[Bug 2256327] perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.20231230 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256327



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2024-e332317e43 has been pushed to the Fedora 38 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh
--advisory=FEDORA-2024-e332317e43`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-e332317e43

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


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256327

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202256327%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 2256272] perl-DateTime-TimeZone-2.61 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256272



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2024-2db7d73c8a has been pushed to the Fedora 38 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh
--advisory=FEDORA-2024-2db7d73c8a`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-2db7d73c8a

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


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256272

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202256272%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 2256323] perl-Module-CoreList-5.20231230 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256323



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2024-44853e6956 has been pushed to the Fedora 38 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh
--advisory=FEDORA-2024-44853e6956`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-44853e6956

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


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256323

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202256323%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 2256272] perl-DateTime-TimeZone-2.61 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256272



--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2024-58302e0eb1 has been pushed to the Fedora 39 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh
--advisory=FEDORA-2024-58302e0eb1`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-58302e0eb1

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


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256272

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202256272%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 2256323] perl-Module-CoreList-5.20231230 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256323



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2024-219e7bdedd has been pushed to the Fedora 39 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh
--advisory=FEDORA-2024-219e7bdedd`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-219e7bdedd

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


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256323

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202256323%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 2256327] perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.20231230 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256327



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2024-280e803476 has been pushed to the Fedora 39 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh
--advisory=FEDORA-2024-280e803476`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-280e803476

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


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256327

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202256327%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 2256705] New: perl-Term-Completion-1.02 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256705

Bug ID: 2256705
   Summary: perl-Term-Completion-1.02 is available
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-Term-Completion
  Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
  Assignee: jples...@redhat.com
  Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: jples...@redhat.com,
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Releases retrieved: 1.02
Upstream release that is considered latest: 1.02
Current version/release in rawhide: 1.00-30.fc39
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Term-Completion/

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/3373/


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


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256705

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202256705%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

[Bug 2256688] perl-Pod-Parser-1.67 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256688



--- Comment #2 from Upstream Release Monitoring 
 ---
the-new-hotness/release-monitoring.org's scratch build of
perl-Pod-Parser-1.67-1.fc38.src.rpm for rawhide completed
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=111259725


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256688

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202256688%23c2
--
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2256688] New: perl-Pod-Parser-1.67 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256688

Bug ID: 2256688
   Summary: perl-Pod-Parser-1.67 is available
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-Pod-Parser
  Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
  Assignee: mspa...@redhat.com
  Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: mspa...@redhat.com,
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org, ppi...@redhat.com
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Releases retrieved: 1.67
Upstream release that is considered latest: 1.67
Current version/release in rawhide: 1.66-2.fc39
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Pod-Parser/

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/3244/


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


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256688

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202256688%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

[Bug 2256688] perl-Pod-Parser-1.67 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256688



--- Comment #1 from Upstream Release Monitoring 
 ---
Created attachment 2007109
  --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=2007109=edit
Update to 1.67 (#2256688)


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256688

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202256688%23c1
--
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2256687] New: perl-Pod-Checker-1.76 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256687

Bug ID: 2256687
   Summary: perl-Pod-Checker-1.76 is available
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-Pod-Checker
  Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
  Assignee: jples...@redhat.com
  Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: jples...@redhat.com, mspa...@redhat.com,
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org, ppi...@redhat.com
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Releases retrieved: 1.76
Upstream release that is considered latest: 1.76
Current version/release in rawhide: 1.75-500.fc39
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Pod-Checker/

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/3239/


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


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256687

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202256687%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: ARM PAC on koji vs COPR

[Stephen Smoogen]

On Wed, 3 Jan 2024 at 15:01, Miroslav Suchý  wrote:

> Dne 03. 01. 24 v 14:46 Jarek Prokop napsal(a):
>
> 4. Why do koji and copr have CPU flag set that differs so much? Is our
> koji infra OK?
>
> For convenience of readers:
>
> Koji:
> Flags: fp asimd evtstrm aes pmull sha1 sha2 crc32 atomics fphp asimdhp
> cpuid asimdrdm lrcpc dcpop asimddp ssbs
>
> Copr:
> Flags: fp asimd evtstrm aes pmull sha1 sha2 crc32 atomics fphp asimdhp cpuid 
> asimdrdm jscvt fcma lrcpc dcpop sha3 sm3 sm4 asimddp sha512 sve asimdfhm dit 
> uscat ilrcpc flagm ssbs paca pacg dcpodp svei8mm svebf16 i8mm bf16 dgh rng
>
> In Copr we use c7g.xlarge type from AWS as ARM builders. So if you spawn this 
> machine in AWS you should be able to reproduce.
>
>
My information may be old, but I believe the Fedora systems will be mostly
virtual machines running on Ampere systems from 2-3 years ago. I think
there are a couple of other systems which may be in usage also. The AWS
systems are a newer generation and different chipset. Another issue is that
ARM like Intel systems may be of the same generation but have different
flags.



> Side note - hopefully in next release Copr will have functionality that will 
> allow you to SSH to host with the failed build 
> https://github.com/fedora-copr/copr/pull/2977 But that will take few weeks. :(
>
> --
> 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
>


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

Schedule for Thursday's FESCo Meeting (2024-01-04)

[Stephen Gallagher]

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 '2024-01-04 17:00 UTC'

Links to all issues to be discussed can be found at:
https://pagure.io/fesco/report/meeting_agenda

= Discussed and Voted in the Ticket =

Change: Wget2 as wget
https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3118
APPROVED (+5, 0, -0)

Change: 389 Directory Server 3.0.0
https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3120
APPROVED (+4, 0, -0)

Change: Systemd Security Hardening
https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3117
APPROVED (+4, 0, -0)

Change: Linker Error On Security Issues
https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3110
APPROVED (+4, 0, -0)


= Followups =

#3101 Change: Remove OpenSSL Compat
https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3101

= New business =

#topic New Meeting Time

= Open Floor =

For more complete details, please visit each individual
issue.  The report of the agenda items can be found at
https://pagure.io/fesco/report/meeting_agenda

If you would like to add something to this agenda, you can
reply to this e-mail, file a new issue at
https://pagure.io/fesco, e-mail me directly, or bring it
up at the end of the meeting, during the open floor topic. Note
that added topics may be deferred until the following meeting.
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Are package-owner mail addresses working?

