On Fri, 2022-09-16 at 23:02 +0200, Peter Boy wrote:
>
>
> > Am 16.09.2022 um 13:43 schrieb Stephen Snow :
> >
> > Have you looked at the Khadis boards? They're available through
> > Digikey
> > canada at
> >
The following builds have been pushed to Fedora EPEL 7 updates-testing
nodejs-16.17.0-1.el7
zchunk-1.2.3-1.el7
Details about builds:
nodejs-16.17.0-1.el7 (FEDORA-EPEL-2022-a9fd9eded4)
JavaScript runtime
Hi Huzaifa,
Thank you for your response and for getting it to me despite the issues
with the mailing list.
You have to subscribe[1] to the devel list to post to it. There
has been a lot of good discussion about this on the ML since my
original post[2].
I am forwarding this to the list to keep
Hello team,
Works is on the way to fully support Wayland for Blender thanks to
upstream developers and contributors (some of them use Fedora) [1].
Starting from 3.3.0 and only for Rawhide, initial Wayland support is
enabled for testing purpose using libdecor for window decoration
Hi Tobias,
On Fri Sep 16, 2022, Tobias Zellner wrote:
> some weeks ago I opened the bug
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2109630
I commented on your bug and submitted a fix.
> Since there is no response to this bug, and following your guide lines
>
# F36 Blocker Review meeting
# Date: 2022-09-19
# Time: 16:00 UTC
# Location: #fedora-blocker-review on irc.libera.chat
Hi folks! We have 4 proposed Final blockers and 6 proposed Final
freeze exceptions to review, so let's have a review meeting.
If you have time this weekend, you can take a look
Hi folks! I'm proposing we cancel the QA meeting on Monday. I don't
have anything much for the agenda again. There will be a blocker review
meeting, though.
If you're aware of anything it would be useful to discuss this week,
please do reply to this mail and we can run the meeting.
Thanks folks!
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2124543
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2124543
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |MODIFIED
--- Comment #5 from
On 9/16/22 14:02, Peter Boy wrote:
Am 16.09.2022 um 13:43 schrieb Stephen Snow :
Have you looked at the Khadis boards? They're available through Digikey
canada at
Hello all,
some weeks ago I opened the bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2109630
Since there is no response to this bug, and following your guide lines
(https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Policy_for_nonresponsive_package_maintainers/),
I opend Non-responsive maintainer
> Am 16.09.2022 um 13:43 schrieb Stephen Snow :
>
> Have you looked at the Khadis boards? They're available through Digikey
> canada at
> https://www.digikey.ca/en/products/filter/single-board-computers-sbcs-computer-on-module-com/933?s=N4IgjCBcoLQdIDGUBmBDANgZwKYBoQB7KAbRACYAGANgBYQBdAXxaA
Fedora Linux 37 Final freeze begins Tuesday 4 October.
Action summary
Accepted blockers
-
1. anaconda — Custom partitioning with 2 drives selected, bootloader
fails to install due to one drive not having a BIOS Boot partition —
ON_QA
ACTION: QA to verify
Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 10:03:35AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>> Isn't peer review much better and easier solution over all? We could also
>> require signed commits I guess.
>
> I think it would slow things down quite a lot to require peer review of
> every commit.
>
> I'd
On Fri, 2022-09-16 at 17:16 +, Dan Čermák wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On September 16, 2022 5:03:03 PM UTC, Kevin Fenzi
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 10:03:35AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> > > Isn't peer review much better and easier solution over all? We
> > > could also
> > > require signed
Hi,
On September 16, 2022 5:03:03 PM UTC, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 10:03:35AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>> Isn't peer review much better and easier solution over all? We could also
>> require signed commits I guess.
>
>I think it would slow things down quite a lot to require
On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 10:03:35AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Isn't peer review much better and easier solution over all? We could also
> require signed commits I guess.
I think it would slow things down quite a lot to require peer review of
every commit.
I'd personally like to avoid anything
On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 10:29:17AM +0300, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
>
> One thing I want to get properly implemented in SSSD in upcoming FIDO2
> support is to allow admins to filter out certain types of public SSH
> keys associated with the user account. E.g. get a way for administrator
> to say
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2062688
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2105100
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
Status|MODIFIED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2078705
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-Perl-Critic-StricterSu |perl-Perl-Critic-StricterSu
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2049731
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|RAWHIDE |ERRATA
--
You are receiving this mail
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2049731
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
Fixed In
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1970378
Bug 1970378 depends on bug 1967876, which changed state.
