Re: Orphaned packages looking for new maintainers

[Bob Mauchin]

Hi,


I'm working on the Go situation due to my non responsive situation.

I'm currently assessing what is needed by our binaries packages and will
take packages needed that have been orphaned. The reminder will be thus
retired.

Some package are probably FTBFS and I will need time to get them back to a
working condition, hopefully before the deadline.

Wishing you all a great day,

Robert-André Mauchin

Fas: eclipseo



>
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: fedora-scm-requests email

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Tue, Jul 18, 2023 at 02:37:54AM +, Maxwell G wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> It seems the fedora-scm-requests processor is creating the initial
> repository commits with `releng bot ` as the
> committer. Does anyone know where this is coming from? Should it be
> changed to something @fedoraproject.org?

Very strange. I fixed it in the db... but I am not sure what caused it.

Can look more tomorrow... it looks like it may have been this way since
the automated processing started. ;( 

kevin


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

fedora-scm-requests email

[Maxwell G]

Hi,

It seems the fedora-scm-requests processor is creating the initial
repository commits with `releng bot ` as the
committer. Does anyone know where this is coming from? Should it be
changed to something @fedoraproject.org?

-- 
Best,


Maxwell G (@gotmax23)
Pronouns: He/They
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[EPEL-devel] Fedora EPEL 8 updates-testing report

[updates]

The following Fedora EPEL 8 Security updates need testing:
 Age  URL
   5  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2023-eaa3950901   
rizin-0.5.2-2.el8
   1  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2023-226639904e   
netcdf-4.7.0-3.el8


The following builds have been pushed to Fedora EPEL 8 updates-testing

fapolicy-analyzer-1.1.0-1.el8
java-runtime-decompiler-7.3-3.el8
python-rsa-4.9-1.el8
texlive-extension-20180414-12.el8

Details about builds:



 fapolicy-analyzer-1.1.0-1.el8 (FEDORA-EPEL-2023-ebbdec2d7e)
 File Access Policy Analyzer

Update Information:

Update to v1.1.0. See the [User Guide](https://github.com/ctc-oss/fapolicy-
analyzer/wiki/User-Guide) for usage.

ChangeLog:

* Tue Jul 11 2023 John Wass  1.1.0-1
- Release v1.1.0




 java-runtime-decompiler-7.3-3.el8 (FEDORA-EPEL-2023-a3b7eca1e5)
 Application for extraction and decompilation of JVM byte code

Update Information:

strictly needing jdk17 unless user says differently    bringing JRD to 21st
century with new decompielrs and JASM ide!

ChangeLog:

* Tue Jul 11 2023 Fedora Release Engineering  - 7.3-3
- strictly needing jdk17 unless user says differently
* Tue Jul 11 2023 Fedora Release Engineering  - 7.3-2
- added 2b99a244b592445962cdd15ca33f80449f9aa2ea.patch to fix compiler issue in 
jrd window
* Fri Jun 30 2023 Fedora Release Engineering  - 7.3-1
- moved to 7.3
- 
https://github.com/pmikova/java-runtime-decompiler/releases/tag/java-runtime-decompiler-7.3
- 
https://github.com/pmikova/java-runtime-decompiler/releases/tag/java-runtime-decompiler-7.2
* Wed Mar 15 2023 Fedora Release Engineering  - 7.1-1
- 
https://github.com/pmikova/java-runtime-decompiler/releases/tag/java-runtime-decompiler-7.1
- moved to jrd 7.1
- added desp on java-diff and new cplc
- fixed(?) procyon wrapper
  - todo procyon crashes witout trace
- removed jd wrapper (was new in 7.1, maybe will be added)
- split plugins to subpkgs
- added jrd-hex launcher
- added hex launcher, added jrd symlinks
* Thu Jul 21 2022 Fedora Release Engineering  - 6.1-5
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_37_Mass_Rebuild
* Fri Jul  8 2022 Jiri Vanek  - 6.1-4
- Rebuilt for Drop i686 JDKs
* Sat Feb  5 2022 Jiri Vanek  - 6.1-3
- Rebuilt for java-17-openjdk as system jdk
* Thu Jan 20 2022 Fedora Release Engineering  - 6.1-2
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_36_Mass_Rebuild




 python-rsa-4.9-1.el8 (FEDORA-EPEL-2023-d3df9e949e)
 Pure-Python RSA implementation

Update Information:

Update python-rsa to 4.9

ChangeLog:

* Mon Jul 17 2023 Jason Montleon  - 4.9-1
- Update to 4.9
* Wed Jun 14 2023 Python Maint  - 4.8-6
- Rebuilt for Python 3.12
* Fri Jan 20 2023 Fedora Release Engineering  - 4.8-5
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_38_Mass_Rebuild
* Fri Jul 22 2022 Fedora Release Engineering  - 4.8-4
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_37_Mass_Rebuild
* Mon Jun 13 2022 Python Maint  - 4.8-3
- Rebuilt for Python 3.11
* Fri Jan 21 2022 Fedora Release Engineering  - 4.8-2
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_36_Mass_Rebuild

References:

  [ 1 ] Bug #2109369 - python-rsa-4.9 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2109369




 texlive-extension-20180414-12.el8 (FEDORA-EPEL-2023-ef5de8807d)
 TeX formatting system

Update Information:

Provide revtex4-1

ChangeLog:

* Mon Jul 17 2023 Than Ngo  - 20180414-12
- fixed #442, provide revtex4-1

References:

  [ 1 ] Bug #442 - Please provide revtex4-1.cls
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=442

[EPEL-devel] Fedora EPEL 9 updates-testing report

[updates]

The following builds have been pushed to Fedora EPEL 9 updates-testing

easy-rsa-3.1.5-1.el9
fapolicy-analyzer-1.1.0-1.el9
gdal-3.4.3-1.el9
hirte-0.4.0-1.el9
java-runtime-decompiler-7.3-3.el9
kitty-0.26.5-6.el9
python-google-auth-2.22.0-1.el9
python-kubernetes-26.1.0-1.el9
python-rsa-4.9-1.el9
rtl-433-22.11-1.20230714git37b804c.el9
rust-anyhow-1.0.72-1.el9
rust-async-compression-0.4.1-1.el9
rust-clap-4.3.14-1.el9
rust-clap_builder-4.3.14-1.el9
rust-clap_derive-4.3.12-1.el9
rust-dissimilar-1.0.7-1.el9
rust-dyn-clone-1.0.12-1.el9
rust-indoc-2.0.3-1.el9
rust-inventory-0.3.9-1.el9
rust-miette-5.10.0-1.el9
rust-miette-derive-5.10.0-1.el9
rust-paste-1.0.14-1.el9
rust-pest-2.7.1-1.el9
rust-pest_derive-2.7.1-1.el9
rust-pest_generator-2.7.1-1.el9
rust-pest_meta-2.7.1-1.el9
rust-prodash-25.0.1-1.el9
rust-reqwest-0.11.18-1.el9
rust-rustversion-1.0.14-1.el9
rust-ryu-1.0.15-1.el9
rust-scopeguard-1.2.0-1.el9
rust-sec1-0.7.3-1.el9
rust-semver-1.0.18-1.el9
rust-unindent-0.2.2-1.el9
rust-winnow-0.4.9-1.el9

Details about builds:



 easy-rsa-3.1.5-1.el9 (FEDORA-EPEL-2023-7dbba7a3a3)
 Simple shell based CA utility

Update Information:

3.1.5

ChangeLog:

* Mon Jun 12 2023 Gwyn Ciesla  - 3.1.5-1
- 3.1.5
* Thu May 25 2023 Gwyn Ciesla  - 3.1.4-1
- 3.1.4
* Sat May 20 2023 Gwyn Ciesla  - 3.1.3-1
- 3.1.3
* Sun Mar  5 2023 Gwyn Ciesla  - 3.1.2-3
- migrated to SPDX license
* Thu Jan 19 2023 Fedora Release Engineering  - 
3.1.2-2
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_38_Mass_Rebuild
* Tue Jan 17 2023 Gwyn Ciesla  - 3.1.2-1
- 3.1.2
* Mon Oct 17 2022 Gwyn Ciesla  - 3.1.1-1
- 3.1.1
* Thu Jul 21 2022 Fedora Release Engineering  - 
3.1.0-2
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_37_Mass_Rebuild
* Thu May 19 2022 Gwyn Ciesla  - 3.1.0-1
- 3.1.0
* Thu Jan 20 2022 Fedora Release Engineering  - 
3.0.8-5
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_36_Mass_Rebuild
* Thu Jan  6 2022 Neal Gompa  - 3.0.8-4
- Minor cleanups and install COPYING.md as license file

References:

  [ 1 ] Bug #264 - easy-rsa : higher version needed in EPEL 9 to work with 
OpenSSL 3.x which comes by default
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=264




 fapolicy-analyzer-1.1.0-1.el9 (FEDORA-EPEL-2023-b74b719154)
 File Access Policy Analyzer

Update Information:

Update to v1.1.0. See the [User Guide](https://github.com/ctc-oss/fapolicy-
analyzer/wiki/User-Guide) for usage.

