Re: F40 Change Proposal: KDE Plasma 6 (System Wide)

[Ian Laurie]

On 9/14/23 10:13, Adam Williamson wrote:

There is https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=427060 and
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=449331 which is marked as a dupe
of it. Later comments on 427060 indicate some folks still have issues
with this.

My personal bugbear that I'd really like fixed is:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016563
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/spice/linux/vd_agent/-/issues/26


I created a VirtualBox KDE instance using:
Fedora-Everything-netinst-x86_64-39_Beta-1.1.iso.  System was updated
with updates-testing enabled.

There are problems even before you login.  The mouse pointer works in
reverse in the greeter, vertical bar over the background, then an arrow
pointer when you hover over the password entry area.

After logging into a Wayland session the mouse weirdness continues with
random (it seems) pointers... sometimes an arrow pointer and sometimes a
vertical bar to select text, but not coinciding with where the cursor
is.  With text in KWrite, and the cursor being an arrow when it should
be a vertical bar, there is a big offset, so you end up selecting the
text on the line below the line you want.

After logging out it was a chore trying to select X11 because the offset
was present in the greeter (I don't believe I have experienced that
before) and you were trying to go lower than the screen to try and
select X11 from the drop-down.

Once in the X11 session everything just works like it should.

Logging out of X11 and back to the greeter things go weird again.

I didn't think the greeter used Wayland?  So there may be something else
going on.  I cannot swear to it, but I don't think I've noticed problems
in the greeter before.

As Adam posted, the offset problem already has a bug for it.  Wayland is
certainly unusable in VirtualBox, but now even the greeter has issues,
and I think that's newish.

--
Ian Laurie
FAS: nixuser | IRC: nixuser
TZ: Australia/Sydney
___
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 2239043] perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-AES-0.08 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2239043

Upstream Release Monitoring  
changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Summary|perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-AES-0.07 |perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-AES-0.08
   |is available|is available



--- Comment #3 from Upstream Release Monitoring 
 ---
Releases retrieved: 0.08
Upstream release that is considered latest: 0.08
Current version/release in rawhide: 0.02-51.fc39
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Crypt-OpenSSL-AES/

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


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


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


Based on the information from Anitya:
https://release-monitoring.org/project/2743/


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


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2239043

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202239043%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 2239043] perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-AES-0.08 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2239043



--- Comment #4 from Upstream Release Monitoring 
 ---
Scratch build failed. Details below:

BuilderException: Build failed:
Command '['rpmbuild', '-D', '_sourcedir .', '-D', '_topdir .', '-bs',
'/var/tmp/thn-mfzwifw5/perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-AES.spec']' returned non-zero exit
status 1.

StdOut:
setting SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH=1694822400
error: Bad file: ./Crypt-OpenSSL-AES-0.08.tar.gz: No such file or directory

RPM build errors:
Bad file: ./Crypt-OpenSSL-AES-0.08.tar.gz: No such file or directory


Traceback:
  File
"/usr/local/lib/python3.11/site-packages/hotness/use_cases/package_scratch_build_use_case.py",
line 56, in build
result = self.builder.build(request.package, request.opts)
 ^
  File "/usr/local/lib/python3.11/site-packages/hotness/builders/koji.py", line
229, in build
raise BuilderException(

If you think this issue is caused by some bug in the-new-hotness, please report
it on the-new-hotness issue tracker:
https://github.com/fedora-infra/the-new-hotness/issues


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2239043

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202239043%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 2239043] perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-AES-0.08 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2239043



--- Comment #5 from Upstream Release Monitoring 
 ---
Created attachment 1989087
  --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1989087=edit
Update to 0.08 (#2239043)


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2239043

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202239043%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

Re: F40 Change Proposal: KDE Plasma 6 (System Wide)

[Kevin Kofler via devel]

Neal Gompa wrote:
> I am interested in learning where you're seeing screen sharing issues
> today.

Quoting myself from:
https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/f40-change-proposal-kde-plasma-6-system-wide/89794/7

I wrote there:
> As for screensharing on Wayland, that does not work with Falkon due to the
> Qt5 QtWebEngine not supporting the system version of Pipewire (which is
> too new for it) and hence being built without Pipewire support. So this
> cannot be tested until we have Qt 6 Falkon (which exists in an unmerged
> upstream branch right now).

Kevin Kofler
___
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: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Kevin Kofler via devel]

Colin Walters wrote:
> Also of salient note, to the best of my knowledge the dist-git equivalent
> for Amazon Linux's isn't public.

Neither is the one for RHEL.
https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/furthering-evolution-centos-stream

Kevin Kofler
___
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: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Kevin Kofler via devel]

Adam Williamson wrote:
> Sure, it's not a problem *yet*. Microsoft is only just starting to
> crank up the enshittification machine...

Also in that vein, forced 2FA with no way to opt out:
https://github.blog/2022-05-04-software-security-starts-with-the-developer-securing-developer-accounts-with-2fa/

Kevin Kofler
___
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: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Gary Buhrmaster]

On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 8:23 PM Neal Gompa  wrote:

> I will also point out the last time we followed RHEL into something,
> we got the modularity system. That itself is an indicator that
> inverting the relationship for decision-making is a bad idea.


In theory, I like the concept of modularity.  But, as
we all know, theory and practice are not always
the same, and modularity was a bridge too far.

___
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: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Colin Walters]

On Fri, Sep 15, 2023, at 4:12 PM, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 1:28 PM Colin Walters  wrote:
>>
>>
>> My point is only partly about the HTML, but about the ecosystem surrounding 
>> it (CI is a really big one) but really the total user experience (account 
>> system, uptime, moving issues), etc.
>>
>> The bigger point I want to make here is that one of the roles of Fedora 
>> obviously is to be an upstream for RHEL.  To state the blindingly obvious 
>> thing, RHEL made a decision to centralize on Gitlab.  Having Fedora be on 
>> pagure creates IMO unnecessary friction for me.  I would be quite curious to 
>> get some sort of survey of other engineers for how they feel.  I'm sure 
>> there's some that disagree with me, to be clear - at least one already 
>> responded.
>>
>
> Fedora is also the upstream to Amazon Linux.

Yes, this is a valid point.  However, I think there are - you know - rather a 
*few* notable differences between the two.  Starting with: I am pretty sure 
still today that Red Hat pays for the time of most people who work on the 
existing infrastructure and the server bills, and has done so for the entire 19 
year existence of Fedora.  Also of salient note, to the best of my knowledge 
the dist-git equivalent for Amazon Linux's isn't public.  CentOS Stream is, and 
synergy between the two is exactly what I'm talking about.  We have no idea 
what source control they use for their forks of packages; I somehow doubt it's 
gitlab or pagure, but who knows.  But still your point is valid in that it 
*would* be interesting to know what Amazon Linux folks think.

>  It is (partly/indirectly)
> an upstream to other RPM distributions. If you're implying we (Fedora)
> need to follow what our downstreams do for development; 

I think using absolute terminology (here, "need") is setting up a strawman.  I 
personally think of things much more in terms of "centers of gravity", that 
influence each other.  I'm saying that the influence and needs of those of us 
who must use gitlab.com/redhat to succeed at our jobs should matter a not small 
amount.

Also to be very clear - I consistently use my personal email for FOSS 
interactions; I'm not speaking for "Red Hat" as any kind of whole.  I am 
expressing my personal, day to day annoyance at having to use 3 different git 
forges to succeed at my job (all at the same company!), and it would be a 
notable improve to go down to two.  (But again again, I am *sure* there are 
those who disagree with me too!  Would love to maybe do a survey)

But, eh.  We could just leave this as the status quo; we all have other 
problems to solve too.
___
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: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Neal Gompa]

On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 1:28 PM Colin Walters  wrote:
>
>
> My point is only partly about the HTML, but about the ecosystem surrounding 
> it (CI is a really big one) but really the total user experience (account 
> system, uptime, moving issues), etc.
>
> The bigger point I want to make here is that one of the roles of Fedora 
> obviously is to be an upstream for RHEL.  To state the blindingly obvious 
> thing, RHEL made a decision to centralize on Gitlab.  Having Fedora be on 
> pagure creates IMO unnecessary friction for me.  I would be quite curious to 
> get some sort of survey of other engineers for how they feel.  I'm sure 
> there's some that disagree with me, to be clear - at least one already 
> responded.
>

Fedora is also the upstream to Amazon Linux. It is (partly/indirectly)
an upstream to other RPM distributions. If you're implying we (Fedora)
need to follow what our downstreams do for development; process; and
infrastructure decisions, then there's going to be a problem because
RHEL is not the only one, nor is it even the most used one.

I will also point out the last time we followed RHEL into something,
we got the modularity system. That itself is an indicator that
inverting the relationship for decision-making is a bad idea.

Simply put, that is *not* how the relationship works when we want it
to work well.






