Need help for python-openshadinglanguage
Hello team, Due to a busy schedule, I am currently unable to investigate the issue related to python-openshadinglanguage on both Rawhide and Fedora 39 due to fmt10 compatibilty. Could someone take a look at the issue and resolve it please? Thank you. Reference: - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2220055 -- Luya Tshimbalanga Fedora Design Team Fedora Design Suite maintainer ___ 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
The following Fedora EPEL 8 Security updates need testing: Age URL 6 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2023-37fa993c81 clamav-0.103.9-1.el8 6 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2023-db0eac64fb chromium-116.0.5845.96-1.el8 2 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2023-5120258393 ImageMagick-6.9.12.93-1.el8 The following builds have been pushed to Fedora EPEL 8 updates-testing boxes-2.2.1-1.el8 nickle-2.93-1.el8 Details about builds: boxes-2.2.1-1.el8 (FEDORA-EPEL-2023-62da038c4b) Command line ASCII boxes unlimited! Update Information: Update to latest version ChangeLog: * Thu Aug 24 2023 Artem Polishchuk - 2.2.1-1 - chore(update): 2.2.1 * Wed Jul 19 2023 Fedora Release Engineering - 2.2.0-3 - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_39_Mass_Rebuild * Wed Jan 18 2023 Fedora Release Engineering - 2.2.0-2 - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_38_Mass_Rebuild nickle-2.93-1.el8 (FEDORA-EPEL-2023-74d274c8a9) A programming language-based prototyping environment Update Information: * Add hex float support to scanf and printf * Fix bug in multiply when one factor is a power of two ChangeLog: * Thu Aug 24 2023 Michel Alexandre Salim - 2.93-1 - Update to 2.93 References: [ 1 ] Bug #2232948 - nickle-2.93 is available https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2232948 ___ epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to epel-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/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2231653] perl-perlfaq-5.20230812 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2231653 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2023-ed86ea7a17 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-ed86ea7a17` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-ed86ea7a17 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=2231653 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202231653%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 2233885] perl-URI-5.20 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2233885 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2023-984ad90082 has been pushed to the Fedora 39 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2023-984ad90082` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-984ad90082 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=2233885 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202233885%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
[Bug 2231653] perl-perlfaq-5.20230812 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2231653 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2023-cd56289774 has been pushed to the Fedora 39 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-cd56289774` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-cd56289774 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=2231653 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202231653%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
[Bug 2233072] perl-DB_File-1.859 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2233072 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2023-02769b2cb4 has been pushed to the Fedora 39 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2023-02769b2cb4` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-02769b2cb4 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=2233072 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202233072%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
[EPEL-devel] Fedora EPEL 9 updates-testing report
The following Fedora EPEL 9 Security updates need testing: Age URL 7 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2023-e2fcc4af81 llhttp-8.1.1-1.el9 python-aiohttp-3.8.5-1.el9 5 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2023-f08c8f0812 chromium-116.0.5845.96-1.el9 5 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2023-e2f8cb1ee1 clamav-1.0.2-1.el9 2 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2023-02f7139d40 ntpsec-1.2.2a-1.el9 2 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2023-7a43301d55 ImageMagick-6.9.12.93-1.el9 0 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2023-f4d52e6818 mosquitto-2.0.17-1.el9 The following builds have been pushed to Fedora EPEL 9 updates-testing boxes-2.2.1-1.el9 caddy-2.6.4-1.el9 nickle-2.93-1.el9 packit-0.79.1-1.el9 pepc-1.4.32-1.el9 rust-reqwest-0.11.20-1.el9 Details about builds: boxes-2.2.1-1.el9 (FEDORA-EPEL-2023-76286022aa) Command line ASCII boxes unlimited! Update Information: Update to latest version ChangeLog: * Thu Aug 24 2023 Artem Polishchuk - 2.2.1-1 - chore(update): 2.2.1 * Wed Jul 19 2023 Fedora Release Engineering - 2.2.0-3 - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_39_Mass_Rebuild * Wed Jan 18 2023 Fedora Release Engineering - 2.2.0-2 - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_38_Mass_Rebuild caddy-2.6.4-1.el9 (FEDORA-EPEL-2023-8849a14e7f) Web server with automatic HTTPS Update Information: This is an upgrade for caddy from version 2.4.6 to 2.6.4 in order to resolve two outstanding CVEs. There are a few relatively minor backwards-incompatible changes, so this update went to the EPEL Steering Committee for approval. Please see the mailing list post for more details. https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel- de...@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/CDNDAKTIAQTFTNDHOIHKQJ4B2LAV5ZSS/ ChangeLog: * Thu Aug 24 2023 Carl George - 2.6.4-1 - Update to version 2.6.4 - Add man pages - Use generated shell completion files instead of static ones - Add fish shell completions References: [ 1 ] Bug #2226939 - CVE-2022-28923 caddy: an open redirection vulnerability which allows attackers to redirect users to phishing websites via crafted URLs [epel-9] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2226939 [ 2 ] Bug #2232267 - CVE-2022-41721 caddy: x/net/http2/h2c: request smuggling [epel-9] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2232267 nickle-2.93-1.el9 (FEDORA-EPEL-2023-eb74fe3a27) A programming language-based prototyping environment Update Information: * Add hex float support to scanf and printf * Fix bug in multiply when one factor is a power of two ChangeLog: * Thu Aug 24 2023 Michel Alexandre Salim - 2.93-1 - Update to 2.93 References: [ 1 ] Bug #2232948 - nickle-2.93 is available https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2232948 packit-0.79.1-1.el9 (FEDORA-EPEL-2023-e014d52363) A tool for integrating upstream projects with Fedora operating system Update Information: Automatic update for packit-0.79.1-1.el9. # **Changelog for packit** ``` * Tue Aug 22 2023 Packit - 0.79.1-1 - We have fixed a bug in getting allowed GPG keys when syncing the release for projects with Packit config in monorepo format in dist-git. (#2037) ``` ChangeLog: * Tue Aug 22 2023 Packit - 0.79.1-1 - We have fixed a bug in getting allowed GPG keys when syncing the release for projects with Packit config in monorepo format in dist-git. (#2037)
Re: Outage Notification - 2009-07-01 01:00 UTC
you are absolutly right ___ 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: Heads up: merging SPDX related PRs
On 23-08-2023 14:55, Miroslav Suchý wrote: Dne 23. 08. 23 v 12:44 Sandro napsal(a): On 20-08-2023 12:19, Miroslav Suchý wrote: If you are workshop participant and have PR opened for longer than 14 days then let me know and I will merge it. Here's the one I made during Flock workshop: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/90-Second-Portraits/pull-request/1 +1 Well, hours after I wrote above, the PR evolved into something broader. For folks interested, see the thread on the legal list [1]. Maybe it's a good idea to somehow tag these, so you get to see submitted SPDX related PRs instead of us having to report these manually? Interresting idea... but no. As reporter you can only tag the PR with tag that already exist in the project. And only owner of the project can create the tag. I see. Could some sysadmin with supercow powers insert a tag globally? Or would that be treading on a great many toes? [1] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/le...@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/FEDCV5RVSSXSESWSLOX3CJQF776EJU4W/ -- 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
Non-responsive maintainer check for juergh
Hello, Does anyone know how to contact juergh (Juerg Haefliger)? They are the sole maintainer of a single package in Fedora (cloud-utils), which hasn't seen any activity for almost 4 years. I've filed a non-responsive check bug here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2234606 Here are open bugs and PRs waiting for a response from them: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/cloud-utils/pull-request/3 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2051099 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2184158 Thanks, Ondrej ___ 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: Warning: DNF is unprotected
On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 07:39:07PM +0200, Robert-André Mauchin wrote: > Hello, > > Just a heads-up: for the upgrade to DNF5 in F39, we unprotected the DNF > package, which leaves all of our users vulnerable to a removal of DNF. > > > We have one affected user here: > https://bsd.network/@claudiom/110944941506724767 Not just on, #fedora-qa: 101441 I've just notice my rawhide system is without `dnf` command, and this ling dnf-automatic timers do not work. There is `dnf5` command available, though -- Tomasz Torcz 72->| 80->| to...@pipebreaker.pl 72->| 80->| ___ 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: Self Introduction: Adam Piasecki
