[Bug 2182563] perl-DateTime-TimeZone-2.60 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2182563 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2023-7fda8f4297 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

[Bug 2182563] perl-DateTime-TimeZone-2.60 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2182563 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2023-7c0abce3ff 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

[Bug 2181308] perl-DateTime-TimeZone-2.58 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2181308 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2023-7c0abce3ff 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

[Bug 2181578] perl-DateTime-TimeZone-2.59 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2181578 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2023-7c0abce3ff 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

[EPEL-devel] Fedora EPEL 7 updates-testing report

The following Fedora EPEL 7 Security updates need testing: Age URL 5 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2023-9a3db4278b openbgpd-7.9-1.el7 The following builds have been pushed to Fedora EPEL 7 updates-testing chromium-111.0.5563.146-1.el7

[Bug 2182563] perl-DateTime-TimeZone-2.60 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2182563 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #4 from

[Bug 2180461] perl-Test2-Suite-0.000150 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2180461 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-Test2-Suite-0.000150-1 |perl-Test2-Suite-0.000150-1

[Bug 2180461] perl-Test2-Suite-0.000150 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2180461 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-Test2-Suite-0.000150-1 |perl-Test2-Suite-0.000150-1

[Bug 2180461] perl-Test2-Suite-0.000150 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2180461 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|---

[Bug 2181091] perl-YAML-Tiny-1.74 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2181091 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-YAML-Tiny-1.74-1.fc39 |perl-YAML-Tiny-1.74-1.fc39

[Test-Announce] 2023-04-03 @ 15:00 UTC - Fedora QA Meeting

# Fedora Quality Assurance Meeting # Date: 2023-04-03 # Time: 15:00 UTC (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto) # Location: #fedora-meeting on irc.libera.chat Greetings testers! It's meeting time again! If anyone has any other items for the agenda, please reply to this email

[Test-Announce] 2023-04-03 @ 16:00 UTC - Fedora 38 Blocker Review Meeting

# F38 Blocker Review meeting # Date: 2023-04-03 # Time: 16:00 UTC # Location: #fedora-blocker-review on irc.libera.chat Hi folks! We have 2 proposed Final blockers and 2 proposed Final freeze exception issues to review, so let's have a review meeting. If you have time this weekend, you can take

Fedora 38 compose report: 20230331.n.0 changes

OLD: Fedora-38-20230330.n.0 NEW: Fedora-38-20230331.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:2 Dropped images: 1 Added packages: 12 Dropped packages:1 Upgraded packages: 49 Downgraded packages: 1 Size of added packages: 3.34 MiB Size of dropped packages:199.45 KiB

[rpms/perl-Sub-Identify] PR #1: Update license to SPDX format

mspacek merged a pull-request against the project: `perl-Sub-Identify` that you are following. Merged pull-request: `` Update license to SPDX format `` https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Sub-Identify/pull-request/1 ___ perl-devel mailing list

[Test-Announce] Fedora 38 Branched 20230331.n.0 nightly compose nominated for testing

Announcing the creation of a new nightly release validation test event for Fedora 38 Branched 20230331.n.0. Please help run some tests for this nightly compose if you have time. For more information on nightly release validation testing, see: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki

[EPEL-devel] Re: Creating an epelrelease dnf variable

On Fri, Mar 31, 2023 at 11:19 AM Miroslav Suchý wrote: > Dne 31. 03. 23 v 16:42 Troy Dawson napsal(a): > > How to set it, I suggest triggers. But that needs a bit more > investigation and testing. > > May I suggest file trigger? > >

[rpms/perl-Sub-Identify] PR #1: Update license to SPDX format

mspacek opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-Sub-Identify` that you are following: `` Update license to SPDX format `` To reply, visit the link below https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Sub-Identify/pull-request/1 ___ perl-devel

[EPEL-devel] Re: Creating an epelrelease dnf variable

Dne 31. 03. 23 v 16:42 Troy Dawson napsal(a): How to set it, I suggest triggers.  But that needs a bit more investigation and testing. May I suggest file trigger? https://rpm-software-management.github.io/rpm/manual/file_triggers.html Miroslav ___

Re: %patchN deprecated?