--
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
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 2238831] perl-Term-Table-0.017 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2238831

Michal Josef Spacek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
   Fixed In Version||perl-Term-Table-0.017-1.fc4
   ||0
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
Last Closed||2023-09-15 19:32:17




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2238831
___
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 2237914] perl-Sys-Virt-9.7.0 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2237914

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
   Fixed In Version||perl-Sys-Virt-9.7.0-1.fc39
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed||2023-09-15 18:54:18



--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2023-7db7363bac has been pushed to the Fedora 39 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2237914

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202237914%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 2237858] perl-Business-ISBN-Data-20230907.001 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2237858

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version|perl-Business-ISBN-Data-202 |perl-Business-ISBN-Data-202
   |30907.001-1.fc40|30907.001-1.fc40
   ||perl-Business-ISBN-Data-202
   ||30907.001-1.fc39



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2023-484d1f8368 has been pushed to the Fedora 39 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2237858

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202237858%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 2235322] perl-Crypt-CBC-3.04 of RHEL9 can not decrypt ciphertext created with 'header' => 'randomiv'

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2235322

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version|perl-Crypt-CBC-3.04-13.el9  |perl-Crypt-CBC-3.04-13.el9
   |perl-Crypt-CBC-3.04-13.fc37 |perl-Crypt-CBC-3.04-13.fc37
   |perl-Crypt-CBC-3.04-13.fc38 |perl-Crypt-CBC-3.04-13.fc38
   ||perl-Crypt-CBC-3.04-13.fc39



--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2023-a987ae65e7 has been pushed to the Fedora 39 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2235322

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202235322%23c12
___
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 2237353] perl-Business-ISBN-Data-20230904.001 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2237353

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version|perl-Business-ISBN-Data-202 |perl-Business-ISBN-Data-202
   |30904.001-1.fc40|30904.001-1.fc40
   ||perl-Business-ISBN-Data-202
   ||30907.001-1.fc39



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2023-484d1f8368 has been pushed to the Fedora 39 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2237353

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202237353%23c6
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2236151] perl-Business-ISBN-Data-20230830.001 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2236151

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version|perl-Business-ISBN-Data-202 |perl-Business-ISBN-Data-202
   |30830.001-1.fc40|30830.001-1.fc40
   ||perl-Business-ISBN-Data-202
   ||30907.001-1.fc39



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2023-484d1f8368 has been pushed to the Fedora 39 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2236151

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202236151%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 2237016] perl-SNMP-Info-3.95 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2237016

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version|perl-SNMP-Info-3.95-1.fc40  |perl-SNMP-Info-3.95-1.fc40
   ||perl-SNMP-Info-3.95-1.fc39



--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2023-abddbc68b8 has been pushed to the Fedora 39 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2237016

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202237016%23c7
___
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 2231059] perl-Authen-SASL-2.1700 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2231059

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version|perl-Authen-SASL-2.1700-1.f |perl-Authen-SASL-2.1700-1.f
   |c40 |c40
   ||perl-Authen-SASL-2.1700-1.f
   ||c39



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2023-f8bc110213 has been pushed to the Fedora 39 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2231059

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202231059%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 2231692] perl-Test-Harness-3.47 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2231692

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version|perl-Test-Harness-3.47-1.fc |perl-Test-Harness-3.47-1.fc
   |40  |40
   |perl-Test-Harness-3.47-1.fc |perl-Test-Harness-3.47-1.fc
   |38  |38
   ||perl-Test-Harness-3.47-1.fc
   ||39



--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2023-3f4ac88ec3 has been pushed to the Fedora 39 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2231692

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202231692%23c8
___
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 2232998] perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.20230820 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2232998

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version|perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.2 |perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.2
   |0230820-1.fc40  |0230820-1.fc40
   |perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.2 |perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.2
   |0230820-1.fc37  |0230820-1.fc37
   |perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.2 |perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.2
   |0230820-1.fc38  |0230820-1.fc38
   ||perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.2
   ||0230820-1.fc39



--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2023-8869d53d5f has been pushed to the Fedora 39 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2232998

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202232998%23c11
___
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

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2233072

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version|perl-DB_File-1.859-1.fc40   |perl-DB_File-1.859-1.fc40
   ||perl-DB_File-1.859-1.fc39



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2023-02769b2cb4 has been pushed to the Fedora 39 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2233072

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202233072%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 2231653] perl-perlfaq-5.20230812 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2231653

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version|perl-perlfaq-5.20230812-1.f |perl-perlfaq-5.20230812-1.f
   |c40 |c40
   |perl-perlfaq-5.20230812-1.f |perl-perlfaq-5.20230812-1.f
   |c38 |c38
   ||perl-perlfaq-5.20230812-1.f
   ||c39



--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2023-cd56289774 has been pushed to the Fedora 39 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2231653

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202231653%23c7
___
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

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2233885

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version|perl-URI-5.21-1.fc40|perl-URI-5.21-1.fc40
   ||perl-URI-5.21-1.fc39



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2023-984ad90082 has been pushed to the Fedora 39 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2233885

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202233885%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 2231470] perl-Log-Dispatchouli-3.006 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2231470

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version|perl-Log-Dispatchouli-3.006 |perl-Log-Dispatchouli-3.006
   |-1.fc40 |-1.fc40
   ||perl-Log-Dispatchouli-3.006
   ||-1.fc39



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2023-0a32dc4de5 has been pushed to the Fedora 39 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2231470

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202231470%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 2233000] perl-Module-CoreList-5.20230820 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2233000

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version|perl-Module-CoreList-5.2023 |perl-Module-CoreList-5.2023
   |0820-1.fc40 |0820-1.fc40
   |perl-Module-CoreList-5.2023 |perl-Module-CoreList-5.2023
   |0820-1.fc38 |0820-1.fc38
   |perl-Module-CoreList-5.2023 |perl-Module-CoreList-5.2023
   |0820-1.fc37 |0820-1.fc37
   ||perl-Module-CoreList-5.2023
   ||0820-1.fc39



--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2023-3b0b79931c has been pushed to the Fedora 39 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2233000

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202233000%23c11
___
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: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Colin Walters]

One thing I find amusing about this list (which like some others is kind of a 
long-running soap opera that happens to sometimes produce software as a side 
effect) is that many times, I can see just two bits of information:

- The subject of the email
- The name of the person responding

And I basically *know* what they're going to say.  

Maybe one morning I'll be drinking my coffee, reading a thread like this that 
has "issues.redhat.com" in the Subject and see e.g. Kevin Kofler reply, open up 
the email and he'll say actually something like "JIRA is so awesome!  I love 
the query language!"¹ and I'll just spew coffee all over my keyboard laughing 
in surprise.  We could all chose to reply to threads we ordinarily wouldn't, in 
a different way - just to, you know, spice things up a bit.  Keep the 
viewers^Hreaders entertained.

(This is a point about the list overall and this thread somewhat specificially, 
but only partially your reply; I was *pretty sure* since you replied you'd be 
disagreeing.  But honestly that's *mainly* because email doesn't have "thumbs 
up" style emoji reactions that would be useful in scenarios like this.  Because 
sending an email that just says "+1" or "I agree" is a lot of noise/overhead...)

On Thu, Sep 14, 2023, at 8:50 AM, Fabio Valentini wrote:

> Switch GitLab and Pagure in that statement and I could say the exact same 
> thing.

My point is only partly about the HTML, but about the ecosystem surrounding it 
(CI is a really big one) but really the total user experience (account system, 
uptime, moving issues), etc.

The bigger point I want to make here is that one of the roles of Fedora 
obviously is to be an upstream for RHEL.  To state the blindingly obvious 
thing, RHEL made a decision to centralize on Gitlab.  Having Fedora be on 
pagure creates IMO unnecessary friction for me.  I would be quite curious to 
get some sort of survey of other engineers for how they feel.  I'm sure there's 
some that disagree with me, to be clear - at least one already responded.

¹ To be clear, I am also not a JIRA fan, but that's a mostly orthogonal 
debate...
___
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: Build does not finish

[Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho]

"Kai A. Hiller"  writes:

> Hello,
>
> I started a build with `fedpkg build`, but after 43h and counting I 
> don‘t think it will finish anymore. Is there a way to terminate the 
> build? The build is 
> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=106154761

Look for this command:

dnf install koji
koji cancel [options]  [ ...]

More information with:

koji cancel --help

-- 
Tulio Magno
___
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: Build does not finish

[Dan Horák]

On Fri, 15 Sep 2023 19:01:07 +0200
"Kai A. Hiller"  wrote:

> Hello,
> 
> I started a build with `fedpkg build`, but after 43h and counting I 
> don‘t think it will finish anymore. Is there a way to terminate the 
> build? The build is 
> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=106154761

seems it hangs in the %check phase, probably it can't deal with the
massive system with 224 cpus ...

for termination you can use "koji cancel "


Dan
___
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: Automate your Fedora package maintenance using Packit

[Adam Williamson]

On Fri, 2023-09-15 at 16:02 +0200, Frantisek Lachman wrote:
> Thanks Dan and Daniel for the responses. You both are right. For our
> defence, this is always setup by an existing Fedora user (=human).
> 
> I can't speak of rel-eng (and honestly don't know) how problematic
> this "physical removal" on request is.
> We can at least promote the licence check more
> and provide instructions on what to do if something does not fulfil the rules.
> (E.g. as a part of the issue Ankur created and mentioned
> (https://github.com/packit/packit/issues/2035))
> 
> Does anyone have any realistic solution (or an improvement) to this
> for Packit itself?
> 
> We can also stop uploading the source to the lookaside cache (or make
> it configurable),
> but the benefit of such automation is significantly reduced.

To be honest it seems a little unfair to 'pick on' Packit about this.

practically speaking, we do not somehow enforce that every packager
does a thorough license review of every new upstream version of
everything they package before uploading it to the lookaside. We do not
really have any protections against packagers running scratch builds
with unredistributable content. Ultimately, we are trusting packagers
to do this right.