[Miro Hrončok]

On 03. 01. 24 19:32, Kevin Fenzi wrote:

On Wed, Jan 03, 2024 at 09:59:23AM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:

On Wed, Jan 3, 2024 at 8:15 AM Sergio Pascual  wrote:


El lun, 1 ene 2024 a las 13:49, Mamoru TASAKA
() escribió:


Sergio Pascual wrote on 2024/01/01 21:36:

Hello and happy new year.

Are package-owner mail addresses working? I have send mails to several
and they return a 550 error message, for example:

550 5.1.1 : Recipient address
rejected: User unknown in local recipient table

Best, Sergio
--


Currently it is -maintain...@fedoraproject.org :

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EmailAliases



Great, thank you. In that case, the "senmail.to" property in the rpm
git repositories should be updated to point to the correct address. I
have checked several repositories and all have -owner addresses there.

For example:

$ git config sendemail.to
cfitsio-ow...@fedoraproject.org




Please file a report with Fedora Infrastructure at
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue


This is actually set in fedpkg (or perhaps rpkg?).

So, best to file it there and get it fixed there.


https://pagure.io/fedpkg/pull-request/533

--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
--
___
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: ARM PAC on koji vs COPR

[Miroslav Suchý]

Dne 03. 01. 24 v 14:46 Jarek Prokop napsal(a):
4. Why do koji and copr have CPU flag set that differs so much? Is our koji infra OK? 


For convenience of readers:

Koji:
Flags: fp asimd evtstrm aes pmull sha1 sha2 crc32 atomics fphp asimdhp cpuid 
asimdrdm lrcpc dcpop asimddp ssbs

Copr:
Flags: fp asimd evtstrm aes pmull sha1 sha2 crc32 atomics fphp asimdhp cpuid 
asimdrdm jscvt fcma lrcpc dcpop sha3 sm3 sm4 asimddp sha512 sve asimdfhm dit 
uscat ilrcpc flagm ssbs paca pacg dcpodp svei8mm svebf16 i8mm bf16 dgh rng

In Copr we use c7g.xlarge type from AWS as ARM builders. So if you spawn this 
machine in AWS you should be able to reproduce.

Side note - hopefully in next release Copr will have functionality that will 
allow you to SSH to host with the failed 
buildhttps://github.com/fedora-copr/copr/pull/2977  But that will take few 
weeks. :(

--
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

[CoreOS] Fedora CoreOS Meeting Minutes 2024-01-03

[Dusty Mabe]

Text Log: 
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/meeting-1_matrix_fedoraproject-org/2024-01-03/fedora-coreos-meeting.2024-01-03-16.30.log.txt
HTML Log: 
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/meeting-1_matrix_fedoraproject-org/2024-01-03/fedora-coreos-meeting.2024-01-03-16.30.log.html
Text Minutes: 
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/meeting-1_matrix_fedoraproject-org/2024-01-03/fedora-coreos-meeting.2024-01-03-16.30.txt
HTML Minutes: 
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/meeting-1_matrix_fedoraproject-org/2024-01-03/fedora-coreos-meeting.2024-01-03-16.30.html


=
# #meeting-1:fedoraproject.org: fedora_coreos_meeting
=

Meeting started by @dustymabe:matrix.org at 2024-01-03 16:30:05



Meeting summary
---
* TOPIC: roll call (@dustymabe:matrix.org, 16:30:16)
* TOPIC: Action items from last meeting (@dustymabe:matrix.org, 16:35:44)
* INFO: there are no action items from the last meeting. 
(@dustymabe:matrix.org, 16:35:56)
* TOPIC: Create a new repo to host Container images needed by Kola tests 
(@dustymabe:matrix.org, 16:36:23)
* LINK: https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/1639 
(@dustymabe:matrix.org, 16:36:28)
* AGREED:  (@apiaseck:matrix.org, 17:03:37)
* AGREED: we will build manifest listed container images for specific tests 
using Jenkins jobs and our multi-arch builders (like we build cosa and 
fcos-buildroot today) and store them in the quay.io/coreos-assembler org in 
quay. (@dustymabe:matrix.org, 17:06:08)
* TOPIC: aarch64 failing to upgrade with /boot filesystem full 
(@dustymabe:matrix.org, 17:07:09)
* LINK: https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/1637 
(@dustymabe:matrix.org, 17:07:14)
* INFO: we are debugging the issue in 
https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/1637 and will try to get 
out releases as soon as we understand the problem more fully 
(@dustymabe:matrix.org, 17:13:11)
* TOPIC: tracker: Fedora 40 changes considerations (@dustymabe:matrix.org, 
17:14:38)
* LINK: https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/1626 
(@dustymabe:matrix.org, 17:14:44)
* INFO: 121. Changes/Linker Error On Security Issues 
(@dustymabe:matrix.org, 17:15:21)
* LINK: 
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Linker_Error_On_Security_Issues 
(@dustymabe:matrix.org, 17:15:29)
* INFO: 121. Changes/Linker Error On Security Issues should be transparent 
to us as failures would happen during rpm builds before reaching FCOS builds. 
(@dustymabe:matrix.org, 17:17:00)
* INFO: 122 389_Directory_Server_3.0.0 (@dustymabe:matrix.org, 17:17:10)
* LINK: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/389_Directory_Server_3.0.0 
(@dustymabe:matrix.org, 17:17:16)
* INFO: we don't ship 389-ds-base (@jlebon:fedora.im, 17:18:42)
* INFO: 122 389_Directory_Server_3.0.0 - Nothing to do, we don't ship 
389-ds-base. (@dustymabe:matrix.org, 17:18:50)
* INFO: 123. DNF: Do not download filelists by default 
(@dustymabe:matrix.org, 17:19:00)
* LINK: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/DNFConditionalFilelists 
(@dustymabe:matrix.org, 17:19:08)
* INFO: 123. DNF: Do not download filelists by default - We'll open an 
issue and investigate this further (@dustymabe:matrix.org, 17:26:39)
* INFO: 213. Wget2 as wget
!link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Wget2asWget 
(@dustymabe:matrix.org, 17:27:18)
* INFO: 213. Wget2 as wget (@dustymabe:matrix.org, 17:27:34)
* LINK: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Wget2asWget 
(@dustymabe:matrix.org, 17:27:39)
* INFO: 213. Wget2 as wget - Nothing to do, we don't ship wget. 
(@dustymabe:matrix.org, 17:27:55)
* TOPIC: Open Floor (@dustymabe:matrix.org, 17:28:34)

Meeting ended at 2024-01-03 17:37:17

Action items


People Present (lines said)
---
* @dustymabe:matrix.org (104)
* @jlebon:fedora.im (39)
* @jbtrystram:matrix.org (18)
* @ajbouh:fedora.im (11)
* @jdoss:beeper.com (6)
* @apiaseck:matrix.org (4)
* @meetbot:fedora.im (2)
* @aaradhak:matrix.org (1)
--
___
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: Re: Are package-owner mail addresses working?

