated to the latest upstream release
now and built successfully.
OLD: Fedora-37-20220823.n.0
NEW: Fedora-37-20220824.n.2
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 1
Added packages: 0
Dropped packages:21
Upgraded packages: 17
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 0 B
Size of dropped packages:1.32 MiB
Size
Sandro kirjoitti 24.8.2022 klo 23.50:
Yes, after I talked to him he became aware of the dependency between the
two packages and adopted flare as well.
AFAIK, both packages have been updated to the latest upstream release
now and built successfully. They should find their way into the
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2116190
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-DateTimeX-Easy-0.090-1 |perl-DateTimeX-Easy-0.090-1
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2116190
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-DateTimeX-Easy-0.090-1 |perl-DateTimeX-Easy-0.090-1
The following Fedora EPEL 7 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
1 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-21ae60f43a
java-latest-openjdk-18.0.2.0.9-1.rolling.el7
The following builds have been pushed to Fedora EPEL 7 updates-testing
The following builds have been pushed to Fedora EPEL 9 updates-testing
ansible-collection-community-general-4.8.6-1.el9
cryfs-0.11.2-5.el9
fastfetch-1.6.5-1.el9
goaccess-1.6.2-2.el9
libaiff-6.0-2.el9
openscap-report-0.1.3-0.el9
parallel-20220822-1.el9
On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 09:50:59PM +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> I think some of those *-team / *-sig / *-maint pseudo-group users are
> outdated. Most of them probably pre-date the existence of actual
> groups, so they are probably all ancient. For example, we removed the
> xgl-maint
On 8/24/22 21:44, Otto Liljalaakso wrote:
Sandro kirjoitti 24.8.2022 klo 14.33:
On 23-08-2022 16:00, Sandro wrote:
I am interested in adopting the orphaned flare package[1]. It doesn't
appear to have any complicated requirements. My local build on a recent
git clone succeeded without effort.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2119882
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Status|ON_QA
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2116190
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-DateTimeX-Easy-0.090-1 |perl-DateTimeX-Easy-0.090-1
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2116587
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Status|ON_QA
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2116479
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2118082
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Fixed In
On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 7:31 PM Mattia Verga via devel
wrote:
>
> Following my comment in
> https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2856#comment-812870 I wrote a simple
> script to check how many users have commit rights onto some project in
> src.fp.o, but aren't (anymore) members of the `packager` group:
Sandro kirjoitti 24.8.2022 klo 14.33:
On 23-08-2022 16:00, Sandro wrote:
I am interested in adopting the orphaned flare package[1]. It doesn't
appear to have any complicated requirements. My local build on a recent
git clone succeeded without effort.
Hello Sandro,
Thank you for taking
On Wed, 2022-08-24 at 16:58 +0200, Alexander Sosedkin wrote:
>
> Reverted in crypto-policies-20220824-2.git2187e9c.fc38,
> sorry for the premature jump scare.
openQA caught an interesting consequence of the change while it was
live: it makes PackageKit start crashing. The jour
Minutes:
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2022-08-24/fedora_coreos_meeting.2022-08-24-16.32.html
Minutes (text):
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2022-08-24/fedora_coreos_meeting.2022-08-24-16.32.txt
Log:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120413
--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-a7f4abd7ee has been pushed to the Fedora 37 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=2120625
--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-9d9488d6bf has been pushed to the Fedora 37 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
Following my comment in
https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2856#comment-812870 I wrote a simple
script to check how many users have commit rights onto some project in
src.fp.o, but aren't (anymore) members of the `packager` group:
```
Found 31 users with commit privileges but not in packager group:
On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 1:00 PM Jilayne Lovejoy wrote:
>
>
>
> On 8/24/22 8:56 AM, Richard Fontana wrote:
> > Cross-posting this to the devel list.
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 11:41 PM Maxwell G wrote:
> >> Hi Legal folks,
> >>
> >> Can you please consider removing the following rule?
> >>
>
On 8/24/22 8:56 AM, Richard Fontana wrote:
Cross-posting this to the devel list.
On Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 11:41 PM Maxwell G wrote:
Hi Legal folks,
Can you please consider removing the following rule?
Fedora package maintainers are expected to announce upstream license
changes that they
Just to chime in from a releng perspective here...