On 8/24/23 15:48, Adam Piasecki wrote: Hello everyone, I hope this message finds you all well! My name is Adam Piasecki, and I've recently joined this mailing list to further immerse myself in such a vibrant open-source community ;) I joined Red Hat in 2022 as an intern, and ever since one thing has been constant: my sincere belief in the transformative power of open source. It's not just the technology; it’s the ethos, the collaborative spirit, and the boundless opportunities for innovation that have always resonated deeply with me. Recently I focused mostly on the CoreOS project, where I'm proudly working as an Associate Software Engineer (I find coreos-assembler quite intriguing). I truly believe in the value that CoreOS brings to the container ecosystem and I am eager to contribute to its growth. I am here not only to learn from each and every one of you but also to share my knowledge, insights, and creativity when possible. Please feel free to reach out if you have any questions or suggestions. I am always open to collaboration, brainstorming, and lending a hand wherever needed. Here's to many fruitful discussions! Warm regards, Adamsky, aka. c4rt0 Welcome to the Fedora Community, Adam! ___ 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: Donate 1 minute of your time to test upgrades from F38 to F39
On 8/23/23 20:22, Miroslav Suchý wrote: Do you want to make Fedora 39 better? Please spend 1 minute of your time and try to run: # Run this only if you use default Fedora modules # next time you run any DNF command default modules will be enabled again sudo dnf module reset '*' dnf --releasever=39 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f39 \ --enablerepo=updates-testing \ $(rpm -q fedora-repos-modular >/dev/null && echo --enablerepo=updates-testing-modular) \ --assumeno distro-sync This command does not replace `dnf system-upgrade`, but it will reveal potential problems. You may also run `dnf upgrade` before running this command. The `--assumeno` will just test the transaction, but does not make the actual upgrade. In case you hit dependency issues, please report it against the appropriate package. Or against fedora-obsolete-packages if that package should be removed in Fedora 39. Please check existing reports against fedora-obsolete-packages first: https://red.ht/2kuBDPu and also there is already bunch of "Fails to install" (F39FailsToInstall) reports: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?bug_id=2168845_id_type=anddependson=tvp_id=12486533 Two notes: * you may want to run the same command with dnf5 to help test new dnf. * this command found zero issues on my personal system - great work all everybody! Thank you Miroslav sudo dnf --releasever=39 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f39 \ --enablerepo=updates-testing \ $(rpm -q fedora-repos-modular >/dev/null && echo --enablerepo=updates-testing-modular) \ --assumeno distro-sync Problem 1: problem with installed package mangohud-0.6.9.1-1.fc38.i686 - package mangohud-0.6.9-1.fc39.i686 from fedora requires libfmt.so.9, but none of the providers can be installed - package mangohud-0.6.9-1.fc39.i686 from updates-testing-modular requires libfmt.so.9, but none of the providers can be installed - mangohud-0.6.9.1-1.fc38.i686 from @System does not belong to a distupgrade repository - fmt-9.1.0-2.fc38.i686 from @System does not belong to a distupgrade repository Problem 2: problem with installed package mesa-va-drivers-freeworld-23.1.5-1.fc38.x86_64 - package mesa-va-drivers-freeworld-23.1.5-1.fc39.x86_64 from rpmfusion-free requires mesa-filesystem(x86-64) = 23.1.5, but none of the providers can be installed - mesa-va-drivers-freeworld-23.1.5-1.fc38.x86_64 from @System does not belong to a distupgrade repository - mesa-filesystem-23.1.5-1.fc38.x86_64 from @System does not belong to a distupgrade repository -> RPMFusion issue probably Problem 3: problem with installed package mangohud-0.6.9.1-1.fc38.x86_64 - package mangohud-0.6.9.1-1.fc38.x86_64 from @System requires libspdlog.so.1.11()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed - package mangohud-0.6.9-1.fc39.x86_64 from fedora requires libspdlog.so.1.11()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed - package mangohud-0.6.9-1.fc39.x86_64 from updates-testing-modular requires libspdlog.so.1.11()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed - spdlog-1.11.0-5.fc38.x86_64 from @System does not belong to a distupgrade repository Problem 4: problem with installed package mesa-dri-drivers-23.1.5-1.fc38.x86_64 - package mesa-dri-drivers-23.2.0~rc2-3.fc39.x86_64 from fedora requires mesa-filesystem(x86-64) = 23.2.0~rc2-3.fc39, but none of the providers can be installed - package mesa-dri-drivers-23.2.0~rc2-3.fc39.x86_64 from updates-testing-modular requires mesa-filesystem(x86-64) = 23.2.0~rc2-3.fc39, but none of the providers can be installed - cannot install both mesa-filesystem-23.2.0~rc2-3.fc39.x86_64 from fedora and mesa-filesystem-23.1.5-1.fc38.x86_64 from @System - cannot install both mesa-filesystem-23.2.0~rc2-3.fc39.x86_64 from updates-testing-modular and mesa-filesystem-23.1.5-1.fc38.x86_64 from @System - package mesa-vdpau-drivers-freeworld-23.1.5-1.fc39.x86_64 from rpmfusion-free requires mesa-filesystem(x86-64) = 23.1.5, but none of the providers can be installed - problem with installed package mesa-vdpau-drivers-freeworld-23.1.5-1.fc38.x86_64 - mesa-vdpau-drivers-freeworld-23.1.5-1.fc38.x86_64 from @System does not belong to a distupgrade repository - mesa-dri-drivers-23.1.5-1.fc38.x86_64 from @System does not belong to a distupgrade repository Problem 5: package steam-1.0.0.78-2.fc39.i686 from rpmfusion-nonfree requires mesa-dri-drivers(x86-32), but none of the providers can be installed - mesa-dri-drivers-23.2.0~rc2-3.fc39.i686 from updates-testing-modular does not belong to a distupgrade repository - mesa-dri-drivers-23.2.0~rc2-3.fc39.i686 from fedora does not belong to a distupgrade repository - package mesa-dri-drivers-23.2.0~rc2-3.fc39.x86_64 from fedora requires mesa-filesystem(x86-64) = 23.2.0~rc2-3.fc39, but none of the providers can be installed - package mesa-dri-drivers-23.2.0~rc2-3.fc39.x86_64 from
Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2023-08-24)
Minutes: https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-2/2023-08-24/fesco.2023-08-24-17.04.html Minutes (text): https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-2/2023-08-24/fesco.2023-08-24-17.04.txt Log: https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-2/2023-08-24/fesco.2023-08-24-17.04.log.html Meeting summary --- * init process (zbyszek_, 17:04:19) * #3059 F39 incomplete changes: 100% complete deadline (zbyszek_, 17:05:18) * Anaconda WebUI for Fedora Workstation by default (zbyszek_, 17:05:42) * Changes were pushed today. The Change is in progress. (zbyszek_, 17:07:23) * Build Fedora Workstation live ISO with Image Builder (zbyszek_, 17:07:30) * This is still being worked out, but it's non-blocking and additive. (zbyszek_, 17:08:35) * Deprecating libuser and removing passwd package from Fedora (zbyszek_, 17:08:42) * LINK: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2233275#c1 (zbyszek_, 17:09:26) * AGREED: Change is deferred to F40 (+7, 0, 0) (zbyszek_, 17:12:10) * Allow Removal of tzdata (zbyszek_, 17:12:23) * This isn't fully implemented yet, we'll revisit on the next meeting. (zbyszek_, 17:15:24) * LLVM 17 (zbyszek_, 17:15:41) * Owners decided to move to rc3, and it's being built now. (zbyszek_, 17:18:14) * Flatpaks without Modules (zbyszek_, 17:18:27) * LINK: https://pagure.io/releng/issue/11626 seems to be the blocker. (zbyszek_, 17:19:34) * This is pretty much done... just a few small things being sorted. (zbyszek_, 17:19:59) * Make Toolbx a release-blocking deliverable and have release-blocking test criteria (zbyszek_, 17:20:12) * This is done except for a single PR to make it blocking in the compose config. (zbyszek_, 17:21:17) * LINK: https://pagure.io/pungi-fedora/pull-request/1195 (nirik, 17:21:56) * LINK: https://pagure.io/pungi-fedora/pull-request/1194 (Son_Goku, 17:22:12) * https://pagure.io/pungi-fedora/pull-request/1195 is about to be merged. (zbyszek_, 17:22:14) * and also https://pagure.io/pungi-fedora/pull-request/1194. (zbyszek_, 17:22:32) * RPM 4.19 (zbyszek_, 17:22:45) * Beta was built 3 months ago. Bugs are being fixed and we're waiting for the final version. This is on track. (zbyszek_, 17:24:29) * Modernize Thread Building Blocks for Fedora 39 (zbyszek_, 17:24:45) * LINK: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2175941#c1 (zbyszek_, 17:25:32) * This seems stalled, but it would be OK to land late if the dependencies can be rebuilt. We'll revisit next week. (zbyszek_, 17:26:27) * SPDX License Phase 2 (zbyszek_, 17:26:42) * This is a neverending task. The Change is in progress. (zbyszek_, 17:28:19) * LegacyXorgDriverRemoval (zbyszek_, 17:28:34) * It seems no work has been done on this. (zbyszek_, 17:32:40) * ACTION: ajax to look at the Change again. (zbyszek_, 17:33:42) * Python 3.12 (zbyszek_, 17:34:05) * python3-3.12.0~rc1-1 is in F39 and most packages have been rebuilt. (zbyszek_, 17:36:16) * LibreOffice 7.6 (zbyszek_, 17:36:40) * LINK: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=2278778 (decathorpe, 17:37:39) * This is in progress. Dependencies have been rebuilt in a side tag. (zbyszek_, 17:37:55) * LINK: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=2278778 (zbyszek_, 17:38:13) * Enable fwupd-refresh.timer by default on IoT, CoreOS & Server editions (zbyszek_, 17:38:31) * LINK: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/fedora-release/pull-request/279 (zbyszek_, 17:39:05) * LINK: https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-config/pull/2562 (zbyszek_, 17:39:10) * This is actively being worked on. We'll revisit next week. (zbyszek_, 17:39:59) * No custom Qt theming for Fedora Workstation (zbyszek_, 17:40:16) * LINK: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/1184 (Son_Goku, 17:40:58) * Builds have been done after the deadline, so a FE has been requested. (zbyszek_, 17:41:33) * Passkey authentication for centrally managed users (zbyszek_, 17:41:46) * This is mostly implemented, but is blocked on selinux policy changes and possibly some udev rule changes. (zbyszek_, 17:46:39) * Bigger ESP (zbyszek_, 17:47:00) * The size change has caused problems, but just reverting it might also cause problems. (zbyszek_, 17:49:39) * Let's discuss this in the bug and revisit next week. (zbyszek_, 17:52:15) * Enable bootupd for Fedora Silverblue & Kinoite (zbyszek_, 17:52:23) * We'll revisit this next week. Owners plan to file a FE. (zbyszek_, 17:54:18) * Next week's chair (zbyszek_, 17:54:53) * ACTION: Son_Goku will chair next meeting (zbyszek_, 17:55:30) * Open Floor (zbyszek_, 17:55:43) Meeting ended at 17:58:14 UTC. Action Items * ajax to look at the Change again. * Son_Goku will chair next meeting Action Items, by person --- * Son_Goku * Son_Goku will