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Wed, Jan 03, 2024 at 09:59:23AM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 3, 2024 at 8:15 AM Sergio Pascual  wrote:
> >
> > El lun, 1 ene 2024 a las 13:49, Mamoru TASAKA
> > () escribió:
> > >
> > > Sergio Pascual wrote on 2024/01/01 21:36:
> > > > Hello and happy new year.
> > > >
> > > > Are package-owner mail addresses working? I have send mails to several
> > > > and they return a 550 error message, for example:
> > > >
> > > > 550 5.1.1 : Recipient address
> > > > rejected: User unknown in local recipient table
> > > >
> > > > Best, Sergio
> > > > --
> > >
> > > Currently it is -maintain...@fedoraproject.org :
> > >
> > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EmailAliases
> > >
> >
> > Great, thank you. In that case, the "senmail.to" property in the rpm
> > git repositories should be updated to point to the correct address. I
> > have checked several repositories and all have -owner addresses there.
> >
> > For example:
> >
> > $ git config sendemail.to
> > cfitsio-ow...@fedoraproject.org
> >
> 
> 
> Please file a report with Fedora Infrastructure at
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

This is actually set in fedpkg (or perhaps rpkg?).

So, best to file it there and get it fixed there.

kevin


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

Re: F40 Change Proposal: Ruby 3.3 (System-Wide)

[Vít Ondruch]

Just to let everybody know, Ruby 3.3 has landed in Rawhide [1]. The 
binary packages have been rebuilt, but there might be other 
compatibility issue. There are also some leftovers:


kf5-kross-interpreters / openbabel
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2256645

subversion
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2255746

vim
No particular reason, but VIM is updated quite often, so I leave it to 
Zdeněk :)



If you need help fixing your package, please come to discuss the issue 
to ruby-sig ML.



Vít


[1] https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-d093bd520d


Dne 02. 11. 23 v 17:52 Aoife Moloney napsal(a):

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: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Ruby_3.3


= Ruby 3.3 =

== Summary ==

Ruby 3.3 is the latest stable version of Ruby. Many new features and
improvements are included for the increasingly diverse and expanding
demands for Ruby. With this major update from Ruby 3.2 in Fedora 39 to
Ruby 3.3 in Fedora 40, Fedora becomes the superior Ruby development
platform.

== Owner ==

* Name: [[User:vondruch| Vít Ondruch]]

* Email: vondr...@redhat.com
* Name: [[User:mtasaka| Mamoru Tasaka]]

* Email: mtas...@fedoraproject.org


== Detailed Description ==

Ruby 3.3 is upstream's new major release of Ruby. Ruby 3.3 adds a new
pure-Ruby JIT compiler named RJIT, uses Lrama as a parser generator,
and many performance improvements especially YJIT.

=== RJIT ===

* Introduced a pure-Ruby JIT compiler RJIT and replaced MJIT.
** RJIT supports only x86_64 architecture on Unix platforms.
** Unlike MJIT, it doesn’t require a C compiler at runtime.
* RJIT exists only for experimental purposes.
** You should keep using YJIT in production.

=== Use Lrama instead of Bison ===

* Replace Bison with Lrama LALR parser generator

=== YJIT ===

* Major performance improvements over 3.2
** Support for splat and rest arguments has been improved.
** Registers are allocated for stack operations of the virtual machine.
** More calls with optional arguments are compiled.
** Exception handlers are also compiled.
** Instance variables no longer exit to the interpreter with
megamorphic Object Shapes.
** Unsupported call types no longer exit to the interpreter.
** `Integer#!=`, `String#!=`, `Kernel#block_given?`, `Kernel#is_a?`,
`Kernel#instance_of?`, `Module#===` are specially optimized.
** Now more than 3x faster than the interpreter on optcarrot!
* Metadata for compiled code uses a lot less memory.
* Generate more compact code on ARM64
* Option to start YJIT in paused mode and then later enable it manually
** `--yjit-pause` and `RubyVM::YJIT.resume`
** This can be used to enable YJIT only once your application is done booting
* `ratio_in_yjit` stat produced by `--yjit-stats` is now available in
release builds, a special stats or dev build is no longer required.
* Exit tracing option now supports sampling
** `--trace-exits-sample-rate=N`
* More thorough testing and multiple bug fixes

=== Other notable changes since 3.2 ===

* Performance improvements
** `defined?(@ivar)` is optimized with Object Shapes.
* IRB has received several enhancements, including but not limited to:
** Advanced `irb:rdbg` integration that provides an equivalent
debugging experience to `pry-byebug`.
** Pager support for commands like `ls` and `show_cmds`.
** More accurate and helpful information provided by the `ls` and
`show_source` commands.
* ext/readline is retired
** Replaced by `reline` that is pure Ruby implementation compatible
with `ext/readline` API.
* RubyGems and Bundler warn if users require gem that is scheduled to
become the bundled gems in the future version of Ruby.

== Feedback ==


== Benefit to Fedora ==

With a latest release, Ruby language is supporting the newest language
features, which enables even faster and easier development of Ruby
applications.


== Scope ==
* Proposal owners:
** Finish packaging of Ruby 3.3. Current changes available in PR
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ruby/pull-request/159
** Rebuilding of Ruby packages providing native extensions (i.e.
packages which depends on libruby).

* Other developers:
** Rebuild of packages with binary extensions (i.e. packages which
depends on libruby) will be handled automatically, but some packages
might need fixes/updates to support Ruby 3.3 properly.

