Re: Help with creating first PR for a package

[Loren M. Lang]

On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 09:45:49AM +0100, Michael J Gruber wrote:
> Am Di., 20. Feb. 2024 um 09:21 Uhr schrieb Loren M. Lang
> :
> >
> > On Sun, Feb 18, 2024 at 06:08:53AM -0300, Priscila Gutierres wrote:
> > > I created this post based on my own experience:
> > > https://dev.to/prinewgirl/a-recipe-made-to-create-your-first-pr-for-the-fedora-project-21be
> > > Hope it helps.
> >
> > Thanks, with these and an Kan-Ru's instructions, I was able to
> > successfully push up my changes to my fork on Pagure. However, I did
> > have one issue with the sources. The push initially failed with the
> > error:
> >
> > Source file (or tarball) 'cachelib-0.12.0.tar.gz' wasn't uploaded
> > to the lookaside cache.
> >
> > I assume that this is another restriction of not being a packager?
> > However, I didn't see this addressed in the provided docs. I was able to
> > bypass it with --no-verify, but the Fedora CI build that was triggered
> > when I made my Pull Request fails since it couldn't find the uploaded
> > sources.
> >
> > I was able to manually submit a passing CI build by pushing up the SRPM.
> >
> 
> Hi there,
> 
> I've uploaded the sources to the lookaside cache for you, after
> checking and confirming what you had checked already. I guess that is
> the reason why uploads are allowed for packagers only - because you
> confirm upfront that you will do these checks :)

Thanks! I see most of the automatic CI tests are running and passing
after my push now that the sources are present. However, there is one
odd failure dist-git test. Too many arguments provided to cd. I suspect
it froms from this line in metadata.yml for the Ansible recipe running
the test:

cd $TMT_SOURCE_DIR/*/

Likely, it's expanding to a path with a space, but I don't see anything
on my end that should be causing the issue.

> 
> As for the PR, it's the maintainer's decision, of course. I would
> rewrite history at least to fold sources update in with the spec file
> bump, and probably also the updated test exceptions.

I followed your suggestion and squashed those commits together.

Thanks,
Loren

> 
> Cheers
> Michael
> --
> ___
> 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

-- 
Loren M. Lang
lor...@north-winds.org
http://www.north-winds.org/


Public Key: http://www.north-winds.org/lorenl_pubkey.asc
Fingerprint: 7896 E099 9FC7 9F6C E0ED  E103 222D F356 A57A 98FA


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: Kickstart install of Rawhide fails

[Orion Poplawski]

On 2/22/24 17:28, Adam Williamson wrote:

On Thu, 2024-02-22 at 15:32 -0700, Orion Poplawski wrote:

I've seeing:

INFO:anaconda.modules.payloads.payload.dnf.transaction_progress:Installed:
glibc-common-2.39.9000-
1.fc41.x86_64 1708040026
e4113ddcb7a4bf591492c0bf4644932b0dad7691ff19c65111751675336cb0c8
INFO:anaconda.modules.payloads.payload.dnf.transaction_progress:Installed:
bash-5.2.26-3.fc40.x86_64 1707490454
3d71ab445ce95481fcd0b367a2541260323b11cff351df8dc8f88df4a5d928df
INFO:anaconda.modules.payloads.payload.dnf.transaction_progress:Configuring
(running scriptlet for): bash-5.2.26-3.fc40.x86_64 1707490454
3d71ab445ce95481fcd0b367a2541260323b11cff351df8dc8f88df4a5d928df
INFO:anaconda.modules.payloads.payload.dnf.transaction_progress:Installed:
dbus-common-1:1.14.10-3.fc40.noarch 1706087027
4501dd43017c1bef93ca8edaae3cbaa501aef60b53e9f7edbe0b5f326d6d471d
INFO:anaconda.modules.payloads.payload.dnf.transaction_progress:Configuring
(running scriptlet for): dbus-common-1:1.14.10-3.fc40.noarch 1706087027
4501dd43017c1bef93ca8edaae3cbaa501aef60b53e9f7edbe0b5f326d6d471d
INFO:dnf.rpm:error: failed to exec scriptlet interpreter /bin/sh: No such file
or directory
warning: %post(dbus-common-1:1.14.10-3.fc40.noarch) scriptlet failed, exit
status 127

ERROR:dnf.rpm:Error in POSTIN scriptlet in rpm package dbus-common
ERROR:anaconda.modules.payloads.payload.dnf.transaction_progress:Error in
POSTIN scriptlet in rpm package dbus-common


But /bin/sh is present and runnable when I try in /mnt/sysroot (the log shows
that bash was just installed as well).

Anyone else hitting this?


Yes, someone else is, when installing in VirtualBox:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244744

It's confusing, isn't it? Are you using VirtualBox?


No - libvirt kvm on EL7 host.  Thanks for the bug link, I've chimed in 
there.


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



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

[Bug 2265610] New: perl-Log-ger-0.042 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2265610

Bug ID: 2265610
   Summary: perl-Log-ger-0.042 is available
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-Log-ger
  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: 0.042
Upstream release that is considered latest: 0.042
Current version/release in rawhide: 0.041-1.fc40
URL: https://metacpan.org/dist/Log-ger/

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/15741/


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


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2265610

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202265610%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: Does Fedora Mobility work with Pinetab 2?