ChangeLog:

* Tue Jul 11 2023 John Wass  1.1.0-1
- Release v1.1.0




 gdal-3.4.3-1.el9 (FEDORA-EPEL-2023-d9d08a61fc)
 GIS file format library

Update Information:

Update to 3.4.3

ChangeLog:

* Sun Jul 16 2023 Orion Poplawski  - 3.4.3-1
- Update to 3.4.3




 hirte-0.4.0-1.el9 (FEDORA-EPEL-2023-74e5ec772f)
 A systemd service controller for multi-nodes environments

Update Information:

Update to 0.4.0 and introduce the python3-pyhirte subpackage with the python
bindings for hirte.

ChangeLog:

* Mon Jul 17 2023 Pierre-Yves Chibon  - 0.4.0-1
- Update to 0.4.0
- Introduce the python3-hirte/pyhirte subpackage




 java-runtime-decompiler-7.3-3.el9 (FEDORA-EPEL-2023-b10a353445)
 Application for extraction and decompilation of JVM byte code

Update Information:

strictly needing jdk17 unless user says differently    finally JRD for epel9
:D

[Bug 2223015] perl-SNMP-Info-3.93 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2223015



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2023-27325d79b4 has been pushed to the Fedora 38 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh
--advisory=FEDORA-2023-27325d79b4`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-27325d79b4

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information
on how to test updates.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2223015

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202223015%23c6
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Should we provide current/previous release links in URLs?

[Orion Poplawski]

As part of the cobbler project testing, we need to test accessing Fedora 
releases with various URLs:


"http://download.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora/linux/releases/35/Everything/x86_64/os;,
"https://mirrors.fedoraproject.org/mirrorlist?repo=fedora-35=x86_64;
"https://mirrors.fedoraproject.org/metalink?repo=fedora-35=x86_64;,

These need to get updated continuously as Fedora progresses.  Could we 
perhaps have a "current" and "previous" (or similar) that tracks the 
most recent and previous release?



--
Orion Poplawski
he/him/his  - surely the least important thing about me
IT Systems Manager 720-772-5637
NWRA, Boulder/CoRA Office FAX: 303-415-9702
3380 Mitchell Lane   or...@nwra.com
Boulder, CO 80301 https://www.nwra.com/


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2223450] New: perl-libwww-perl-6.72 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2223450

Bug ID: 2223450
   Summary: perl-libwww-perl-6.72 is available
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-libwww-perl
  Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
  Assignee: mspa...@redhat.com
  Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: ka...@ucw.cz, mspa...@redhat.com,
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org,
rhug...@redhat.com, rstr...@redhat.com
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Releases retrieved: 6.72
Upstream release that is considered latest: 6.72
Current version/release in rawhide: 6.71-1.fc39
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/libwww-perl/

Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a
stable branch: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/


More information about the service that created this bug can be found at:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Upstream_Release_Monitoring


Please keep in mind that with any upstream change, there may also be packaging
changes that need to be made. Specifically, please remember that it is your
responsibility to review the new version to ensure that the licensing is still
correct and that no non-free or legally problematic items have been added
upstream.


Based on the information from Anitya:
https://release-monitoring.org/project/3024/


To change the monitoring settings for the project, please visit:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-libwww-perl


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2223450

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202223450%23c0
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: fedora-review workarounds for dnf5

[Sandro]

On 17-07-2023 20:39, Jerry James wrote:

On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 10:54 AM Jerry James  wrote:

Like many of you, I have been quite inconvenienced because of
dnf5-related breakage of fedora-review.  I've been monkeying with it
today and finally got a successful run of fedora-review after making
the following changes [*].

1. Edit /etc/mock/templates/fedora-rawhide.tpl.  Change:

config_opts['package_manager'] = 'dnf'

to:

config_opts['package_manager'] = 'dnf5'

2. Run 'mock -r fedora-rawhide-x86_64 --scrub=bootstrap'

3. Edit /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/FedoraReview/deps.py.  Change line
83 from:

 "dnf repoquery -q -C --requires --resolve " + " 
".join(list(set(pkgs))),

to:

 "dnf repoquery -q -C --requires " + " ".join(list(set(pkgs))),

Change line 97 from:

 name = line.rsplit(".", 2)[0]

to:

 name = resolve_one(line)[0].rsplit(".", 2)[0]

Change line 286 from:

 "dnf repoquery -C -l " + " ".join(list(set(pkgs))),

to:

 "dnf repoquery --files " + " ".join(list(set(pkgs))),

Other changes may be needed.

[*] Altering rpm-controlled files is generally a bad idea, and I do not
 recommend it.  I am only doing so in this case because fedora-review does
 not work at all without these changes.  I understand that my changes will
 be overwritten the next time a mock-core-configs or fedora-review update
 is installed.


Skip steps 1 and 2.  They are unnecessary.  Step 3 is all you need.


Would that be a temporary solution for Copr as well? I mean for all 
rawhide builds? I quite miss not having fedora-review available there.


-- Sandro
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Say goodbye to polymake

[Jerry James]

The introduction of perl 5.38.0 broke polymake beyond repair.  Several
symbols formerly used by polymake have been marked as internal APIs.
They now have the ELF hidden attribute, so we can't even cheat by
adding prototypes to the polymake code.

Polymake upstream is aware of the issue.  For the time being, they are
advising their downstreams to stay on perl 5.36.0, which is not
feasible for Fedora.  In the long term, they plan to remove the
mandatory perl bindings from polymake.  However, they as yet have no
timeline for that effort.  It might be years.

I don't see that I have any choice but to retire polymake from
Rawhide.  This will have some repercussions:
- gap-pkg-polymaking, python-jupymake, and python-jupyter-polymake
will also be retired
- sagemath and Macaulay2 will be rebuilt without polymake support
- packages that I have maintained solely for use by polymake will be
orphaned: azove, permlib, plantri, sympol, vinci

I could try begging the perl package maintainers to add a downstream
patch making the affected symbols visible again.  However, since those
symbols are now internal only, the perl maintainers are free to alter
or remove them at any time, so that would not be a good long term
solution.
-- 
Jerry James, who is currently channeling Billy Joel
http://www.jamezone.org/
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F40 Change: Privacy-preserving Telemetry for Fedora Workstation (System-Wide)

[Adam Williamson]

On Mon, 2023-07-17 at 16:26 -0400, przemek klosowski via devel wrote:
> I seems to me that there are two slightly different understanding of 
> 'opt-in':
> 
>  1. data collection is happening automatically, but there is a way to
>     'opt-out' and turn it off.
>  2. the user is asked for permission, and the default answer is
>     preselected as 'yes'
> 
> I think GDPR prohibits the first option, but the second one must be 
> allowed because it's like pretty much all GDPR-compliant implementations 
> i've seen
> 
> I understand that Michael's Telemetry proposal uses the second method.

The original form of the proposal does. It seems fairly clear at this
point that the proposal will be revised to use a "choice required"
method, where there is no "default" choice and the user must
deliberately pick one option or the other to proceed. This has come up
in the discussion on discussion.fp.o .
-- 
Adam Williamson (he/him/his)
Fedora QA
Fedora Chat: @adamwill:fedora.im | Mastodon: @ad...@fosstodon.org
https://www.happyassassin.net



___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Non-responsive maintainer check for Athos Ribeiro,(athoscr)

[Ben Beasley]

Thanks for your response! Of course, I understand that free time is a scarce 
and unpredictable commodity.

Please do let me know if you need someone to co-maintain, or just make a few 
PR’s for, any of the font-related Python packages.

Best wishes,
Ben Beasley (FAS music)

On Mon, Jul 17, 2023, at 3:51 PM, Athos Ribeiro wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 03:13:31PM -0400, Ben Beasley wrote:
>>Does anyone know how to contact Athos Ribeiro (FAS: athoscr)? This 
>>email is part of the non-responsive maintainer process 
>>(https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2223422).
>
> Hi Ben,
>
> Thanks for the contact :)
>
> I haven't been able to give those some love due to ENOTIME different job
> in a while.
>
> I am setting up my fedora dev env once again this week and will start
> either giving some love to each of those or start passing the one I am
> no longer interested in maintaining forward!
>
>>The following PR and bug/NEEDINFO have received no response in 7-9 months:
>>
>>https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-defcon/pull-request/1
>>
>>    https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1936574
>>
>>The activity report at https://src.fedoraproject.org/user/athoscr/ 
>>shows no activity in the past year, and fedora-active-user reports:
>>
>>    $ python3 fedora_active_user.py --user athoscr --nofas
>>    Last action on koji:
>>       Wed, 31 May 2023 tag_package_owners entry created by bodhi 
>>[still active]
>>
>>    Last package update on bodhi:
>>       2021-02-19 23:00:32 on package hugo-0-1
>>    Last actions performed according to fedmsg:
>>      - io.pagure.prod.pagure.issue.comment.added on 2023-02-15 07:07:42
>>
>>A list of some other apparently-neglected bugs follows.
>>
>>Updates available for a long time with the release-monitoring.org bugs 
>>still in the NEW state:
>>
>>    flawfinder: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1914559
>>
>>    python-fontMath: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1974954
>>
>>    python-glyphsLib: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1881116
>>
>>    python-pyclipper: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=194
>>
>>    rubygem-chake: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1907051
>>
>>    rubygem-fakefs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2209178
>>
>>    rubygem-pathspec: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1912644
>>
>>A Python 3.12 compatibility bug has also received no response since 
>>late last year:
>>
>>    python-firehose: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2154946
>>
>>Additionally, a request to consider fixing or retiring a package:
>>
>>    rubygem-sinatra-rabbit: 
>>https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1880144
>>
>
> -- 
> Athos Ribeiro
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: List of long term FTBFS packages to be retired in August

[Jerry James]

On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 1:15 PM Miro Hrončok  wrote:
> xmvn-connector-ivymizdebsk

Didik opened a PR to fix this:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/xmvn-connector-ivy/pull-request/2.
-- 
Jerry James
https://www.jamezone.org/
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F40 Change: Privacy-preserving Telemetry for Fedora Workstation (System-Wide)

[przemek klosowski via devel]

On 7/12/23 19:21, Demi Marie Obenour wrote:


1. The GDPR and similar regulations are 100% clear that consent must
be opt-*in*.  Opt-*out*, as is proposed here, is not consent.
Therefore, this change is proposing collecting telemetry *without
user’s consent*.


