https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2123418
--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-51f66cd332 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 36.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-51f66cd332
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2123418
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |MODIFIED
--- Comment #1 from
The following builds have been pushed to Fedora EPEL 7 updates-testing
anope-2.0.11-1.el7
resalloc-4.7-1.el7
resalloc-openstack-9.3-1.el7
uglify-js-3.17.1-1.el7
Details about builds:
Note I'm following the pkg-config version, *not* the soname.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
The following Fedora EPEL 8 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
6 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-9d8794e452
ImageMagick-6.9.12.63-1.el8
5 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-73672e02b0
java-latest-openjdk-18.0.2.0.9-1.rolling.el8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2125785
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-FFI-CheckLib-0.29-1.fc |perl-FFI-CheckLib-0.29-1.fc
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2125785
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-FFI-CheckLib-0.29-1.fc |perl-FFI-CheckLib-0.29-1.fc
On Wed, 2022-09-21 at 02:53 +0200, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> Tommy Nguyen wrote:
> > DNF5 is ridiculously fast.
>
> It is faster, but "ridiculously"? In the metric that matters (elapsed
> wallclock time), your benchmark shows the update taking 30% less
> time.
>
> That said, there are
Ben Cotton wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2022 at 10:03 AM Neal Gompa wrote:
>>
>> The main reason would be blocker review, but I'm not sure how often it
>> comes up in the past few cycles.
>
> Rarely, which is why I think using distribution as a proxy is fine.
> For the curious, a total of 16 comps
Brian C. Lane wrote:
> We have reached a point where boot security is important enough
LOL!
> that Windows is now only allowing their bootloader to be used.
It is blatantly obvious that that is actually the goal, not the means.
This is clearly a vendor lock-in "feature", with "security" used
Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> Being different than other distros is most confusing of all!
I have to disagree with that blanket assertion.
E.g., I believe it would have been much more confusing for our users if we
had shipped kdelibs 3.5.x as kdelibs4 (or "kdelibs4c2a" as Debian actually
called
Tommy Nguyen wrote:
> DNF5 is ridiculously fast.
It is faster, but "ridiculously"? In the metric that matters (elapsed
wallclock time), your benchmark shows the update taking 30% less time.
That said, there are other features of DNF5 (no more Python, shared cache
between PackageKit and CLI)
Miro Hrončok wrote:
>* https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/JdkInTreeLibsAndStdclibStatic
> was submitted as an Fedora 37 update after it was deferred to Fedora
> 38. We need to decide what to do. (mhroncok, 17:02:38)
[snip]
>* AGREED: The update may be shipped after Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2128532
Bug ID: 2128532
Summary: perl-Variable-Magic-0.63 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-Variable-Magic
Keywords: FutureFeature,
For those who are still not convinced, here is a comparison:
$ toolbox create -d fedora -r 37 && toolbox enter
$ sudo time dnf upgrade -y
26.79user 3.46system 0:49.09elapsed 61%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata
489304maxresident)k
47400inputs+1243320outputs (266major+377843minor)pagefaults 0swaps
$ toolbox
Hi all,
a new version rpkg-1.65 together with fedpkg-1.43 are released containing
both features and bugfixes.
Currently, all supported packages are present in stable repositories.
Changelog (web documentation):
https://docs.pagure.org/rpkg/releases/1.65.html
OK, thanks for the heads-up. I didn't notice this because I was looking
at the GNOME build rules, where evolution-data-server does not yet
depend on it. We'll need to coordinate with you to ensure the 2.38 ->
2.40 update goes smoothly, then. I don't expect this to be difficult:
it should be
On Tue, 2022-09-20 at 11:48 -0500, Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Chris Murphy said:
> > An additional topic is having boot entries for Windows (and macOS) that
> > don't work in the meantime. While we could just remove the scripts that
> > create these entries to chainload another
===
#fedora-meeting: FESCO (2022-09-20)
===
Meeting started by mhroncok at 17:00:17 UTC. The full logs are available
at
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2022-09-20/fesco.2022-09-20-17.00.log.html
.
Meeting
...
Downgrading:
conmon x86_64 2:2.1.3-1.fc37
fedora 57 k
grubby x86_64 8.40-66.fc37
fedora
On Tue, Sep 20, 2022 at 10:01:36AM -0400, Ben Cotton wrote:
> comps, the system of XML files used to put packages into functional
> groups is hosted on a Pagure repo[1] but also has a Bugzilla
> component. In the interests of simplicity, I propose to disable the
> comps component and use the
Once upon a time, Chris Murphy said:
> An additional topic is having boot entries for Windows (and macOS) that don't
> work in the meantime. While we could just remove the scripts that create
> these entries to chainload another bootloader, they're still needed for BIOS
> systems which don't
ppisar commented on the pull-request: `Add an integration test with BibLaTeX`
that you are following:
``
A surprise! I did not expect anybody to merge it. I only wanted to see whether
the new test passes before I merge it. Nevertheless, it passed and it's merged
now. Exactly what I would do. I
Dear all,
You are kindly invited to the meeting:
EPEL Steering Committee on 2022-09-21 from 16:00:00 to 17:00:00 US/Eastern
At fedora-meet...@irc.libera.chat
The meeting will be about:
This is the weekly EPEL Steering Committee Meeting.