[Ryan Bach via devel]

Do you have a non ftp site?
--
___
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 2265425] perl-RDF-RDFa-Generator-0.202 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2265425



--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2024-3aa7c10eb3 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-2024-3aa7c10eb3`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-3aa7c10eb3

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=2265425

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202265425%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 2265425] perl-RDF-RDFa-Generator-0.202 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2265425

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2024-5febc63a9a 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-2024-5febc63a9a`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-5febc63a9a

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=2265425

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202265425%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: F40 Change Proposal: F40 Change Proposal: Unify /usr/bin and /usr/sbin (System-Wide)

[Neal Gompa]

On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 8:32 PM Sérgio Basto  wrote:
>
> On Sun, 2024-01-28 at 20:14 +, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 28, 2024 at 7:54 PM Gary Buhrmaster
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 7:54 PM Aoife Moloney 
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Wiki -> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Unify_bin_and_sbin
> > > >
> > >
> > > One additional item to consider is to review
> > > the packager guidelines for use of /sbin
> > > (and /usr/sbin) in additional locations from
> > > those involved directly with installing binaries.
> > >
> > > In particular, I am thinking of the sysusers
> > > examples where the use of /sbin/nologin
> > > should, perhaps, be changed to /usr/bin/nologin.
> > >
> > > There are almost certainly other places
> > > in the docs/guidelines.
> > >
> > > The documentation updates are always
> > > the most annoying in my experience.
> >
> > We cannot change this without breaking backward compatibility. It'll
> > have to stay that way until RHEL 9 falls out of support.
>
>
> That is a good argument to not change it , why we need break backward
> compatibility ?
>

Nah. It just means we don't change any configuration or PATH stuff,
which is fine because the sbin -> bin symlink will cover it.

> is not sbin for super users and bin for users ?
>

No. This is one of those many myths about the "Unix FHS". And it
doesn't even matter much these days anyway, since most newer
administrative tools don't install in sbin anyway.




--
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Kickstart install of Rawhide fails

[Sérgio Basto]

On Thu, 2024-02-22 at 16:28 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 2024-02-22 at 15:32 -0700, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> > I've seeing:
> > 
> > INFO:anaconda.modules.payloads.payload.dnf.transaction_progress:Ins
> > talled:
> > glibc-common-2.39.9000-
> > 1.fc41.x86_64 1708040026
> > e4113ddcb7a4bf591492c0bf4644932b0dad7691ff19c65111751675336cb0c8
> > INFO:anaconda.modules.payloads.payload.dnf.transaction_progress:Ins
> > talled:
> > bash-5.2.26-3.fc40.x86_64 1707490454
> > 3d71ab445ce95481fcd0b367a2541260323b11cff351df8dc8f88df4a5d928df
> > INFO:anaconda.modules.payloads.payload.dnf.transaction_progress:Con
> > figuring
> > (running scriptlet for): bash-5.2.26-3.fc40.x86_64 1707490454
> > 3d71ab445ce95481fcd0b367a2541260323b11cff351df8dc8f88df4a5d928df
> > INFO:anaconda.modules.payloads.payload.dnf.transaction_progress:Ins
> > talled:
> > dbus-common-1:1.14.10-3.fc40.noarch 1706087027
> > 4501dd43017c1bef93ca8edaae3cbaa501aef60b53e9f7edbe0b5f326d6d471d
> > INFO:anaconda.modules.payloads.payload.dnf.transaction_progress:Con
> > figuring
> > (running scriptlet for): dbus-common-1:1.14.10-3.fc40.noarch
> > 1706087027
> > 4501dd43017c1bef93ca8edaae3cbaa501aef60b53e9f7edbe0b5f326d6d471d
> > INFO:dnf.rpm:error: failed to exec scriptlet interpreter /bin/sh:
> > No such file
> > or directory
> > warning: %post(dbus-common-1:1.14.10-3.fc40.noarch) scriptlet
> > failed, exit
> > status 127
> > 
> > ERROR:dnf.rpm:Error in POSTIN scriptlet in rpm package dbus-common
> > ERROR:anaconda.modules.payloads.payload.dnf.transaction_progress:Er
> > ror in
> > POSTIN scriptlet in rpm package dbus-common
> > 
> > 
> > But /bin/sh is present and runnable when I try in /mnt/sysroot (the
> > log shows
> > that bash was just installed as well).
> > 
> > Anyone else hitting this?
> 
> Yes, someone else is, when installing in VirtualBox:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244744
> 

by excluding parts (por exclusão de partes)  I don't know if is well
translated , my guess is
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Unify_bin_and_sbin


> It's confusing, isn't it? Are you using VirtualBox?
> -- 
> Adam Williamson (he/him/his)
> Fedora QA
> Fedora Chat: @adamwill:fedora.im | Mastodon: @ad...@fosstodon.org
> https://www.happyassassin.net
> 
> 
> 
> --
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

-- 
Sérgio M. B.
--
___
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: F40 Change Proposal: Unify /usr/bin and /usr/sbin (System-Wide)

[Sérgio Basto]

On Sun, 2024-01-28 at 20:14 +, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 28, 2024 at 7:54 PM Gary Buhrmaster
>  wrote:
> > 
> > On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 7:54 PM Aoife Moloney 
> > wrote:
> > > 
> > > Wiki -> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Unify_bin_and_sbin
> > > 
> > 
> > One additional item to consider is to review
> > the packager guidelines for use of /sbin
> > (and /usr/sbin) in additional locations from
> > those involved directly with installing binaries.
> > 
> > In particular, I am thinking of the sysusers
> > examples where the use of /sbin/nologin
> > should, perhaps, be changed to /usr/bin/nologin.
> > 
> > There are almost certainly other places
> > in the docs/guidelines.
> > 
> > The documentation updates are always
> > the most annoying in my experience.
> 
> We cannot change this without breaking backward compatibility. It'll
> have to stay that way until RHEL 9 falls out of support.


That is a good argument to not change it , why we need break backward
compatibility ? 

is not sbin for super users and bin for users ? 

-- 
Sérgio M. B.
--
___
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: Does Fedora Mobility work with Pinetab 2?

[Allan via devel]

On Thu, 22 Feb 2024 05:06:18 -
Ryan Bach via devel  wrote:
> I don't see any info googling it.

It is WIP.

Official images doesn't work as Fedora kernels doesn't support
the display and WiFi yet.

I have an older KDE Remix image here:

ftp://pine.warpspeed.dk/nightly/pinetab2/PineTab2-KDE-F39.tar.xz
ftp://pine.warpspeed.dk/nightly/pinetab2/Readme.txt

Internal WiFi does not work on that yet - but some external
WiFi chips do.


--
___
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: Kickstart install of Rawhide fails

[Adam Williamson]

On Thu, 2024-02-22 at 15:32 -0700, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> I've seeing:
> 
> INFO:anaconda.modules.payloads.payload.dnf.transaction_progress:Installed:
> glibc-common-2.39.9000-
> 1.fc41.x86_64 1708040026
> e4113ddcb7a4bf591492c0bf4644932b0dad7691ff19c65111751675336cb0c8
> INFO:anaconda.modules.payloads.payload.dnf.transaction_progress:Installed:
> bash-5.2.26-3.fc40.x86_64 1707490454
> 3d71ab445ce95481fcd0b367a2541260323b11cff351df8dc8f88df4a5d928df
> INFO:anaconda.modules.payloads.payload.dnf.transaction_progress:Configuring
> (running scriptlet for): bash-5.2.26-3.fc40.x86_64 1707490454
> 3d71ab445ce95481fcd0b367a2541260323b11cff351df8dc8f88df4a5d928df
> INFO:anaconda.modules.payloads.payload.dnf.transaction_progress:Installed:
> dbus-common-1:1.14.10-3.fc40.noarch 1706087027
> 4501dd43017c1bef93ca8edaae3cbaa501aef60b53e9f7edbe0b5f326d6d471d
> INFO:anaconda.modules.payloads.payload.dnf.transaction_progress:Configuring
> (running scriptlet for): dbus-common-1:1.14.10-3.fc40.noarch 1706087027
> 4501dd43017c1bef93ca8edaae3cbaa501aef60b53e9f7edbe0b5f326d6d471d
> INFO:dnf.rpm:error: failed to exec scriptlet interpreter /bin/sh: No such file
> or directory
> warning: %post(dbus-common-1:1.14.10-3.fc40.noarch) scriptlet failed, exit
> status 127
> 
> ERROR:dnf.rpm:Error in POSTIN scriptlet in rpm package dbus-common
> ERROR:anaconda.modules.payloads.payload.dnf.transaction_progress:Error in
> POSTIN scriptlet in rpm package dbus-common
> 
> 
> But /bin/sh is present and runnable when I try in /mnt/sysroot (the log shows
> that bash was just installed as well).
> 
> Anyone else hitting this?

Yes, someone else is, when installing in VirtualBox:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244744

It's confusing, isn't it? Are you using VirtualBox?
-- 
Adam Williamson (he/him/his)
Fedora QA
Fedora Chat: @adamwill:fedora.im | Mastodon: @ad...@fosstodon.org
https://www.happyassassin.net



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

Re: Login issues to lists.* and src.*? Any outages?

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 04:46:23PM -0500, Christopher wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 4:01 PM Gary Buhrmaster
>  wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 8:20 PM Christopher  
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Are there any known issues right now for logging in to 
> > > lists.fedoraproject.org or src.fedoraproject.org?
> > > Do we have a page for known outages?
> >
> > https://status.fedoraproject.org/
> >
> > It currently reports all systems operational
> >
> 
> Yeah, I found that after asking. It also says it's updated manually,
> so I'm not sure how reliable it is.

Well, I am not sure how to answer that... if we know about some issue
that affects a lot of people we try and update it. If we don't know
about an issue, we can't know to update it and if the issue is something
that doesn't seem to affect a lot of people or is something we can
quickly fix, we often don't update it.

> > > I can log in to accounts.fedoraproject.org, so I know my password and 2FA 
> > > token still works, but not to src.f.o or lists.f.o.
> > > I tried to disable my 2FA in there, to see if that had an effect, but it 
> > > wouldn't let me (I thought it was optional?)

What happens when you try and login?
Hangs? an error? a timeout? 

We have had one of our identity provider vm's from time to time stop
responding to requests (although it responds to liveness checks). 
This might be a case of that if you see it timeout.
I just checked and they are both up and working now... are you still
seeing this?

> > Enrolling in 2FA is a one-way action
> > (like Hotel California, you can never leave).

You can actually, but you have to mail ad...@fedoraproject.org, use some
method to prove you are you and then your token can be removed. 

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

Inactive provenpackagers for the F41 cycle

[Mattia Verga via devel]

In accordance with FESCo policy[1], the following provenpackagers will
be submitted for removal in two weeks based on a lack of Koji builds
submitted in the last six months. If you received this directly, you
can reply off-list to indicate you should still be in the
provenpackager group.

Note that removal from this group is not a "punishment" or a lack of
appreciation for the work you have done. The intent of the process is
to ensure contributors with distro-wide package privileges are still
active and responsive. This process is done regularly at the branch
point in each release.

[1]
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Provenpackager_policy/#_maintaining_provenpackager_status
Checked 130 provenpackagers
The following 12 provenpackagers have not submitted a Koji build since at least 
2023-08-15 00:00:00:
puiterwijk
rdieter
mbooth
xvitaly
bowlofeggs
caolanm
tibbs
hadess
hguemar
law
wtogami
steve--
___
devel-announce mailing list -- devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-announce-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Inactive provenpackagers for the F41 cycle

[Mattia Verga]

In accordance with FESCo policy[1], the following provenpackagers will
be submitted for removal in two weeks based on a lack of Koji builds
submitted in the last six months. If you received this directly, you
can reply off-list to indicate you should still be in the
provenpackager group.

Note that removal from this group is not a "punishment" or a lack of
appreciation for the work you have done. The intent of the process is
to ensure contributors with distro-wide package privileges are still
active and responsive. This process is done regularly at the branch
point in each release.

[1]
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Provenpackager_policy/#_maintaining_provenpackager_status
Checked 130 provenpackagers
The following 12 provenpackagers have not submitted a Koji build since at least 
2023-08-15 00:00:00:
puiterwijk
rdieter
mbooth
xvitaly
bowlofeggs
caolanm
tibbs
hadess
hguemar
law
wtogami
steve--
___
devel-announce mailing list -- devel-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-announce-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: List of long term FTBFS packages to be retired in 1 week

[Michael Brown]

On 21/02/2024 15:43, Miro Hrončok wrote:
Based on the current fail to build from source policy, the following 
packages

should be retired from Fedora 40 approximately one week before branching.



If you see a package that can be rebuilt, please do so.

     Package    (co)maintainers


pesign-test-app    javierm, nfrayer, pjones, rharwood


I've created a bugfix PR for this package that fixes the immediate build 
problem (due to changed paths in gnu-efi):


  https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/pesign-test-app/pull-request/1

Could someone in provenpackagers please review and merge?

Thanks,

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

Re: Orphaned packages looking for new maintainers

[Tim Semeijn via devel]

On 13 Feb 2024, at 03:11, Maxwell G  wrote:
> 
>Package   (co)maintainers  Status 
> Change
> 
> 3proxy orphan  0 weeks 
> ago  
> python-mmtf@scitech_sig, orphan5 weeks 
> ago  
> python-mrcfile orphan  5 weeks ago

Taken these as I am interested in maintaining them.
--
___
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

Kickstart install of Rawhide fails

[Orion Poplawski]

I've seeing:

INFO:anaconda.modules.payloads.payload.dnf.transaction_progress:Installed:
glibc-common-2.39.9000-
1.fc41.x86_64 1708040026
e4113ddcb7a4bf591492c0bf4644932b0dad7691ff19c65111751675336cb0c8
INFO:anaconda.modules.payloads.payload.dnf.transaction_progress:Installed:
bash-5.2.26-3.fc40.x86_64 1707490454
3d71ab445ce95481fcd0b367a2541260323b11cff351df8dc8f88df4a5d928df
INFO:anaconda.modules.payloads.payload.dnf.transaction_progress:Configuring
(running scriptlet for): bash-5.2.26-3.fc40.x86_64 1707490454
3d71ab445ce95481fcd0b367a2541260323b11cff351df8dc8f88df4a5d928df
INFO:anaconda.modules.payloads.payload.dnf.transaction_progress:Installed:
dbus-common-1:1.14.10-3.fc40.noarch 1706087027
4501dd43017c1bef93ca8edaae3cbaa501aef60b53e9f7edbe0b5f326d6d471d
INFO:anaconda.modules.payloads.payload.dnf.transaction_progress:Configuring
(running scriptlet for): dbus-common-1:1.14.10-3.fc40.noarch 1706087027
4501dd43017c1bef93ca8edaae3cbaa501aef60b53e9f7edbe0b5f326d6d471d
INFO:dnf.rpm:error: failed to exec scriptlet interpreter /bin/sh: No such file
or directory
warning: %post(dbus-common-1:1.14.10-3.fc40.noarch) scriptlet failed, exit
status 127

ERROR:dnf.rpm:Error in POSTIN scriptlet in rpm package dbus-common
ERROR:anaconda.modules.payloads.payload.dnf.transaction_progress:Error in
POSTIN scriptlet in rpm package dbus-common


But /bin/sh is present and runnable when I try in /mnt/sysroot (the log shows
that bash was just installed as well).

Anyone else hitting this?

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


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

[Bug 2265222] perl-IO-Compress-2.207 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2265222

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version|perl-IO-Compress-2.207-1.fc |perl-IO-Compress-2.207-1.fc
   |41  |41
   ||perl-IO-Compress-2.207-1.fc
   ||40



--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2024-73add0f8c0 (perl-IO-Compress-2.207-1.fc40) 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=2265222

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202265222%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

Re: Login issues to lists.* and src.*? Any outages?

[Christopher]

On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 4:01 PM Gary Buhrmaster
 wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 8:20 PM Christopher  
> wrote:
> >
> > Are there any known issues right now for logging in to 
> > lists.fedoraproject.org or src.fedoraproject.org?
> > Do we have a page for known outages?
>
> https://status.fedoraproject.org/
>
> It currently reports all systems operational
>

Yeah, I found that after asking. It also says it's updated manually,
so I'm not sure how reliable it is.


>
> > I can log in to accounts.fedoraproject.org, so I know my password and 2FA 
> > token still works, but not to src.f.o or lists.f.o.
> > I tried to disable my 2FA in there, to see if that had an effect, but it 
> > wouldn't let me (I thought it was optional?)
>
> Enrolling in 2FA is a one-way action
> (like Hotel California, you can never leave).


LOL, that's fine, as long as it's working... and it seems to be on
accounts.f.o, but not the others. I'm just really confused about why.
--
___
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: Login issues to lists.* and src.*? Any outages?

[Gary Buhrmaster]

On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 8:20 PM Christopher  wrote:
>
> Are there any known issues right now for logging in to 
> lists.fedoraproject.org or src.fedoraproject.org?
> Do we have a page for known outages?

https://status.fedoraproject.org/

It currently reports all systems operational

> I can log in to accounts.fedoraproject.org, so I know my password and 2FA 
> token still works, but not to src.f.o or lists.f.o.
> I tried to disable my 2FA in there, to see if that had an effect, but it 
> wouldn't let me (I thought it was optional?)

Enrolling in 2FA is a one-way action
(like Hotel California, you can never leave).
--
___
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

Login issues to lists.* and src.*? Any outages?

[Christopher]

Are there any known issues right now for logging in to
lists.fedoraproject.org or src.fedoraproject.org?
Do we have a page for known outages?

I can log in to accounts.fedoraproject.org, so I know my password and 2FA
token still works, but not to src.f.o or lists.f.o.
I tried to disable my 2FA in there, to see if that had an effect, but it
wouldn't let me (I thought it was optional?)

I'm still in the packager group in accounts.f.o (not inactive). So, I'm not
sure what the problem is.

Is this a known issue? I haven't seen anything about this on the devel list
recently.

Thanks,
Christopher
--
___
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

Inactive packagers for the F40 cycle

[Mattia Verga via devel]

Per the "Inactive packagers policy" [1], I've run the script and detected 164 
inactive packagers. At the end of the email you can find the full list.

[1] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Policy_for_inactive_packagers/

I also need to apologize, as the first time I ran the script it missed the 
checks on mailing lists and bugzilla activities, so it opened a lot of 
unnecessary tickets...

Mattia

### Found 164 inactive packagers. ###
aarapov
achernya
acmnpv
alsadi
anishpatil
armbru
arthurbuliva
atkac
bagnara
bdperkin
benniej
bkearney
blackfile
brejoc
bressers
c4chris
carmenbianca
caspermeijn
conor117
ctwo0002
danw
davidcl
denis
dfan
digimer
djachimo
dkliban
dmoerner
ebaron
elisre
emoret
emunson
epvergara
ewalsh
fangq
filbranden
flaper87
fnecas
gchamoul
gferon
gicmo
gil
gilboa
harald
hardaker
honli
ibotty
ixs
izhar
jaltman
jamesread
jamesturner246
japokorn
jcollie
jeffreylauribose
jimbair
jjohnstn
jkang
jklimes
jmatthews
jortel
josmyers
josueneo
jscotka
jshort
jskala
jwhite
jwilson
kaboon
kapil1087
karm
kenjiro
kme
ksyz
laiot
lalatendu
lcts
lgs
lhrazky
liangwen12year
linuxdonald
linuxsystemroles
maci
marxin
matyas
mayorga
mbasti
mcepl
merlinm
mfabik
mfojtik
miguel7ra
mikedep333
milkice
milovidov
miminar
miyunari
mmraka
mrniranjan
munroesj52
mycae
mzeleny
nacho
njha
nknazeko
nmilosev
nnac123
nocnokneo
oden
ogutierrez
ohaessler
olem
osoukup
otubo
packagerbot
pawsa
petebuffon
pgampe
phuang
piotrp
pmkovar
portante
qwan
rdossant
renep
returntrip
rjmco
rluzynski
ruben
russellb
rvokal
rzinsly
samahaj
sanqui
saypaul
scottt
sdunnaga
shishz
shwetha
sijis
smakarov
snavin
sparks
spstarr
sseago
stephen144
sturivny
susmit
szeth
theyoyojo
tkasparek
treydock
tuju
txtoth
valentic
vanessakris
vbubela
volter
vstanek
wolfy
wwoods
xberry
yalgaer
yuvalturg--
___
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 2265547] perl-RDF-RDFa-Generator-0.204 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2265547

Petr Pisar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
   Fixed In Version||perl-RDF-RDFa-Generator-0.2
   ||04-1.fc41



--- Comment #1 from Petr Pisar  ---
A bug-fix release suitable for all Fedoras.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2265547

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202265547%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 2265547] perl-RDF-RDFa-Generator-0.204 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2265547

Petr Pisar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC|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=2265547
--
___
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: mock: ImportError: /lib64/libdnf.so.2: undefined symbol: g_once_init_enter_pointer

[Jun Aruga (he / him)]

> Fedora 35 ^^ buildroot? Probably something to check.

My /etc/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64.cfg had the
`config_opts['releasever'] = '35'`.
I changed it to the `config_opts['releasever'] = '41'`.
As I still see the same error, it's not the root cause. But I need to
recover files the /etc/mock from the
mock-core-configs-40.1-1.fc39.noarch.rpm.
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=2403024

By the way, it seems that the cause was addressed on the Bugzilla
ticket. Definitely it comes from my customized config.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2265336#c5

-- 
Jun | He - Him | Timezone: UTC+1 or 2, Czech Republic
See  for
the timezone.
--
___
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

SoPlex and SCIP builds

[Jerry James]

Thanks to Benson Muite and Kai Hiller, the final package reviews
needed for the SoPlex and SCIP effort are done.  The packages will be
built in these side tags:

f41-build-side-84341
f40-build-side-84343

There are several packages that take multiple hours to build, and must
be built serially due to dependencies between them, so the builds will
probably take 2-3 days.  If you need to build any of the following
packages in the next 2-3 days, please coordinate with me.  The
maintainers are BCCed on this message.

- bliss
- coin-or-Alps
- coin-or-Bcp
- coin-or-Bcps
- coin-or-Blis
- coin-or-Bonmin
- coin-or-Cbc
- coin-or-Cgl
- coin-or-Clp
- coin-or-CoinMP
- coin-or-CoinUtils
- coin-or-Couenne
- coin-or-Dip
- coin-or-DyLP
- coin-or-FlopC++
- coin-or-Ipopt
- coin-or-lemon
- coin-or-OS
- coin-or-Osi
- coin-or-SYMPHONY
- freefem++
- gfan
- Macaulay2
- mp
- opencv
- openms
- polymake
- python-cyipopt
- python-jupymake
- python-pysingular
- Singular
- TOPCOM

I will reply to this message when the side tags are ready to merge.  A
big thank you to everyone who helped along the way.
-- 
Jerry James
http://www.jamezone.org/
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: mock: ImportError: /lib64/libdnf.so.2: undefined symbol: g_once_init_enter_pointer

[Vít Ondruch]

Dne 21. 02. 24 v 18:38 Jun Aruga (he / him) napsal(a):

On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 6:09 PM Stephen Smoogen  wrote:



On Wed, 21 Feb 2024 at 12:05, Miroslav Suchý  wrote:

Dne 21. 02. 24 v 17:38 Jun Aruga (he / him) napsal(a):

$ mock -r fedora-rawhide-x86_64 --shell



--setenv=LC_MESSAGES=C.UTF-8 --resolv-conf=off /usr/bin/dnf-3
--disableplugin=versionlock install @buildsys-build

This is suspicious. It should use DNF5 now.

What is

   rpm -qf /etc/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64.cfg

Since mock-core-configs-40.2-1 it should use DNF5.

That said, DNF3 should work too. But instead of hunting this bug it may be 
easier to update configs and use DNF5 that should be used anyway.


Usually when I see errors like this.. it is usually a mixed up rawhide cache 
stored somewhere.. aka something is pulling in something really old. `mock 
--clean fedora-rawhide-x86_64` usually fixes these but it may also need a local 
update first too.

Thanks for your help. I still see the same error after running the
`mock --clean fedora-rawhide-x86_64`.

```
$ mock --clean fedora-rawhide-x86_64

$ mock -r fedora-rawhide-x86_64 --shell
...
ERROR: Command failed:
  # /usr/bin/systemd-nspawn -q -M 46d4e94c6647468aa33584d8fb7d42ae -D
/var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64-bootstrap/root -a
--capability=cap_ipc_lock
--bind=/tmp/mock-resolv.0la37cbp:/etc/resolv.conf --console=pipe
--setenv=TERM=vt100 --setenv=SHELL=/bin/bash
--setenv=HOME=/var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/root/installation-homedir
--setenv=HOSTNAME=mock --setenv=PATH=/usr/bin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/sbin
'--setenv=PROMPT_COMMAND=printf "\033]0;\007"'
'--setenv=PS1= \s-\v\$ ' --setenv=LANG=C.UTF-8
--setenv=LC_MESSAGES=C.UTF-8 --resolv-conf=off /usr/bin/dnf-3
--installroot /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/root/ --releasever
35



Fedora 35 ^^ buildroot? Probably something to check.


Vít



  --setopt=deltarpm=False --setopt=allow_vendor_change=yes
--allowerasing --disableplugin=local --disableplugin=spacewalk
--disableplugin=versionlock install @buildsys-build
--setopt=tsflags=nocontexts
Traceback (most recent call last):
   File "/usr/bin/dnf-3", line 61, in 
 from dnf.cli import main
   File "/usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/dnf/__init__.py", line 30, in 

 import dnf.base
   File "/usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/dnf/base.py", line 29, in 
 import libdnf.transaction
   File "/usr/lib64/python3.12/site-packages/libdnf/__init__.py", line
14, in 
 from . import conf
   File "/usr/lib64/python3.12/site-packages/libdnf/conf.py", line 10,
in 
 from . import _conf
ImportError: /lib64/libdnf.so.2: undefined symbol: g_once_init_enter_pointer
```



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

[Bug 2265547] New: perl-RDF-RDFa-Generator-0.204 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2265547

Bug ID: 2265547
   Summary: perl-RDF-RDFa-Generator-0.204 is available
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-RDF-RDFa-Generator
  Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
  Assignee: ppi...@redhat.com
  Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org, ppi...@redhat.com
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Releases retrieved: 0.204
Upstream release that is considered latest: 0.204
Current version/release in rawhide: 0.200-19.fc40
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/RDF-RDFa-Generator/

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/13054/


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


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2265547

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202265547%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

[rpms/perl-Sys-CPU] PR #3: Add support for riscv64

[Richard W . M . Jones]

rjones commented on the pull-request: `Add support for riscv64` that you are 
following:
``
> @eseyman Upstream is dead in this time.
> I requested admin rights for me today.
> I believe that upstream is important and I could manage it.

If you manage this they I can submit the PR upstream on David's behalf.
``

To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Sys-CPU/pull-request/3
--
___
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: DNF5 ~ how to "remove --oldinstallonly" ?

[Petr Pisar]

V Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 02:28:18PM +1100, Ian Laurie napsal(a):
> I have my dnf configured with installonly_limit=6 and now and then find
> it useful to get rid of old kernels (for example after a move from
> Fedora n to n+1).
> 
> I know in the early days of DNF5 you couldn't do this, but can you do it
> now?
> 
It seems this feature has not yet been implemented. A request for it
 is still opened
and "dnf5 remove --help" does not mention that feature.

-- Petr


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

Re: Orphaned packages looking for new maintainers

[Ralf Corsépius]

Am 21.02.24 um 18:50 schrieb Maxwell G:

Report started at 2024-02-21 17:04:45 UTC

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



perl-Cache-FastMmap   iarnell, orphan  0 weeks ago

Taken for Fedora.

A whole bunch of further packages I maintain, depend on it.

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

[rpms/perl-Net-Stomp] PR #2: 0.62 bump

[Michal Josef Špaček]

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

Merged pull-request:

``
0.62 bump
``

https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Net-Stomp/pull-request/2
--
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[rpms/perl-Net-Stomp] PR #2: 0.62 bump

[Michal Josef Špaček]

mspacek opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-Net-Stomp` that 
you are following:
``
0.62 bump
``

To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Net-Stomp/pull-request/2
--
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[rpms/perl-Sys-CPU] PR #3: Add support for riscv64

[Michal Josef Špaček]

mspacek commented on the pull-request: `Add support for riscv64` that you are 
following:
``
@eseyman Upstream is dead in this time.
I requested admin rights for me today. 
I believe that upstream is important and I could manage it.
``

To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Sys-CPU/pull-request/3
--
___
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: Unresponsive maintainer: petersen / Pandoc package not updated since June 2023: Security vulnerability, CVE-2023-35936 (medium)

[Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek]

On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 02:06:22PM +0800, Jens-Ulrik Petersen wrote:
> I realised a second open package review is
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2068718 (isocline)
> - it's a newer dep for pandoc (actually hslua-repl).

Done.

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

[Bug 2265425] perl-RDF-RDFa-Generator-0.202 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2265425



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2024-5febc63a9a (perl-RDF-RDFa-Generator-0.202-1.fc38) has been
submitted as an update to Fedora 38.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-5febc63a9a


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2265425

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202265425%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 2265425] perl-RDF-RDFa-Generator-0.202 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2265425

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED



--- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2024-3aa7c10eb3 (perl-RDF-RDFa-Generator-0.202-1.fc39) has been
submitted as an update to Fedora 39.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-3aa7c10eb3


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2265425

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202265425%23c1
--
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: The semiannual "Transaction failed: Signature verification failed." exercise

[Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek]

On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 10:21:50AM -0800, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 18, 2024 at 12:32:45PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > So I think the whole issue can be solved by letting tools use
> > two keys for rawhide. The patch for mkosi was merged [1].
> > Should we do something similar for mock?
> > 
> > [1] 
> > https://github.com/systemd/mkosi/commit/f221562c945a48db9384f8521f67b9b02cd71ac1
> 
> I think that would help a good bit if we can. 
> 
> I do see logic there to use rawhide and rawhide-1, but I think it needs
> rawhide+1 also (at least around branching time)?
> 
> Can someone file a mock bug/pr?

https://github.com/rpm-software-management/mock/issues/1338

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: Donate 1 minute of your time to test upgrades from F39 to F40

[Geraldo Simião Kutz]

*This are the repos enabled here:*
id do repo  nome do repo
fedora  Fedora 39 - x86_64
fedora-cisco-openh264   Fedora 39 openh264 (From Cisco) - x86_64
google-chrome-beta  google-chrome-beta
rpmfusion-free  RPM Fusion for Fedora 39 - Free
rpmfusion-free-tainted  RPM Fusion for Fedora 39 - Free tainted
rpmfusion-free-updates  RPM Fusion for Fedora 39 - Free -
Updates
rpmfusion-free-updates-testing  RPM Fusion for Fedora 39 - Free - Test
Updates
rpmfusion-nonfree   RPM Fusion for Fedora 39 - Nonfree
rpmfusion-nonfree-updates   RPM Fusion for Fedora 39 - Nonfree -
Updates
rpmfusion-nonfree-updates-testing   RPM Fusion for Fedora 39 - Nonfree -
Test Updates
updates Fedora 39 - x86_64 - Updates
updates-testing Fedora 39 - x86_64 - Test Updates

*This was the command used:* *sudo dnf system-upgrade download
--releasever=40*

*This was the output:*
Erro:
 Problema: solicitações conflitantes
  - package libva-intel-media-driver-24.1.3-1.fc40.i686 from fedora
conflicts with intel-media-driver provided by
intel-media-driver-24.1.3-1.fc40.x86_64 from rpmfusion-nonfree
  - package libva-intel-media-driver-24.1.3-1.fc40.x86_64 from fedora
conflicts with intel-media-driver provided by
intel-media-driver-24.1.3-1.fc40.x86_64 from rpmfusion-nonfree
  - problema com o pacote instalado libva-2.20.0-2.fc39.x86_64
  - libva-2.20.0-2.fc39.x86_64 from @System  does not belong to a
distupgrade repository

*With this other command:* *sudo dnf system-upgrade download
--releasever=40 --allowerasing --best*

*I got this result:*
Erro:
 Problema: solicitações conflitantes
  - package gstreamer1-plugins-bad-free-1.22.9-3.fc40.x86_64 from fedora
requires libva.so.2()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
  - package libva-intel-media-driver-24.1.3-1.fc40.x86_64 from fedora
conflicts with intel-media-driver provided by
intel-media-driver-24.1.3-1.fc40.x86_64 from rpmfusion-nonfree
  - package vlc-plugin-gstreamer-1:3.0.20-12.fc40.x86_64 from fedora
requires gstreamer1-plugins-bad-free(x86-64), but none of the providers can
be installed
  - não é possível instalar o melhor candidato para a tarefa
  - libva-2.20.0-2.fc39.x86_64 from @System  does not belong to a
distupgrade repository
  - gstreamer1-plugins-bad-free-1.22.9-1.fc39.x86_64 from @System  does not
belong to a distupgrade repository

*But **then I removed gstreamer1-plugins-bad-free and run:*  *sudo dnf
system-upgrade download --releasever=40 --allowerasing --best
--exclude=libva-intel-media-driver,gstreamer1-plugins-bad-free,vlc-plugin-gstreamer,libva*

and the upgrade did proceed without errors.

Now I'm on F40 KDE and all is working fine (already upgraded libva and
reinstalled gstreamer1-plugins-bad-free)


Em qua., 21 de fev. de 2024 às 04:12, Miroslav Suchý 
escreveu:

> Do you want to make Fedora 40 better? Please spend 1 minute of your time
> and try to run:
>
> # Run this only if you use default Fedora modules
> # next time you run any DNF command default modules will be enabled again
> # This is last time we should do that :)
>
> sudo dnf module reset '*'
>
> dnf --releasever=40 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f40 \
> --enablerepo=updates-testing \
> $(rpm -q fedora-repos-modular >/dev/null && echo
> --enablerepo=updates-testing-modular) \
> --assumeno distro-sync
>
>
> This command does not replace `dnf system-upgrade`, but it will reveal
> potential problems.
>
> You may also run `dnf upgrade` before running this command.
>
> The `--assumeno` will just test the transaction, but does not make the
> actual upgrade.
>
>
> In case you hit dependency issues, please report it against the
> appropriate package.
>
> Or against fedora-obsolete-packages if that package should be removed in
> Fedora 40. Please check existing reports against fedora-obsolete-packages
> first:
>
> https://red.ht/2kuBDPu
>
> and also there is already bunch of "Fails to install" (F40FailsToInstall)
> reports:
>
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?bug_id=2231790_id_type=anddependson=tvp_id=13416789
>
>
> Two notes:
>
> * you may want to run the same command with dnf5 to help test new dnf. Do
> not forget to add --best otherwise DNF5 hides all problems.
>
> * this command found several issues on my workstation. One was issue with
> teamd that you will likely hit too:
>
>   https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2263334
>
> and there was few other with missing provides/obsoletes that I reported.
> For convenience here is the relevant part of Fedora Guidelines:
>
>
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#renaming-or-replacing-existing-packages
>
>
> Thank you
> Miroslav
> --
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora 

[Fedocal] Reminder meeting : ELN SIG

[sgallagh]

Dear all,

You are kindly invited to the meeting:
   ELN SIG on 2024-02-23 from 12:00:00 to 13:00:00 US/Eastern
   At fedora-meet...@irc.libera.chat

The meeting will be about:



Source: https://calendar.fedoraproject.org//meeting/10568/

--
___
devel 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 2265425] perl-RDF-RDFa-Generator-0.202 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2265425

Petr Pisar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
   Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
 CC|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=2265425
--
___
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 2265222] perl-IO-Compress-2.207 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2265222



--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2024-73add0f8c0 (perl-IO-Compress-2.207-1.fc40) has been submitted as an
update to Fedora 40.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-73add0f8c0


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2265222

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202265222%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 2265222] perl-IO-Compress-2.207 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2265222

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
   Fixed In Version||perl-IO-Compress-2.207-1.fc
   ||41
Last Closed||2024-02-22 11:23:47



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2024-40bb413c16 (perl-IO-Compress-2.207-1.fc41) has been pushed to the
Fedora 41 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=2265222

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202265222%23c2
--
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Donate 1 minute of your time to test upgrades from F39 to F40

[Ankur Sinha]

No issues here on my primary driver (with updates-testing enabled,
though), but did see some packages being downgraded:

Downgrading:
 bind-libs  x86_64 32:9.18.21-4.fc40   
fedora 1.2 M
 bind-license   noarch 32:9.18.21-4.fc40   
fedora  14 k
 bind-utils x86_64 32:9.18.21-4.fc40   
fedora 225 k
 conmon x86_64 2:2.1.8-4.fc40  
fedora  52 k
 dnf5   x86_64 5.1.12-1.fc40   
fedora 588 k
 dnf5-plugins   x86_64 5.1.12-1.fc40   
fedora 351 k
 fuse-overlayfs x86_64 1.12-3.fc40 
fedora  67 k
 libdnf5x86_64 5.1.12-1.fc40   
fedora 974 k
 libdnf5-clix86_64 5.1.12-1.fc40   
fedora 262 k
 perl-Tkx86_64 804.036-12.fc39 
fedora 2.2 M
 python3-patool noarch 1.12-0.27.20231014gitab64562.fc40   
fedora 146 k
 python3-plotly noarch 5.18.0-9.fc40   
fedora  17 M
 python3-xarray noarch 2023.8.0-1.fc40 
fedora 2.4 M
 python3-xlsxwriter noarch 3.1.9-3.fc40
fedora 324 k
 python3-xnat   noarch 0.5.1-6.fc40
fedora 228 k

Transaction Summary
==
Install  86 Packages
Upgrade4183 Packages
Remove3 Packages
Downgrade15 Packages

Total download size: 6.6 G
Operation aborted.


I'll look at plotly and xnat, since they are neuro-sig packages.

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


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

[Bug 2265222] perl-IO-Compress-2.207 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2265222

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED



--- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2024-40bb413c16 (perl-IO-Compress-2.207-1.fc41) has been submitted as an
update to Fedora 41.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-40bb413c16


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2265222

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202265222%23c1
--
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Donate 1 minute of your time to test upgrades from F39 to F40

[Kalev Lember]

On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 12:41 AM Garry T. Williams 
wrote:

>  Problem 3: package network-scripts-ppp-2.5.0-3.fc39.x86_64 from @System
> requires network-scripts, but none of the providers can be installed
>   - network-scripts-10.20-1.fc39.x86_64 from @System  does not belong to a
> distupgrade repository
>   - problem with installed package network-scripts-ppp-2.5.0-3.fc39.x86_64
>

This one should be fixed in
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-9289eac273

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

Re: Current status of OSTree and its handling RPM scriptlets?

[Zdenek Dohnal]

Hi Jonathan!

On 2/13/24 16:47, Jonathan Lebon wrote:

Has it got fixed during the time? Or is there a new technology which
would do the trick for Silverblue and Fedora Linux alike?

Just a note: I would say "for Silverblue and traditional systems
alike" instead. Silverblue is part of Fedora Linux. :)
Ok, I thought there are Fedora Linux, Fedora Silverblue and Fedora 
CoreOS (maybe others :) ). Thanks!

The common way to make "image-mode friendly" system state changes is
to e.g. use a systemd service


Do you have an example of such systemd service? I could see that a shell 
script can be started by systemd unit to do the migration, but that 
would have to be run in %post scriptlet again AFAIK - unless you would 
require machine restart (and the service is run during reboot) or manual 
service start...


tmpfiles.d won't work for me, I have to make changes in /usr/bin :( - 
looks like it designed for temp/volatile files.



  or a tmpfiles.d dropin or to bake the
migration into the application itself (all these would of course work
across OSTree and non-OSTree based variants).

Specifically for alternatives, see also
https://github.com/fedora-sysv/chkconfig/issues/9  which calls for
changing how it's implemented to be more compatible with image-based
updates.

Specifically for your issue though, it's not clear to me how much it's
worth supporting this. Do they also have a way to prevent `sudo vi`
from e.g. creating/modifying a systemd unit that can run arbitrary code?

:)



Thank you in advance!

Hope that helps!
--
___
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


--
Zdenek Dohnal
Senior Software Engineer
Red Hat, BRQ-TPBC
--
___
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