I seems to me that there are two slightly different understanding of 
'opt-in':


1. data collection is happening automatically, but there is a way to
   'opt-out' and turn it off.
2. the user is asked for permission, and the default answer is
   preselected as 'yes'

I think GDPR prohibits the first option, but the second one must be 
allowed because it's like pretty much all GDPR-compliant implementations 
i've seen


I understand that Michael's Telemetry proposal uses the second method.

Perhaps a criticism of the opt-out approach (even in the second form) 
results from people believing that the consent at the installation time 
is not fully informed---that somehow people don't understand the 
ramifications and amount of data being shared. This is actually makes sense.


Such concern could be mitigated by scheduling a system notification 
after several weeks or months, with a rough summary of the collected 
data ( 'we shared X anonymized reports about Y,Z and W'), and offering a 
link to a telemetry consent dialog.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2223434] perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-PKCS10-0.20 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2223434



--- Comment #2 from Upstream Release Monitoring 
 ---
the-new-hotness/release-monitoring.org's scratch build of
perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-PKCS10-0.20-1.fc38.src.rpm for rawhide completed
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=103492272


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2223434

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202223434%23c2
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2223434] perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-PKCS10-0.20 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2223434



--- Comment #1 from Upstream Release Monitoring 
 ---
Created attachment 1976268
  --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1976268=edit
Update to 0.20 (#2223434)


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2223434

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202223434%23c1
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2223434] New: perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-PKCS10-0.20 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2223434

Bug ID: 2223434
   Summary: perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-PKCS10-0.20 is available
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-PKCS10
  Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
  Assignee: wjhns...@hardakers.net
  Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org,
wjhns...@hardakers.net
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Releases retrieved: 0.20
Upstream release that is considered latest: 0.20
Current version/release in rawhide: 0.19-5.fc38
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Crypt-OpenSSL-PKCS10/

Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a
stable branch: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/


More information about the service that created this bug can be found at:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Upstream_Release_Monitoring


Please keep in mind that with any upstream change, there may also be packaging
changes that need to be made. Specifically, please remember that it is your
responsibility to review the new version to ensure that the licensing is still
correct and that no non-free or legally problematic items have been added
upstream.


Based on the information from Anitya:
https://release-monitoring.org/project/2746/


To change the monitoring settings for the project, please visit:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-PKCS10


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2223434

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202223434%23c0
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Non-responsive maintainer check for Athos Ribeiro,(athoscr)

[Athos Ribeiro]

On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 03:13:31PM -0400, Ben Beasley wrote:
Does anyone know how to contact Athos Ribeiro (FAS: athoscr)? This 
email is part of the non-responsive maintainer process 
(https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2223422).


Hi Ben,

Thanks for the contact :)

I haven't been able to give those some love due to ENOTIME different job
in a while.

I am setting up my fedora dev env once again this week and will start
either giving some love to each of those or start passing the one I am
no longer interested in maintaining forward!


The following PR and bug/NEEDINFO have received no response in 7-9 months:

https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-defcon/pull-request/1

    https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1936574

The activity report at https://src.fedoraproject.org/user/athoscr/ 
shows no activity in the past year, and fedora-active-user reports:


    $ python3 fedora_active_user.py --user athoscr --nofas
    Last action on koji:
       Wed, 31 May 2023 tag_package_owners entry created by bodhi 
[still active]


    Last package update on bodhi:
       2021-02-19 23:00:32 on package hugo-0-1
    Last actions performed according to fedmsg:
      - io.pagure.prod.pagure.issue.comment.added on 2023-02-15 07:07:42

A list of some other apparently-neglected bugs follows.

Updates available for a long time with the release-monitoring.org bugs 
still in the NEW state:


    flawfinder: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1914559

    python-fontMath: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1974954

    python-glyphsLib: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1881116

    python-pyclipper: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=194

    rubygem-chake: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1907051

    rubygem-fakefs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2209178

    rubygem-pathspec: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1912644

A Python 3.12 compatibility bug has also received no response since 
late last year:


    python-firehose: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2154946

Additionally, a request to consider fixing or retiring a package:

    rubygem-sinatra-rabbit: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1880144




--
Athos Ribeiro
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2222635] F39FailsToInstall: perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-PKCS10

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=635

Michal Josef Spacek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||mspa...@redhat.com



--- Comment #2 from Michal Josef Spacek  ---
PR: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-PKCS10/pull-request/6


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=635

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%20635%23c2
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[rpms/perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-PKCS10] PR #6: Fix build with Perl 5.38

[Michal Josef Špaček]

mspacek opened a new pull-request against the project: 
`perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-PKCS10` that you are following:
``
Fix build with Perl 5.38
``

To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-PKCS10/pull-request/6
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Non-responsive maintainer check for Athos Ribeiro,(athoscr)

[Ben Beasley]

Does anyone know how to contact Athos Ribeiro (FAS: athoscr)? This email 
is part of the non-responsive maintainer process 
(https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2223422).


The following PR and bug/NEEDINFO have received no response in 7-9 months:

https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-defcon/pull-request/1

    https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1936574

The activity report at https://src.fedoraproject.org/user/athoscr/ shows 
no activity in the past year, and fedora-active-user reports:


    $ python3 fedora_active_user.py --user athoscr --nofas
    Last action on koji:
       Wed, 31 May 2023 tag_package_owners entry created by bodhi 
[still active]


    Last package update on bodhi:
       2021-02-19 23:00:32 on package hugo-0-1
    Last actions performed according to fedmsg:
      - io.pagure.prod.pagure.issue.comment.added on 2023-02-15 07:07:42

A list of some other apparently-neglected bugs follows.

Updates available for a long time with the release-monitoring.org bugs 
still in the NEW state:


    flawfinder: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1914559

    python-fontMath: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1974954

    python-glyphsLib: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1881116

    python-pyclipper: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=194

    rubygem-chake: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1907051

    rubygem-fakefs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2209178

    rubygem-pathspec: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1912644

A Python 3.12 compatibility bug has also received no response since late 
last year:


    python-firehose: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2154946

Additionally, a request to consider fixing or retiring a package:

    rubygem-sinatra-rabbit: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1880144

___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Orphaned packages looking for new maintainers

[Richard W.M. Jones]

On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 08:48:56PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> ocaml-ancient orphan   0 weeks ago
> ocaml-charinfo-width  orphan   0 weeks ago
> ocaml-cil orphan   0 weeks ago
> ocaml-lwt-log orphan   0 weeks ago
> ocaml-mmaporphan   0 weeks ago
> ocaml-seq orphan   0 weeks ago
> ocaml-tplib   jjames, orphan   0 weeks ago

A note that these packages were intentionally orphaned when we
upgraded to OCaml 5 and we are not looking for new maintainers.  If
there's a package which depends on one of them please let us know.

Rich.

-- 
Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com
virt-p2v converts physical machines to virtual machines.  Boot with a
live CD or over the network (PXE) and turn machines into KVM guests.
http://libguestfs.org/virt-v2v
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Cython 3 plans

[Miro Hrončok]

Hello Pythonistas,

apparently, Cython 3.0.0 final was released today.

I plan to make it build somehow in 
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/Cython/pull-request/41 and once it does, 
I'll update the package in Rawhide, introducing a python(3)-cython0.29 
conflicting compact package for those who cannot upgrade yet (like python-lxml).


Note that Cython 0.29 was only built without tests during the Python 3.12 
bootstrap and I am unsure we will ever be able to enable them again (at least 
not all of them).


We'll get rid of emacs-cython-mode during the transition -- it can be packaged 
separately by someone else if desired.


--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
python-devel mailing list -- python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2222638] F39FailsToInstall: perl-Tk

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=638

Yaakov Selkowitz  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||467765 (ZedoraTracker)





Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=467765
[Bug 467765] Fedora for System z (s390): Bug Tracker
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=638
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Orphaned packages looking for new maintainers

[Miro Hrončok]

The following packages are orphaned and will be retired when they
are orphaned for six weeks, unless someone adopts them. If you know for sure
that the package should be retired, please do so now with a proper reason:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_remove_a_package_at_end_of_life

Note: If you received this mail directly you (co)maintain one of the affected
packages or a package that depends on one. Please adopt the affected package or
retire your depending package to avoid broken dependencies, otherwise your
package will fail to install and/or build when the affected package gets 
retired.

Request package ownership via the *Take* button in he left column on
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/

Full report available at:
https://churchyard.fedorapeople.org/orphans-2023-07-17.txt
grep it for your FAS username and follow the dependency chain.