Packit is intended for folks/teams who are both upstream maintainers
and downstream packagers. Such folks should already be aware of the
licensing of the upstream and able to address any issues with it. They
likely already pull new releases of their project downstream as a
matter of course. Automating it doesn't really seem like it's exposing
us to any radical increase in potential licensing problems.
-- 
Adam Williamson (he/him/his)
Fedora QA
Fedora Chat: @adamwill:fedora.im | Mastodon: @ad...@fosstodon.org
https://www.happyassassin.net



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

Build does not finish

[Kai A. Hiller]

Hello,

I started a build with `fedpkg build`, but after 43h and counting I 
don‘t think it will finish anymore. Is there a way to terminate the 
build? The build is 
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=106154761


Kai
___
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 2239168] New: perl-GnuPG-Interface-1.03 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2239168

Bug ID: 2239168
   Summary: perl-GnuPG-Interface-1.03 is available
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-GnuPG-Interface
  Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
  Assignee: emman...@seyman.fr
  Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: emman...@seyman.fr, fed...@mj41.cz,
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org,
xav...@bachelot.org
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Releases retrieved: 1.03
Upstream release that is considered latest: 1.03
Current version/release in rawhide: 1.02-7.fc38
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/GnuPG-Interface/

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


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


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


Based on the information from Anitya:
https://release-monitoring.org/project/12665/


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


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2239168

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202239168%23c0
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Automate your Fedora package maintenance using Packit

[Chuck Anderson]

On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 02:35:36PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> IIUC strictly speaking content must be validated for license compliance
> before it is present on any Fedora infrastructure. IOW, doing scratch
> builds in either Koji or Copr is also predicated on having permissible
> content under an approved license, just as lookaside cache uploads are.

Doesn't the-new-hotness already do scratch builds in Koji in an automated
fashion with no license checking?
___
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: Automate your Fedora package maintenance using Packit

[Cristian Le via devel]

Agree it should be in Fedora CI. Maybe it can be added to the Zuul CI, 
or the default scratch build.


But to run Fedora CI, the source would need to be in the look-aside 
cache. I think it would be ok that if the packit run is 
pull_from_upstream that a licensecheck is run (after the spectool -g and 
before running the fedpkg new-sources) and report upstream if it fails. 
Then the packager can check it and re-run via the cli command to "sign" 
that they have verified it.


I don't think it is very necessary in the propose_downstream since the 
project hosting it and the packager maintaining it there should be 
responsible there. But if the check is not hard, might as well add it 
for sanity.


I have tried to run locally licensecheck -r, but I think the output is a 
bit too noisy for processing with so many "UNKNOWN". The 
--merge-licenses doesn't seem to help either. But it should still be 
doable to accumulate all detected licenses and continue if that is not 
different. An edge-case issue would be if upstream changes a specific 
section of the code to a specific license unknown to licensecheck, but I 
don't think the regular maintainer is diligent enough to do that 
rigorous check either.


On 2023/09/15 16:18, Frantisek Lachman wrote:

I quite like these checks but wouldn't it be better to have these as
part of Fedora CI? (Or any other CI system running on dist-git PRs?)

František

On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 4:13 PM Daniel P. Berrangé  wrote:

If you wanted to be especially helpful, perhaps Packit could compare
the old and new tarballs, and present the maintainer a list of newly
added files as a BZ attachment. It could also run 'licensecheck -r'
on old and new tarballs and report any notable changes. Still needs
human review, but that might help nudge the maintainer to actually
do the license review, as I bet it is often skipped on rebases.

With regards,
Daniel

___
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

Re: Automate your Fedora package maintenance using Packit

[Petr Pisar]

V Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 03:13:22PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé napsal(a):
> I think it isn't too hard to make it acceptable, just stick a
> flag in the middle of your process that human has to acknowledge
> eg:
> 
>   1. Release monitoring files the new BZ ticket (it already includes
>  wording warning the maintainer to review the new release for
>  licensing changes).
> 
>  This BZ would have a flag set  'license-review=?' initially
> 
>   2. Maintainer reviews the new tarball to check the license
>  situation is all still golden.
> 
>  If OK, maintainer toggles flag to license-review=+,
>  else toggles to license-review=-
> 
>   3. Packit sees the flag approval and its magic happens to
>  upload tarball and file pull request, etc
> 
> 
I like this.

-- Petr


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

pghmcfc pushed to rpms/perl-Crypt-IDEA (f39). "Update license field to new BSD-Systemics SPDX license id"

[notifications]

Notification time stamped 2023-09-15 15:07:52 UTC

From 69e1fa494a1b4d57614e71150c24363f537b131f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Michal Josef Špaček 
Date: Sep 14 2023 19:50:09 +
Subject: Update license field to new BSD-Systemics SPDX license id


---

diff --git a/perl-Crypt-IDEA.spec b/perl-Crypt-IDEA.spec
index f8f9ba5..f191516 100644
--- a/perl-Crypt-IDEA.spec
+++ b/perl-Crypt-IDEA.spec
@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 Summary:   Perl interface to IDEA block cipher
 Name:  perl-Crypt-IDEA
 Version:   1.10
-Release:   28%{?dist}
-License:   BSD with advertising
+Release:   29%{?dist}
+License:   BSD-Systemics
 URL:   https://metacpan.org/release/Crypt-IDEA
 Source0:   
https://cpan.metacpan.org/modules/by-module/Crypt/Crypt-IDEA-%{version}.tar.gz
 # Build
@@ -64,6 +64,9 @@ make test
 %{_mandir}/man3/Crypt::IDEA.3*
 
 %changelog
+* Thu Sep 14 2023 Michal Josef Špaček  - 1.10-29
+- Update license field to new BSD-Systemics SPDX license id
+
 * Thu Jul 20 2023 Fedora Release Engineering  - 
1.10-28
 - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_39_Mass_Rebuild
 



https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Crypt-IDEA/c/69e1fa494a1b4d57614e71150c24363f537b131f?branch=f39
___
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

pagure pushed to rpms/perl-Crypt-IDEA (rawhide). "Update license field to new BSD-Systemics SPDX license id"

[notifications]

Notification time stamped 2023-09-15 14:57:01 UTC

From 69e1fa494a1b4d57614e71150c24363f537b131f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Michal Josef Špaček 
Date: Sep 14 2023 19:50:09 +
Subject: Update license field to new BSD-Systemics SPDX license id


---

diff --git a/perl-Crypt-IDEA.spec b/perl-Crypt-IDEA.spec
index f8f9ba5..f191516 100644
--- a/perl-Crypt-IDEA.spec
+++ b/perl-Crypt-IDEA.spec
@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 Summary:   Perl interface to IDEA block cipher
 Name:  perl-Crypt-IDEA
 Version:   1.10
-Release:   28%{?dist}
-License:   BSD with advertising
+Release:   29%{?dist}
+License:   BSD-Systemics
 URL:   https://metacpan.org/release/Crypt-IDEA
 Source0:   
https://cpan.metacpan.org/modules/by-module/Crypt/Crypt-IDEA-%{version}.tar.gz
 # Build
@@ -64,6 +64,9 @@ make test
 %{_mandir}/man3/Crypt::IDEA.3*
 
 %changelog
+* Thu Sep 14 2023 Michal Josef Špaček  - 1.10-29
+- Update license field to new BSD-Systemics SPDX license id
+
 * Thu Jul 20 2023 Fedora Release Engineering  - 
1.10-28
 - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_39_Mass_Rebuild
 



https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Crypt-IDEA/c/69e1fa494a1b4d57614e71150c24363f537b131f?branch=rawhide
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[rpms/perl-Crypt-IDEA] PR #1: Update license field to new BSD-Systemics SPDX license id

[Paul Howarth]

pghmcfc merged a pull-request against the project: `perl-Crypt-IDEA` that you 
are following.

Merged pull-request:

``
Update license field to new BSD-Systemics SPDX license id
``

https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Crypt-IDEA/pull-request/1
___
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: Automate your Fedora package maintenance using Packit

[Miroslav Suchý]

Dne 15. 09. 23 v 13:18 Ankur Sinha napsal(a):

I guess it should be possible to make packit (or the-new-hotness?) run
licensecheck on the new sources and include that in the PR comment too,
perhaps also with a list of packages that depend on the one being
updated as an "impact check"?


It is almost impossible to do the check with old Callaway system. This is actually why I joined the group working on 
SPDX migration - I wanted automatically determine in Copr if the license is allowed. I found that it is actually easier 
and faster to migrate all the Fedora packages to SPDX and then use standard SPDX tooling rather than write NIH tool that 
would work with Callaway system.


When we finish the migration of Fedora to SPDX we plan to adapt tooling that will warn maintainer when new source has 
suspicious text that may be license that is not mention in License tag. But this circa two years ahead. If somebody 
wants to contribute let me know.


--
Miroslav Suchy, RHCA
Red Hat, Manager, Packit and CPT, #brno, #fedora-buildsys
___
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: Automate your Fedora package maintenance using Packit

[Frantisek Lachman]

Thanks for the info, Dan.

If this issue is not hit often,
I think it makes sense to ease the workflow for everyone
and go through this process if needed.
We can either inform people about how to do that
or do it for them.
(But sadly, we can't do the work of rel-eng.)

Otherwise, I think we can implement the config option to let the user decide.
Here's the issue I've just created for that:
https://github.com/packit/packit/issues/2082


František


On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 4:10 PM Dan Horák  wrote:
>
> On Fri, 15 Sep 2023 16:02:04 +0200
> Frantisek Lachman  wrote:
>
> > Thanks Dan and Daniel for the responses. You both are right. For our
> > defence, this is always setup by an existing Fedora user (=human).
> >
> > I can't speak of rel-eng (and honestly don't know) how problematic
> > this "physical removal" on request is.
>
> it's a process that at least 2 people must go thru, one opening a
> ticket, second doing the removal and closing the ticket ...
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Fedora Copr - Mock v5.1

[Pavel Raiskup]

Hello again,

just a quick update that Mock 5.1 has been deployed into Fedora Copr,
too.  While on it, openSUSE Leap 15.3 is now EOL and 15.5 added.

Happy building!
Pavel

On pátek 15. září 2023 14:05:19 CEST Pavel Raiskup wrote:
> Hello maintainers!
> 
> Let me announce a new release of Mock v5.1 (the chroot build environment
> manager for building RPMs).
> 
> Mock 5.1 further stabilizes the (now default) --use-bootstrap-image
> feature, and adds a "fallback" mechanism which turns the feature OFF
> if Podman can not be used.  In case of temporary network issues, Mock
> repeatedly tries to "podman pull" the image.  It contains a
> compatibility fix with the new systemd-nspawn (rhbz#2238820) which was
> painful during the recent days.
> 
> In case of any trouble, please report issues upstream:
> https://github.com/rpm-software-management/mock/issues
> 
> Full release notes:
> https://rpm-software-management.github.io/mock/Release-Notes-5.1
> 
> The updated packages are in Bodhi:
> 
> [Fedora 39]: 
> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-245c858aed
> [Fedora 38]: 
> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-67a714a252
> [Fedora 37]: 
> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-fb5ab02f5e
> [EPEL 9]: 
> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2023-72c92e599a
> [EPEL 8]: 
> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2023-45ace77fca
> 
> Happy building!
> Pavel
> 
> 
> 
> 



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

Re: Automate your Fedora package maintenance using Packit

[Frantisek Lachman]

I quite like these checks but wouldn't it be better to have these as
part of Fedora CI? (Or any other CI system running on dist-git PRs?)

František

On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 4:13 PM Daniel P. Berrangé  wrote:
> If you wanted to be especially helpful, perhaps Packit could compare
> the old and new tarballs, and present the maintainer a list of newly
> added files as a BZ attachment. It could also run 'licensecheck -r'
> on old and new tarballs and report any notable changes. Still needs
> human review, but that might help nudge the maintainer to actually
> do the license review, as I bet it is often skipped on rebases.
>
> With regards,
> Daniel
___
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: Automate your Fedora package maintenance using Packit

[Daniel P . Berrangé]

On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 04:02:04PM +0200, Frantisek Lachman wrote:
> Thanks Dan and Daniel for the responses. You both are right. For our
> defence, this is always setup by an existing Fedora user (=human).
> 
> I can't speak of rel-eng (and honestly don't know) how problematic
> this "physical removal" on request is.
> We can at least promote the licence check more
> and provide instructions on what to do if something does not fulfil the rules.
> (E.g. as a part of the issue Ankur created and mentioned
> (https://github.com/packit/packit/issues/2035))
> 
> Does anyone have any realistic solution (or an improvement) to this
> for Packit itself?
> 
> We can also stop uploading the source to the lookaside cache (or make
> it configurable),
> but the benefit of such automation is significantly reduced.

I think it isn't too hard to make it acceptable, just stick a
flag in the middle of your process that human has to acknowledge
eg:

  1. Release monitoring files the new BZ ticket (it already includes
 wording warning the maintainer to review the new release for
 licensing changes).

 This BZ would have a flag set  'license-review=?' initially

  2. Maintainer reviews the new tarball to check the license
 situation is all still golden.

 If OK, maintainer toggles flag to license-review=+,
 else toggles to license-review=-

  3. Packit sees the flag approval and its magic happens to
 upload tarball and file pull request, etc


If you wanted to be especially helpful, perhaps Packit could compare
the old and new tarballs, and present the maintainer a list of newly
added files as a BZ attachment. It could also run 'licensecheck -r'
on old and new tarballs and report any notable changes. Still needs
human review, but that might help nudge the maintainer to actually
do the license review, as I bet it is often skipped on rebases.

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

Re: Automate your Fedora package maintenance using Packit

[Dan Horák]

On Fri, 15 Sep 2023 16:02:04 +0200
Frantisek Lachman  wrote:

> Thanks Dan and Daniel for the responses. You both are right. For our
> defence, this is always setup by an existing Fedora user (=human).
> 
> I can't speak of rel-eng (and honestly don't know) how problematic
> this "physical removal" on request is.

it's a process that at least 2 people must go thru, one opening a
ticket, second doing the removal and closing the ticket ...

> We can at least promote the licence check more
> and provide instructions on what to do if something does not fulfil the rules.
> (E.g. as a part of the issue Ankur created and mentioned
> (https://github.com/packit/packit/issues/2035))
> 
> Does anyone have any realistic solution (or an improvement) to this
> for Packit itself?
> 
> We can also stop uploading the source to the lookaside cache (or make
> it configurable),
> but the benefit of such automation is significantly reduced.

I think making it configurable could be the way, for example an upstream
project where I am the developer can have the upload enabled, because I
control my licensing situation, but it shouldn't be the default for a
"random" project.


Dan

> František
> 
> 
> On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 3:39 PM Dan Horák  wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 15 Sep 2023 15:13:58 +0200
> > Frantisek Lachman  wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Petr,
> > >
> > > we would like to avoid storing the archive in the lookaside cache before
> > > approving but the problem is that the CI on the PR (mainly the scratch
> > > build) does not work without the archive being in the lookaside cache
> > > already. Once this becomes possible, we (=Packit) would be happy to do 
> > > this
> > > only when approved.
> > >
> > > But thanks to the archive hash, we don't build anything to Fedora that is
> > > not approved.
> >
> > but this is the problem, once uploaded, it can be reached and
> > downloaded, making Fedora distributing the content. It then needs
> > a rel-eng action to "physically" remove problematic source archive.
> >
> >
> > Dan
> > ___
> > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> > Fedora Code of Conduct: 
> > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> > List Archives: 
> > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> > Do not reply to spam, report it: 
> > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct: 
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives: 
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam, report it: 
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Blender 3.6.2 failure to build

[Ben Beasley]

Thanks for working on this.

Are you certain that Blender failed to build in F39? As I reported in 
[1], the build failure in question is due to openxr 1.0.29, which only 
happened in F40.


Koschei remains green for F39[2], and there is a pending update rebuilt 
against USD 23.08[3] (so please don’t rebuild Blender again in F39 until 
that update goes stable at the end of the Beta Freeze).


For F40, we agreed to go ahead and merge the USD 23.08 side tag and fix 
the Blender build afterward[4]. At the time, there was no upstream patch 
available. I’m glad to see that one is available now. After you apply 
the patch, please do rebuild Blender in Rawhide to fix the current FTI 
bug[5]. Or I can commit the patch and do the rebuild, if you’d prefer.


Let me know if there’s anything I can do to help!


[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2236801

[2] https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/package/blender?collection=f39

[3] https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-62bee27bd1

[4] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2236801#c2

[5] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2237533

On 9/15/23 3:40 AM, Luya Tshimbalanga wrote:

Hi,

On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 11:12 PM Luya Tshimbalanga
https://projects.blender.org/blender/blender/issues/111820 Try
applying the linked patch in
https://projects.blender.org/blender/blender/commit/8159bd90e527552ccfe27...

Thanks, Elliot. The patch fixed the issue.

Luya
___
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

Re: Automate your Fedora package maintenance using Packit

[Frantisek Lachman]

Thanks Dan and Daniel for the responses. You both are right. For our
defence, this is always setup by an existing Fedora user (=human).

I can't speak of rel-eng (and honestly don't know) how problematic
this "physical removal" on request is.
We can at least promote the licence check more
and provide instructions on what to do if something does not fulfil the rules.
(E.g. as a part of the issue Ankur created and mentioned
(https://github.com/packit/packit/issues/2035))

Does anyone have any realistic solution (or an improvement) to this
for Packit itself?

We can also stop uploading the source to the lookaside cache (or make
it configurable),
but the benefit of such automation is significantly reduced.

František


On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 3:39 PM Dan Horák  wrote:
>
> On Fri, 15 Sep 2023 15:13:58 +0200
> Frantisek Lachman  wrote:
>
> > Hi Petr,
> >
> > we would like to avoid storing the archive in the lookaside cache before
> > approving but the problem is that the CI on the PR (mainly the scratch
> > build) does not work without the archive being in the lookaside cache
> > already. Once this becomes possible, we (=Packit) would be happy to do this
> > only when approved.
> >
> > But thanks to the archive hash, we don't build anything to Fedora that is
> > not approved.
>
> but this is the problem, once uploaded, it can be reached and
> downloaded, making Fedora distributing the content. It then needs
> a rel-eng action to "physically" remove problematic source archive.
>
>
> Dan
> ___
> 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

Re: Automate your Fedora package maintenance using Packit

[Dan Horák]

On Fri, 15 Sep 2023 15:39:50 +0200
Frantisek Lachman  wrote:

> Thanks Vít for the link!
> 
> I am honestly not sure how CI should do this (and don't want to be the
> one who decides..;)
> 
> If CI does not need to have the source in the lookaside cache, Packit
> does not need to store anything in the lookaside cache (that's a good
> thing), but the maintainer can't be sure that the CI uses the same
> archive as Koji when building the package. (And someone needs to
> upload the archive into the lookaside archive later on.)

copr is able to download the sources using the SourceX tags before
building, if they use https. It is sufficient to have just the spec in a
git repo.


Dan

 
> František
> 
> On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 3:23 PM Vít Ondruch  wrote:
> >
> > I was proposing some methods how to enable download of sources for e.g. CI 
> > purposes here:
> >
> > https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/1132#comment-769233
> >
> > But without too much success.
> >
> > But of course, CI could also be improved to download the required sources, 
> > if there is proper source URL.
> >
> >
> > Vít
> >
> >
> > Dne 15. 09. 23 v 15:13 Frantisek Lachman napsal(a):
> >
> > Hi Petr,
> >
> > we would like to avoid storing the archive in the lookaside cache before 
> > approving but the problem is that the CI on the PR (mainly the scratch 
> > build) does not work without the archive being in the lookaside cache 
> > already. Once this becomes possible, we (=Packit) would be happy to do this 
> > only when approved.
> >
> > But thanks to the archive hash, we don't build anything to Fedora that is 
> > not approved.
> >
> > If anyone has any better solution we're happy to improve. We also try to 
> > avoid Packit having too many permissions.
> >
> > František
> > (as a Packit PO)
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 1:25 PM Petr Pisar  wrote:
> >>
> >> V Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 12:53:21PM +0200, Laura Barcziova napsal(a):
> >> > Yes, Fedora dist-git lookaside cache. The upstream archive is uploaded
> >> > automatically
> >>
> >> Did you know that a license review must precede uploading to Fedora 
> >> dist-git
> >> lookaside cache? The reason is once the archive is uploaded, Fedora
> >> distributes it.
> >>
> >> -- Petr
> >>
> >> ___
> >> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> >> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> >> Fedora Code of Conduct: 
> >> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> >> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> >> List Archives: 
> >> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> >> Do not reply to spam, report it: 
> >> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
> >
> >
> > ___
> > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> > Fedora Code of Conduct: 
> > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> > List Archives: 
> > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> > Do not reply to spam, report it: 
> > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
> >
> > ___
> > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> > Fedora Code of Conduct: 
> > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> > List Archives: 
> > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> > Do not reply to spam, report it: 
> > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct: 
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives: 
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam, report it: 
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
___
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: Automate your Fedora package maintenance using Packit

[Frantisek Lachman]

Thanks Vít for the link!

I am honestly not sure how CI should do this (and don't want to be the
one who decides..;)

If CI does not need to have the source in the lookaside cache, Packit
does not need to store anything in the lookaside cache (that's a good
thing), but the maintainer can't be sure that the CI uses the same
archive as Koji when building the package. (And someone needs to
upload the archive into the lookaside archive later on.)

František

On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 3:23 PM Vít Ondruch  wrote:
>
> I was proposing some methods how to enable download of sources for e.g. CI 
> purposes here:
>
> https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/1132#comment-769233
>
> But without too much success.
>
> But of course, CI could also be improved to download the required sources, if 
> there is proper source URL.
>
>
> Vít
>
>
> Dne 15. 09. 23 v 15:13 Frantisek Lachman napsal(a):
>
> Hi Petr,
>
> we would like to avoid storing the archive in the lookaside cache before 
> approving but the problem is that the CI on the PR (mainly the scratch build) 
> does not work without the archive being in the lookaside cache already. Once 
> this becomes possible, we (=Packit) would be happy to do this only when 
> approved.
>
> But thanks to the archive hash, we don't build anything to Fedora that is not 
> approved.
>
> If anyone has any better solution we're happy to improve. We also try to 
> avoid Packit having too many permissions.
>
> František
> (as a Packit PO)
>
> On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 1:25 PM Petr Pisar  wrote:
>>
>> V Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 12:53:21PM +0200, Laura Barcziova napsal(a):
>> > Yes, Fedora dist-git lookaside cache. The upstream archive is uploaded
>> > automatically
>>
>> Did you know that a license review must precede uploading to Fedora dist-git
>> lookaside cache? The reason is once the archive is uploaded, Fedora
>> distributes it.
>>
>> -- Petr
>>
>> ___
>> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
>> Fedora Code of Conduct: 
>> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
>> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
>> List Archives: 
>> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>> Do not reply to spam, report it: 
>> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
>
>
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct: 
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives: 
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam, report it: 
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
>
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct: 
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives: 
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam, report it: 
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Automate your Fedora package maintenance using Packit

[Dan Horák]

On Fri, 15 Sep 2023 15:13:58 +0200
Frantisek Lachman  wrote:

> Hi Petr,
> 
> we would like to avoid storing the archive in the lookaside cache before
> approving but the problem is that the CI on the PR (mainly the scratch
> build) does not work without the archive being in the lookaside cache
> already. Once this becomes possible, we (=Packit) would be happy to do this
> only when approved.
> 
> But thanks to the archive hash, we don't build anything to Fedora that is
> not approved.

but this is the problem, once uploaded, it can be reached and
downloaded, making Fedora distributing the content. It then needs
a rel-eng action to "physically" remove problematic source archive.


Dan
___
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: Automate your Fedora package maintenance using Packit

[Daniel P . Berrangé]

On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 03:13:58PM +0200, Frantisek Lachman wrote:
> Hi Petr,
> 
> we would like to avoid storing the archive in the lookaside cache before
> approving but the problem is that the CI on the PR (mainly the scratch
> build) does not work without the archive being in the lookaside cache
> already. Once this becomes possible, we (=Packit) would be happy to do this
> only when approved.

IIUC strictly speaking content must be validated for license compliance
before it is present on any Fedora infrastructure. IOW, doing scratch
builds in either Koji or Copr is also predicated on having permissible
content under an approved license, just as lookaside cache uploads are.

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

Re: Automate your Fedora package maintenance using Packit

[Vít Ondruch]

I was proposing some methods how to enable download of sources for e.g. 
CI purposes here:


https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/1132#comment-769233

But without too much success.

But of course, CI could also be improved to download the required 
sources, if there is proper source URL.



Vít


Dne 15. 09. 23 v 15:13 Frantisek Lachman napsal(a):

Hi Petr,

we would like to avoid storing the archive in the lookaside cache 
before approving but the problem is that the CI on the PR (mainly the 
scratch build) does not work without the archive being in the 
lookaside cache already. Once this becomes possible, we (=Packit) 
would be happy to do this only when approved.


But thanks to the archive hash, we don't build anything to Fedora that 
is not approved.


If anyone has any better solution we're happy to improve. We also try 
to avoid Packit having too many permissions.


František
(as a Packit PO)

On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 1:25 PM Petr Pisar  wrote:

V Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 12:53:21PM +0200, Laura Barcziova napsal(a):
> Yes, Fedora dist-git lookaside cache. The upstream archive is
uploaded
> automatically

Did you know that a license review must precede uploading to
Fedora dist-git
lookaside cache? The reason is once the archive is uploaded, Fedora
distributes it.

-- Petr

___
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 todevel-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


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

Re: Automate your Fedora package maintenance using Packit

[Frantisek Lachman]

And maybe one more related note to this. We've been asked multiple
times to do auto-merges as well, but that's not really what we want to
do. We do want human approval during the process. (Automation can
suggest the change and once approved take care of the builds/updates,
but a single tool should not go through the whole pipeline without any
human approval.)

František


On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 3:13 PM Frantisek Lachman  wrote:
>
> Hi Petr,
>
> we would like to avoid storing the archive in the lookaside cache before 
> approving but the problem is that the CI on the PR (mainly the scratch build) 
> does not work without the archive being in the lookaside cache already. Once 
> this becomes possible, we (=Packit) would be happy to do this only when 
> approved.
>
> But thanks to the archive hash, we don't build anything to Fedora that is not 
> approved.
>
> If anyone has any better solution we're happy to improve. We also try to 
> avoid Packit having too many permissions.
>
> František
> (as a Packit PO)
>
> On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 1:25 PM Petr Pisar  wrote:
>>
>> V Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 12:53:21PM +0200, Laura Barcziova napsal(a):
>> > Yes, Fedora dist-git lookaside cache. The upstream archive is uploaded
>> > automatically
>>
>> Did you know that a license review must precede uploading to Fedora dist-git
>> lookaside cache? The reason is once the archive is uploaded, Fedora
>> distributes it.
>>
>> -- Petr
>>
>> ___
>> 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

LoadOptions handling in rhboot/shim fallback.c

[Mike Beaton]

Vitaly Kuznetsov has offered https://github.com/rhboot/shim/pull/611
to fix the NVRAM entry generated by `add_boot_option(...)` in Shim's
`fallback.c`.

It is quite pervasive in that file to treat the size of the loaded
image arguments as `StrLen(arguments) * 2` (just search for
`StrLen(arguments)`, since `StrLen(arguments) * sizeof (CHAR16)` is
also used) - so the issue identified in the PR affects
`find_boot_option(...)` as well as add_boot_option(...)`.

Additionally, while the PR does not currently address this,
`image->LoadOptionsSize` should include the size of the `CHAR_NULL`
terminator of `image->LoadOptions` (when `arguments` is non-empty), so
I believe the `first_new_option_size` handling in the file needs
updating in a similar manner too.

Sincerely,

Mike Beaton
___
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: Automate your Fedora package maintenance using Packit

[Frantisek Lachman]

Hi Petr,

we would like to avoid storing the archive in the lookaside cache before
approving but the problem is that the CI on the PR (mainly the scratch
build) does not work without the archive being in the lookaside cache
already. Once this becomes possible, we (=Packit) would be happy to do this
only when approved.

But thanks to the archive hash, we don't build anything to Fedora that is
not approved.

If anyone has any better solution we're happy to improve. We also try to
avoid Packit having too many permissions.

František
(as a Packit PO)

On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 1:25 PM Petr Pisar  wrote:

> V Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 12:53:21PM +0200, Laura Barcziova napsal(a):
> > Yes, Fedora dist-git lookaside cache. The upstream archive is uploaded
> > automatically
>
> Did you know that a license review must precede uploading to Fedora
> dist-git
> lookaside cache? The reason is once the archive is uploaded, Fedora
> distributes it.
>
> -- Petr
>
> ___
> 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

Fedora 39 compose report: 20230915.n.0 changes

[Fedora Branched Report]

OLD: Fedora-39-20230914.n.0
NEW: Fedora-39-20230915.n.0

= SUMMARY =
Added images:2
Dropped images:  4
Added packages:  0
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages:   0
Downgraded packages: 0

Size of added packages:  0 B
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Size of upgraded packages:   0 B
Size of downgraded packages: 0 B

Size change of upgraded packages:   0 B
Size change of downgraded packages: 0 B

= ADDED IMAGES =
Image: i3 live aarch64
Path: Spins/aarch64/iso/Fedora-i3-Live-aarch64-39-20230915.n.0.iso
Image: KDE live aarch64
Path: Spins/aarch64/iso/Fedora-KDE-Live-aarch64-39-20230915.n.0.iso

= DROPPED IMAGES =
Image: LXQt live aarch64
Path: Spins/aarch64/iso/Fedora-LXQt-Live-aarch64-39-20230914.n.0.iso
Image: Kinoite dvd-ostree x86_64
Path: Kinoite/x86_64/iso/Fedora-Kinoite-ostree-x86_64-39-20230914.n.0.iso
Image: Sericea dvd-ostree x86_64
Path: Sericea/x86_64/iso/Fedora-Sericea-ostree-x86_64-39-20230914.n.0.iso
Image: Kinoite dvd-ostree ppc64le
Path: Kinoite/ppc64le/iso/Fedora-Kinoite-ostree-ppc64le-39-20230914.n.0.iso

= ADDED PACKAGES =

= DROPPED PACKAGES =

= UPGRADED PACKAGES =

= DOWNGRADED PACKAGES =
___
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: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Leigh Scott]

Use whatever you like as I wont be migrating to the new infra!
___
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

Mock v5.1 released (and mock-core-configs v39.1)

[Pavel Raiskup]

Hello maintainers!

Let me announce a new release of Mock v5.1 (the chroot build environment
manager for building RPMs).

Mock 5.1 further stabilizes the (now default) --use-bootstrap-image
feature, and adds a "fallback" mechanism which turns the feature OFF
if Podman can not be used.  In case of temporary network issues, Mock
repeatedly tries to "podman pull" the image.  It contains a
compatibility fix with the new systemd-nspawn (rhbz#2238820) which was
painful during the recent days.

In case of any trouble, please report issues upstream:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/mock/issues

Full release notes:
https://rpm-software-management.github.io/mock/Release-Notes-5.1

The updated packages are in Bodhi:

[Fedora 39]: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-245c858aed
[Fedora 38]: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-67a714a252
[Fedora 37]: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-fb5ab02f5e
[EPEL 9]: 
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2023-72c92e599a
[EPEL 8]: 
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2023-45ace77fca

Happy building!
Pavel





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

Re: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Cristian Le via devel]

It might also be worth mentioning that both gitea and forgejo support 
Github Actions [1][2]. I did not personally test them, but it might be 
good for the familiarity and reuse of the maintained Github Actions 
library. One missing thing are Github applications, but I don't think we 
are using something currently with Pagure right?


[1] https://docs.gitea.com/usage/actions/comparison
[2] https://forgejo.org/docs/latest/user/actions/

On 2023/09/15 12:06, Dan Čermák wrote:

Ondřej Budai  writes:


What about hosted Gitea from gitea.com?

Gitea is fully open source, very popular in the self-hosting community and
their hosted offering would free up some of our precious infra team
resources.

Gitea is ok from a UX perspective but it is still quite lacking from an
integration point of view. Also, I have found it's API to have a few odd
quirks after working with it for quite some time at $dayjob. Maybe it'll
get there in another year or two, if it gets at least *some* corporate
backing.


Cheers,

Dan
___
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

Re: Automate your Fedora package maintenance using Packit

[Petr Pisar]

V Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 12:53:21PM +0200, Laura Barcziova napsal(a):
> Yes, Fedora dist-git lookaside cache. The upstream archive is uploaded
> automatically

Did you know that a license review must precede uploading to Fedora dist-git
lookaside cache? The reason is once the archive is uploaded, Fedora
distributes it.

-- Petr



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

Re: Automate your Fedora package maintenance using Packit

[Ankur Sinha]

On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 12:53:21 +0200, Laura Barcziova wrote:
> Yes, Fedora dist-git lookaside cache. The upstream archive is uploaded
> automatically, but only a pull request is created in the particular dist-git
> repo with the change of the sources reference. Once the PRs are created, it is
> up to the maintainer to review these changes and, just after that, merge the
> changes with the updated reference to the respective branches.

See also: https://github.com/packit/packit/issues/2035

Packit is awesome, it really does help to automate lots of menial tasks,
but the risk really is that maintainers forget to do their due diligence
before merging the PRs and all that.

I guess it should be possible to make packit (or the-new-hotness?) run
licensecheck on the new sources and include that in the PR comment too,
perhaps also with a list of packages that depend on the one being
updated as an "impact check"?

See also: https://github.com/fedora-infra/the-new-hotness/issues/545

Another issue relevant to us Fedora package maintainers is this one
(already being worked on from what I see):
https://github.com/packit/packit/issues/1920

-- 
Thanks,
Regards,
Ankur Sinha "FranciscoD" (He / Him / His) | 
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Ankursinha
Time zone: Europe/London


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

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20230915.n.0 changes

[Fedora Rawhide Report]

OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20230914.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20230915.n.0

= SUMMARY =
Added images:2
Dropped images:  1
Added packages:  4
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages:   78
Downgraded packages: 0

Size of added packages:  563.07 KiB
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Size of upgraded packages:   1.76 GiB
Size of downgraded packages: 0 B

Size change of upgraded packages:   9.07 MiB
Size change of downgraded packages: 0 B

= ADDED IMAGES =
Image: Sericea dvd-ostree x86_64
Path: Sericea/x86_64/iso/Fedora-Sericea-ostree-x86_64-Rawhide-20230915.n.0.iso
Image: Kinoite dvd-ostree aarch64
Path: Kinoite/aarch64/iso/Fedora-Kinoite-ostree-aarch64-Rawhide-20230915.n.0.iso

= DROPPED IMAGES =
Image: Workstation live aarch64
Path: 
Workstation/aarch64/iso/Fedora-Workstation-Live-aarch64-Rawhide-20230914.n.0.iso

= ADDED PACKAGES =
Package: mkosi14-14-1.fc40
Summary: Create bespoke OS images
RPMs:mkosi14
Size:294.23 KiB

Package: rust-libtest-mimic-0.6.1-1.fc40
Summary: Test harness that looks and behaves like rustc's built-in test harness
RPMs:rust-libtest-mimic+default-devel rust-libtest-mimic-devel
Size:42.67 KiB

Package: rust-smol_str0.1-0.1.24-1.fc40
Summary: Small-string optimized string type with O(1) clone
RPMs:rust-smol_str0.1+arbitrary-devel rust-smol_str0.1+default-devel 
rust-smol_str0.1+serde-devel rust-smol_str0.1+std-devel rust-smol_str0.1-devel
Size:48.74 KiB

Package: rust-winnow0.4-0.4.11-1.fc40
Summary: Byte-oriented, zero-copy, parser combinators library
RPMs:rust-winnow0.4+alloc-devel rust-winnow0.4+default-devel 
rust-winnow0.4+simd-devel rust-winnow0.4+std-devel 
rust-winnow0.4+unstable-doc-devel rust-winnow0.4-devel
Size:177.44 KiB


= DROPPED PACKAGES =

= UPGRADED PACKAGES =
Package:  alot-0.10-1.fc40
Old package:  alot-0.8.1-17.fc39
Summary:  Experimental terminal MUA based on notmuch mail
RPMs: alot
Size: 369.85 KiB
Size change:  31.30 KiB
Changelog:
  * Thu Sep 14 2023 Packit  - 0.10-1
  - New upstream release 0.10


Package:  apptainer-1.2.3-1.fc40
Old package:  apptainer-1.2.2-1.fc39
Summary:  Application and environment virtualization formerly known as 
Singularity
RPMs: apptainer apptainer-suid
Size: 121.37 MiB
Size change:  31.94 KiB
Changelog:
  * Thu Sep 14 2023 Dave Dykstra  - 1.2.3
  - Update to upstream 1.2.3


Package:  bfs-3.0.2-1.fc40
Old package:  bfs-3.0.1-1.fc39
Summary:  A breadth-first version of the UNIX find command
RPMs: bfs
Size: 528.75 KiB
Size change:  2.98 KiB
Changelog:
  * Thu Sep 14 2023 Gustavo Costa  - 3.0.2-1
  - Update to 3.0.2 (rhbz#2237850)


Package:  blueprint-compiler-0.10.0-1.fc40
Old package:  blueprint-compiler-0.6.0-4.fc39
Summary:  A markup language for GTK user interfaces
RPMs: blueprint-compiler
Size: 226.68 KiB
Size change:  42.68 KiB
Changelog:
  * Thu Sep 14 2023 Lyes Saadi  - 0.10.0-1
  - Updating to 0.10.0 (rhbz#2148671, rhbz#2169892)


Package:  btrfs-progs-6.5.1-1.fc40
Old package:  btrfs-progs-6.3.3-1.fc40
Summary:  Userspace programs for btrfs
RPMs: btrfs-progs btrfs-progs-devel libbtrfs libbtrfsutil 
python3-btrfsutil
Size: 6.56 MiB
Size change:  42.08 KiB
Changelog:
  * Thu Sep 14 2023 Neal Gompa  - 6.5.1-1
  - Update to 6.5.1


Package:  centpkg-0.8.1-3.fc40
Old package:  centpkg-0.8.1-2.fc40
Summary:  CentOS utility for working with dist-git
RPMs: centpkg centpkg-sig
Size: 84.25 KiB
Size change:  -170 B
Changelog:
  * Fri Sep 15 2023 Carl George  - 0.8.1-3
  - Add patch for Python 3.12 compatibility, resolves rhbz#2238954


Package:  cmake-3.27.4-7.fc40
Old package:  cmake-3.27.4-6.fc40
Summary:  Cross-platform make system
RPMs: cmake cmake-data cmake-doc cmake-filesystem cmake-gui 
cmake-rpm-macros
Size: 61.51 MiB
Size change:  3.28 KiB
Changelog:
  * Wed Sep 06 2023 Panu Matilainen  - 3.27.4-6
  - Only require cmake-rpm-macros when rpm-build is installed part II

  * Thu Sep 14 2023 Bj??rn Esser  - 3.27.4-7
  - Add upstream patches from milestone to cmake-3.27.5


Package:  distribution-gpg-keys-1.96-1.fc40
Old package:  distribution-gpg-keys-1.92-1.fc40
Summary:  GPG keys of various Linux distributions
RPMs: distribution-gpg-keys distribution-gpg-keys-copr
Size: 61.20 MiB
Size change:  10.74 KiB
Changelog:
  * Thu Sep 14 2023 Miroslav Such??  1.93-1
  - Add SUSE ALP signing keys
  - Add SLE 2023 signing keys

  * Thu Sep 14 2023 Miroslav Such??  1.94-1
  - new release because testing new release process

  * Thu Sep 14 2023 Miroslav Such??  1.95-1
  - new release to test new release process

  * Thu Sep 14 2023 Miroslav Such??  1.96-1
  - Restructure openSUSE GPG keys


Package:  docbook-dtds-1.0-83.fc40
Old package:  docbook-dtds-1.0-82.fc39
Summary:  SGML and XML document type definitions for DocBook
RPMs: docbook-dtds

Re: Automate your Fedora package maintenance using Packit

[Laura Barcziova]

Yes, Fedora dist-git lookaside cache. The upstream archive is uploaded
automatically, but only a pull request is created in the particular
dist-git repo with the change of the *sources* reference. Once the PRs are
created, it is up to the maintainer to review these changes and, just after
that, merge the changes with the updated reference to the respective
branches.

Laura

On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 12:00 PM Petr Pisar  wrote:

> V Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 09:22:46AM +0200, Laura Barcziova napsal(a):
> > Once set up, here's how it works:
> >
> >-
> >
> >Upstream Release Monitoring creates a Bugzilla bug when new upstream
> >versions are detected.
> >-
> >
> >As a reaction to that, Packit:
> >-
> >
> >   automatically uploads the upstream archive to the lookaside cache,
> >   -
> What lookaside cache? Fedora dist-git? Who does review licenses in the new
> upstream archive BEFORE uploading it?
>
> -- Petr
> ___
> 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

[rpms/perl-Term-Table] PR #5: 0.017 bump

[Michal Josef Špaček]

mspacek merged a pull-request against the project: `perl-Term-Table` that you 
are following.

Merged pull-request:

``
0.017 bump
``

https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Term-Table/pull-request/5
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[rpms/perl-Term-Table] PR #5: 0.017 bump

[Michal Josef Špaček]

mspacek opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-Term-Table` that 
you are following:
``
0.017 bump
``

To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Term-Table/pull-request/5
___
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: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Dan Čermák]

Ondřej Budai  writes:

> What about hosted Gitea from gitea.com?
>
> Gitea is fully open source, very popular in the self-hosting community and
> their hosted offering would free up some of our precious infra team
> resources.

Gitea is ok from a UX perspective but it is still quite lacking from an
integration point of view. Also, I have found it's API to have a few odd
quirks after working with it for quite some time at $dayjob. Maybe it'll
get there in another year or two, if it gets at least *some* corporate
backing.


Cheers,

Dan
___
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: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Clement Verna]

On Fri, 15 Sept 2023 at 11:37, Leon Fauster via devel <
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:

> Am 15.09.23 um 07:43 schrieb Clement Verna:
>
> > At the risk of being controversial and a voice of the minority, I think
> > using GitHub would be beneficial for the Fedora project. In practice
> > already most of packagers have to use GitHub to collaborate with
> > upstream so it wouldn't  be a tool to learn. But where, GitHub would be
> > really beneficial IMO is for making our work more visible and reachable
> > to attract new contributors. It is also worth to mention that other
> > distros close to Fedora like Alma Linux or Rocky Linux are using GitHub
> > for their development and it doesn't seems to be a problem.
> >
> IIRC, github just get copies of the self-hosted git-instances that are
> based on gitea (https://git.almalinux.org/) or gitlab
> (https://git.rockylinux.org/) ...
>

Ha thanks, that's interesting. I look at both project web page and just saw
the links to GitHub.


>
> --
> Leon
> ___
> 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

Re: Automate your Fedora package maintenance using Packit

[Petr Pisar]

V Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 09:22:46AM +0200, Laura Barcziova napsal(a):
> Once set up, here's how it works:
> 
>-
> 
>Upstream Release Monitoring creates a Bugzilla bug when new upstream
>versions are detected.
>-
> 
>As a reaction to that, Packit:
>-
> 
>   automatically uploads the upstream archive to the lookaside cache,
>   -
What lookaside cache? Fedora dist-git? Who does review licenses in the new
upstream archive BEFORE uploading it?

-- Petr


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

[Bug 2238831] perl-Term-Table-0.017 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2238831

Michal Josef Spacek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED



--- Comment #1 from Michal Josef Spacek  ---
Changes:

0.017 2023-09-13 10:41:08-07:00 America/Los_Angeles

- Remove 'Importer' dependency

Only for rawhide, not trivial change


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2238831

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202238831%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: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Leon Fauster via devel]

Am 15.09.23 um 07:43 schrieb Clement Verna:

At the risk of being controversial and a voice of the minority, I think 
using GitHub would be beneficial for the Fedora project. In practice 
already most of packagers have to use GitHub to collaborate with 
upstream so it wouldn't  be a tool to learn. But where, GitHub would be 
really beneficial IMO is for making our work more visible and reachable 
to attract new contributors. It is also worth to mention that other 
distros close to Fedora like Alma Linux or Rocky Linux are using GitHub 
for their development and it doesn't seems to be a problem.


IIRC, github just get copies of the self-hosted git-instances that are 
based on gitea (https://git.almalinux.org/) or gitlab 
(https://git.rockylinux.org/) ...


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

Re: F40 Change Proposal: KDE Plasma 6 (System Wide)

[Marcin Juszkiewicz]

W dniu 13.09.2023 o 17:53, Aoife Moloney pisze:


== Summary ==
KDE Plasma 6 is successor to KDE Plasma 5 created by the KDE
Community. It is based on Qt 6 and KDE Frameworks 6 and brings many
changes and improvements over previous versions. For Fedora Linux, the
transition to KDE Plasma 6 will also include dropping support for the
X11 session entirely, leaving only Plasma Wayland as the sole offered
desktop mode.


Which leaves us with "Numpad shortcuts don't work in wayland sessions" 
bug in KDE/Wayland:


https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=453423

Someone in KDE decided to treat KEY_KP1 ("1" on numpad part of pc105 
keyboard) in same way as KEY_1 ("1" on alphanumeric part of pc105 
keyboard). Which breaks several setups where people use shortcuts with 
numpad keys (for me it is Meta+KP[1-9] to organize windows).



This bug is one of reasons I am still on KDE/X11 rather than KDE/Wayland.

Other reasons are:

1. Zoom meeting app which is unable to share Wayland windows
2. RSIBreak app is unable to track activity
___
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

GNOME 45.0 builds for Fedora

[Kalev Lember]

Hi all,

GNOME 45.0 upstream tarball date is this weekend and I'm coordinating
the downstream builds for F39 and rawhide.

A quick note where we are in the release schedule:

Fedora 39 Beta was declared GO yesterday and is going to ship with GNOME
45.beta. We have the 45.rc mega-update in Bodhi
(https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-d422824191) and it
is queued to stable and hopefully gets pushed to stable later tonight
once the floodgates open again after the F39 Beta freeze.

My plan is to collect all F39 builds in the f39-gnome side tag, but for
rawhide build directly for rawhide. Hopefully there are no soname bumps
between 45.rc and 45.0 complicating things.

If you are helping with builds, please do the following:

For F39, use 'fedpkg build --target f39-gnome' and I'll take care to
submit everything to bodhi as a single mega-update.

For rawhide, if you are building just a single package, build directly
in rawhide. If it's a soname bump or anything else that requires
multiple packages built together, please use a koji self-service side
tag ('fedpkg request-side-tag' while the rawhide branch is checked out)
and build using this. We sadly don't have a good way to do named side
tags (f40-gnome) for rawhide.

openQA is active in rawhide and gating updates so hopefully it prevents
any broken updates landing.

I'm going to be following the above myself and kicking off builds as
soon as they are released upstream.

If you run into any issues (or if there are soname bumps or anything
else that would complicate things), please let me know - I'm available
for sorting things out.

Thanks and looking forward to an exciting GNOME 45.0 release!

--
Kalev
___
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

[rpms/perl-XML-Catalog] PR #1: Package tests; Modernize spec

[Jitka Plesnikova]

jplesnik merged a pull-request against the project: `perl-XML-Catalog` that you 
are following.

Merged pull-request:

``
Package tests; Modernize spec
``

https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-XML-Catalog/pull-request/1
___
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: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Ondřej Budai]

What about hosted Gitea from gitea.com?

Gitea is fully open source, very popular in the self-hosting community and
their hosted offering would free up some of our precious infra team
resources.

Ondřej

Dne st 13. 9. 2023 19:45 uživatel Matthew Miller 
napsal:

> On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 09:20:09AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > IIRC it was a condition of that proposal that we wind up on a hosted
> > version of the *open source* release of gitlab, which is something we
> > managed to talk gitlab into doing for us. IMBW, though, it was a while
> > ago.
>
> Short version is: yes, we did talk them into that with an informal plan,
> and
> then someone higher up at gitlab pulled the plug on the idea.
>
> At this point, we need to step back and re-evaluate all of our options. I'm
> open to the idea of a revitalized pagure as one of the possibilities, but
> before I'd personally back that, I'd like to see it _really_ revitalized...
> it needs to be more than a heroic effort by a few people. Otherwise, we'll
> be back in the same place in few years.
>
>
> --
> Matthew Miller
> 
> Fedora Project Leader
> ___
> 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

[rpms/perl-XML-Catalog] PR #1: Package tests; Modernize spec

[Jitka Plesnikova]

jplesnik opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-XML-Catalog` that 
you are following:
``
Package tests; Modernize spec
``

To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-XML-Catalog/pull-request/1
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[rpms/perl-Thread-Queue] PR #1: Package tests; Modernize spec

[Jitka Plesnikova]

jplesnik merged a pull-request against the project: `perl-Thread-Queue` that 
you are following.

Merged pull-request:

``
Package tests; Modernize spec
``

https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Thread-Queue/pull-request/1
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[rpms/perl-Thread-Queue] PR #1: Package tests; Modernize spec

[Jitka Plesnikova]

jplesnik opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-Thread-Queue` 
that you are following:
``
Package tests; Modernize spec
``

To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Thread-Queue/pull-request/1
___
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: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Panu Matilainen]

On 9/14/23 15:50, Fabio Valentini wrote:

On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 2:42 PM Colin Walters  wrote:


On Wed, Sep 13, 2023, at 1:44 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:

On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 09:20:09AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:

IIRC it was a condition of that proposal that we wind up on a hosted
version of the *open source* release of gitlab, which is something we
managed to talk gitlab into doing for us. IMBW, though, it was a while
ago.


Short version is: yes, we did talk them into that with an informal plan, and
then someone higher up at gitlab pulled the plug on the idea.


FWIW I interact with pagure rarely enough that it is somewhat painful to 
context switch each time.  I accept having to deal with both github and gitlab, 
but going from 2 to 3 has a real cost, particularly around things like CI 
systems.


Switch GitLab and Pagure in that statement and I could say the exact same thing.

Personally, I find the Pagure UI (and GitHub) to be much cleaner and
easier to navigate than the UX mess that is GitLab ...
I even find fully FOSS alternatives like Forgejo (Codeberg) *much*
easier to use than GitLab.


Truly.

GitLab used to be quite nice, back in the day. Nowadays I find it 
impossible to navigate. Pagure has its oddities and I never been at home 
there, but it is indeed the (considerably) lesser evil now. And pine for 
Codeberg (which I use for my personal projects).


- Panu -
___
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: Blender 3.6.2 failure to build

[Luya Tshimbalanga]

> Hi,
> 
> On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 11:12 PM Luya Tshimbalanga
>  
> I don't see any reference to Python 3.12 there. The error is:
> 
> In file included from /usr/include/epoxy/egl.h:46,
>  from
> /builddir/build/BUILD/blender-3.6.2/intern/ghost/intern/GHOST_ContextEGL.hh:13,
>  from
> /builddir/build/BUILD/blender-3.6.2/intern/ghost/intern/GHOST_XrGraphicsBinding.cc:12:
> /builddir/build/BUILD/blender-3.6.2/intern/ghost/intern/GHOST_XrGraphicsBinding.cc:
> In member function ‘virtual void
> GHOST_XrGraphicsBindingOpenGL::initFromGhostContext(GHOST_Context&)’:
> /builddir/build/BUILD/blender-3.6.2/intern/ghost/intern/GHOST_XrGraphicsBinding.cc:154:42:
> error: invalid conversion from ‘void (* (*)(const char*))()’ to
> ‘PFN_xrEglGetProcAddressMNDX’ {aka ‘void* (*)(const char*)’}
> [-fpermissive]
>   154 | oxr_binding.egl.getProcAddress = eglGetProcAddress;
>   |  ^
>   |  |
>   |  void (* (*)(const char*))()
> 
> which looks like
> https://projects.blender.org/blender/blender/issues/111820 Try
> applying the linked patch in
> https://projects.blender.org/blender/blender/commit/8159bd90e527552ccfe27...

Thanks, Elliot. The patch fixed the issue.

Luya
___
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

Automate your Fedora package maintenance using Packit

[Laura Barcziova]

If you're a Fedora package maintainer, we've got an exciting automation
solution for you!

At the beginning of the year, we announced a new feature called
pull_from_upstream that eases the process of bringing upstream releases
into Fedora. This feature can be easily configured directly in the dist-git
repository without access to the upstream (as opposed to our previously
introduced automation). It is most suitable for simple packages with
straightforward update processes (e.g. without patches, or need to build in
side tags).

Our automation works on top of the Upstream Release Monitoring [1], and
here's how to set it up:


   1.

   Enable Upstream Release Monitoring for your Fedora package: set the
   mapping of the project in Anitya and in the left column in
   https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/$YourPackage, change *Monitoring
   status* to *Monitoring*.
   2.

   Add the Packit configuration with the *pull_from_upstream* job to your
   dist-git repository (see example
   https://packit.dev/docs/configuration/downstream/pull_from_upstream#example
   ).

Once set up, here's how it works:

   -

   Upstream Release Monitoring creates a Bugzilla bug when new upstream
   versions are detected.
   -

   As a reaction to that, Packit:
   -

  automatically uploads the upstream archive to the lookaside cache,
  -

  creates dist-git pull request(s) at https://src.fedoraproject.org/
   with all the
  necessary changes, like updates to the specfile and sources.

If you are interested in this, read the previously published full post with
the details of the setup here: https://packit.dev/posts/pull-from-upstream.
Since the publication of this post, many users have adopted this feature
and provided valuable feedback, allowing us to enhance the UX. We're now
excited to assist you in automating the process as well!

In addition to creating pull requests in dist-git, Packit can also automate
Koji builds and Bodhi updates:

   -

   https://packit.dev/docs/configuration/downstream/koji_build
   -

   https://packit.dev/docs/configuration/downstream/bodhi_update


For complete automation documentation, don't miss our comprehensive Fedora
release guide at: https://packit.dev/docs/fedora-releases-guide. It
contains all the essential information and setup tips.

For any questions, feel free to contact us: https://packit.dev/#contact.

Best regards,

Packit team!

[1]
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Upstream_Release_Monitoring/
___
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

[rpms/perl-Pod-Escapes] PR #1: Package tests; Modernize spec

[Jitka Plesnikova]

jplesnik merged a pull-request against the project: `perl-Pod-Escapes` that you 
are following.

Merged pull-request:

``
Package tests; Modernize spec
``

https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Pod-Escapes/pull-request/1
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[rpms/perl-Pod-Escapes] PR #1: Package tests; Modernize spec

[Jitka Plesnikova]

jplesnik opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-Pod-Escapes` that 
you are following:
``
Package tests; Modernize spec
``

To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Pod-Escapes/pull-request/1
___
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: An update on RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com

[Adam Williamson]

On Fri, 2023-09-15 at 07:43 +0200, Clement Verna wrote:
> At the risk of being controversial and a voice of the minority, I think
> using GitHub would be beneficial for the Fedora project. In practice
> already most of packagers have to use GitHub to collaborate with upstream
> so it wouldn't  be a tool to learn. But where, GitHub would be really
> beneficial IMO is for making our work more visible and reachable to attract
> new contributors. It is also worth to mention that other distros close to
> Fedora like Alma Linux or Rocky Linux are using GitHub for their
> development and it doesn't seems to be a problem.

Sure, it's not a problem *yet*. Microsoft is only just starting to
crank up the enshittification machine...

https://www.theregister.com/2023/09/13/github_alienates_customers_by_force/
-- 
Adam Williamson (he/him/his)
Fedora QA
Fedora Chat: @adamwill:fedora.im | Mastodon: @ad...@fosstodon.org
https://www.happyassassin.net



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

[rpms/perl-inc-latest] PR #1: Package tests; Modernize spec

[Jitka Plesnikova]

jplesnik merged a pull-request against the project: `perl-inc-latest` that you 
are following.

Merged pull-request:

``
Package tests; Modernize spec
``

https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-inc-latest/pull-request/1
___
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: SPDX Statistics - Marco Polo edition

[Miroslav Suchý]

I forgot to add one important piece of news about rust packages:

Because Fabio reported that all crates (rust-*) has been migrated. I added all rust-* packages that has "valid as SPDX 
but no changelog entry" to ignore list


https://pagure.io/copr/license-validate/blob/main/f/ignore-packages.txt#_72

And remove the the wide rust-* regexp from ignore list.

That revealed remaining issues with crates, rust itself and coreos-installer 
that were previously hidden. See

https://pagure.io/copr/license-validate/blob/main/f/packages-without-spdx-final.txt#_11221

--
Miroslav Suchy, RHCA
Red Hat, Manager, Packit and CPT, #brno, #fedora-buildsys
___
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