Re: Fedora CoreOS Meeting Minutes 2023-08-23
Hello, On Wednesday, August 23, 2023 2:27:40 PM EDT Steven Presti wrote: > * New Package Request: audit (spresti, 17:04:16) > * LINK: https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/1362 > (spresti, 17:04:29) > * LINK: > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/audit/blob/rawhide/f/audit.spec#_20 > (travier, 17:10:28) > * LINK: > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/audit/blob/rawhide/f/audit.spec#_152 > (dustymabe, 17:12:01) > * LINK: > > https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/1362#issuecomment-1 > 690335372 (travier, 17:13:10) > * AGREED: We'll fix the remaining issues in the audit package and > we'll include it in Fedora CoreOS once ready (spresti, 17:17:40) Out of curiosity, is this being done in the context of F39 or F40? The reason I ask is that a big change is in the works for the audit system for F40. I was waiting for the F40 Change Proposal cycle to be open before saying anything. Basically it amounts to separating augenrules/auditctl into it's own service to load audit rules which the auditd service will depend on. This way people happy using journald for audit logs can avoid installing the audit package. This will need extra eyes - hence it will go through the Change Proposal process to ensure it works well. So, if this is in the context of F40, it may warrant another look at the plans. -Steve ___ 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: Donate 1 minute of your time to test upgrades from F38 to F39
> just a note rpmfusion free and nofree not ready > > What is the issue? I branched rpmfusion repo two weeks ago $ sudo repoclosure --check rpmfusion-free --check rpmfusion-nonfree Last metadata expiration check: 1:27:59 ago on Thu 24 Aug 2023 17:14:49 BST. package: mesa-va-drivers-freeworld-23.1.5-1.fc39.i686 from rpmfusion-free unresolved deps (1): mesa-filesystem(x86-32) = 23.1.5 package: mesa-va-drivers-freeworld-23.1.5-1.fc39.x86_64 from rpmfusion-free unresolved deps (1): mesa-filesystem(x86-64) = 23.1.5 package: mesa-vdpau-drivers-freeworld-23.1.5-1.fc39.i686 from rpmfusion-free unresolved deps (1): mesa-filesystem(x86-32) = 23.1.5 package: mesa-vdpau-drivers-freeworld-23.1.5-1.fc39.x86_64 from rpmfusion-free unresolved deps (1): mesa-filesystem(x86-64) = 23.1.5 package: telegram-desktop-4.8.4-2.fc39.x86_64 from rpmfusion-free unresolved deps (1): qt6-qtbase(x86-64) = 6.5.1 Error: Repoclosure ended with unresolved dependencies (5) across 5 packages. telegram-desktop is fixed and awaiting to be pushed to the repo. ___ 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
Warning: DNF is unprotected
Hello, Just a heads-up: for the upgrade to DNF5 in F39, we unprotected the DNF package, which leaves all of our users vulnerable to a removal of DNF. And since the delaying of DNF5, we haven't re-protected it. https://github.com/rpm-software-management/dnf/commit/352b174a0b4ce2048ef1a25b785f20449e2addc2 On a F38 system: $ cat /etc/dnf/protected.d/dnf.conf # DNF is obsoleted in Fedora 39 by DNF 5 and should no longer be marked as protected. # dnf We have one affected user here: https://bsd.network/@claudiom/110944941506724767 I've filed: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/dnf/issues/1982 If anyone can fix this quickly, that would be neat. I'm not sure if the config(noreplace) should be brought back in the SPEC so I leave this to the specialists. Thanks. Robert-André ___ 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
F40 Change Proposal: Restructure Kubernetes Packages
== Summary == New or revised (sub)package names are proposed for Kubernetes packages in Fedora. The new names will better align Kubernetes with current usage as documented upstream and improve alignment of package content with current Fedora practices and standards. See https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/f40-change-proposal-restructure-kubernetes-packages/87806/1 for details and to reply. ___ devel-announce mailing list -- devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-announce-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-annou...@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
F40 Change Proposal: SQLAlchemy 2
== Summary == The python-sqlalchemy package is upgraded to major version 2. A compatibility package python-sqlalchemy1.4 is added to the distribution to cater for software which doesn’t yet use the new API, this can be installed side-by-side. Other packages using SQLAlchemy are identified and, if necessary, steps are taken to ensure they use the correct major version package. See https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/f40-change-proposal-sqlalchemy-2/87805 for details and to reply. ___ devel-announce mailing list -- devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-announce-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-annou...@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
F40 Change Proposal: Restructure Kubernetes Packages
== Summary == New or revised (sub)package names are proposed for Kubernetes packages in Fedora. The new names will better align Kubernetes with current usage as documented upstream and improve alignment of package content with current Fedora practices and standards. See https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/f40-change-proposal-restructure-kubernetes-packages/87806/1 for details and to reply. ___ devel-announce mailing list -- devel-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-announce-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-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
F40 Change Proposal: SQLAlchemy 2
== Summary == The python-sqlalchemy package is upgraded to major version 2. A compatibility package python-sqlalchemy1.4 is added to the distribution to cater for software which doesn’t yet use the new API, this can be installed side-by-side. Other packages using SQLAlchemy are identified and, if necessary, steps are taken to ensure they use the correct major version package. See https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/f40-change-proposal-sqlalchemy-2/87805 for details and to reply. ___ devel-announce mailing list -- devel-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-announce-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-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Donate 1 minute of your time to test upgrades from F38 to F39
> just a note rpmfusion free and nofree not ready > > What do you mean? I branched rpmfusion two week ago, the repo deps look fine to me. $ sudo repoclosure --check rpmfusion-free --check rpmfusion-nonfreetanita999fly Last metadata expiration check: 1:07:49 ago on Thu 24 Aug 2023 17:14:49 BST. package: mesa-va-drivers-freeworld-23.1.5-1.fc39.i686 from rpmfusion-free unresolved deps (1): mesa-filesystem(x86-32) = 23.1.5 package: mesa-va-drivers-freeworld-23.1.5-1.fc39.x86_64 from rpmfusion-free unresolved deps (1): mesa-filesystem(x86-64) = 23.1.5 package: mesa-vdpau-drivers-freeworld-23.1.5-1.fc39.i686 from rpmfusion-free unresolved deps (1): mesa-filesystem(x86-32) = 23.1.5 package: mesa-vdpau-drivers-freeworld-23.1.5-1.fc39.x86_64 from rpmfusion-free unresolved deps (1): mesa-filesystem(x86-64) = 23.1.5 package: telegram-desktop-4.8.4-2.fc39.x86_64 from rpmfusion-free unresolved deps (1): qt6-qtbase(x86-64) = 6.5.1 Error: Repoclosure ended with unresolved dependencies (5) across 5 packages. telegram-desktop fix is waiting to be pushed. ___ 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: Donate 1 minute of your time to test upgrades from F38 to F39