For human readable dependency chains,
see https://packager-dashboard.fedoraproject.org/
For all orphaned packages,
see https://packager-dashboard.fedoraproject.org/orphan

Package  (co)maintainers   Status Change

Zim   ohaessler, orphan0 weeks ago
axc   orphan   3 weeks ago
bctoolbox orphan   3 weeks ago
bcunitorphan   3 weeks ago
belcard   orphan   3 weeks ago
belr  orphan   3 weeks ago
bitstower-markets orphan   3 weeks ago
clblast   orphan, trix 1 weeks ago
cmrt  kwizart, orphan  5 weeks ago
dlrn  epel-packagers-sig, jpena,   0 weeks ago
  openstack-sig, orphan
eosrei-emojione-fonts orphan   2 weeks ago
gfbgraph  orphan   3 weeks ago
git-subrepo   orphan   3 weeks ago
go-bindatago-sig, jchaloup, orphan 0 weeks ago
golang-bitbucket- go-sig, orphan   5 weeks ago
bertimus9-systemstat
golang-contrib-opencensus-orphan   5 weeks ago
exporter-prometheus
golang-contrib-opencensus-go-sig, orphan   5 weeks ago
resource
golang-gitea-lunny-loggo-sig, orphan   5 weeks ago
golang-gitea-lunny-nodb   go-sig, orphan   5 weeks ago
golang-github-abourget-teamcity   go-sig, orphan   5 weeks ago
golang-github-acme-lego   go-sig, orphan   5 weeks ago
golang-github-adalogics-fuzz- go-sig, orphan   5 weeks ago
headers
golang-github-aead-chacha20   go-sig, jchaloup, orphan 5 weeks ago
golang-github-aead-poly1305   go-sig, jchaloup, orphan 5 weeks ago
golang-github-agl-ed25519 go-sig, jchaloup, orphan 5 weeks ago
golang-github-akamai- go-sig, orphan   5 weeks ago
akamaiopen-edgegrid
golang-github-akavel-rsrc go-sig, orphan   5 weeks ago
golang-github-alecthomas- orphan   5 weeks ago
kingpin
golang-github-alicebob-gopher-go-sig, orphan   5 weeks ago
json
golang-github-alicebob-   go-sig, orphan   5 weeks ago
miniredis
golang-github-aliyun-alibaba- bdperkin, go-sig, orphan 5 weeks ago
cloud-sdk
golang-github-aliyun-oss-sdk  bdperkin, go-sig, orphan 5 weeks ago
golang-github-anacrolix-  go-sig, orphan   5 weeks ago
envpprof
golang-github-anacrolix-  go-sig, orphan   5 weeks ago
missinggo
golang-github-anacrolix-stm   go-sig, orphan   5 weeks ago
golang-github-andy-kimball-   go-sig, orphan   5 weeks ago
arenaskl
golang-github-antchfx-htmlquery   go-sig, orphan   5 weeks ago
golang-github-apache-arrowgo-sig, orphan   0 weeks ago
golang-github-apache-thrift   go-sig, orphan   5 weeks ago
golang-github-apex-loggo-sig, orphan   5 weeks ago
golang-github-apex-logs   go-sig, orphan   5 weeks ago
golang-github-apparentlymart- orphan   5 weeks ago
textseg
golang-github-appc-docker2aci go-sig, orphan   5 weeks ago
golang-github-appc-goaci  go-sig, orphan   5 weeks ago
golang-github-appc-spec   go-sig, jchaloup, orphan 5 weeks ago
golang-github-aquarapid-  go-sig, 

Orphaned packages looking for new maintainers

[Miro Hrončok]

The following packages are orphaned and will be retired when they
are orphaned for six weeks, unless someone adopts them. If you know for sure
that the package should be retired, please do so now with a proper reason:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_remove_a_package_at_end_of_life

Note: If you received this mail directly you (co)maintain one of the affected
packages or a package that depends on one. Please adopt the affected package or
retire your depending package to avoid broken dependencies, otherwise your
package will fail to install and/or build when the affected package gets 
retired.

Request package ownership via the *Take* button in he left column on
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/

Full report available at:
https://churchyard.fedorapeople.org/orphans-2023-07-17.txt
grep it for your FAS username and follow the dependency chain.

For human readable dependency chains,
see https://packager-dashboard.fedoraproject.org/
For all orphaned packages,
see https://packager-dashboard.fedoraproject.org/orphan

Package  (co)maintainers   Status Change

Zim   ohaessler, orphan0 weeks ago
axc   orphan   3 weeks ago
bctoolbox orphan   3 weeks ago
bcunitorphan   3 weeks ago
belcard   orphan   3 weeks ago
belr  orphan   3 weeks ago
bitstower-markets orphan   3 weeks ago
clblast   orphan, trix 1 weeks ago
cmrt  kwizart, orphan  5 weeks ago
dlrn  epel-packagers-sig, jpena,   0 weeks ago
  openstack-sig, orphan
eosrei-emojione-fonts orphan   2 weeks ago
gfbgraph  orphan   3 weeks ago
git-subrepo   orphan   3 weeks ago
go-bindatago-sig, jchaloup, orphan 0 weeks ago
golang-bitbucket- go-sig, orphan   5 weeks ago
bertimus9-systemstat
golang-contrib-opencensus-orphan   5 weeks ago
exporter-prometheus
golang-contrib-opencensus-go-sig, orphan   5 weeks ago
resource
golang-gitea-lunny-loggo-sig, orphan   5 weeks ago
golang-gitea-lunny-nodb   go-sig, orphan   5 weeks ago
golang-github-abourget-teamcity   go-sig, orphan   5 weeks ago
golang-github-acme-lego   go-sig, orphan   5 weeks ago
golang-github-adalogics-fuzz- go-sig, orphan   5 weeks ago
headers
golang-github-aead-chacha20   go-sig, jchaloup, orphan 5 weeks ago
golang-github-aead-poly1305   go-sig, jchaloup, orphan 5 weeks ago
golang-github-agl-ed25519 go-sig, jchaloup, orphan 5 weeks ago
golang-github-akamai- go-sig, orphan   5 weeks ago
akamaiopen-edgegrid
golang-github-akavel-rsrc go-sig, orphan   5 weeks ago
golang-github-alecthomas- orphan   5 weeks ago
kingpin
golang-github-alicebob-gopher-go-sig, orphan   5 weeks ago
json
golang-github-alicebob-   go-sig, orphan   5 weeks ago
miniredis
golang-github-aliyun-alibaba- bdperkin, go-sig, orphan 5 weeks ago
cloud-sdk
golang-github-aliyun-oss-sdk  bdperkin, go-sig, orphan 5 weeks ago
golang-github-anacrolix-  go-sig, orphan   5 weeks ago
envpprof
golang-github-anacrolix-  go-sig, orphan   5 weeks ago
missinggo
golang-github-anacrolix-stm   go-sig, orphan   5 weeks ago
golang-github-andy-kimball-   go-sig, orphan   5 weeks ago
arenaskl
golang-github-antchfx-htmlquery   go-sig, orphan   5 weeks ago
golang-github-apache-arrowgo-sig, orphan   0 weeks ago
golang-github-apache-thrift   go-sig, orphan   5 weeks ago
golang-github-apex-loggo-sig, orphan   5 weeks ago
golang-github-apex-logs   go-sig, orphan   5 weeks ago
golang-github-apparentlymart- orphan   5 weeks ago
textseg
golang-github-appc-docker2aci go-sig, orphan   5 weeks ago
golang-github-appc-goaci  go-sig, orphan   5 weeks ago
golang-github-appc-spec   go-sig, jchaloup, orphan 5 weeks ago
golang-github-aquarapid-  go-sig, 

Re: fedora-review workarounds for dnf5

[Jerry James]

On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 10:54 AM Jerry James  wrote:
> Like many of you, I have been quite inconvenienced because of
> dnf5-related breakage of fedora-review.  I've been monkeying with it
> today and finally got a successful run of fedora-review after making
> the following changes [*].
>
> 1. Edit /etc/mock/templates/fedora-rawhide.tpl.  Change:
>
> config_opts['package_manager'] = 'dnf'
>
> to:
>
> config_opts['package_manager'] = 'dnf5'
>
> 2. Run 'mock -r fedora-rawhide-x86_64 --scrub=bootstrap'
>
> 3. Edit /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/FedoraReview/deps.py.  Change line
>83 from:
>
> "dnf repoquery -q -C --requires --resolve " + " 
> ".join(list(set(pkgs))),
>
>to:
>
> "dnf repoquery -q -C --requires " + " ".join(list(set(pkgs))),
>
>Change line 97 from:
>
> name = line.rsplit(".", 2)[0]
>
>to:
>
> name = resolve_one(line)[0].rsplit(".", 2)[0]
>
> Change line 286 from:
>
> "dnf repoquery -C -l " + " ".join(list(set(pkgs))),
>
>to:
>
> "dnf repoquery --files " + " ".join(list(set(pkgs))),
>
> Other changes may be needed.
>
> [*] Altering rpm-controlled files is generally a bad idea, and I do not
> recommend it.  I am only doing so in this case because fedora-review does
> not work at all without these changes.  I understand that my changes will
> be overwritten the next time a mock-core-configs or fedora-review update
> is installed.