A general agenda is the following:
#topic aloha
On Tue, Sep 20, 2022, at 9:50 AM, Brian C. Lane wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 12:16:33PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
>> "The installer must be able to install into free space alongside an
>> existing clean Windows installation and install a bootloader which can
>> boot into both Windows and
jnovy commented on the pull-request: `Add an integration test with BibLaTeX`
that you are following:
``
Merged, thank you Petr!
``
To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/biber/pull-request/3
___
perl-devel mailing list --
On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 12:16:33PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> "The installer must be able to install into free space alongside an
> existing clean Windows installation and install a bootloader which can
> boot into both Windows and Fedora."
>
> to say:
>
> "The installer must be able to
jnovy merged a pull-request against the project: `biber` that you are following.
Merged pull-request:
``
Add an integration test with BibLaTeX
``
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/biber/pull-request/3
___
perl-devel mailing list --
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2128347
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |CLOSED
Resolution|---
On Mon, Sep 19, 2022, at 1:16 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> "The installer must be able to install into free space alongside an
> existing clean Windows installation and install a bootloader which can
> boot into both Windows and Fedora."
>
> to say:
>
> "The installer must be able to install
On Mon, Sep 19, 2022, at 2:45 PM, Robbie Harwood wrote:
> The only way to get the TPM state to match not using a particular loader
> is to not use a loader - i.e., have grub2 (or efibootmgr in Fedora
> userspace) set EFI BootNext and reboot the machine.
I know systemd-boot does implement
ppisar opened a new pull-request against the project: `biber` that you are
following:
``
Add an integration test with BibLaTeX
``
To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/biber/pull-request/3
___
perl-devel mailing list --
Hi,
On Tue, 2022-09-20 at 08:24 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> For now it's required by Builder and gnome-initial-setup
... and evolution-data-server, according to:
dnf repoquery --alldeps --whatrequires "webkit2gtk5.0"
and
dnf repoquery --alldeps --whatrequires
On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 9:17 PM Adam Williamson
wrote:
> "The installer must be able to install into free space alongside an
> existing clean Windows installation. As long as the Windows
> installation does not have BitLocker enabled, the installer must also
> install a bootloader which can boot
On Tue, Sep 20, 2022 at 10:03 AM Neal Gompa wrote:
>
> The main reason would be blocker review, but I'm not sure how often it
> comes up in the past few cycles.
Rarely, which is why I think using distribution as a proxy is fine.
For the curious, a total of 16 comps bugs have ever been a part of
On Tue, Sep 20, 2022 at 10:02 AM Ben Cotton wrote:
>
> comps, the system of XML files used to put packages into functional
> groups is hosted on a Pagure repo[1] but also has a Bugzilla
> component. In the interests of simplicity, I propose to disable the
> comps component and use the Pagure repo
comps, the system of XML files used to put packages into functional
groups is hosted on a Pagure repo[1] but also has a Bugzilla
component. In the interests of simplicity, I propose to disable the
comps component and use the Pagure repo for all comps issues. In the
case where a change in comps is
OLD: Fedora-37-20220919.n.0
NEW: Fedora-37-20220920.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 3
Dropped packages:1
Upgraded packages: 55
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 1.20 MiB
Size of dropped packages:126.77 KiB
On Tue, Sep 20 2022 at 08:24:32 AM -0500, Michael Catanzaro
wrote:
Being different than other distros is most confusing of all!
BTW part of the confusion here might be that you're used to the Fedora
package name, webkit2gtk3. But all other distros just called it
webkit2gtk. I want to avoid
On Thu, Sep 15 2022 at 08:49:39 AM -0500, Michael Catanzaro
wrote:
I had a pet idea to change the API version to -4.5, so that we could
sync up with GTK 5 with -5.0, but this didn't seem popular upstream.
So now I'm toying with changing to -5.1 or -6.0 just to avoid
confusion caused by
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2128347
Bug ID: 2128347
Summary: Please port your pcre dependency to pcre2. Pcre has
been deprecated
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component:
Hi everyone,
I'm getting questions where people could get the ISO image with the
Anaconda Web UI. If you also have this question I tried to answer it here:
https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/isos-with-the-new-installer-are-they-available-yet/42448/2?u=jkonecny
TL;DR
Don't worry, we are
On 20-09-2022 07:12, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Mon, Sep 19, 2022, at 2:45 PM, Robbie Harwood wrote:
I'm fine with the proposed change. I'm also fine with the
original text.
During boot, certain actions are taken that are recorded in the
TPM. These include, for instance, any loaders that are
43 matches
Mail list logo