* Release engineering: [https://pagure.io/releng/issue/11753 #11753] <
** The packages are going to be rebuild in side-tag, but that does not
need releng involvement nowadays.

* Policies and guidelines: N/A (not needed for this Change)

* Trademark approval: N/A (not needed for this Change)

* Alignment with Community Initiatives:


== Upgrade/compatibility impact ==

* User specific Ruby binary extensions need to be rebuild.
* Ruby 

Re: Packed relative ELF relocations (DT_RELR) enabled by default in rawhide

[Alessandro Astone]

It also appears for aarch64.
It is an issue because software may use `-Wl,--fatal-warnings` so this warning 
breaks the build.
As an example, pretty much the entire KDE software collection now fails to 
compile on aarch64 and s390x: 
https://invent.kde.org/frameworks/extra-cmake-modules/-/blob/04affb76a6af4ccbda50abfe264c62d7b7f60d84/kde-modules/KDECompilerSettings.cmake#L549
--
___
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

License for python-grabbit updated from “MIT” to “MIT AND Unlicense”

[Ben Beasley]

The License field for python-grabbit has been updated from “MIT” to “MIT 
AND Unlicense” to reflect the _version.py file generated by Versioneer 0.29.


As described in 
https://github.com/python-versioneer/python-versioneer#license, the 
_version.py file generated by Versioneer is under the same license as 
Versioneer itself. Since Versioneer 0.24, this is Unlicense; before 
that, it was CC0-1.0, or in much older versions, a public-domain 
declaration represented as LicenseRef-Fedora-Public-Domain.

--
___
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: Packed relative ELF relocations (DT_RELR) enabled by default in rawhide

[Florian Weimer]

* Dan Horák:

> On Wed, 03 Jan 2024 10:47:12 +0100
> Florian Weimer  wrote:
>
>> This changed was originally planned and approved for Fedora 39.  It
>> reduces startup time somewhat for large objects with lots of function
>> and object pointers in global data.
>> 
>> It should be a transparent change, internal to the toolchain.  Within
>> glibc itself, we started using this linker feature in glibc 2.36 (Fedora
>> 37), and no issues surfaced.  A few dozen test rebuilds of core packages
>> did not show any issues, either.
>
> is
> /usr/bin/ld: warning: -z pack-relative-relocs ignored
> related? It seems to appear in s390x builds.

Yeah, it is, it did not occur to me to check that it was actually
enabled in the link editor on all architectures because the format is
portable.  I'll raise the gap with IBM.

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

Re: F40 Change Proposal: Optimized Binaries for the AMD64 Architecture (System-Wide)

[Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek]

On Sat, Dec 30, 2023 at 08:27:46AM +, Mattia Verga via devel wrote:
> Il 28/12/23 18:25, Robert Marcano via devel ha scritto:
> > On 12/28/23 12:58 PM, Chris Adams wrote:
> >> Once upon a time, Aoife Moloney  said:
> >>> Systemd will be modified to insert the additional directories into the
> >>> `$PATH` environment variable (affecting all programs on the system)
> >> Anything that depends on PATH entries is IMHO doomed to failure.  There
> >> are way too many things that explicitly set PATH to "known" values (for
> >> good and bad reasons) to be able to depend on extending it.  Heck, it
> >> took a long time to get sudo just to include /usr/local/{bin,sbin}.
> >>
> > Maybe replacing the /usr/bin related entries with a generic wrapper that
> > launch the best binary from the per architecture directories.
> >
> > Note: This may affect a few programs that use argv[0] for something
> > meaningful.
> > --
> 
> I've got not much knowledge on this matter, anyway here's my 2c:
> 
> Since we're talking about a few packages that will gain from this change 
> and that they're must be manually "enabled" to build with this feature, 
> I'd prefer this kind of wrapper approach instead of changing the PATH 
> globally.

This is also a valid approach. This is the first alternative proposal
which makes me say "hmm, this would also work". It is possibly even
simpler than setting the $PATH. A very small disadvantage is that the
wrapper would need to do its work every time the binary is called.
But the wrapper could be trivially implemented in shell or it could be
a compiled binary, making the wrapper very cheap.

Hmm, what do other people think?

> Maybe a RPM macro could be provided for using in specfile where we want 
> optimized binaries. Those binaries will be created like 'xz-x86-64-v2', 
> 'xz-x86-64-v3' and so on and all installed in /usr/bin. Then a 'xz' 
> wrapper will call the appropriate executable based on what supported 
> instruction set is detected available. 

xYes.

> And maybe in future we could have 
> dnf to install the appropriate optimized subpackage binaries.

I didn't cover this in my proposal because it seemed a bit premature
to figure out a way to install variants automatically even before we
know if and how many of those we will have.

My general idea was to have an anchor package like "system-x86-64-v3"
(name to be figured out) and then use rich dependencies to pull in
the -v2 and -v3 variants on systems which have it installed.
Either the user or the installer would only need to install the
right anchor packages and then the rest would be handled automatically
by dnf.

> It may be much more complex than just injecting new PATHs, but I think 
> it's more elegant and could be a shared mechanism with other linux 
> distributions.

The mechanism with $PATH would also be shared with other distros.
If the code is added in systemd, it would become automatically
available everywhere.

Zbyszek
--
___
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: Are package-owner mail addresses working?

[Stephen Gallagher]

On Wed, Jan 3, 2024 at 8:15 AM Sergio Pascual  wrote:
>
> El lun, 1 ene 2024 a las 13:49, Mamoru TASAKA
> () escribió:
> >
> > Sergio Pascual wrote on 2024/01/01 21:36:
> > > Hello and happy new year.
> > >
> > > Are package-owner mail addresses working? I have send mails to several
> > > and they return a 550 error message, for example:
> > >
> > > 550 5.1.1 : Recipient address
> > > rejected: User unknown in local recipient table
> > >
> > > Best, Sergio
> > > --
> >
> > Currently it is -maintain...@fedoraproject.org :
> >
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EmailAliases
> >
>
> Great, thank you. In that case, the "senmail.to" property in the rpm
> git repositories should be updated to point to the correct address. I
> have checked several repositories and all have -owner addresses there.
>
> For example:
>
> $ git config sendemail.to
> cfitsio-ow...@fedoraproject.org
>


Please file a report with Fedora Infrastructure at
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

ARM PAC on koji vs COPR

[Jarek Prokop]

Hi,

recently Ruby 3.3 was released, we have noticed a failure to build on 
COPR's aarch64:

https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/jackorp/ruby-builds/fedora-rawhide-aarch64/06848355-ruby/
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/jackorp/ruby-builds/fedora-rawhide-aarch64/06848355-ruby/builder-live.log.gz

But we do not observe these failures on koji (see e.g. 
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=111230891 )


What i have observed is that the hw_info.log reports different flags, 
visually I'd say koji has half the CPU flags, despite koji reporting to be

the equal CPU model Neoverse-N1 of the vendor ID of ARM as does copr report.