On 31. 03. 23 13:58, Petr Menšík wrote: Is there also documented and preferred way to apply just single patch when %autosetup -N -S git is used? I mean, if I want to have all patches applied git-like way, I know I can use -m or -M parameters to %autopatch. But %autopatch -m 1 -M 1 does not

Different binaries size in Rawhide and F38

Hello all. It looks like strip is broken in Rawhide. Affected package - telegram-desktop. Fedora 38 binary size: 83,563,448 bytes. Rawhide binary size: 98,968,520 bytes. Builds: https://koji.rpmfusion.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=25349 (F38)

Re: DNF Sytem Upgrade requirements for an F37 → F38 upgrade

On Fri, Mar 31, 2023 at 7:09 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > I will submit systemd-tests-251.14-2.fc37 with the patch. > I doubt that it solves the issue completely, but it shouldn't make > it worse, so let's at least do this for now. Thank you, I see it's still being built in koji. I

Re: DNF Sytem Upgrade requirements for an F37 → F38 upgrade

On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 02:37:16PM +0200, Alexander Ploumistos wrote: > On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 2:33 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek > wrote: > > > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 02:25:33PM +0200, Alexander Ploumistos wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 2:10 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek > > >

Re: Fedpkg: Could not execute pre_push_check: Fail to upload files. Server returns status 403

On Fri, Mar 31, 2023 at 11:40:28AM -, Ondřej Mejzlík wrote: > Hi, > > For the past week I have been having issues pushing changes into my own fork > of a package. > > Here is what I have done: > (All of this used to work fine about a week ago, my steps are always the > same.) > > Click

[Bug 2181971] perl-Glib-Object-Introspection-0.050 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2181971 --- Comment #20 from Sergio Basto --- (In reply to Petr Pisar from comment #19) > Now I apply these changes to all Fedoras where an update with > perl-Glib-Object-Introspection-0.050 has been submitted. Many thanks , I hope I did the right

Re: Issue trying to add co-maintainer to package

On Fri, Mar 31, 2023 at 08:49:40AM -0700, Jerry Snitselaar wrote: > Hi, > > I'm trying add the user kgold as a co-maintainer to the tss2 package. > Peter added him to the packagers group the other week. Ken shows > up in the packagers group when I look at his profile in FAS, and > it shows for

Re: %patchN deprecated?

One thing to note is that the new format doesn’t work with EPEL releases; I had to revert to the %patchN style for them. On 29 Mar 2023, at 3:53, Florian Festi wrote: On 3/29/23 10:31, Michael J Gruber wrote: Has `%patchN` been deprecated in favour of `%patch N`? Yes, see %patch section on

Issue trying to add co-maintainer to package

Hi, I'm trying add the user kgold as a co-maintainer to the tss2 package. Peter added him to the packagers group the other week. Ken shows up in the packagers group when I look at his profile in FAS, and it shows for him as well. Ken has logged out and back in, but every time I've tried to add

Re: Fedora Linux 38 blocker status summary

The current target is the early target date (18 April). Action summary Accepted blockers - 1. kernel — anaconda failed to detect the fcoe target(only affects ixgbe) — NEW ACTION: Maintainers to diagnose issue NEEDINFO: lnie 2. plasma-workspace — Logging out

Re: F39 proposal: RPM 4.19 (System-Wide Change proposal)

On 3/31/23 15:40, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 3:42 PM Ben Cotton wrote: >> >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/RPM-4.19 > >> == Detailed Description == >> RPM 4.19 contains various improvements over previous versions. Many of >> them are internal in nature such as

[Bug 2183554] New: perl-Math-BigInt-1.999838 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2183554 Bug ID: 2183554 Summary: perl-Math-BigInt-1.999838 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-Math-BigInt Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged

[EPEL-devel] Re: EPEL2RHEL - New Wording? - New Workflow?

That sounds great, thanks. On Thu, Mar 30, 2023, 8:28 AM Troy Dawson wrote: > It doesn't look like they've done their merge yet, so I'll see if I can > get your change in. > How does this sound? > > Subject: > Notice: will be automatically retired from EPEL when > RHEL . is released > >

[Bug 2181971] perl-Glib-Object-Introspection-0.050 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2181971 --- Comment #19 from Petr Pisar --- I finished changing Rawhide. Here you can see a standalone update for perl-Glib-Object-Introspection which under

[EPEL-devel] Creating an epelrelease dnf variable

This is mainly for EPEL10 planning, but others might find it useful, so I'm sending it to the email vs the epel10 discussion on discourse. I was talking with Carl about creating a dnf variable for the epel 10 repos. He had been talking about using $releasever and $releaseminor. But we also

[rpms/perl-Package-Generator] PR #1: Update license to SPDX format

mspacek merged a pull-request against the project: `perl-Package-Generator` that you are following. Merged pull-request: `` Update license to SPDX format `` https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Package-Generator/pull-request/1 ___ perl-devel

Re: Specfile - Upgrade - Check if the old and the new package versions are the same

On Fri, Mar 31, 2023 at 4:00 AM Vít Ondruch wrote: > Out of curiosity, are you considering also package downgrades? > It's not described in OpenLDAP Upstream docs, so I was not trying to cover that, but... It's a good idea to add the check and do the same safety precautions I do with the

Re: F39 proposal: RPM 4.19 (System-Wide Change proposal)

Dne 31. 03. 23 v 15:40 Stephen Gallagher napsal(a): * Creating User and Groups from sysusers.d files including Provides and Requires or Recommends I may have cried a little bit in joy here. This is huge! Yes! Huge thanks for this. Miroslav ___