BTW, after removing python3-slip, python3-slip-dbus and python3-decorator, both dnf5 and dnf produce no errors On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 6:35 AM Tom London wrote: > > > On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 3:39 AM Nicola Sella wrote: > >> Thanks Mirek, >> >> dnf --releasever=39 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f39 \ >>> --enablerepo=updates-testing \ >>> $(rpm -q fedora-repos-modular >/dev/null && echo >>> --enablerepo=updates-testing-modular) \ >>> --assumeno distro-sync >>> >> Allow me to steal some testing. :) >> I would like to point out that running the same command, replacing dnf >> with dnf5, should work and produce the same transaction. >> I suggest running both commands and report eventual errors. This would be >> of great help for the dnf team to implement/debug distro-upgrade commands. >> >> I am getting no errors in the transaction and have the same package list >> with both package managers. >> >> Thanks, >> >> >> >> I get this with dnf5: > > Problem 1: package python3-slip-0.6.4-29.fc38.noarch requires python(abi) > = 3.11, but none of the providers can be installed > - cannot install both python3-3.11.4-1.fc38.x86_64 and > python3-3.12.0~rc1-1.fc39.x86_64 > - cannot install the best update candidate for package > python3-slip-0.6.4-29.fc38.noarch > - cannot install the best update candidate for package > python3-3.11.4-1.fc38.x86_64 > Problem 2: package python3-3.11.4-1.fc38.x86_64 requires > python3-libs(x86-64) = 3.11.4-1.fc38, but none of the providers can be > installed > - package python3-slip-dbus-0.6.4-29.fc38.noarch requires python(abi) = > 3.11, but none of the providers can be installed > - cannot install both python3-libs-3.11.4-1.fc38.x86_64 and > python3-libs-3.12.0~rc1-1.fc39.x86_64 > - cannot install the best update candidate for package > python3-slip-dbus-0.6.4-29.fc38.noarch > - cannot install the best update candidate for package > python3-libs-3.11.4-1.fc38.x86_64 > Problem 3: package ibus-1.5.29~rc1-2.fc39.x86_64 requires python(abi) = > 3.12, but none of the providers can be installed > - python3-3.12.0~rc1-1.fc39.i686 has inferior architecture > - cannot install both python3-3.11.4-1.fc38.x86_64 and > python3-3.12.0~rc1-1.fc39.x86_64 > - problem with installed package > - package python3-slip-dbus-0.6.4-29.fc38.noarch requires python(abi) = > 3.11, but none of the providers can be installed > - cannot install the best update candidate for package > ibus-1.5.28-6.fc38.x86_64 > Problem 4: package vtk-9.2.6-6.fc39.x86_64 requires > libpython3.12.so.1.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed > - cannot install both python3-libs-3.11.4-1.fc38.x86_64 and > python3-libs-3.12.0~rc1-1.fc39.x86_64 > - package python3-3.11.4-1.fc38.x86_64 requires python3-libs(x86-64) = > 3.11.4-1.fc38, but none of the providers can be installed > - problem with installed package > - package python3-slip-0.6.4-29.fc38.noarch requires python(abi) = 3.11, > but none of the providers can be installed > - cannot install the best update candidate for package > vtk-9.2.5-2.fc38.x86_64 > > and this with dnf: > > Problem 1: package python3-slip-0.6.4-29.fc38.noarch requires python(abi) > = 3.11, but none of the providers can be installed > - cannot install both python3-3.11.4-1.fc38.x86_64 and > python3-3.12.0~rc1-1.fc39.x86_64 > - cannot install the best update candidate for package > python3-slip-0.6.4-29.fc38.noarch > - cannot install the best update candidate for package > python3-3.11.4-1.fc38.x86_64 > Problem 2: package python3-3.11.4-1.fc38.x86_64 requires > python3-libs(x86-64) = 3.11.4-1.fc38, but none of the providers can be > installed > - package python3-slip-dbus-0.6.4-29.fc38.noarch requires python(abi) = > 3.11, but none of the providers can be installed > - cannot install both python3-libs-3.11.4-1.fc38.x86_64 and > python3-libs-3.12.0~rc1-1.fc39.x86_64 > - cannot install the best update candidate for package > python3-slip-dbus-0.6.4-29.fc38.noarch > - cannot install the best update candidate for package > python3-libs-3.11.4-1.fc38.x86_64 > Problem 3: package torbrowser-launcher-0.3.6-6.fc39.noarch requires > python(abi) = 3.12, but none of the providers can be installed > - python3-3.12.0~rc1-1.fc39.i686 has inferior architecture > - cannot install both python3-3.11.4-1.fc38.x86_64 and > python3-3.12.0~rc1-1.fc39.x86_64 > - problem with installed package > - package python3-slip-dbus-0.6.4-29.fc38.noarch requires python(abi) = > 3.11, but none of the providers can be installed > - cannot install the best update candidate for package > torbrowser-launcher-0.3.6-3.fc38.noarch > Problem 4: package vtk-9.2.6-6.fc39.x86_64 requires > libpython3.12.so.1.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed > - cannot install both python3-libs-3.11.4-1.fc38.x86_64 and > python3-libs-3.12.0~rc1-1.fc39.x86_64 > - package python3-3.11.4-1.fc38.x86_64 requires python3-libs(x86-64) = > 3.11.4-1.fc38, but none of the
[CANCELED] Re: [Fedocal] Reminder meeting : ELN SIG
No meeting this week. On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 8:00 AM wrote: > > Dear all, > > You are kindly invited to the meeting: >ELN SIG on 2023-08-25 from 12:00:00 to 13:00:00 US/Eastern >At fedora-meet...@irc.libera.chat > > The meeting will be about: ___ 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
Schedule for Thursday's FESCo Meeting (2023-08-24)
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FESCo meeting Thursday at 17:00UTC in #fedora-meeting-2 on irc.libera.chat. To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto or run: date -d '2023-08-24 17:00 UTC' Links to all issues to be discussed can be found at: https://pagure.io/fesco/report/meeting_agenda = Discussed and Voted in the Ticket = #3050 Request major version update exception - Thunderbird 115 https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3050 APPROVED (+4, 1, 0) = Followups = = New business = #3059 F39 incomplete changes: 100% complete deadline https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3059 = Open Floor = For more complete details, please visit each individual issue. The report of the agenda items can be found at https://pagure.io/fesco/report/meeting_agenda If you would like to add something to this agenda, you can reply to this e-mail, file a new issue at https://pagure.io/fesco, e-mail me directly, or bring it up at the end of the meeting, during the open floor topic. Note that added topics may be deferred until the following meeting. ___ 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: zlib-ng as a compat replacement for zlib
As far as I can tell it's mostly legacy removal and adoption of (now) standardized types, such as "z_size_t" being replaced by "size_t" There is a document here that tries to describe the different considerations: https://github.com/zlib-ng/zlib-ng/blob/develop/PORTING.md "The zlib-ng native has implemented some modernization and simplifications in its API, intended to make life easier for application developers." "In certain places zlib-ng native uses more appropriate data types, removing the need for some workarounds in the API compared to zlib." In another discussion the maintainer said that compat mode still includes all of the performance improvements. There is one compatibility hiccup mentioned on the porting document which also affects compat mode, which is that if you provide your own buffer, zlib-ng needs a larger buffer than zlib regardless of which way it is compiled. ___ 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
Self Introduction: Adam Piasecki
Hello everyone, I hope this message finds you all well! My name is Adam Piasecki, and I've recently joined this mailing list to further immerse myself in such a vibrant open-source community ;) I joined Red Hat in 2022 as an intern, and ever since one thing has been constant: my sincere belief in the transformative power of open source. It's not just the technology; it’s the ethos, the collaborative spirit, and the boundless opportunities for innovation that have always resonated deeply with me. Recently I focused mostly on the CoreOS project, where I'm proudly working as an Associate Software Engineer (I find coreos-assembler quite intriguing). I truly believe in the value that CoreOS brings to the container ecosystem and I am eager to contribute to its growth. I am here not only to learn from each and every one of you but also to share my knowledge, insights, and creativity when possible. Please feel free to reach out if you have any questions or suggestions. I am always open to collaboration, brainstorming, and lending a hand wherever needed. Here's to many fruitful discussions! Warm regards, Adamsky, aka. c4rt0 ___ 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: Donate 1 minute of your time to test upgrades from F38 to F39
On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 3:39 AM Nicola Sella wrote: > Thanks Mirek, > > dnf --releasever=39 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f39 \ >> --enablerepo=updates-testing \ >> $(rpm -q fedora-repos-modular >/dev/null && echo >> --enablerepo=updates-testing-modular) \ >> --assumeno distro-sync >> > Allow me to steal some testing. :) > I would like to point out that running the same command, replacing dnf > with dnf5, should work and produce the same transaction. > I suggest running both commands and report eventual errors. This would be > of great help for the dnf team to implement/debug distro-upgrade commands. > > I am getting no errors in the transaction and have the same package list > with both package managers. > > Thanks, > > > > I get this with dnf5: Problem 1: package python3-slip-0.6.4-29.fc38.noarch requires python(abi) = 3.11, but none of the providers can be installed - cannot install both python3-3.11.4-1.fc38.x86_64 and python3-3.12.0~rc1-1.fc39.x86_64 - cannot install the best update candidate for package python3-slip-0.6.4-29.fc38.noarch - cannot install the best update candidate for package python3-3.11.4-1.fc38.x86_64 Problem 2: package python3-3.11.4-1.fc38.x86_64 requires python3-libs(x86-64) = 3.11.4-1.fc38, but none of the providers can be installed - package python3-slip-dbus-0.6.4-29.fc38.noarch requires python(abi) = 3.11, but none of the providers can be installed - cannot install both python3-libs-3.11.4-1.fc38.x86_64 and python3-libs-3.12.0~rc1-1.fc39.x86_64 - cannot install the best update candidate for package python3-slip-dbus-0.6.4-29.fc38.noarch - cannot install the best update candidate for package python3-libs-3.11.4-1.fc38.x86_64 Problem 3: package ibus-1.5.29~rc1-2.fc39.x86_64 requires python(abi) = 3.12, but none of the providers can be installed - python3-3.12.0~rc1-1.fc39.i686 has inferior architecture - cannot install both python3-3.11.4-1.fc38.x86_64 and python3-3.12.0~rc1-1.fc39.x86_64 - problem with installed package - package python3-slip-dbus-0.6.4-29.fc38.noarch requires python(abi) = 3.11, but none of the providers can be installed - cannot install the best update candidate for package ibus-1.5.28-6.fc38.x86_64 Problem 4: package vtk-9.2.6-6.fc39.x86_64 requires libpython3.12.so.1.