IMHO you should do builds for f38 now also (either by making a side tag
and bootstrapping them just like was done for f37, or tagging f37 builds
you need into the f38 sidetag).
While it's technically possible to push the f37 builds into
Thanks so much Troy, Yes I inherited this environment. I will look for you
clues.
Have a great day!!
From: Troy Dawson
Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2022 11:09 AM
To: EPEL Development List
Subject: [EPEL-devel] Re: duplicates
Hi Lynn,
I think you need to contact whoever setup your spacewalk /
Hi Lynn,
I think you need to contact whoever setup your spacewalk / satellite
system. They are the owners of epel7-centos7-x86_64, not the EPEL
community.
epel7-centos7-x86_64 is a custom repository, that I am betting is on your
spacewalk system.
There are three clues for this.
1st - epel7 is
going to revert the brokenness in f38 after it branches off, is ever a
good idea.
Please revert the change and wait for the devel list and FESCo
discussion of the topic before implementing it again.
Ack, will do promptly. My bad.
Reverted in crypto-policies-20220824-2.git2187e9c.fc38,
Thx
gt; > What do I do now? Just keep it as it is?
> > > Revert, somehow initiate the approval early and unrevert once I have one?
> >
> > I don't think keeping rawhide/f38 intentionally broken, even if you're
> > going to revert the brokenness in f38 after it bran
Cross-posting this to the devel list.
On Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 11:41 PM Maxwell G wrote:
>
> Hi Legal folks,
>
> Can you please consider removing the following rule?
>
> > Fedora package maintainers are expected to announce upstream license
> > changes that they become aware of on the Fedora
V Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 09:55:39AM -0400, Neal Gompa napsal(a):
> Hey all,
>
> I'm updating ffmpeg to 5.1 to synchronize with third-party
> repositories that use this version for F37+. Because there were some
> failed builds from the F37 mass build due to bootstrap cycles, I'm
> using this as an
I have tried to create a package for that, including rpm-macros to
easily remove conflicting installed icons.
Here it is:
https://lyessaadi.fedorapeople.org/icon-development-kit-2022.08.18-1.fc38.src.rpm
Should I submit that for review and change conflicting packages? Or
should we instead
On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 4:32 PM Fabio Valentini wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 4:28 PM Alexander Sosedkin
> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 4:18 PM Vít Ondruch wrote:
> > >
> > > Alexander,
> > >
> > > Would you mind to comment on your intentions with:
> > >
> > >
On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 4:28 PM Alexander Sosedkin wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 4:18 PM Vít Ondruch wrote:
> >
> > Alexander,
> >
> > Would you mind to comment on your intentions with:
> >
> >
On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 4:18 PM Vít Ondruch wrote:
>
> Alexander,
>
> Would you mind to comment on your intentions with:
>
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/crypto-policies/c/2f33ffcfa7192037f969c6a28e092aca767a1415?branch=rawhide
>
> which just landed in Fedora and broke Ruby test suite (even
V Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 03:00:23PM +0200, Iñaki Ucar napsal(a):
> On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 at 12:39, Petr Pisar wrote:
> >
> > > So if the rawhide rebuild can be based on the result of the F37 side tag,
> > > then bootstrapping etc. is not required, and the rebuild is fast and
> > > straightforward.
Alexander,
Would you mind to comment on your intentions with:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/crypto-policies/c/2f33ffcfa7192037f969c6a28e092aca767a1415?branch=rawhide
which just landed in Fedora and broke Ruby test suite (even more then it
was broken before):
On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 03:57:37PM +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 3:49 PM Daniel P. Berrangé
> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Feb 20, 2022 at 10:13:18PM +0100, Sandro Mani wrote:
> > > Hi
> > >
> > > Following recent discussions and to reduce the maintenance burden, I'm
> > >
On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 3:49 PM Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
>
> On Sun, Feb 20, 2022 at 10:13:18PM +0100, Sandro Mani wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > Following recent discussions and to reduce the maintenance burden, I'm
> > planning to start merging native and mingw packages. Initially, I'll be
> > looking
Hey all,
I'm updating ffmpeg to 5.1 to synchronize with third-party
repositories that use this version for F37+. Because there were some
failed builds from the F37 mass build due to bootstrap cycles, I'm
using this as an opportunity to clean that up too. There is also some
ELN fallout to deal
On Sun, Feb 20, 2022 at 10:13:18PM +0100, Sandro Mani wrote:
> Hi
>
> Following recent discussions and to reduce the maintenance burden, I'm
> planning to start merging native and mingw packages. Initially, I'll be
> looking at these packages where I maintain both variants:
I've done the same
On 24/08/2022 08:21, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
Seen at least on F36 x86_64: The package
libreoffice-postgresql-7.3.4.2-4.fc36.x86_64 (built 2022-07-12) contains
a library /usr/lib64/libreoffice/program/libpostgresql-sdbc-impllo.so
that links against libpq (built with -lpq), so the library has
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120625
--- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-9d9488d6bf has been submitted as an update to Fedora 37.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-9d9488d6bf
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120413
--- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-a7f4abd7ee has been submitted as an update to Fedora 37.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-a7f4abd7ee
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120625
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
jplesnik merged a pull-request against the project: `perl-Config-Perl-V` that
you are following.
Merged pull-request:
``
Tests
``
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Config-Perl-V/pull-request/1
___
perl-devel mailing list --
jplesnik opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-Config-Perl-V`
that you are following:
``
Tests
``
To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Config-Perl-V/pull-request/1
___
perl-devel mailing list --
On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 at 12:39, Petr Pisar wrote:
>
> > So if the rawhide rebuild can be based on the result of the F37 side tag,
> > then bootstrapping etc. is not required, and the rebuild is fast and
> > straightforward. More so if no commits are needed.
> >
> This optimization is also possible.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2119963
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2119963
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
Fixed In Version|
On 23-08-2022 16:00, Sandro wrote:
I am interested in adopting the orphaned flare package[1]. It doesn't
appear to have any complicated requirements. My local build on a recent
git clone succeeded without effort.
I became aware of the package being orphaned by the announcement sent a
couple
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2119963
--- Comment #5 from Petr Pisar ---
Upstream fixed the crash in a git tree.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2119963
V Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 10:58:00AM +0200, Iñaki Ucar napsal(a):
> On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 at 10:49, Petr Pisar wrote:
> >
> > V Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 08:16:00PM +0200, Iñaki Ucar napsal(a):
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > We have a new R version sitting on a side tag (f37-build-side-55653)
> > > for a few
On 24. 08. 22 12:15, Iñaki Ucar wrote:
On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 at 12:04, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 24. 08. 22 10:58, Iñaki Ucar wrote:
Thanks. The main issue is that there are circular dependencies, and it
requires bootstrapping in some cases and disabling the checks in
others, and then another
On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 at 12:04, Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> On 24. 08. 22 10:58, Iñaki Ucar wrote:
> > Thanks. The main issue is that there are circular dependencies, and it
> > requires bootstrapping in some cases and disabling the checks in
> > others, and then another pass to reenable everything. So
Orion Poplawski wrote:
> Does this break ABI?
Yes. They changed functions to take 64-bit integers instead of 32-bit ones.
When called by code compiled against a previous version, the upper half will
be garbage. On some architectures (depending on how exactly arguments are
passed, but they will
Elliott Sales de Andrade wrote:
> Icons are not code.
Even if they are compiled into a code binary as a resource file (as seem to
be often done in this case)?
Kevin Kofler
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe
On 24. 08. 22 10:58, Iñaki Ucar wrote:
Thanks. The main issue is that there are circular dependencies, and it
requires bootstrapping in some cases and disabling the checks in
others, and then another pass to reenable everything. So if the
rawhide rebuild can be based on the result of the F37
On Wed, Aug 24, 2022, at 11:56, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> That was exactly my point though. If nobody finds CVEs, then nobody has to
> fix them. We can only fix what we know about, and blackhats can only attack
> what they know about.
The fact that there are no new CVEs (and therefore
On 8/24/22 05:56, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
>> pcre will also have a drop in found CVEs simply because far fewer people
>> will be bothering to look at the old code. If no one is looking for bugs
>> then none are going to be reported :-)
>
> That was exactly my
Lukas Javorsky wrote:
> Anyway, the main idea behind this change is to prevent any new packages
> coming to Fedora 38 to require the old pcre package and forward them to
> use the newer version of it *pcre2*.
As I have stated several times, I do not see this process as a productive or
useful
Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> pcre will also have a drop in found CVEs simply because far fewer people
> will be bothering to look at the old code. If no one is looking for bugs
> then none are going to be reported :-)
That was exactly my point though. If nobody finds CVEs, then nobody has to
fix
Thank you for all of your feedback.
As Zbyszek mentioned, this change is only about the *deprecation*, not the
*retirement*.
This means that if the pcre is deprecated, no new package will be allowed
to require it. Also, it would mean that all of the existing packages will
be notified about this
Le 24/08/2022 à 09:47, Vít Ondruch a écrit :> Shouldn't we have shared
"Icon Library" package, which would solve the
conflicts?
Yes, this is what I'm also proposing, and what I think is probably the
most painless solution. Additionally, since packages like
gnome-control-center install icons
And now with the attachments... Classic.
On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 at 11:28, Iñaki Ucar wrote:
>
> On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 at 10:59, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 10:39 AM Petr Pisar wrote:
> > >
> > > V Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 08:16:00PM +0200, Iñaki Ucar napsal(a):
> > > > Hi
On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 at 10:59, Fabio Valentini wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 10:39 AM Petr Pisar wrote:
> >
> > V Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 08:16:00PM +0200, Iñaki Ucar napsal(a):
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > We have a new R version sitting on a side tag (f37-build-side-55653)
> > > for a few weeks
On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 10:58 AM Iñaki Ucar wrote:
>
> On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 at 10:49, Petr Pisar wrote:
> >
> > V Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 08:16:00PM +0200, Iñaki Ucar napsal(a):
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > We have a new R version sitting on a side tag (f37-build-side-55653)
> > > for a few weeks now,
On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 at 10:49, Petr Pisar wrote:
>
> V Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 08:16:00PM +0200, Iñaki Ucar napsal(a):
> > Hi all,
> >
> > We have a new R version sitting on a side tag (f37-build-side-55653)
> > for a few weeks now, where packages are being rebuilt as time permits.
> > Unfortunately,
On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 10:39 AM Petr Pisar wrote:
>
> V Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 08:16:00PM +0200, Iñaki Ucar napsal(a):
> > Hi all,
> >
> > We have a new R version sitting on a side tag (f37-build-side-55653)
> > for a few weeks now, where packages are being rebuilt as time permits.
> >
Dne 24. 08. 22 v 2:55 Lyes Saadi napsal(a):
Hello devel,
I recently packaged blackbox-terminal, but, someone packaging another
app, extension-manager noticed that his package conflicted with mine,
and a `dnf whatprovides` later noticed that it also conflicted with
cozy*. I soon discovered
V Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 08:16:00PM +0200, Iñaki Ucar napsal(a):
> Hi all,
>
> We have a new R version sitting on a side tag (f37-build-side-55653)
> for a few weeks now, where packages are being rebuilt as time permits.
> Unfortunately, F37 is not rawhide anymore, so the question is whether
> this
On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 at 04:56, Maxwell G wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, August 23, 2022 1:16:00 PM CDT Iñaki Ucar wrote:
> > We have a new R version sitting on a side tag (f37-build-side-55653)
> > for a few weeks now, where packages are being rebuilt as time permits.
>
> Can this perhaps be handled
On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 05:14:33AM +0200, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> Ben Cotton wrote:
> > == Summary ==
> > Upstream stopped the support for the old 'pcre' package. It only
> > supports the new 'pcre2' version, so Fedora should deprecate it so it
> > could later be retired and removed from
On Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 03:42:30PM -0400, Ben Cotton wrote:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PcreDeprecation
>
> 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
On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 05:14:33AM +0200, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> Ben Cotton wrote:
> > == Summary ==
> > Upstream stopped the support for the old 'pcre' package. It only
> > supports the new 'pcre2' version, so Fedora should deprecate it so it
> > could later be retired and removed from
Seen at least on F36 x86_64: The package
libreoffice-postgresql-7.3.4.2-4.fc36.x86_64 (built 2022-07-12) contains
a library /usr/lib64/libreoffice/program/libpostgresql-sdbc-impllo.so
that links against libpq (built with -lpq), so the library has
0x0001 (NEEDED)
81 matches
Mail list logo