Re: F39 proposal: RPM 4.19 (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 3:42 PM Ben Cotton wrote: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/RPM-4.19 > == Detailed Description == > RPM 4.19 contains various improvements over previous versions. Many of > them are internal in nature such as moving from automake to cmake, > improvements to the

Heads-up: fast_float 4.0.0 coming to Rawhide

In one week (2023-03-07), or slightly later, I plant to update fast_float to 4.0.0[1] in Rawhide. This new major release contains one small but technically incompatible change: errc::result_out_of_range is now set on over/underflow. A PR[2] is ready, and I have already verified (by local mock

Re: Specfile - Upgrade - Check if the old and the new package versions are the same

Dne 30. 03. 23 v 20:38 Simon Pichugin napsal(a): When the server package upgrades to the next major version, there are upgrade instructions that need to be performed by the administrator. And what's most important, the server should not start automatically without explicit agreement from the

[Bug 2183513] New: Upgrade perl-Data-Munge to 0.10

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2183513 Bug ID: 2183513 Summary: Upgrade perl-Data-Munge to 0.10 Product: Fedora Version: rawhide URL: https://metacpan.org/release/Data-Munge Status: NEW Component:

[rpms/perl-Package-Generator] PR #1: Update license to SPDX format

mspacek opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-Package-Generator` that you are following: `` Update license to SPDX format `` To reply, visit the link below https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Package-Generator/pull-request/1 ___

[Bug 2158384] Upgrade perl-Convert-Color to 0.16

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2158384 Jitka Plesnikova changed: What|Removed |Added Version|38 |rawhide Summary|Upgrade

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20230331.n.0 changes

OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20230330.n.0 NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20230331.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:2 Dropped images: 1 Added packages: 5 Dropped packages:9 Upgraded packages: 126 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 158.59 MiB Size of dropped packages

i-nex core dumped on fc38

Hi, when i run i-nex on fedora 38 i get a core dump [1] see debugging-i-nex.txt I have compiled i-nex [2] with a new patch, since a newer libcpuid version is used on fedora 38. I cannot expect any help from upstream, as development has been discontinued in the meantime. [1]

[rpms/perl-Scope-Guard] PR #1: Update license to SPDX format

mspacek merged a pull-request against the project: `perl-Scope-Guard` that you are following. Merged pull-request: `` Update license to SPDX format `` https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Scope-Guard/pull-request/1 ___ perl-devel mailing list --

Re: %patchN deprecated?

I would suggest creating at least self-contained change on Fedora to describe what has changed and why. Those syntax might be a little weird, but were used quite often. It would be nice to have some place to read about it. Because frankly it just started warning when used, but I do not

[Bug 2181971] perl-Glib-Object-Introspection-0.050 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2181971 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Resolution|---

[Bug 2181971] perl-Glib-Object-Introspection-0.050 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2181971 --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2023-9cec1a7508 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 39. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-9cec1a7508 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC

[Bug 2181971] perl-Glib-Object-Introspection-0.050 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2181971 Petr Pisar changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version||perl-Glib-Object-Introspect

Fedpkg: Could not execute pre_push_check: Fail to upload files. Server returns status 403

Hi, For the past week I have been having issues pushing changes into my own fork of a package. Here is what I have done: (All of this used to work fine about a week ago, my steps are always the same.) Click the Fork button for example here: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ppp/tree/ fedpkg

[rpms/perl-Scope-Guard] PR #1: Update license to SPDX format

mspacek opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-Scope-Guard` that you are following: `` Update license to SPDX format `` To reply, visit the link below https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Scope-Guard/pull-request/1 ___ perl-devel

Re: Specfile - Upgrade - Check if the old and the new package versions are the same

Out of curiosity, are you considering also package downgrades? Vít Dne 30. 03. 23 v 20:38 Simon Pichugin napsal(a): Hi folks, Thank you for the answers! On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 1:16 AM Vít Ondruch wrote: I wonder what the "do something" is, because comparing versions is almost

[rpms/perl-Test-LeakTrace] PR #1: Update license to SPDX format

mspacek merged a pull-request against the project: `perl-Test-LeakTrace` that you are following. Merged pull-request: `` Update license to SPDX format `` https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Test-LeakTrace/pull-request/1 ___ perl-devel mailing

[rpms/perl-Test-LeakTrace] PR #1: Update license to SPDX format

mspacek opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-Test-LeakTrace` that you are following: `` Update license to SPDX format `` To reply, visit the link below https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Test-LeakTrace/pull-request/1 ___

Re: RPM 4.19: Dynamic subpackages with Python extras

On 30. 03. 23 23:55, Miro Hrončok wrote: Hello Python packagers. RPM 4.19 introduces this feature: https://rpm-software-management.github.io/rpm/manual/dynamic_specs.html I decided to write this email to gather my thoughts. I believe that with this, we can turn manual Python extras