Skip steps 1 and 2.  They are unnecessary.  Step 3 is all you need.
-- 
Jerry James
http://www.jamezone.org/
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: RFC: Roadmap for DNF5 in Fedora 39 / invoking the Contingency Mechanism

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 01:37:35PM +0200, Pavel Raiskup wrote:
> 
> As I understand how DNF5 team works, they keep updating DNF5 quickly
> enough even in Fedora 38 (but the 'dnf -> dnf-3' exists, instead of
> 'dnf -> dnf5').
> 
> I'm a bit lost in the minor numbers; and Mirek is right, not all the
> missing features are actually important from the Koji perspective (e.g.
> forcearch).
> 
> We keep the list of issues tracked here:
> https://github.com/rpm-software-management/mock/issues/894
> And namely, https://github.com/rpm-software-management/dnf5/issues/617
> seems like a showstopper ATM.  At least as long as we have to check
> GPG signatures at koji buildroot installation time.

We don't in koji, but developers do on local mockbuilds.

> Otherwise, Mock 4.1+ on Fedora 38 *host* (or in container) should just
> work fine with fedora rawhide chroots and package_manager=dnf5.  Don't
> forget to `mock -r fedora-rawhide-x86_64 --scrub=bootstrap` first,
> because the root_cache tarball for bootstrap has the installed DNF4
> packages, not DNF5, from previous calls.

We could try this out in staging, I don't think we want to push anything
into prod right now since the mass rebuild starts wed.

kevin


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

fedora-review workarounds for dnf5

[Jerry James]

Like many of you, I have been quite inconvenienced because of
dnf5-related breakage of fedora-review.  I've been monkeying with it
today and finally got a successful run of fedora-review after making
the following changes [*].

1. Edit /etc/mock/templates/fedora-rawhide.tpl.  Change:

config_opts['package_manager'] = 'dnf'

to:

config_opts['package_manager'] = 'dnf5'

2. Run 'mock -r fedora-rawhide-x86_64 --scrub=bootstrap'

3. Edit /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/FedoraReview/deps.py.  Change line
   83 from:

"dnf repoquery -q -C --requires --resolve " + " ".join(list(set(pkgs))),

   to:

"dnf repoquery -q -C --requires " + " ".join(list(set(pkgs))),

   Change line 97 from:

name = line.rsplit(".", 2)[0]

   to:

name = resolve_one(line)[0].rsplit(".", 2)[0]

Change line 286 from:

"dnf repoquery -C -l " + " ".join(list(set(pkgs))),

   to:

"dnf repoquery --files " + " ".join(list(set(pkgs))),

Other changes may be needed.

[*] Altering rpm-controlled files is generally a bad idea, and I do not
recommend it.  I am only doing so in this case because fedora-review does
not work at all without these changes.  I understand that my changes will
be overwritten the next time a mock-core-configs or fedora-review update
is installed.

-- 
Jerry James
http://www.jamezone.org/
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2223392] perl-Test-Vars: FTBFS with Perl 5.38

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2223392

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Summary|perl-Test-Vars: FTBFS in|perl-Test-Vars: FTBFS with
   |Fedora Rawhide  |Perl 5.38




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2223392
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2223392] perl-Test-Vars: FTBFS in Fedora Rawhide

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2223392

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Link ID||Github
   ||houseabsolute/p5-Test-Vars/
   ||issues/49
 Blocks||2168842
   ||(F39FTBFS,RAWHIDEFTBFS)





Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2168842
[Bug 2168842] Fedora 39 FTBFS Tracker
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2223392
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2223392] New: perl-Test-Vars: FTBFS in Fedora Rawhide

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2223392

Bug ID: 2223392
   Summary: perl-Test-Vars: FTBFS in Fedora Rawhide
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
   URL: https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/package/perl-Test-Va
rs
OS: Linux
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-Test-Vars
  Severity: medium
  Assignee: p...@city-fan.org
  Reporter: jples...@redhat.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: p...@city-fan.org, perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Description of problem:
Package perl-Test-Vars fails to build from source in Fedora Rawhide with new
Perl 5.38.

+ ./Build test
# Testing Test::Vars/0.015
t/00_load.t .. ok
t/01_all_vars_ok_self.t .. ok
# Test::Vars ignores CompileError.pm because: Intentional compile error.
# Test::Vars ignores ImplicitTopic.pm because: Can't use global $_ in "my" at
t/lib/ImplicitTopic.pm line 6, near "my $_ "
t/02_no_warnings.t ... ok
t/03_warned.t  ok
t/04_ignores.t ... ok
t/05_test_vars.t . ok
t/06_vars_ok_self.t .. ok
#   Failed test 'got expected output from test_vars'
#   at t/07_stub_sub_bug.t line 25.
# Structures begin differing at:
#  $got->[0][2][1][1] = '$x is used once in ::foo '
# $expected->[0][2][1][1] = '$x is used once in ::foo at
t/lib/StubSub.pm line 13'
# Looks like you failed 1 test of 2.
t/07_stub_sub_bug.t .. 
Dubious, test returned 1 (wstat 256, 0x100)
Failed 1/2 subtests 
t/08_undef_aux_list.t  ok
t/09_array_slice.t ... ok
t/10_my_sub.t  ok
Test Summary Report
---
t/07_stub_sub_bug.t(Wstat: 256 (exited 1) Tests: 2 Failed: 1)
  Failed test:  2
  Non-zero exit status: 1
Files=11, Tests=71,  1 wallclock secs ( 0.04 usr  0.01 sys +  1.14 cusr  0.31
csys =  1.50 CPU)
Result: FAIL

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
0.015-9.fc39

Steps to Reproduce:
koji build --scratch f39 perl-Test-Vars-0.015-9.fc39.src.rpm

Additional info:
This package is tracked by Koschei. See:
https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/package/perl-Test-Vars

Reproducible: Always


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2223392

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202223392%23c0
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: btrfs loses 32-bit application compatibility after a while

[Florian Weimer]

* Daniel P. Berrangé:

>> But that still raises the question - why does it look like this
>> started to happen pretty suddenly around June 30?
>> The list of updates that were applied to builders in that timeframe
>> doesn't raise any alarm bells (except maybe the 6.3 kernel):
>> (see https://pagure.io/releng/issue/11531#comment-864471)
>> I read the release notes for the 6.3 kernel but didn't see any
>> mentions of BTRFS changes that could explain this. :(
>
> Or what 32-bit code is being run in the context of koji that is
> NOT compiled with LFS ?  Is this something silly like configure
> script tests not enabling LFS, but the resulting applications
> correctly using LFS ?

A dependency used during RPM file creation, libcap, is not fully built
in LFS mode.  Once we fix that, we know that we'll run into issues with
chkconfig and update-alternatives.  It's a never-ending source of bugs.
It's not a good use of maintainer time.

We can't change the overall distribution flags with CFLAGS injection
because doing so has ABI implications.

Thanks,
Florian
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2212972] perl-Graphics-TIFF-20 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2212972

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
 CC||jples...@redhat.com
Last Closed||2023-07-17 13:41:32




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2212972
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

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

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2183554

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
 Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED
Last Closed||2023-07-17 13:39:45




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2183554
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2223222] perl-IO-Compress-2.205 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2223222

Xavier Bachelot  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||2223223





Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2223223
[Bug 2223223] perl-IO-Compress-Zstd-2.205 is available
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2223222
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: RFC: Roadmap for DNF5 in Fedora 39 / invoking the Contingency Mechanism

[Pavel Březina]

On 7/17/23 07:39, Jaroslav Mracek wrote:

Hello Pavel,

May I ask you to be more specific what is the problem with including 
references for issues? I am not sure whether your issues are related to 
issues referenced by Fabio or whether you have in mind something else. 
It will help us to prioritize the work.


Hi, I put more details in the fesco ticket: 
https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3039#comment-864686 I believe these are 
commonly known so I did not open any ticket against dnf5.


As said in the comment, I stopped putting effort into making dnf5 work 
for our use case (which is provisioning of multiple distributions for 
upstream PR CI via ansible), we would certainly hit more issues - or 
unimplemented functionality if you want to sugar coat it - that would 
require workarounds.




On Fri, Jul 14, 2023 at 10:50 AM Pavel Březina > wrote:


On 7/13/23 23:59, Fabio Valentini wrote:
 > Hi all,
 >
 > I'm opening this thread to trigger discussion of the roadmap for DNF5
 > in Fedora 39 - whether the switch still looks doable for this
release,
 > or whether it should be reverted for F39 and postponed to F40.

+1 for postponing. We have hit issues preparing CI environment via
ansible and applying workarounds to make dnf5 work is imho not the way
to go with such core tool. It should be there as opt-in so it can get
tested but not default.