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed - cannot install both python3-libs-3.11.4-1.fc38.x86_64 and python3-libs-3.12.0~rc1-1.fc39.x86_64 - package python3-3.11.4-1.fc38.x86_64 requires python3-libs(x86-64) = 3.11.4-1.fc38, but none of the providers can be installed - problem with installed package - package python3-slip-0.6.4-29.fc38.noarch requires python(abi) = 3.11, but none of the providers can be installed - cannot install the best update candidate for package vtk-9.2.5-2.fc38.x86_64 and this with dnf: Problem 1: package python3-slip-0.6.4-29.fc38.noarch requires python(abi) = 3.11, but none of the providers can be installed - cannot install both python3-3.11.4-1.fc38.x86_64 and python3-3.12.0~rc1-1.fc39.x86_64 - cannot install the best update candidate for package python3-slip-0.6.4-29.fc38.noarch - cannot install the best update candidate for package python3-3.11.4-1.fc38.x86_64 Problem 2: package python3-3.11.4-1.fc38.x86_64 requires python3-libs(x86-64) = 3.11.4-1.fc38, but none of the providers can be installed - package python3-slip-dbus-0.6.4-29.fc38.noarch requires python(abi) = 3.11, but none of the providers can be installed - cannot install both python3-libs-3.11.4-1.fc38.x86_64 and python3-libs-3.12.0~rc1-1.fc39.x86_64 - cannot install the best update candidate for package python3-slip-dbus-0.6.4-29.fc38.noarch - cannot install the best update candidate for package python3-libs-3.11.4-1.fc38.x86_64 Problem 3: package torbrowser-launcher-0.3.6-6.fc39.noarch requires python(abi) = 3.12, but none of the providers can be installed - python3-3.12.0~rc1-1.fc39.i686 has inferior architecture - cannot install both python3-3.11.4-1.fc38.x86_64 and python3-3.12.0~rc1-1.fc39.x86_64 - problem with installed package - package python3-slip-dbus-0.6.4-29.fc38.noarch requires python(abi) = 3.11, but none of the providers can be installed - cannot install the best update candidate for package torbrowser-launcher-0.3.6-3.fc38.noarch Problem 4: package vtk-9.2.6-6.fc39.x86_64 requires libpython3.12.so.1.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed - cannot install both python3-libs-3.11.4-1.fc38.x86_64 and python3-libs-3.12.0~rc1-1.fc39.x86_64 - package python3-3.11.4-1.fc38.x86_64 requires python3-libs(x86-64) = 3.11.4-1.fc38, but none of the providers can be installed - problem with installed package - package python3-slip-0.6.4-29.fc38.noarch requires python(abi) = 3.11, but none of the providers can be installed - cannot install the best update candidate for package vtk-9.2.5-2.fc38.x86_64 Notice that Problem 3 is different. tom -- Tom London
Re: Donate 1 minute of your time to test upgrades from F38 to F39
On 8/23/23 04:12 PM, Richard Shaw wrote: On Wed, Aug 23, 2023 at 1:41 PM Steven A. Falco mailto:stevenfa...@gmail.com>> wrote: On 8/23/23 02:22 PM, Miroslav Suchý wrote: > dnf --releasever=39 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f39 \ > --enablerepo=updates-testing \ > $(rpm -q fedora-repos-modular >/dev/null && echo --enablerepo=updates-testing-modular) \ > --assumeno distro-sync Problem 1: problem with installed package freecad-1:0.20.2-3.fc38.x86_64 - freecad-1:0.20.2-3.fc38.x86_64 from @System does not belong to a distupgrade repository - nothing provides libboost_python311.so.1.81.0()(64bit) needed by freecad-1:0.20.2-4.fc39.x86_64 from fedora - nothing provides libboost_python311.so.1.81.0()(64bit) needed by freecad-1:0.20.2-4.fc39.x86_64 from fedora-modular - nothing provides libboost_python311.so.1.81.0()(64bit) needed by freecad-1:0.20.2-4.fc39.x86_64 from updates-modular - nothing provides libboost_python311.so.1.81.0()(64bit) needed by freecad-1:0.20.2-4.fc39.x86_64 from updates-testing-modular Problem 2: problem with installed package freecad-data-1:0.20.2-3.fc38.noarch - package freecad-data-1:0.20.2-4.fc39.noarch from fedora requires freecad = 1:0.20.2-4.fc39, but none of the providers can be installed - package freecad-data-1:0.20.2-4.fc39.noarch from fedora-modular requires freecad = 1:0.20.2-4.fc39, but none of the providers can be installed - package freecad-data-1:0.20.2-4.fc39.noarch from updates-modular requires freecad = 1:0.20.2-4.fc39, but none of the providers can be installed - package freecad-data-1:0.20.2-4.fc39.noarch from updates-testing-modular requires freecad = 1:0.20.2-4.fc39, but none of the providers can be installed - freecad-data-1:0.20.2-3.fc38.noarch from @System does not belong to a distupgrade repository - nothing provides libboost_python311.so.1.81.0()(64bit) needed by freecad-1:0.20.2-4.fc39.x86_64 from fedora - nothing provides libboost_python311.so.1.81.0()(64bit) needed by freecad-1:0.20.2-4.fc39.x86_64 from fedora-modular - nothing provides libboost_python311.so.1.81.0()(64bit) needed by freecad-1:0.20.2-4.fc39.x86_64 from updates-modular - nothing provides libboost_python311.so.1.81.0()(64bit) needed by freecad-1:0.20.2-4.fc39.x86_64 from updates-testing-modular Problem 3: problem with installed package python3-shiboken2-1:5.15.7-2.fc38.x86_64 - package python3-shiboken2-1:5.15.7-2.fc38.x86_64 from @System requires python(abi) = 3.11, but none of the providers can be installed - package python3-shiboken2-1:5.15.7-2.fc38.x86_64 from fedora requires python(abi) = 3.11, but none of the providers can be installed - package python3-shiboken2-1:5.15.7-2.fc38.x86_64 from fedora-modular requires python(abi) = 3.11, but none of the providers can be installed - package python3-shiboken2-1:5.15.7-2.fc38.x86_64 from updates-modular requires python(abi) = 3.11, but none of the providers can be installed - package python3-shiboken2-1:5.15.7-2.fc38.x86_64 from updates-testing-modular requires python(abi) = 3.11, but none of the providers can be installed - python3-3.11.4-1.fc38.x86_64 from @System does not belong to a distupgrade repository Problem 4: problem with installed package python3-pyside2-1:5.15.7-2.fc38.x86_64 - package python3-pyside2-1:5.15.7-2.fc38.x86_64 from @System requires python(abi) = 3.11, but none of the providers can be installed - package python3-pyside2-1:5.15.7-2.fc38.x86_64 from fedora requires python(abi) = 3.11, but none of the providers can be installed - package python3-pyside2-1:5.15.7-2.fc38.x86_64 from fedora-modular requires python(abi) = 3.11, but none of the providers can be installed - package python3-pyside2-1:5.15.7-2.fc38.x86_64 from updates-modular requires python(abi) = 3.11, but none of the providers can be installed - package python3-pyside2-1:5.15.7-2.fc38.x86_64 from updates-testing-modular requires python(abi) = 3.11, but none of the providers can be installed - package python3-3.11.4-1.fc38.x86_64 from @System requires python3-libs(x86-64) = 3.11.4-1.fc38, but none of the providers can be installed - python3-libs-3.11.4-1.fc38.x86_64 from @System does not belong to a distupgrade repository FreeCAD is a known issue since the upgrade to Python 3.12. PySide2 is not compatible with Python 3.12 and upstream has no intention of making it compatible as they are only supporting PySide6 for Qt6 now. There's also a TBB dependency issue. For now it would be better to use the appimage. Thanks, Richard - I had missed that thread. Steve ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of
Fedora 39 compose report: 20230824.n.0 changes
OLD: Fedora-39-20230823.n.0 NEW: Fedora-39-20230824.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:1 Dropped images: 1 Added packages: 0 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 2 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 0 B Size of dropped packages:0 B Size of upgraded packages: 25.84 MiB Size of downgraded packages: 0 B Size change of upgraded packages: 912.78 KiB Size change of downgraded packages: 0 B = ADDED IMAGES = Image: Kinoite dvd-ostree aarch64 Path: Kinoite/aarch64/iso/Fedora-Kinoite-ostree-aarch64-39-20230824.n.0.iso = DROPPED IMAGES = Image: Workstation live aarch64 Path: Workstation/aarch64/iso/Fedora-Workstation-Live-aarch64-39-20230823.n.0.iso = ADDED PACKAGES = = DROPPED PACKAGES = = UPGRADED PACKAGES = Package: anaconda-39.32-1.fc39 Old package: anaconda-39.29-1.fc39 Summary: Graphical system installer RPMs: anaconda anaconda-core anaconda-dracut anaconda-gui anaconda-install-env-deps anaconda-install-img-deps anaconda-live anaconda-tui anaconda-webui anaconda-widgets anaconda-widgets-devel Size: 23.58 MiB Size change: 889.79 KiB Changelog: * Mon Aug 21 2023 Packit - 39.30-1 - webui: update pixel tests (kkoukiou) - webui: move groupedAdditional content to PageGroup as specified in the documentation (kkoukiou) - webui: port disk selector to the new Select implementation (kkoukiou) - webui: tests: workaround non-unique selector for the modal (kkoukiou) - webui: Upgrade to Patternfly 5 (kkoukiou) - Improve image building docs (mkolman) - Improve image building docs (mkolman) - webui: Do not show unused devices on the review page (vtrefny) - liveinst: Port to polkit (rstrode) - webui: Fixed typo to launch Live OS ISO with test/webui_testvm.py script (akankovs) - webui: Automatically prefill mount point for swap devices (vtrefny) - manual: Allow using swap without reformatting (vtrefny) - Update translations from Weblate for master (github-actions) - webui: Allow changing and removing duplicate required mount points (vtrefny) - webui: test editing of the log in error reporting dialog (rvykydal) - Correct spelling of "formatted" (awilliam) - webui: Remove