More details regarding the failures:
According to upstream bug report [0] the culprit is change introducing 
PAC/BTI support in some arm64 assembly [1] and the fix
to no longer have Ruby segfault is including 
`ASFLAGS=-mbranch-protection=pac-ret` [2] in addition to the same flag 
in XCFLAGS.


This spawns a few questions for me:
1. Since [1] the `-mbranch-protection=pac-ret` is needed in both CFLAGS 
and ASFLAGS, I am unsure how it interacts with the Fedora defaults,
I see default CFLAGS contain `-mbranch-protection=standard` and the flag 
with pac-ret seems to be appended to libruby.so in the case of the 
upstream fix [2].


From what I understand, it shouldn't cause problems to have these 2 
flags at the same time on the correct compilation artifacts, is that 
correct?


2. Since files compiled with `-mbranch-protection=pac-ret` seem to end 
up in the .so library and Ruby binary extensions link against that solib,

do the binary extensions also have to be compiled with that exact option?

3. If we do not fix this bug in Ruby 3.3.0 but wait with this for 3.3.1 
where the fix will most probably land, will we by effect exclude a 
subset of ARM CPUs,

that actually have the PAC capability, for that in-between period?

4. Why do koji and copr have CPU flag set that differs so much? Is our 
koji infra OK?


5. Why does it fail on copr and does not fail on koji? It seems the 
paca/pacg have to be present and set on the CPU flags for the segfaults 
to occur.


I tried answering the last question when reading on that in kernel docs 
[3], but I can't say I understand the text 100%.


Thanks,
Jarek Prokop

[0] https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20085
[1] https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/9306
[2] https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/9371
[3] https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v6.4/arm64/pointer-authentication.html
--
___
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 2256301] perl-Digest-MD5-2.59 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256301

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
   Fixed In Version||perl-Digest-MD5-2.59-1.fc40
 Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED
Last Closed||2024-01-03 13:15:12



--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2024-c6a294e78d has been pushed to the Fedora 40 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256301

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202256301%23c3
--
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Are package-owner mail addresses working?

[Sergio Pascual]

El lun, 1 ene 2024 a las 13:49, Mamoru TASAKA
() escribió:
>
> Sergio Pascual wrote on 2024/01/01 21:36:
> > Hello and happy new year.
> >
> > Are package-owner mail addresses working? I have send mails to several
> > and they return a 550 error message, for example:
> >
> > 550 5.1.1 : Recipient address
> > rejected: User unknown in local recipient table
> >
> > Best, Sergio
> > --
>
> Currently it is -maintain...@fedoraproject.org :
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EmailAliases
>

Great, thank you. In that case, the "senmail.to" property in the rpm
git repositories should be updated to point to the correct address. I
have checked several repositories and all have -owner addresses there.

For example:

$ git config sendemail.to
cfitsio-ow...@fedoraproject.org



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

[Bug 2256327] perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.20231230 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256327

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
   Fixed In Version||perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.2
   ||0231230-1.fc40
 Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED
Last Closed||2024-01-03 12:48:11



--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2024-ef457337a3 has been pushed to the Fedora 40 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256327

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202256327%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 2256327] perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.20231230 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256327



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2024-e332317e43 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 38.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-e332317e43


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256327

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202256327%23c2
--
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2256327] perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.20231230 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256327



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2024-e332317e43 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 38.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-e332317e43

--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2024-280e803476 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 39.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-280e803476


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256327

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202256327%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 2256327] perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.20231230 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256327

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED



--- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2024-ef457337a3 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 40.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-ef457337a3


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256327

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202256327%23c1
--
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2256323] perl-Module-CoreList-5.20231230 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256323

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
 Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED
   Fixed In Version||perl-Module-CoreList-5.2023
   ||1230-1.fc40
Last Closed||2024-01-03 12:33:12



--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2024-9b24153595 has been pushed to the Fedora 40 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256323

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202256323%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 2256323] perl-Module-CoreList-5.20231230 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256323



--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2024-219e7bdedd has been submitted as an update to Fedora 39.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-219e7bdedd


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256323

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202256323%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 2256323] perl-Module-CoreList-5.20231230 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256323



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2024-44853e6956 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 38.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-44853e6956


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256323

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202256323%23c2
--
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2256323] perl-Module-CoreList-5.20231230 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256323

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED



--- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2024-9b24153595 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 40.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-9b24153595


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256323

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202256323%23c1
--
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2256272] perl-DateTime-TimeZone-2.61 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256272



--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2024-58302e0eb1 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 39.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-58302e0eb1


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256272

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202256272%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 2256272] perl-DateTime-TimeZone-2.61 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256272

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version||perl-DateTime-TimeZone-2.61
   ||-1.fc40
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
 Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED
Last Closed||2024-01-03 12:09:17



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2024-0291df7fb7 has been pushed to the Fedora 40 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256272

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202256272%23c2
--
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2256272] perl-DateTime-TimeZone-2.61 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256272

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED



--- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2024-0291df7fb7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 40.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-0291df7fb7


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256272

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202256272%23c1
--
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2256294] perl-Exporter-5.78 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256294

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
   Fixed In Version||perl-Exporter-5.78-1.fc40
Last Closed||2024-01-03 11:57:12



--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2024-9d3558c3c5 has been pushed to the Fedora 40 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256294

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202256294%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 2256301] perl-Digest-MD5-2.59 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256301

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2024-c6a294e78d has been submitted as an update to Fedora 40.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-c6a294e78d


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256301

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202256301%23c2
--
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Dist-git decoupling investigation finished

[Michal Konecny]

Hi everyone,

We would like to inform you thatAdvanced Reconnaissance Crew (ARC) 
from the CPE 
team finished research into decoupling dist-git from its pagure-related 
dependencies. The finished investigation is available here 



*Disclaimer*: This is only an investigation and it doesn't decide 
anything. The decision itself is being discussed here 



This investigation has come about as part of discussions that arose 
fromIssue #26: DistGit to GitLab Move - initiatives-proposal - 
Pagure.io.