DNF5 was released in Fedora 38 where it replaced microdnf, therefore it 
was possible to test it in Fedora 38


Best regards

Jaroslav


 > This is also being tracked in a FESCo ticket:
 > https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3039

 >
 > The DNF5 Change was approved with the condition that bits that are
 > important to the distribution *MUST* work, but this does not seem to
 > be the case yet, six months after this was initially approved -
 > there's at least a few things that are still using dnf-3 or have been
 > broken since the switch to dnf5:
 >
 > - rawhide mock / koji builds still default to dnf-3 (DNF 4)
 > - Fedora CI has been partially broken since the switch to DNF5 (c.f.
 >
[fedora-ci/general#416](https://pagure.io/fedora-ci/general/issue/416) 
),
 > making CI results for bodhi updates at least partially useless
 > - fedora-review has been broken since the switch to DNF5 (c.f.
 > [FedoraReview#482](FedoraReview/issue/482)), which is really hurting
 > the rate at which new packages are getting reviewed and added to
 > Fedora
 > - (not an exhaustive list, feel free to mention other things, I will
 > update the list to include them)
 >
 > We are now mere days before the Fedora 39 mass rebuild is
scheduled to
 > start, so I think it's time to start talking about the roadmap for
 > getting missing pieces into place for Fedora 39, or if that is not
 > possible within this timeframe, whether the contingency mechanism
 > should be enacted.
 >
 > Fabio
 > ___
 > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

 > To unsubscribe send an email to
devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

 > Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/

 > List Guidelines:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

 > List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org 

 > Do not reply to spam, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/

List Guidelines:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org 

Do not reply to spam, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue



___
devel mailing 

[Bug 2223238] perl-Test-Compile-3.3.1 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2223238

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version||perl-Test-Compile-3.3.1-1.f
   ||c39
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
 Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED
Last Closed||2023-07-17 11:39:56



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2023-fc9ea33ba1 has been pushed to the Fedora 39 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2223238

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202223238%23c2
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: RFC: Roadmap for DNF5 in Fedora 39 / invoking the Contingency Mechanism

[Pavel Raiskup]

On pátek 14. července 2023 14:30:03 CEST Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> Dne 14. 07. 23 v 2:11 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a):
> > On Fri, Jul 14, 2023 at 12:26:27AM +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> >> Dne 13. 07. 23 v 23:59 Fabio Valentini napsal(a):
> >>> - rawhide mock / koji builds still default to dnf-3 (DNF 4)
> >> Support for DNF5 landed in Mock
> >>
> >> https://rpm-software-management.github.io/mock/Release-Notes-4.0
> >>
> >> In the meantime 4.1 was released.
> >>
> >> I hope that in week or two we release 4.2 and we can set
> >>
> >> config_opts['package_manager'] = 'dnf5'
> >>
> >> for fedora-rawhide config. I have just created
> >> https://github.com/rpm-software-management/mock/issues/1147
> >>
> >> Of course, Koji admins can do that independently in their configs.
> > Sure, but... our builders are Fedora 38.
> > Is the dnf5 in f38 expected to be ready to do bootstrap chroots?
> > Or only the rawhide one?
> 
> Hmm,
> 
> F39 has dnf5-5.0.15-4.fc39 
> 
> 
> F38 has dnf5-5.0.13-2.fc38 
> 
> 
> and there are some important changes (like module enable or forcearch) but 
> not sure if Koji will need this. Mock uses it 
> in some scenarions.

As I understand how DNF5 team works, they keep updating DNF5 quickly
enough even in Fedora 38 (but the 'dnf -> dnf-3' exists, instead of
'dnf -> dnf5').

I'm a bit lost in the minor numbers; and Mirek is right, not all the
missing features are actually important from the Koji perspective (e.g.
forcearch).

We keep the list of issues tracked here:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/mock/issues/894
And namely, https://github.com/rpm-software-management/dnf5/issues/617
seems like a showstopper ATM.  At least as long as we have to check
GPG signatures at koji buildroot installation time.

Otherwise, Mock 4.1+ on Fedora 38 *host* (or in container) should just
work fine with fedora rawhide chroots and package_manager=dnf5.  Don't
forget to `mock -r fedora-rawhide-x86_64 --scrub=bootstrap` first,
because the root_cache tarball for bootstrap has the installed DNF4
packages, not DNF5, from previous calls.

Pavel





___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2223238] perl-Test-Compile-3.3.1 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2223238

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED



--- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2023-fc9ea33ba1 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 39.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-fc9ea33ba1


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2223238

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202223238%23c1
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: [Question] how to make Fedora linux os ?

[Stephen Smoogen]

On Thu, 13 Jul 2023 at 21:45, Miao, Jun  wrote:

> Hi Guys,
>
>
>
> AFAIK, the Yocto Project is an open source collaboration project that
> provides tools, templates, and methods to help developers create custom
> Linux-based systems for embedded devices.
>
>
>
> My confusion is that:
>
>1. what`s the tool to make our Fedora Linux 38 released like Yocto?
>2. And Centos ?
>3. And Ubuntu ?
>
>
>
>
>

I believe the Yocto system is based on a similar system as Gentoo. It was
chosen because most embedded teams at the time were fairly small (maybe 1-2
engineers per 'board') and setting up a multi-system pipeline was too much
for getting a system which may only have a 'lifetime' of 1-2 years with a
large amount of NDAs and other legal entanglements involved. It also came
with the advantage that one could pick and choose layers to change overall
design so a basic chipset could be found in a camera, phone, or washing
machine but have different additions/subtractions done to make it work for
each. As teams got larger, the tooling has become more complex so you can
stand up dedicated build clusters and such but in general, a developer can
figure out what will make something work themselves without bothering other
developers.

My outsider look at Yocto OS development seems to have developers either
focusing on specific problem sets: 'make this work on a refrigerator with
this much memory/cpu/storage and these applications' or an overall 'layer'
solution: 'Legal says no GPLv3 so please make sure none of them are
included in an image' or 'we need to have one image with debug symbols and
this debugger, and this image without', etc.

One problem with this style of development is that you can easily end up
with 2 developers working on the same board but having chosen completely
different optimizations and compile time choices that applications and
libraries can not easily mix between the two.

The other operating systems you are looking at is aimed at a different
problem where how do you get a large number of developers who may only
focus on one bit be able to work with each other in a smooth as much
manner. This means that the system is less about building the entire
operating system in one location but more about makings sure that 400
developers can build stuff which will work together. This means that a
developer builds only items which are for testing and developer, and then
pushes changes to a central system which will attempt to rebuild things
using choices (compiler options, disk layout, etc) set by either a Fedora
Engineering Steering Committee decision or general agreement by the main
maintainer of a subsystem.

The Fedora and CentOS build systems are fairly complicated with about 70 to
100 interrelated applications from when a developer does a build to when
someone can download a finished package on a mirror. I have tried writing
out a 'map' like a subway system but I usually get lost somewhere in the
middle.  The general solution is something like

[fedpkg] -> [Fedora Builders and Source Control] -> [Fedora QA] -> [Fedora
Image Making (iso/containers/etc)] -> [Mirroring System] -> [User]

The above 'loses' a lot of granular tools in that set of items with various
message buses, various side tools, etc.  The lost granularity covers
various attempts to deal with concurrency problems where group A is
updating the entire python stack while group B is still building updates
based on the old stack.  Group A's work may take weeks so stopping group B
during that time could lead to security issues. [There are many other
concurrency which the community has found over the years but that was the
first one which came to mind.]

-- 
Stephen Smoogen, Red Hat Automotive
Let us be kind to one another, for most of us are fighting a hard battle.
-- Ian MacClaren
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2223015] perl-SNMP-Info-3.93 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2223015

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version||perl-SNMP-Info-3.93-1.fc39
 Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed||2023-07-17 11:12:55



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2023-63890cea40 has been pushed to the Fedora 39 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2223015

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202223015%23c5
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2223015] perl-SNMP-Info-3.93 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2223015



--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2023-27325d79b4 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 38.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-27325d79b4


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2223015

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202223015%23c4
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20230717.n.0 changes

[Fedora Rawhide Report]

OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20230716.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20230717.n.0

= SUMMARY =
Added images:1
Dropped images:  7
Added packages:  4
Dropped packages:72
Upgraded packages:   62
Downgraded packages: 1

Size of added packages:  55.50 MiB
Size of dropped packages:3.54 MiB
Size of upgraded packages:   4.56 GiB
Size of downgraded packages: 9.65 MiB

Size change of upgraded packages:   -98.73 MiB
Size change of downgraded packages: 10.17 KiB

= ADDED IMAGES =
Image: Onyx dvd-ostree x86_64
Path: Onyx/x86_64/iso/Fedora-Onyx-ostree-x86_64-Rawhide-20230717.n.0.iso

= DROPPED IMAGES =
Image: i3 live aarch64
Path: Spins/aarch64/iso/Fedora-i3-Live-aarch64-Rawhide-20230716.n.0.iso
Image: Sericea dvd-ostree x86_64
Path: Sericea/x86_64/iso/Fedora-Sericea-ostree-x86_64-Rawhide-20230716.n.0.iso
Image: Kinoite dvd-ostree ppc64le
Path: Kinoite/ppc64le/iso/Fedora-Kinoite-ostree-ppc64le-Rawhide-20230716.n.0.iso
Image: Silverblue dvd-ostree x86_64
Path: 
Silverblue/x86_64/iso/Fedora-Silverblue-ostree-x86_64-Rawhide-20230716.n.0.iso
Image: LXQt live aarch64
Path: Spins/aarch64/iso/Fedora-LXQt-Live-aarch64-Rawhide-20230716.n.0.iso
Image: Silverblue dvd-ostree aarch64
Path: 
Silverblue/aarch64/iso/Fedora-Silverblue-ostree-aarch64-Rawhide-20230716.n.0.iso
Image: Workstation live aarch64
Path: 
Workstation/aarch64/iso/Fedora-Workstation-Live-aarch64-Rawhide-20230716.n.0.iso