Bug 1967876 Summary: Review Request: perl-Statistics-ChiSquare - How
well-distributed is your data?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1967876
What|Removed
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1783126
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
Fixed In
On Fri, 16 Sep 2022 13:06:42 +
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> Error: Transaction test error:
> file /usr/include/lv2/atom from install of
> lv2-devel-1.18.8-1.fc37.x86_64 conflicts with file from package
> lv2-devel-1.18.2-2.fc36.x86_64
[snip list of lv2-devel conflicts]
On 9/16/22 8:40 AM, Brandon Nielsen wrote:
On 9/15/22 12:01 PM, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
On 15/09/2022 13:35, Zdenek Dohnal wrote:
1. install snapd
No. Thanks.
Please build regular RPMs.
I maintain a copr[0]. Unfortunately a move and a new job have kept me
from giving them as
On 9/15/22 12:01 PM, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
On 15/09/2022 13:35, Zdenek Dohnal wrote:
1. install snapd
No. Thanks.
Please build regular RPMs.
I maintain a copr[0]. Unfortunately a move and a new job have kept me
from giving them as much love as I would like recently, but they at
On 9/15/22 19:01, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
On 15/09/2022 13:35, Zdenek Dohnal wrote:
1. install snapd
No. Thanks.
Please build regular RPMs.
That's the plan, but it is currently blocked as it is written in the email.
However the guts of functionality will be the same (Web UI,
OLD: Fedora-37-20220915.n.0
NEW: Fedora-37-20220916.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 1
Added packages: 0
Dropped packages:8
Upgraded packages: 47
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 0 B
Size of dropped packages:3.15 MiB
Size
On Thu, 15 Sep 2022 11:57:53 -0700
Adam Williamson wrote:
> We have "critical path" groups for lots of desktops, including ones
> that aren't release-blocking: deepin, lxde, lxqt, and xfce. The logic
> here is approximately: things that are critical to those desktops are
> indeed critical to
On Tue, Sep 13, 2022 at 7:27 PM Adam Williamson
wrote:
>
> There's another issue we need to take care of here for Final: CoreOS is
> supposed to become an Edition for F37, and Cloud is supposed to return
> as one.
>
> Ideally this announcement should have included them alongside
> Workstation and
On Thu, Sep 15, 2022 at 7:11 AM Lukas Javorsky wrote:
>
> We've decided to remove them in Fedora 42, but it's impossible to remember to
> do it for 2 years.
> There is no way to file a Bugzilla to Fedora 42 yet.
I can create a '42' version in Bugzilla and disable it after the bug
is created. I
On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 03:35:29PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek:
>
> > So… we certainly don't want people having to declare the dependency
> > manually everywhere.
>
> The packaging guidelines seem to say that the manual dependency is
> required, though.
Yeah,
On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 9:32 AM Daniel Gonçalves wrote:
>
> Hello!
>
> I have two systemw with btrfs and I want to perform some send/receive
> between them (over SSH) in order to backup my datas.
> Unfortunately the send command consume all available ram and is killed
> by systemd-oomd service.
>
On Fri, 16 Sept 2022 at 09:32, Daniel Gonçalves wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I have two systemw with btrfs and I want to perform some send/receive
> between them (over SSH) in order to backup my datas.
> Unfortunately the send command consume all available ram and is killed
> by systemd-oomd service.
>
>
* Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek:
> So… we certainly don't want people having to declare the dependency
> manually everywhere.
The packaging guidelines seem to say that the manual dependency is
required, though.
Thanks,
Florian
___
devel mailing list --
Hello!
I have two systemw with btrfs and I want to perform some send/receive
between them (over SSH) in order to backup my datas.
Unfortunately the send command consume all available ram and is killed
by systemd-oomd service.
Did I miss anything or should I report a bug?