The investigation has the following objectives:

1. Enumerate and write down a description of all the integrations we
   rely on in our current git forge (Pagure)
2. Create a list of integrations to continue after moving to different
   git forge
3. Write a recommendation plan on how we can loosely couple these
   integrations generically with another git forge (make it git forge
   agnostic as possible)
4. Add the list and descriptions of integrations to the right place in
   our documentation

As the investigation is done, we are looking for feedback from 
community. Feel free to reply to this e-mail or if you prefer you can 
reply in discussion thread 
.


On behalf of ARC,
Michal


--
___
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 2256272] perl-DateTime-TimeZone-2.61 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256272

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC|iarn...@gmail.com,  |
   |jples...@redhat.com |
   Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256272
--
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20240103.n.0 changes

[Fedora Rawhide Report]

OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20240102.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20240103.n.0

= SUMMARY =
Added images:1
Dropped images:  2
Added packages:  7
Dropped packages:85
Upgraded packages:   170
Downgraded packages: 0

Size of added packages:  12.83 MiB
Size of dropped packages:240.65 MiB
Size of upgraded packages:   3.19 GiB
Size of downgraded packages: 0 B

Size change of upgraded packages:   18.75 MiB
Size change of downgraded packages: 0 B

= ADDED IMAGES =
Image: Silverblue dvd-ostree x86_64
Path: 
Silverblue/x86_64/iso/Fedora-Silverblue-ostree-x86_64-Rawhide-20240103.n.0.iso

= DROPPED IMAGES =
Image: i3 live aarch64
Path: Spins/aarch64/iso/Fedora-i3-Live-aarch64-Rawhide-20240102.n.0.iso
Image: Workstation live aarch64
Path: 
Workstation/aarch64/iso/Fedora-Workstation-Live-aarch64-Rawhide-20240102.n.0.iso

= ADDED PACKAGES =
Package: createrepo-agent-0.4.2-1.fc40
Summary: Rapidly and repeatedly generate RPM repository metadata
RPMs:createrepo-agent
Size:162.92 KiB

Package: keepass-2.55-5.fc40
Summary: Password manager
RPMs:keepass
Size:5.85 MiB

Package: libformfactor-0.3.1-1.fc40
Summary: Efficient computation of scattering form factors of arbitrary polyhedra
RPMs:libformfactor libformfactor-devel
Size:497.21 KiB

Package: liquidshell-1.9.0-1.fc40
Summary: Basic desktop shell using QtWidgets
RPMs:liquidshell
Size:1.56 MiB

Package: magic_enum-0.9.5-1.fc40
Summary: Static reflection for enums for modern C++
RPMs:magic_enum-devel
Size:198.49 KiB

Package: rust-event-listener3-3.1.0-1.fc40
Summary: Notify async tasks or threads
RPMs:rust-event-listener3+default-devel rust-event-listener3+parking-devel 
rust-event-listener3+portable-atomic-devel 
rust-event-listener3+portable-atomic-util-devel 
rust-event-listener3+portable_atomic_crate-devel rust-event-listener3+std-devel 
rust-event-listener3-devel
Size:82.68 KiB

Package: zydis-4.0.0-3.fc40
Summary: Fast and lightweight x86/x86-64 disassembler and code generation 
library
RPMs:zydis zydis-devel zydis-doc zydis-tools
Size:4.50 MiB


= DROPPED PACKAGES =
Package: appmenu-qt-0.2.7+14.04.20140305-17.fc39
Summary: Global application menu to Qt4
RPMs:appmenu-qt
Size:215.42 KiB

Package: arora-0.11.0-29.fc39
Summary: A cross platform web browser
RPMs:arora
Size:2.97 MiB

Package: aspell-ar-1.2-30.fc39
Summary: Arabic dictionary for Aspell
RPMs:aspell-ar
Size:20.13 MiB

Package: aspell-he-1.0-30.fc39
Summary: Hebrew dictionary for Aspell
RPMs:aspell-he
Size:9.00 MiB

Package: bettercap-2.32.0-9.fc39
Summary: Tool for 802.11, BLE and Ethernet reconnaissance and MITM attacks
RPMs:bettercap golang-github-bettercap-devel
Size:34.19 MiB

Package: bidiv-1.5-34.fc39
Summary: Display logical Hebrew on unidirectional terminals
RPMs:bidiv
Size:93.48 KiB

Package: byzanz-0.3-0.33.fc38
Summary: A desktop recorder
RPMs:byzanz
Size:515.14 KiB

Package: cagibi-0.2.0-27.fc39
Summary: SSDP (UPnP discovery) cache/proxy daemon
RPMs:cagibi
Size:252.95 KiB

Package: cpptoml-0.1.1-10.fc39
Summary: Header-only C++ TOML library
RPMs:cpptoml-devel
Size:145.38 KiB

Package: cutter-1.2.7-9.fc39
Summary: Unit Testing Framework for C/C++
RPMs:cutter cutter-devel cutter-gui cutter-report
Size:3.27 MiB

Package: dovecot-fts-xapian-1.5.4b-8.fc39
Summary: Dovecot FTS plugin based on Xapian
RPMs:dovecot-fts-xapian
Size:219.07 KiB

Package: echo-artist-0.1.1-25.fc39
Summary: Automation tools for echo-icon-theme artists
RPMs:echo-artist
Size:22.56 KiB

Package: emacs-evil-1.14.2-3.fc39
Summary: Extensible vi layer for Emacs
RPMs:emacs-evil
Size:327.05 KiB

Package: emacs-goto-chg-1.7.5-3.fc39
Summary: Emacs add-on to go to last change in current buffer
RPMs:emacs-goto-chg
Size:26.29 KiB

Package: emacs-undo-tree-0.7.2-9.fc39
Summary: Treats undo history as a tree of changes
RPMs:emacs-undo-tree
Size:63.83 KiB

Package: fbf-mukti-fonts-3.0.2-7.fc39
Summary: Bangla open source Opentype font
RPMs:fbf-mukti-fonts
Size:210.84 KiB

Package: fontopia-1.8-16.fc39
Summary: The console font editor
RPMs:fontopia
Size:749.90 KiB

Package: gball-2.0-19.fc39
Summary: The Console Ball and Racket Game
RPMs:gball
Size:169.69 KiB

Package: ghc-crypto-cipher-types-0.0.9-45.fc39
Summary: Generic cryptography cipher types
RPMs:ghc-crypto-cipher-types ghc-crypto-cipher-types-devel 
ghc-crypto-cipher-types-doc ghc-crypto-cipher-types-prof
Size:1.01 MiB

Package: gnome-video-arcade-0.8.8-15.fc39
Summary: GNOME Video Arcade is a MAME front-end for GNOME
RPMs:gnome-video-arcade
Size:6.40 MiB

Package: gnudos-1.11-19.fc39
Summary: The GnuDOS library for GNU/Linux
RPMs:gnudos gnudos-devel
Size:992.41 KiB

Package: golang-vbom-util-0-0.15.20190520gitefcd4e0.fc39
Summary: Sort orders, comparison functions, and "heavy-weight string" util

Re: Packed relative ELF relocations (DT_RELR) enabled by default in rawhide

[Dan Horák]

On Wed, 03 Jan 2024 10:47:12 +0100
Florian Weimer  wrote:

> This changed was originally planned and approved for Fedora 39.  It
> reduces startup time somewhat for large objects with lots of function
> and object pointers in global data.
> 
> It should be a transparent change, internal to the toolchain.  Within
> glibc itself, we started using this linker feature in glibc 2.36 (Fedora
> 37), and no issues surfaced.  A few dozen test rebuilds of core packages
> did not show any issues, either.

is
/usr/bin/ld: warning: -z pack-relative-relocs ignored
related? It seems to appear in s390x builds.


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: utf8cpp update to 4.0.5

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

On Thursday, 23 November 2023 at 17:44, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> Dear all,
> I am in the process of updating utf8cpp (a header only package)
> from 3.2.5 to 4.0.2 in rawhide. No rebuilds are necessary immediately,

Upstream released 4.0.5 in the meantime, so rebased.

> but I did rebuild all consumers in COPR[1].
[...]
> Rebuild failures:
> * termy-server: bundles ancient version of utf8cpp (unbundled in Fedora)
>   and needs porting to newer utf8cpp, seems dead upstream (last commit
>   in April 2019)

I'll try to fix this.

> * vfrnav: unrelated to utf8cpp, existing FTBFS bug:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2185412

vfrnav seems to be building fine, though the bug above is not closed
yet.

> paraview and vtk are still building. paraview is currently FTBFS because
> it depends on openmpi, which is no longer built for i686, and FTI
> because of dependency on older GDAL
> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2250641).

I rebuilt paraview and vtk locally with no issues.

> I'll push the update to rawhide in the next few days. Affected
> maintainers are in Bcc.

This is now done.

> [1] https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/rathann/utf8cpp-devel/

Regards,
Dominik
-- 
Fedora   https://fedoraproject.org
There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and
oppression to develop psychic muscles.
-- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan
--
___
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 2256294] perl-Exporter-5.78 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256294

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED



--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2024-9d3558c3c5 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 40.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-9d3558c3c5


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256294

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202256294%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 2256301] perl-Digest-MD5-2.59 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256301

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
   Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
 CC|jples...@redhat.com,|
   |mspa...@redhat.com, |
   |ppi...@redhat.com   |




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256301
--
___
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

Packed relative ELF relocations (DT_RELR) enabled by default in rawhide

[Florian Weimer]

This changed was originally planned and approved for Fedora 39.  It
reduces startup time somewhat for large objects with lots of function
and object pointers in global data.

It should be a transparent change, internal to the toolchain.  Within
glibc itself, we started using this linker feature in glibc 2.36 (Fedora
37), and no issues surfaced.  A few dozen test rebuilds of core packages
did not show any issues, either.

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

Orphaned packages looking for new maintainers

[Miro Hrončok]

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

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

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

Full report available at:
https://churchyard.fedorapeople.org/orphans-2024-01-03.txt
grep it for your FAS username and follow the dependency chain.

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

Package  (co)maintainers   Status Change

cdsclient astro-sig, orphan0 weeks ago
clash go-sig, orphan   5 weeks ago
csmithorphan   0 weeks ago
drumstick orphan, yanqiyu  0 weeks ago
drumstick0orphan, yanqiyu  0 weeks ago
kmetronomeorphan   0 weeks ago
libASLorion, orphan, slaanesh  2 weeks ago
mrpt  jkastner, kwizart, orphan,   5 weeks ago
  robotics-sig
mygnuhealth   orphan   0 weeks ago
obs-service-cargo_vendor  orphan   2 weeks ago
python-compressed-rtf orphan   0 weeks ago
python-google-cloud-access-   fkolwa, miyunari, orphan,2 weeks ago
approval  python-packagers-sig
python-google-cloud-access-   fkolwa, miyunari, orphan,2 weeks ago
context-manager   python-packagers-sig
python-google-cloud-api-gateway   fkolwa, miyunari, orphan,2 weeks ago
  python-packagers-sig
python-google-cloud-apigee-   fkolwa, miyunari, orphan,2 weeks ago
connect   python-packagers-sig
python-google-cloud-appengine-fkolwa, miyunari, orphan,2 weeks ago
admin python-packagers-sig
python-google-cloud-asset fkolwa, miyunari, orphan,2 weeks ago
  python-packagers-sig
python-google-cloud-automlfkolwa, miyunari, orphan,2 weeks ago
  python-packagers-sig
python-google-cloud-bigquery  fkolwa, miyunari, orphan,2 weeks ago
  python-packagers-sig
python-google-cloud-bigquery- fkolwa, miyunari, orphan,2 weeks ago
connectionpython-packagers-sig
python-google-cloud-bigquery- fkolwa, miyunari, orphan,2 weeks ago
datatransfer  python-packagers-sig
python-google-cloud-bigquery- fkolwa, miyunari, orphan,2 weeks ago
reservation   python-packagers-sig
python-google-cloud-bigquery- fkolwa, miyunari, orphan,2 weeks ago
storage   python-packagers-sig
python-google-cloud-bigtable  fkolwa, miyunari, orphan,2 weeks ago
  python-packagers-sig
python-google-cloud-billing   fkolwa, miyunari, orphan,2 weeks ago
  python-packagers-sig
python-google-cloud-billing-  fkolwa, miyunari, orphan,2 weeks ago
budgets   python-packagers-sig
python-google-cloud-build fkolwa, miyunari, orphan,2 weeks ago
  python-packagers-sig
python-google-cloud-commonfkolwa, miyunari, orphan,2 weeks ago
  python-packagers-sig
python-google-cloud-container fkolwa, miyunari, orphan,2 weeks ago
  python-packagers-sig
python-google-cloud-  fkolwa, miyunari, orphan,2 weeks ago
containeranalysis python-packagers-sig
python-google-cloud-data-fusion   fkolwa, miyunari, orphan,2 weeks ago
  python-packagers-sig
python-google-cloud-datacatalog   fkolwa, miyunari, orphan,2 weeks ago
  python-packagers-sig
python-google-cloud-dataproc  fkolwa, miyunari, orphan,2 

[rpms/perl] PR #11: Update Compress::Raw::Zlib for improved compatibility with zlib-ng

[Florian Weimer]

fweimer opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl` that you are 
following:
``
Update Compress::Raw::Zlib for improved compatibility with zlib-ng
``

To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl/pull-request/11
--
___
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: Optimized Binaries for the AMD64 Architecture (System-Wide)

[Vít Ondruch]

Thanks for pointing this out.

This reminds me and I don't think this have been discussed yet, but I 
guess that we should soon address where e.g. WebAssembly binaries should 
go. I think we should really consider to establish some generic 
infrastructure for such cases.



Vít


Dne 03. 01. 24 v 9:07 Marián Konček napsal(a):


Note that mingw-* packages currently in Fedora install into the 
/usr/i686-w64-mingw32/ or /usr/x86_64-w64-mingw32/ directories.


This is a different topic but if each archful package installed its 
files into a directory containing the arch name, it would allow 
parallel installability without configuring dnf and possibly make it 
more convenient for cross-platform development.


On 2. 1. 2024 16:23, Vít Ondruch wrote:



Dne 02. 01. 24 v 13:42 Stephen Smoogen napsal(a):



On Tue, 2 Jan 2024 at 06:21, Vít Ondruch  wrote:


Dne 28. 12. 23 v 17:12 Aoife Moloney napsal(a):

The dynamic linker already has the `glibc-hwcaps` mechanism to load
optimized implementations of ''shared objects'' [3]. This means that
packages can provide optimized libraries and they linker will be
automatically load them from separate directories if appropriate.
(For AMD64, this is `/usr/lib64/glibc-hwcaps/x86-64-v{2,3,4}/`.)



Is this something specific to x86_64 that the libs needs to be
nested in a place such as
`/usr/lib64/glibc-hwcaps/x86-64-v{2,3,4}/`? Why not use e.g.
`/usr/x86-64-v{2,3,4}/lib` directories instead? Or something
more universal.


Adding directories to the /usr sub-space generally gets bogged down 
into 'You are polluting my name-space' arguments which get no-where 
because some of the people getting angry is having to live with some 
3rd party rules and regulations which stipulated how things look and 
will only get updated once a decade or so. [The same goes with 
subdirectories in /usr/bin etc where it causes similar problems.] 
There tends to be no 'general' case which works unless it gets 
'agreed' upon by some outside of the distro body that publishes 
'versioned' standards.



Checking what Debian does, they have paths such as 
`/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/`. So we would not be alone.



Vít



Vít

--
___
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



--
Stephen Smoogen, Red Hat Automotive
Let us be kind to one another, for most of us are fighting a hard 
battle. -- Ian MacClaren


--
___
devel mailing list --devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email 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


--
___
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

--
Marián Konček

--
___
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: F40 Change Proposal: Optimized Binaries for the AMD64 Architecture (System-Wide)

[Marián Konček]

Note that mingw-* packages currently in Fedora install into the 
/usr/i686-w64-mingw32/ or /usr/x86_64-w64-mingw32/ directories.


This is a different topic but if each archful package installed its 
files into a directory containing the arch name, it would allow parallel 
installability without configuring dnf and possibly make it more 
convenient for cross-platform development.


On 2. 1. 2024 16:23, Vít Ondruch wrote:



Dne 02. 01. 24 v 13:42 Stephen Smoogen napsal(a):



On Tue, 2 Jan 2024 at 06:21, Vít Ondruch  wrote:


Dne 28. 12. 23 v 17:12 Aoife Moloney napsal(a):

The dynamic linker already has the `glibc-hwcaps` mechanism to load
optimized implementations of ''shared objects'' [3]. This means that
packages can provide optimized libraries and they linker will be
automatically load them from separate directories if appropriate.
(For AMD64, this is `/usr/lib64/glibc-hwcaps/x86-64-v{2,3,4}/`.)



Is this something specific to x86_64 that the libs needs to be
nested in a place such as
`/usr/lib64/glibc-hwcaps/x86-64-v{2,3,4}/`? Why not use e.g.
`/usr/x86-64-v{2,3,4}/lib` directories instead? Or something more
universal.


Adding directories to the /usr sub-space generally gets bogged down 
into 'You are polluting my name-space' arguments which get no-where 
because some of the people getting angry is having to live with some 
3rd party rules and regulations which stipulated how things look and 
will only get updated once a decade or so. [The same goes with 
subdirectories in /usr/bin etc where it causes similar problems.] 
There tends to be no 'general' case which works unless it gets 
'agreed' upon by some outside of the distro body that publishes 
'versioned' standards.



Checking what Debian does, they have paths such as 
`/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/`. So we would not be alone.



Vít



Vít

--
___
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



--
Stephen Smoogen, Red Hat Automotive
Let us be kind to one another, for most of us are fighting a hard 
battle. -- Ian MacClaren


--
___
devel mailing list --devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email 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


--
___
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


--
Marián Konček
--
___
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