obsolete check for btrfs reformat support (vtrefny) - Add realease notes for keyboard from live system (jkonecny) - Add support for virtual console keymap from live (jkonecny) - Add live environment keyboard settings support (jkonecny) - Don't directly copy webui files in makeupdates script (mkolman) - webui: increase default size of log review text area in critical error dialog (rvykydal) - test: allow booting a Live OS ISO with test/webui_testvm.py script (kkoukiou) - webui: use monospace font in critical error dialog (rvykydal) - webui: disable error reporting button when reading log for review (rvykydal) - webui: in Critical Error test click to report to BZ only after the log is read (rvykydal) - Move get_missing_keyboard_configuration method (jkonecny) - Fix typo in the LocalizationInterface docstring (jkonecny) - Add execWithCaptureAsLiveUser to run as liveuser (jkonecny) - Extract liveuser data from help to generic tooling (jkonecny) - make: Document downloading .po from l10n repo (vslavik) - make: Update POT from branch, not pinned commit (vslavik) - webui: tests: cleanup webui.log in the end of the test (kkoukiou) - webui: give better feedback to user after 'Report issue' was clicked (kkoukiou) - webui: add testing of log existence in critical error handling (rvykydal) - webui: translate critical error context only in the dialog (rvykydal) - webui: use Critical Error dialog for critical failures on Back button (rvykydal) - webui: use Critical Error dialog in installation progress (rvykydal) - webui: use Critical Error dialog to handle erros in getting data about storage (rvykydal) - webui: display also the background wizard page with Critical Error dialog (rvykydal) - webui: use form layout and add log review of journal (rvykydal) - webui: add button for reporting to Bugzilla to CriticalError dialog (rvykydal) - webui: tests: convert testErrorHandling to a non-destructive test (kkoukiou) - webui: tests: remove unused variable (kkoukiou) - webui: use storage exception for critical error dialog test (rvykydal) - webui: move partition_disk to Storage helper class (rvykydal) - webui: use Critical Error dialog to handle erros in getting data about storage (rvykydal) - webui: use Critical Error dialog for disks rescan (rvykydal) - webui: use Critical Error dialog in installation progress (rvykydal) - webui: add context to Critical Error dialog (rvykydal) - webui: Prevent the Anaconda window from being closed by keyboard shortcuts (akankovs) - webui: fix make rsync not updating the test VM (kkoukiou) - webui: Back/Next button are not localized (akankovs) - we
[EPEL-devel] incompatible update of caddy in EPEL 9
I am performing an incompatible upgrade of the caddy package in EPEL 9. In accordance with the incompatible upgrade policy [0], I proposed this upgrade just over a week ago on the epel-devel mailing list [1]. For reasons detailed in the previous email, it is no longer possible to update the package at the current version, preventing me from resolving known CVEs. Today the EPEL Steering Committee voted to approve this upgrade [2]. This upgrade will take the package from version 2.4.6 to 2.6.4. This includes a few backwards-incompatible changes. I believe these changes are on the milder side, and most users shouldn't notice a difference. Here are the most notable removals/changes: - Reverse proxy: Incoming X-Forwarded-* headers will no longer be automatically trusted, to prevent spoofing. - Logging: Removed the deprecated common_log field from HTTP access logs, and the single_field encoder. - Logging: The remote_addr field has been replaced by remote_ip and remote_port fields in HTTP access logs, which split up the two parts of the remote address. - Caddyfile: The reverse_proxy directive's handle_response subdirective has had its status replacement functionality moved to a new replace_status subdirective. There are also a few additional changes to features labeled as experimental, and some deprecations (not yet removed). For a full list, see the upstream release notes [3][4]. If you are able, please test and provide karma for the update [5]. [0] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/epel/epel-policy-incompatible-upgrades/ [1] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/CDNDAKTIAQTFTNDHOIHKQJ4B2LAV5ZSS/ [2] https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2023-08-23/epel.2023-08-23-20.00.html [3] https://github.com/caddyserver/caddy/releases/tag/v2.5.0 [4] https://github.com/caddyserver/caddy/releases/tag/v2.6.0 [5] https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2023-8849a14e7f -- Carl George ___ epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to epel-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/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[EPEL-devel] retiring caddy in EPEL 7
I am retiring the caddy package from EPEL 7. In accordance with the retirement policy [0], I proposed this retirement just over a week ago on the epel-devel mailing list [1]. For reasons detailed in the previous email, it is no longer possible to update the package with the same major version, preventing me from resolving known CVEs. Doing an incompatible update to the next major version is not an appealing option with only ten months left until the retirement of EPEL 7 as a whole. Users that wish to keep using caddy on RHEL 7 can use the Copr repo from the upstream project [2][3]. Caddy is also available from EPEL 8 and EPEL 9 for users that are ready to migrate to a newer operating system version. Both of these options will involve the disruptive update from caddy v1 to v2, but users can opt-in to it at their own pace. The upstream project has a migration guide in their documentation to help [4]. [0] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/epel/epel-policy-retirement/#process_security_reasons [1] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/JZRLEWOCX5QX3XZ7INLUZIB7LPAMDUZC/ [2] https://caddyserver.com/docs/install#fedora-redhat-centos [3] https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/g/caddy/caddy/ [4] https://caddyserver.com/docs/v2-upgrade -- Carl George ___ epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to epel-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/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[EPEL-devel] Incompatible security update for llhttp in EPEL9
This email announces that the llhttp package in EPEL9 will be upgraded from 6.0.10 to 8.1.1[1], which breaks the ABI and bumps the SONAME version, as discussed[2] and approved[3] under the EPEL Incompatible Upgrades Policy[4]. At the same time, python-aiohttp will be upgraded from 3.8.4 to 3.8.5. Currently, only python-aiohttp depends on the llhttp package in EPEL9. This update fixes CVE-2023-30589[5]. Users of the python-aiohttp package, or of the various packages that depend on it, will benefit from this security fix but should not expect any incompatibilities or performance regressions. In the unlikely case that you are maintaining software that depends directly on the llhttp package, you will need to rebuild it due to the SONAME version bump. Breaking changes from 6.0.10 to 8.1.1 include a couple of HTTP parsing changes (“do not allow whitespaces after start line,” “require semicolon to start chunk parameters”) and one API change (“rename status code 509”). Most programs will not require source code changes. [1] https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2023-e2fcc4af81 [2] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/DLJ4ILU6QHXN2YYHTHNTAF2ED6YRP23H/ [3] https://pagure.io/epel/issue/241 [4] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/epel/epel-policy-incompatible-upgrades/#process_for_incompatible_upgrades [5] https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2023-30589 [4] https://github.com/advisories/GHSA-cggh-pq45-6h9x [5] https://github.com/aio-libs/aiohttp/security/advisories/GHSA-45c4-8wx5-qw6w ___ epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to epel-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/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Fedocal] Reminder meeting : ELN SIG
Dear all, You are kindly invited to the meeting: ELN SIG on 2023-08-25 from 12:00:00 to 13:00:00 US/Eastern At fedora-meet...@irc.libera.chat The meeting will be about: Source: https://calendar.fedoraproject.org//meeting/10531/ ___ 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 2234337] perl-DBD-Pg-3.17.0 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2234337 Jitka Plesnikova changed: What|Removed |Added Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC|dev...@gunduz.org, | |jples...@redhat.com,| |ka...@ucw.cz, | |mspa...@redhat.com, | |prais...@redhat.com,| |rhug...@redhat.com, | |rstr...@redhat.com | -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2234337 ___ 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
[Test-Announce] Fedora 39 Branched 20230824.n.0 nightly compose nominated for testing
Announcing the creation of a new nightly release validation test event for Fedora 39 Branched 20230824.n.0. Please help run some tests for this nightly compose if you have time. For more information on nightly release validation testing, see: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Release_validation_test_plan Notable package version changes: anaconda - 20230812.n.0: anaconda-39.29-1.fc39.src, 20230824.n.0: anaconda-39.32-1.fc39.src Test coverage information for the current release can be seen at: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/testcase_stats/39 You can see all results, find testing instructions and image download locations, and enter results on the Summary page: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_39_Branched_20230824.n.0_Summary The individual test result pages are: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_39_Branched_20230824.n.0_Installation https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_39_Branched_20230824.n.0_Base https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_39_Branched_20230824.n.0_Server https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_39_Branched_20230824.n.0_Cloud https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_39_Branched_20230824.n.0_Desktop https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_39_Branched_20230824.n.0_Security_Lab Thank you for testing! -- Mail generated by relvalconsumer: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/relvalconsumer ___ test-announce mailing list -- test-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-announce-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/test-annou...@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