= ADDED PACKAGES =
Package: fractal-5~beta1-1.fc39
Summary: Matrix group messaging app
RPMs:fractal
Size:49.28 MiB

Package: obs-studio-plugin-webkitgtk-0~git20201202.0e32b92-2.fc39
Summary: OBS Browser source plugin based on WebKitGTK
RPMs:obs-studio-plugin-webkitgtk
Size:97.23 KiB

Package: python-blosc2-2.2.5-1.fc39
Summary: Python wrapper for the Blosc2 compression library
RPMs:python3-blosc2
Size:1.11 MiB

Package: python-imagecodecs-2022.9.26-1.fc39
Summary: Image transformation, compression, and decompression codecs
RPMs:python3-imagecodecs
Size:5.02 MiB


= DROPPED PACKAGES =
Package: php-doctrine-migrations-2.3.5-3.fc38
Summary: PHP Doctrine Migrations project
RPMs:php-doctrine-migrations
Size:86.65 KiB

Package: php-friendsofphp-proxy-manager-lts-1.0.14-1.fc38
Summary: OOP proxy wrappers utilities
RPMs:php-friendsofphp-proxy-manager-lts
Size:92.11 KiB

Package: php-laminas-authentication-2.13.0-2.fc38
Summary: Laminas Framework Authentication component
RPMs:php-laminas-authentication
Size:47.26 KiB

Package: php-laminas-barcode-2.12.0-2.fc38
Summary: Laminas Framework Barcode component
RPMs:php-laminas-barcode
Size:53.48 KiB

Package: php-laminas-cache-2.11.3-5.fc38
Summary: Laminas Framework Cache component
RPMs:php-laminas-cache
Size:131.06 KiB

Package: php-laminas-captcha-2.16.0-2.fc38
Summary: Laminas Framework Captcha component
RPMs:php-laminas-captcha
Size:29.05 KiB

Package: php-laminas-code4-4.8.0-2.fc38
Summary: Laminas Framework Code component
RPMs:php-laminas-code4
Size:73.33 KiB

Package: php-laminas-config3-3.8.0-2.fc38
Summary: Laminas Framework Config component v3
RPMs:php-laminas-config3
Size:39.45 KiB

Package: php-laminas-console-2.8.0-9.fc37
Summary: Laminas Framework Console component
RPMs:php-laminas-console
Size:49.59 KiB

Package: php-laminas-crypt-3.10.0-1.fc39
Summary: Laminas Framework Crypt component
RPMs:php-laminas-crypt
Size:51.92 KiB

Package: php-laminas-db-2.15.0-2.fc37
Summary: Laminas Framework Db component
RPMs:php-laminas-db
Size:149.26 KiB

Package: php-laminas-diactoros-1.8.7p2-8.fc38
Summary: PSR HTTP Message implementations
RPMs:php-laminas-diactoros
Size:64.46 KiB

Package: php-laminas-diactoros2-2.25.2-1.fc39
Summary: PSR HTTP Message implementations v2
RPMs:php-laminas-diactoros2
Size:66.71 KiB

Package: php-laminas-diagnostics-1.13.0-4.fc38
Summary: A set of components for performing diagnostic tests
RPMs:php-laminas-diagnostics
Size:50.53 KiB

Package: php-laminas-dom-2.13.0-2.fc38
Summary: Laminas Framework Dom component
RPMs:php-laminas-dom
Size:20.29 KiB

Package: php-laminas-escaper-2.12.0-2.fc38
Summary: Laminas Framework Escaper component
RPMs:php-laminas-escaper
Size:17.29 KiB

Package: php-laminas-eventmanager-3.10.0-2.fc38
Summary: Trigger and listen to events within a PHP application
RPMs:php-laminas-eventmanager
Size:35.55 KiB

Package: php-laminas-feed-2.20.0-2.fc38
Summary: Laminas Framework Feed component
RPMs:php-laminas-feed
Size:113.79 KiB

Package: php-laminas-file-2.12.0-2.fc38
Summary: Laminas Framework File component
RPMs:php-laminas-file
Size:33.09 KiB

Package: php-laminas-filter-2.31.0-2.fc38
Summary: Laminas Framework Filter component
RPMs:php-laminas-filter
Size:76.86 KiB

Package: php-laminas-form-2.17.1-1.fc36
Summary: Laminas Framework Form component
RPMs:php-laminas-form
Size:110.37 KiB

Package: php-laminas-http

[Bug 2223015] perl-SNMP-Info-3.93 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2223015

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED



--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2023-63890cea40 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 39.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-63890cea40


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2223015

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202223015%23c3
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2223015] perl-SNMP-Info-3.93 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2223015

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC|jples...@redhat.com,|
   |ktdre...@ktdreyer.com,  |
   |w...@gouldfamily.org|
   Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2223015
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

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

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2183554



--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2023-8af989420d has been submitted as an update to Fedora 38.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-8af989420d


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2183554

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202183554%23c3
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2222961] perl-Math-BigInt-1.999839 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=961

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
 Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED
   Fixed In Version||perl-Math-BigInt-1.9998.39-
   ||1.fc39
Last Closed||2023-07-17 10:42:55



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2023-d368655e9c has been pushed to the Fedora 39 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=961

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%20961%23c2
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2222961] perl-Math-BigInt-1.999839 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=961

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED



--- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2023-d368655e9c has been submitted as an update to Fedora 39.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-d368655e9c


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=961

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%20961%23c1
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Possible to combine ExclusiveArch?

[Daniel P . Berrangé]

On Sat, Jul 15, 2023 at 05:11:02PM +0200, Nils Philippsen wrote:
> On Fri, 2023-07-14 at 13:30 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > For some virt packages we need to combine 2 or 3 of:
> > 
> >   ExclusiveArch: %{kernel_arches}
> >   ExclusiveArch: %{qemu_sysemu_host_arches}   # [1]
> >   ExclusiveArch: %{ocaml_native_compiler}
> > 
> > to mean only compile on the intersection of these arches.  If you
> > have
> > multiple ExclusiveArch lines then RPM seems to do the union of arches
> > which is the opposite of what anyone would want.
> 
> I beg to differ. When a tag in RPM can have multiple items (e.g.
> Provides, (Build)Requires), this …:
> 
> Tag: item1 item2 item3
> 
> … is consistently equivalent to this:
> 
> Tag: item1
> Tag: item2
> Tag: item3
> 
> To have ExclusiveArch behave differently would be surprising – nobody
> () would read this and expect the effective list of arches the
> package would be built for to be empty:
> 
> ExclusiveArch: x86_64
> ExclusiveArch: s390x
> ExclusiveArch: aarch64
> 
> > Dan Berrange came up with a clever way to do it though ...
> > 
> >   %ifnarch %{kernel_arches}
> >   ExcludeArch: %{_arch}
> >   %endif
> >   %ifnarch %{qemu_sysemu_host_arches}
> >   ExcludeArch: %{_arch}
> >   %endif
> > 
> > But this makes my head hurt.  Is there a better way or could RPM
> > provide explicit union and intersection operators?
> 
> I think this would be a good approach.

It is certainly easier to read and understand than using a LUA script
to get to implement variable intersection for ExclusiveArch !

With regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: https://berrange.com  -o-https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org -o-https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org-o-https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: btrfs loses 32-bit application compatibility after a while

[Daniel P . Berrangé]

On Fri, Jul 14, 2023 at 11:47:39PM +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 14, 2023 at 10:45 PM Eric Sandeen  wrote:
> >
> > On 7/14/23 6:53 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > > * Neal Gompa:
> > >
> > >> On Thu, Jul 13, 2023 at 8:29 AM Fabio Valentini  
> > >> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> On Thu, Jul 13, 2023 at 10:33 AM Florian Weimer  
> > >>> wrote:
> > 
> >  Fedora lists are hostile to upstream collaboration via cross-posting, 
> >  so
> >  I can only forward this for your information.
> > 
> >  This causes problems with the i686 builders.
> > >>>
> > >>> I wonder how this only started to happen recently? Has something
> > >>> changed in BTRFS with the 6.3 kernel?
> > >>> This only started happening a few days after builders were rebooted at
> > >>> the end of June to apply updates (and kernel 6.3 was among those
> > >>> updates, as far as I can tell).
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> This was always possible. I'm curious as to why it took so long for us
> > >> to hit it, though.
> > >>
> > >> The recommended solution is to create a new subvolume for these
> > >> environments, since the inode count is reset for each subvolume.
> > >
> > > What about impact beyond the builders?
> > >
> > > Are end users are expected to do this?  Do we have a tool for this?
> >
> > FWIW, 64 bit inodes have existed in some Linux filesystems for a very
> > long time. On XFS, you'll get them by default - and quickly, not after
> > extended use - on a filesystem of sufficient size (around 1T-2T by
> > default, if I remember right.)
> >
> > XFS does have a hack^Wmount option to force inodes into the 32-bit
> > range, but just FWIW we almost never see users running into problems
> > with 32-bit applications (but maybe because they know about the mount
> > option...)
> 
> But that still raises the question - why does it look like this
> started to happen pretty suddenly around June 30?
> The list of updates that were applied to builders in that timeframe
> doesn't raise any alarm bells (except maybe the 6.3 kernel):
> (see https://pagure.io/releng/issue/11531#comment-864471)
> I read the release notes for the 6.3 kernel but didn't see any
> mentions of BTRFS changes that could explain this. :(

Or what 32-bit code is being run in the context of koji that is
NOT compiled with LFS ?  Is this something silly like configure
script tests not enabling LFS, but the resulting applications
correctly using LFS ?

With regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: https://berrange.com  -o-https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org -o-https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org-o-https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review swaps for easy Rust packages

[Fabio Valentini]

On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 11:21 AM Fabio Valentini  wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> In order to update the "log" crate (the canonical logging facade for
> Rust; packaged as rust-log) to the latest version, I need to package a
> few new dependencies. Some have already been updated / built in a
> rawhide side tag (f39-build-side-69898), but some are still missing. I
> hope to be able to finish this update before the mass rebuild happens,
> otherwise the packages will be broken.

Sorry, that was a typo, it should've been f39-build-side-69808.
Packages that are pending review can be test-built against the
packages in this side tag.

Fabio
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Review swaps for easy Rust packages

[Fabio Valentini]

Hi all,

In order to update the "log" crate (the canonical logging facade for
Rust; packaged as rust-log) to the latest version, I need to package a
few new dependencies. Some have already been updated / built in a
rawhide side tag (f39-build-side-69898), but some are still missing. I
hope to be able to finish this update before the mass rebuild happens,
otherwise the packages will be broken.

The packages that are still pending review are very simple. They are
100% unmodified output of rust2rpm, with tests enabled, with license
files included, etc. I can offer to review similarly simple packages
(Rust, Python, CMake, meson) in return.

- rust-sval_test: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2217030
- rust-sval_ref: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2217032
- rust-sval_buffer: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2217037
- rust-sval_fmt: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2217034
- rust-serde_buf: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2217023
- rust-sval_serde: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2217044
- rust-value-bag-serde1: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2217024
- rust-value-bag-sval2: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2217056

I'm also waiting for reviews of the missing dependencies of ntpd-rs
(an NTP implementation with NTS support written in Rust):

- rust-tower: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2214392
- rust-tower-http: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2214428
- rust-axum: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2214429
- rust-prometheus-client: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2214431

These are pretty simple packages as well, but not quite 100%
boilerplate as the sval/value-bag stuff.

I've also submitted a review for the "gimoji" application:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2214339

Fabio
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: RFC: Roadmap for DNF5 in Fedora 39 / invoking the Contingency Mechanism

[Peter Robinson]

On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 6:40 AM Jaroslav Mracek  wrote:
>
> Hello Pavel,
>
> May I ask you to be more specific what is the problem with including 
> references for issues? I am not sure whether your issues are related to 
> issues referenced by Fabio or whether you have in mind something else. It 
> will help us to prioritize the work.
>
> On Fri, Jul 14, 2023 at 10:50 AM Pavel Březina  wrote:
>>
>> On 7/13/23 23:59, Fabio Valentini wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > I'm opening this thread to trigger discussion of the roadmap for DNF5
>> > in Fedora 39 - whether the switch still looks doable for this release,
>> > or whether it should be reverted for F39 and postponed to F40.
>>
>> +1 for postponing. We have hit issues preparing CI environment via
>> ansible and applying workarounds to make dnf5 work is imho not the way
>> to go with such core tool. It should be there as opt-in so it can get
>> tested but not default.
>
>
> DNF5 was released in Fedora 38 where it replaced microdnf, therefore it was 
> possible to test it in Fedora 38

Except dnf5 broke a number of microdnf usecases with low memory where
microdnf worked [1].

[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2214520

> Best regards
>
> Jaroslav
>
>>
>>
>> > This is also being tracked in a FESCo ticket:
>> > https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3039
>> >
>> > The DNF5 Change was approved with the condition that bits that are
>> > important to the distribution *MUST* work, but this does not seem to
>> > be the case yet, six months after this was initially approved -
>> > there's at least a few things that are still using dnf-3 or have been
>> > broken since the switch to dnf5:
>> >
>> > - rawhide mock / koji builds still default to dnf-3 (DNF 4)
>> > - Fedora CI has been partially broken since the switch to DNF5 (c.f.
>> > [fedora-ci/general#416](https://pagure.io/fedora-ci/general/issue/416)),
>> > making CI results for bodhi updates at least partially useless
>> > - fedora-review has been broken since the switch to DNF5 (c.f.
>> > [FedoraReview#482](FedoraReview/issue/482)), which is really hurting
>> > the rate at which new packages are getting reviewed and added to
>> > Fedora
>> > - (not an exhaustive list, feel free to mention other things, I will
>> > update the list to include them)
>> >
>> > We are now mere days before the Fedora 39 mass rebuild is scheduled to
>> > start, so I think it's time to start talking about the roadmap for
>> > getting missing pieces into place for Fedora 39, or if that is not
>> > possible within this timeframe, whether the contingency mechanism
>> > should be enacted.
>> >
>> > Fabio
>> > ___
>> > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>> > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
>> > Fedora Code of Conduct: 
>> > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
>> > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
>> > List Archives: 
>> > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>> > Do not reply to spam, report it: 
>> > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
>> ___
>> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
>> Fedora Code of Conduct: 
>> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
>> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
>> List Archives: 
>> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>> Do not reply to spam, report it: 
>> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
>
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct: 
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives: 
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam, report it: 
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Next Open NeuroFedora Meeting: Monday, 17 July (today) at 13:00 UTC

[Sandro]

Hello everyone,

Please join us at the next Open NeuroFedora team meeting on Monday 03 
July at 1300UTC in #fedora-neuro on Matrix or IRC (Libera.chat).  The 
meeting is a public meeting, and open for everyone to attend. You can 
join us over:


Matrix: https://matrix.to/#/#neuro:fedoraproject.org
IRC: https://webchat.libera.chat/?channels=#fedora-neuro

You can use this link to see the local time for the meeting:
https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Open+NeuroFedora+Meeting=20230717T13=1440=1

or you can use this command in a terminal:
$ date --date='TZ="UTC" 1300 2023-07-17'

The meeting will be chaired by @Penguinpee. The agenda for the meeting is:

- New introductions and roll call.
- Tasks from last meeting: 
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/latest/neurofedora
- Open Pagure tickets: 
https://pagure.io/neuro-sig/NeuroFedora/issues?status=Open=S%3A+Next+meeting
- Package health check: 
https://packager-dashboard.fedoraproject.org/dashboard?groups=neuro-sig
- Open package reviews check: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=fedora-neuro
- CompNeuro lab compose status check for F39: 
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=30691

- Neuroscience query of the week
- Next meeting day, and chair.
- Open floor.

We hope to see you there!

The meeting announcement is also posted on the NeuroFedora blog here: 
https://neuroblog.fedoraproject.org/blog_index.html (PR pending approval)


You can learn more about NeuroFedora here:
https://neuro.fedoraproject.org

Kind regards,
--
Sandro
FAS: gui1ty
IRC: Penguinpee
Elsewhere: [Pp]enguinpee
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2223222] perl-IO-Compress-2.205 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2223222

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
   Fixed In Version||perl-IO-Compress-2.205-1.fc
   ||39
Last Closed||2023-07-17 07:48:55



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2023-9c8b4013a0 has been pushed to the Fedora 39 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2223222

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202223222%23c2
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2221342] perl-App-cpm-0.997012 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2221342

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
 Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED
   Fixed In Version||perl-App-cpm-0.997.012-1.fc
   ||39
Last Closed||2023-07-17 07:24:55



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2023-6b0818255a has been pushed to the Fedora 39 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2221342

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202221342%23c2
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2221342] perl-App-cpm-0.997012 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2221342

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED



--- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2023-6b0818255a has been submitted as an update to Fedora 39.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-6b0818255a


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2221342

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202221342%23c1
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2223222] perl-IO-Compress-2.205 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2223222

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED



--- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2023-9c8b4013a0 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 39.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-9c8b4013a0


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2223222

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202223222%23c1
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: [Question] how to make Fedora linux os ?

[Adam Williamson]

On Mon, 2023-07-17 at 02:58 +0200, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> Adam Williamson wrote:
> > This is the wrong question, kinda. There is no detailed step-by-step
> > process. The process for creating a compose is, more or less, "push the
> > magic COMPOSE NOW" button. (Okay, there's a *bit* more to it than that,
> > but not a lot). The SOP for it is
> > https://docs.pagure.org/releng/sop_composing_fedora.html .
> >  
> > All the complexity, these days, is in what happens when you push the
> > button. Which is so complex I just couldn't stand the thought of
> > sitting down and writing it all out.
> >  
> > *basically*...more or less...what happens when you hit the button is
> > that pungi - https://pagure.io/pungi - following the Fedora pungi
> > config - https://pagure.io/pungi-fedora - creates a whole bunch of Koji
> > tasks. Each of those Koji tasks does...something, there are a lot of
> > somethings, often using different tools.
> 
> Note though (and I am writing this for other readers, I know *you* know 
> this) that the compose process you describe here does not actually compile 
> any packages. It just collects the packages that have previously been built 
> in a given Koji tag and builds repositories and/or images from those.

Right, of course - this part of the overall process starts from
whatever set of packages is tagged 'f39' (or whatever) at the time it
starts. Thanks for noting that!
-- 
Adam Williamson (he/him/his)
Fedora QA
Fedora Chat: @adamwill:fedora.im | Mastodon: @ad...@fosstodon.org
https://www.happyassassin.net



___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue