OLD: Fedora-39-20231102.n.0
NEW: Fedora-39-20231103.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:3
Dropped images: 5
Added packages: 0
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 2
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 0 B
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Size of upgraded
=
#fedora-meeting-2: FESCO (2023-11-02)
=
Meeting started by tstellar at 17:00:45 UTC. The full logs are available
at
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-2/2023-11-02/fesco.2023-11-02-17.00.log.html
.
The following Fedora EPEL 9 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
6 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2023-b475c743aa
chromium-118.0.5993.117-1.el9
3 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2023-747e8b0ab1
salt-3005.4-1.el9
3
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2245998
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-Mail-POP3Client-2.21-6 |perl-Mail-POP3Client-2.21-6
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2245998
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version||perl-Mail-POP3Client-2.21-6
On 02-11-2023 11:19, Fabio Valentini wrote:
I have an update for libunibreak ready and plan to release that for
rawhide in a week (or slightly later).
The new version bumps libunibreak from so.3 to so.5.
I also intend to drop building for i686.
Note: Dropping builds for i686 is technically
or quicker:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2239008
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
> Just had upstream dev move to f39 and I tried it myself.
>
..
> grub2-mkrelpath: error: failed to get canonical path of
> `/boot/vmlinuz-6.6.0+'.
> dirname: missing operand
> Try 'dirname --help' for more information.
>
> this appears to be because I now have /boot/bzImage-6.6.0+ instead of
>
Just had upstream dev move to f39 and I tried it myself.
Building an installing a kernel from Linus now fails
make -C /home/airlied/devel/kernel/build \
-f /home/airlied/devel/kernel/linux/Makefile install
make[1]: Entering directory '/home/airlied/devel/kernel/build'
make --no-print-directory
The Fedora Linux 39 Final RC 1.5 compose is GO and will be shipped live on
Tuesday, November 7th 2023.
For more information please check the Go/No-Go meeting minutes[1] or log[2].
[1]
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2023-11-02/f39-final-go_no_go-meeting.2023-11-02-17.04.html
[2]
The Fedora Linux 39 Final RC 1.5 compose is GO and will be shipped live on
Tuesday, November 7th 2023.
For more information please check the Go/No-Go meeting minutes[1] or log[2].
[1]
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2023-11-02/f39-final-go_no_go-meeting.2023-11-02-17.04.html
[2]
On Thu, Nov 2, 2023 at 1:33 PM Brian C. Lane wrote:
>
> I think we should:
>
> * Switch the default local gpg check to true
> - this removes surprise when you learn you've been installing
> unchecked software for ... years? If they want it, it can be set
> back to false by the user.
>
On Tue, Oct 31, 2023 at 04:23:41PM +0100, Petr Pisar wrote:
> The nonchecking behavior probably exists to make installing local packages
> easy. If DNF5 would insist on checking the signatures, Fedora users would have
> to pass --no-gpgchecks option to their "dnf5" commands to override the new
>
This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes
process, proposals are publicly announced in order to receive
community feedback. This proposal will only be implemented if approved
by the Fedora Engineering Steering Committee.
Wiki:
This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes
process, proposals are publicly announced in order to receive
community feedback. This proposal will only be implemented if approved
by the Fedora Engineering Steering Committee.
Wiki:
This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes
process, proposals are publicly announced in order to receive
community feedback. This proposal will only be implemented if approved
by the Fedora Engineering Steering Committee.
Wiki:
This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes
process, proposals are publicly announced in order to receive
community feedback. This proposal will only be implemented if approved
by the Fedora Engineering Steering Committee.
Wiki:
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the
FESCo meeting Thursday at 17:00UTC in #fedora-meeting-2 on
irc.libera.chat.
To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto
or run:
date -d '2023-11-02 17:00 UTC'
Links to all issues to
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2246640
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2246773
--- Comment #4 from Dick Franks ---
If you know the path to the perl RPM spec for the distribution, the required
exactly matching version number could be extracted using this one-liner:
perl -ne 'print qq(version="$1"\n) if
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2246640
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
--- Comment #1 from
On Wed, Nov 1, 2023 at 5:39 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 01, 2023 at 10:49:36AM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 01, 2023 at 11:05:33AM -0400, Christopher wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 31, 2023 at 7:50 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > > >
> > > > FWIW, from what I can
On Wed, Nov 1, 2023 at 1:50 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 01, 2023 at 11:05:33AM -0400, Christopher wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 31, 2023 at 7:50 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > >
> > > FWIW, from what I can recall, yum used to check all packages, but this
> > > resulted in tons of people
OLD: Fedora-39-20231101.n.0
NEW: Fedora-39-20231102.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:2
Dropped images: 1
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
On Tue, 31 Oct 2023 at 14:26, Aoife Moloney wrote:
> Hi Jonathan,
>
> Sorry this (among other things Im sure) fell through the cracks while we
> were without a Fedora Program Manager :(
>
Yep, completely understandable. It wouldn't have been a problem if I had
started the work sooner!
> I
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20231101.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20231102.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:2
Dropped images: 2
Added packages: 4
Dropped packages:2
Upgraded packages: 112
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 456.27 KiB
Size of dropped packages
Dear all,
You are kindly invited to the meeting:
ELN SIG on 2023-11-03 from 12:00:00 to 13:00:00 US/Eastern
At fedora-meet...@irc.libera.chat
The meeting will be about:
Source: https://calendar.fedoraproject.org//meeting/10568/
___
devel
= DNF: Do not download filelists by default =
This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes
process, proposals are publicly announced in order to receive
community feedback. This proposal will only be implemented if approved
by the Fedora Engineering Steering Committee.
= DNF: Do not download filelists by default =
This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes
process, proposals are publicly announced in order to receive
community feedback. This proposal will only be implemented if approved
by the Fedora Engineering Steering Committee.
Wiki Link: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/BuildWithDNF5
= Build Fedora with DNF 5 =
== Summary ==
We are proposing to change the Mock configuration in Mock
(mock-core-configs), Koji, and Copr to use DNF 5 as Mock's package
manager instead of DNF 4. DNF 5 would be used by Mock to install
Wiki Link: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/BuildWithDNF5
= Build Fedora with DNF 5 =
== Summary ==
We are proposing to change the Mock configuration in Mock
(mock-core-configs), Koji, and Copr to use DNF 5 as Mock's package
manager instead of DNF 4. DNF 5 would be used by Mock to install
On 11/1/23 17:09, Christopher wrote:
On Wed, Nov 1, 2023 at 5:53 AM Paul Howarth wrote:
Maybe not using dnf, but you can check it using rpm directly:
$ wget mypackage.rpm
$ rpm --checksig mypackage.rpm
Yeah, that's why DNF is more convenient for this... the whole point of
using DNF to
On Thu, Nov 2, 2023, 01:31 Sandro wrote:
> I have an update for libunibreak ready and plan to release that for
> rawhide in a week (or slightly later).
>
> The new version bumps libunibreak from so.3 to so.5.
>
> I also intend to drop building for i686.
>
Note: Dropping builds for i686 is
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247483
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247483
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
--- Comment #1 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247582
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version||perl-Business-ISBN-Data-202
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247582
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |MODIFIED
--- Comment #1 from
V Tue, Oct 31, 2023 at 04:49:30PM -0700, Kevin Fenzi napsal(a):
> FWIW, from what I can recall, yum used to check all packages, but this
> resulted in tons of people complaining because they did not want it to
> check their local packages. So, a localpkg_gpgcheck option was added and
> set to
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2246773
--- Comment #3 from Jitka Plesnikova ---
(In reply to Dick Franks from comment #2)
> Q: Is the perl version available to the build process necessarily the same
> as the perl included in the distribution?
No, but it could help us to find out
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247582
Bug ID: 2247582
Summary: perl-Business-ISBN-Data-20231102.001 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-Business-ISBN-Data
Keywords:
40 matches
Mail list logo