Re: zlib-ng as a compat replacement for zlib
@Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho there is one question I have due to the zlib-ng... What is the difference between zlib-ng compiled with and without the `ZLIB_COMPAT=ON` option? Are there any differences in the performance, or is it only the names of the functions? I'm interested in this because I want to know why would someone use the "non-compat" zlib-ng? Are there any advantages in using it against the "compat" zlib-ng? Thanks for the information. On Wed, Aug 23, 2023 at 11:00 AM Lukas Javorsky wrote: > In the end most of the patches were dropped the uplift wasn't worth the >> effort of maintaining them downstream, when the effort can be better >> spent getting a 10X uplift using a more modern compression >> implementation (ex zstd/lz4/lzo/etc) that isn't written with so many >> byte oriented assumptions. >> > > Yes, generally having downstream patches is not the goal we want to chase > in Fedora/RHEL. > It takes too much effort and knowledge which could be used much more > efficiently. > > And also one of the key values of Red Hat is "upstream first", so we > always propose the patches to upstream making it a win-win for both sides. > Unfortunately, zlib's upstream isn't too welcoming for complex patches > such as these, and most of them are stuck in open PR. > > That is a big plus for zlib-ng as its upstream is open for such PRs. > On the other hand, changes like these could lead to broken compatibility > which is a big concern for our products in the case of widely used > packages such as zlib. > > > > On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 10:26 PM Jeremy Linton > wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> On 8/6/23 08:33, John Reiser wrote: >> > On 8/6/23 02:00, Peter Robinson wrote: >> >> We tried to pull some of the optimisations in some time ago to the >> >> Fedora package and they caused some issues with compatibility. >> > >> > Please provide *any* documentation! Such as: the dates the work was >> > performed, >> > the participants, the nature of the issues, the "other side" of the >> problem >> > cases (the other packages, the use cases, etc.) >> >> Waves, some of this was my fault. >> >> example bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1582555 >> look at the zlib rpm history you will see things like: >> >> >> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/zlib/c/71a74f9c8684dd99c0e0657f53affb90a3ca3219?branch=rawhide >> >> there were a few others that were ignored, or we reverted part of the >> original set of 5 or 6 patches. The original patches were aarch64 + NEON >> optimizations, but there were a number of issues around unittests in >> various packages that zipped something then validated the results >> against a known crc/hash/etc which then failed because the hash changed, >> the size changed, padding issues, the optimized code touched valid parts >> of the buffer and tripped buffer poisoning logic, etc. >> >> Turns out zlib is old school byte oriented and any slight behavioral >> change can result in compatibility issues. The first obvious >> optimization is to increase the fetched word/matching sizes, which >> maintain binary compatibility with the zlib format/decompressor but >> results in buffer len/compressed size deltas. >> >> Of course some of these were potentially the fault of the patches, but >> you have to decide between perf or compatibility when writing these, and >> if the goal is faster, then the compatibility gets sacrificed. >> >> Bugzilla is taking its time retrieving some of the BZs that were closed >> without fixes. So you will have to search for them yourself. >> >> In the end most of the patches were dropped the uplift wasn't worth the >> effort of maintaining them downstream, when the effort can be better >> spent getting a 10X uplift using a more modern compression >> implementation (ex zstd/lz4/lzo/etc) that isn't written with so many >> byte oriented assumptions. >> >> >> >> >> > ___ >> > 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 >> > > > -- > S pozdravom/ Best regards > > Lukáš
Re: Donate 1 minute of your time to test upgrades from F38 to F39
Thanks Mirek, dnf --releasever=39 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f39 \ > --enablerepo=updates-testing \ > $(rpm -q fedora-repos-modular >/dev/null && echo > --enablerepo=updates-testing-modular) \ > --assumeno distro-sync > Allow me to steal some testing. :) I would like to point out that running the same command, replacing dnf with dnf5, should work and produce the same transaction. I suggest running both commands and report eventual errors. This would be of great help for the dnf team to implement/debug distro-upgrade commands. I am getting no errors in the transaction and have the same package list with both package managers. Thanks, On Wed, Aug 23, 2023 at 8:23 PM Miroslav Suchý wrote: > Do you want to make Fedora 39 better? Please spend 1 minute of your time > and try to run: > > # Run this only if you use default Fedora modules > # next time you run any DNF command default modules will be enabled again > sudo dnf module reset '*' > > dnf --releasever=39 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f39 \ > --enablerepo=updates-testing \ > $(rpm -q fedora-repos-modular >/dev/null && echo > --enablerepo=updates-testing-modular) \ > --assumeno distro-sync > > > This command does not replace `dnf system-upgrade`, but it will reveal > potential problems. > > You may also run `dnf upgrade` before running this command. > > The `--assumeno` will just test the transaction, but does not make the > actual upgrade. > > > In case you hit dependency issues, please report it against the > appropriate package. > > Or against fedora-obsolete-packages if that package should be removed in > Fedora 39. Please check existing reports against fedora-obsolete-packages > first: > > https://red.ht/2kuBDPu > > and also there is already bunch of "Fails to install" (F39FailsToInstall) > reports: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?bug_id= > 2168845_id_type=anddependson=tvp_id=12486533 > > > Two notes: > > * you may want to run the same command with dnf5 to help test new dnf. > > * this command found zero issues on my personal system - great work all > everybody! > > > Thank you > Miroslav > ___ > 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
[Bug 2231653] perl-perlfaq-5.20230812 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2231653 --- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2023-ed86ea7a17 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 38. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-ed86ea7a17 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2231653 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202231653%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
Re: Donate 1 minute of your time to test upgrades from F38 to F39
Hello, I got quite a few issues, some of these are from third party repos, but others do seem to be Fedora packages that are still FTBFS/FTI (a majority are neuro-sig packages that we're aware of and working on): Problem 1: package python3-cypy-0.2.0-12.fc38.noarch from @System requires python(abi) = 3.11, but none of the providers can be installed - python3-3.11.4-1.fc38.x86_64 from @System does not belong to a distupgrade repository - problem with installed package python3-cypy-0.2.0-12.fc38.noarch Problem 2: package python3-pygments-git-1.6.0-2.fc38.noarch from @System requires python3.11dist(pygments), but none of the providers can be installed - python3-pygments-2.14.0-1.fc38.noarch from @System does not belong to a distupgrade repository - problem with installed package python3-pygments-git-1.6.0-2.fc38.noarch Problem 3: package python3-pygpu-0.7.6-19.fc38.x86_64 from @System requires python3.11dist(mako) >= 0.7, but none of the providers can be installed - python3-mako-1.2.3-2.fc38.noarch from @System does not belong to a distupgrade repository - problem with installed package python3-pygpu-0.7.6-19.fc38.x86_64 Problem 4: package python3-theano-1.1.2-6.fc38.noarch from @System requires python3.11dist(filelock), but none of the providers can be installed - python3-filelock-3.8.2-2.fc38.noarch from @System does not belong to a distupgrade repository - problem with installed package python3-theano-1.1.2-6.fc38.noarch Problem 5: package python3-3.11.4-1.fc38.x86_64 from @System requires python3-libs(x86-64) = 3.11.4-1.fc38, but none of the providers can be installed - package python3-slip-0.6.4-29.fc38.noarch from @System requires python(abi) = 3.11, but none of the providers can be installed - python3-libs-3.11.4-1.fc38.x86_64 from @System does not belong to a distupgrade repository - problem with installed package python3-slip-0.6.4-29.fc38.noarch Problem 6: problem with installed package igt-gpu-tools-1.26-3.20220508gitcffa5ff.fc38.x86_64 - package igt-gpu-tools-1.26-3.20220508gitcffa5ff.fc38.x86_64 from @System requires libprocps.so.8()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed - package igt-gpu-tools-1.26-3.20220508gitcffa5ff.fc38.x86_64 from @System requires libprocps.so.8(LIBPROCPS_0)(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed - package igt-gpu-tools-1.26-3.20220508gitcffa5ff.fc38.x86_64 from fedora requires libprocps.so.8()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed - package igt-gpu-tools-1.26-3.20220508gitcffa5ff.fc38.x86_64 from fedora requires libprocps.so.8(LIBPROCPS_0)(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed - package igt-gpu-tools-1.26-3.20220508gitcffa5ff.fc38.x86_64 from fedora-modular requires libprocps.so.8()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed - package igt-gpu-tools-1.26-3.20220508gitcffa5ff.fc38.x86_64 from fedora-modular requires libprocps.so.8(LIBPROCPS_0)(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed - package igt-gpu-tools-1.26-3.20220508gitcffa5ff.fc38.x86_64 from updates-modular requires libprocps.so.8()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed - package igt-gpu-tools-1.26-3.20220508gitcffa5ff.fc38.x86_64 from updates-modular requires libprocps.so.8(LIBPROCPS_0)(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed - package igt-gpu-tools-1.26-3.20220508gitcffa5ff.fc38.x86_64 from updates-testing-modular requires libprocps.so.8()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed - package igt-gpu-tools-1.26-3.20220508gitcffa5ff.fc38.x86_64 from updates-testing-modular requires libprocps.so.8(LIBPROCPS_0)(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed - procps-ng-3.3.17-11.fc38.x86_64 from @System does not belong to a distupgrade repository Problem 7: problem with installed package python3-sciunit-0.2.7-6.fc38.noarch - package python3-sciunit-0.2.7-6.fc38.noarch from @System requires python3.11dist(gitpython), but none of the providers can be installed - package python3-sciunit-0.2.7-6.fc38.noarch from fedora requires python3.11dist(gitpython), but none of the providers can be installed - package python3-sciunit-0.2.7-6.fc38.noarch from fedora-modular requires python3.11dist(gitpython), but none of the providers can be installed - package python3-sciunit-0.2.7-6.fc38.noarch from updates-modular requires python3.11dist(gitpython), but none of the providers can be installed - package python3-sciunit-0.2.7-6.fc38.noarch from updates-testing-modular requires python3.11dist(gitpython), but none of the providers can be installed - python3-GitPython-3.1.30-2.fc38.noarch from @System does not belong to a distupgrade repository Problem 8: problem with installed package python3-pyneuroml-0.7.3-1.fc38.noarch - package python3-pyneuroml-0.7.3-1.fc38.noarch from @System requires python3.11dist(pylems) >= 0.5.7, but none of the providers can be installed - package python3-pyneuroml-0.7.3-1.fc38.noarch from
[Bug 2231653] perl-perlfaq-5.20230812 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2231653 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Fixed In Version||perl-perlfaq-5.20230812-1.f ||c40 Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2023-08-24 09:16:34 --- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2023-8a51329888 has been pushed to the Fedora 40 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=2231653 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202231653%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 2231653] perl-perlfaq-5.20230812 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2231653 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED --- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2023-8a51329888 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 40. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-8a51329888 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2231653 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202231653%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: %pyproject_save_files license handlers
On 8/23/23 18:34, Miro Hrončok wrote: On 23. 08. 23 13:17, Sandro wrote:> This might be out of scope, but would it also be possible to have it fail or issue a warning if %pyproject_save_files -l marks a license, but the packager also uses an explicit %license in %files. That would prevent duplication. Unfortunately, the macro have no way of knowing what is included in %files manually, co I am afraid this is not possible to implement. This should be possible to detect in Zuul, if you use it, because the rpm-linter there raises an error if it finds a duplicate files. Lumír ___ 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 2233885] perl-URI-5.20 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2233885 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Fixed In Version||perl-URI-5.21-1.fc40 Last Closed||2023-08-24 08:46:49 --- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2023-e8413e8cc2 has been pushed to the Fedora 40 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=2233885 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202233885%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 2231653] perl-perlfaq-5.20230812 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2231653 Jitka Plesnikova changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC|jples...@redhat.com,| |mspa...@redhat.com, | |ppi...@redhat.com | 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=2231653 ___ 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 2233885] perl-URI-5.20 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2233885 --- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2023-984ad90082 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 39. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-984ad90082 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2233885 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202233885%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 1409444] dropbox-api-command-2.13 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1409444 Petr Pisar changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE Fixed In Version||dropbox-api-command-2.13-1. ||fc32 CC||ppi...@redhat.com Last Closed||2023-08-24 07:50:41 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1409444 ___ 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 2233072] perl-DB_File-1.859 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2233072 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |ERRATA Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Fixed In Version||perl-DB_File-1.859-1.fc40 Last Closed||2023-08-24 07:37:35 --- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2023-df69a8c318 has been pushed to the Fedora 40 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=2233072 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202233072%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 2233885] perl-URI-5.20 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2233885 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED --- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2023-e8413e8cc2 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 40. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-e8413e8cc2 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2233885 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202233885%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 2233765] Upgrade perl-HTML-Selector-XPath to 0.28
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2233765 Jitka Plesnikova changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Status|NEW |CLOSED Fixed In Version||perl-HTML-Selector-XPath-0. ||28-1.fc40 Last Closed||2023-08-24 07:13:36 --- Comment #1 from Jitka Plesnikova --- Built by corsepiu -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2233765 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202233765%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 2233072] perl-DB_File-1.859 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2233072 --- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2023-02769b2cb4 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 39. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-02769b2cb4 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2233072 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202233072%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 2233072] perl-DB_File-1.859 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2233072 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED --- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2023-df69a8c318 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 40. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-df69a8c318 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2233072 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202233072%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 2233885] perl-URI-5.20 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2233885 Jitka Plesnikova changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC|jples...@redhat.com,| |ka...@ucw.cz, | |mspa...@redhat.com, | |p...@city-fan.org, | |rhug...@redhat.com, | |rstr...@redhat.com | 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=2233885 ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-de...@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-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Self Introduction: Łukasz Patron
On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 01:04:36AM +0200, Łukasz Patron wrote: > Hello, > > My name is Łukasz, a software engineer from Poland. > In free time, I'm contributing to various OSS projects, mainly LineageOS. > > For Fedora, I plan to co-maintain WeeChat package and help with other > packages that I'll notice some issues with. Hey Łukasz, Welcome to Fedora! :) -- Tomasz Torcz 72->| 80->| to...@pipebreaker.pl 72->| 80->| ___ 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