FYI I run Fedora 36
On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 09:12:49AM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 9:01 AM Panu Matilainen wrote:
> >
> > On 9/16/22 15:22, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > > On Wed, Sep 14, 2022 at 11:02:22AM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > >> On Wed, Sep 14, 2022 at 10:53 AM Smith,
On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 9:01 AM Panu Matilainen wrote:
>
> On 9/16/22 15:22, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 14, 2022 at 11:02:22AM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
> >> On Wed, Sep 14, 2022 at 10:53 AM Smith, Stewart via devel
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> On Sep 14, 2022, at 4:17
Error: Transaction test error:
file /usr/include/lv2/atom from install of lv2-devel-1.18.8-1.fc37.x86_64
conflicts with file from package lv2-devel-1.18.2-2.fc36.x86_64
file /usr/include/lv2/buf-size from install of lv2-devel-1.18.8-1.fc37.x86_64
conflicts with file from package
On 9/16/22 15:22, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
On Wed, Sep 14, 2022 at 11:02:22AM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Wed, Sep 14, 2022 at 10:53 AM Smith, Stewart via devel
wrote:
On Sep 14, 2022, at 4:17 AM, Tom Hughes via devel
wrote:
On 14/09/2022 12:11, Florian Weimer wrote:
I see
On 9/15/22 21:47, Carl George wrote:
On Tue, Sep 13, 2022 at 8:46 PM Mukundan Ragavan wrote:
I have a packaging question -
One of the packages I maintain, nextcloud-client, fails to execute in
EPEL-9. It is being blocked by SELinux policy.
getsebool selinuxuser_execmod is off in EL9.
Is
Hi everyone,
You can find this week's CPE (Community Platform Engineering) weekly report
here:
https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/cpe-weekly-update-week-37-2022/
If you want to keep receiving weekly reports by email, please subscribe to
either https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/ or
On Wed, Sep 14, 2022 at 11:02:22AM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 14, 2022 at 10:53 AM Smith, Stewart via devel
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > > On Sep 14, 2022, at 4:17 AM, Tom Hughes via devel
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> On 14/09/2022 12:11, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > >> I see some new build
Hello Jiri,
Have you looked at the Khadis boards? They're available through Digikey
canada at
https://www.digikey.ca/en/products/filter/single-board-computers-sbcs-computer-on-module-com/933?s=N4IgjCBcoLQdIDGUBmBDANgZwKYBoQB7KAbRACYAGANgBYQBdAXxaA
They look quite a bit more capable than RPi IMO.
Hello!
Thanx a lot all for suggestions. Especially I did not know that there is
suggested set for running Fedora Server.
Yes, I will be running a Fedora on it, yes, I belive I wil share the steps and
thoughts, as this usually always hurt :)
Most of the recomanded boards are very similar to
Just very minor contribution to alrready very complex trhead.
- to remove packager status if they are not using it, is just wrong. OpenJDK was using it far years and it really did not proved itself. Now OpenJDK have policy, that once you earn any status, you remain with it. The downgrade or no
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20220915.n.1
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20220916.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:2
Dropped images: 1
Added packages: 0
Dropped packages:8
Upgraded packages: 20
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 0 B
Size of dropped packages:3.24 MiB
On Fri, 9 Sept 2022 at 13:58, Ron Olson wrote:
>
> Hey all-
>
> I’m having an issue trying to get Swift 5.6.3 built on EPEL-8, even though it
> builds fine for everything else (Rawhide, F36, F35, EPEL-9): “undefined
> reference to 'std::__throw_bad_array_new_length()’”.
That symbol was added
On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 09:48:28AM +0200, Lukas Javorsky wrote:
> > put a comment in the specfile :-)
> That's quite easy to miss.
It's also no problem if the Obsoletes/Provides remain in place. Even
indefinitely. A comment in the spec file is the correct mechanism for
this, as it's something
Isn't peer review much better and easier solution over all? We could
also require signed commits I guess.
Vít
Dne 15. 09. 22 v 20:36 Gary Buhrmaster napsal(a):
On Thu, Sep 15, 2022 at 5:55 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Thu, Sep 15, 2022 at 09:26:36AM +0300, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
Proven
>
> put a comment in the specfile :-)
>
That's quite easy to miss.
On Thu, Sep 15, 2022 at 1:38 PM Dan Horák wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Sep 2022 13:10:41 +0200
> Lukas Javorsky wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I just got a question about how should I track the removal of "Provides
> and
> > Obsoletes" from
On to, 15 syys 2022, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Thu, Sep 15, 2022 at 09:26:36AM +0300, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
Proven packagers seem to be a fair category to address. Also packagers
responsible for security-related bits of the distribution. Compilers?
Well, as others noted in this thread, any
54 matches
Mail list logo
