Old review ticket triage

I spent a bit of time recently trying to clean up the oldest package review tickets, making sure links are accessible and the submitted packages actually build. At this point I think all of the tickets in http://fedoraproject.org/PackageReviewStatus/NEW.html older than May 2012 should actually be

Re: Old review ticket triage

MS == Miroslav Suchý msu...@redhat.com writes: MS 1) What about those old merge requests? Don't know; didn't do merge requests. You or anyone else is of course welcome to look at the list; there's a whole report for them. MS 2) Why is not on that list some packages which are still waiting for

Re: bugzilla.redhat.com vs upstream bug trackers

MT == Miloslav Trmač m...@volny.cz writes: MT For example, right now the easiest way to become a Fedora packager MT is still to learn RPM packaging (only) and add a new package (which MT will, by now, fairly often be something obscure with a few hundred MT of users), That is actually quite

Schedule for Thursday's FPC Meeting (2013-07-18 16:00 UTC)

Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FPC meeting Thursday at 2013-07-18 16:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on irc.freenode.net. Local time information (via. rktime): 2013-07-18 09:00 Thu US/Pacific PDT 2013-07-18 12:00 Thu US/Eastern EDT 2013-07-18

Schedule for Thursday's FPC Meeting (2013-07-25 16:00 UTC)

Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FPC meeting Thursday at 2013-07-25 16:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on irc.freenode.net. Note that there was no meeting last week, and that time constraints will probably prevent us from getting through the entire volume of new business

Re: amending the new package process

PT == Pete Travis li...@petetravis.com writes: PT Maybe some list or other communication channel that's more clearly PT for packaging issues - I'm told devel@ can be intimidating - would PT help, but I'm not really suggesting anything specific. Just to be sure, you do know about

[Guidelines Change] Changes to the packaging guidelines

A few more changes this week: The Byte compilation section of the Python packaging guidelines was rewritten to include information about packaging the pycache directories generated by newer Python versions. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#Byte_compiling

Re: Orphaning freefem++

DM == Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski domi...@greysector.net writes: DM Dear Fedora Community, I'm orphaning the freefem++ package[1] since DM I don't have access to anyone that uses it and despite having an DM active upstream, it's a pain to get it to build with each new DM release. Crap, I

Re: Orphaning freefem++

DM == Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski domi...@greysector.net writes: DM I meant each new release of freefem++. The build process tries to DM download sources for many external libraries and patches some of DM them, so you have to work around it. Hmm. I looked at the patches and they don't look

Re: [Guielines Change] Changes to the packaging guidelines

RS == Richard Shaw hobbes1...@gmail.com writes: RS Is this retroactive on all supported versions of Fedora? Packaging guideline changes are pretty much never retroactive; we don't really have an enforcement body. RS 20+? Well, 20 isn't exactly important. RS What about EPEL 5, 6, 7? Pretty

[Guielines Change] Changes to the packaging guidelines

%license must be used in place of %doc to designate any file containing the license information for a package. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Documentation and https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines Guidelines for DevAssistant packages (DAP) were

Re: [Proposal] Ring-based Packaging Policies

KF == Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com writes: KF I know in the past the FPC has talked about relaxing the bundling KF guidelines, perhaps we could get some of them to weigh in here? Yeah, we had a big discussion about that a while back, where we sort of agreed on a basic change of philosophy

[Guidelines change] Changes to the packaging guidelines

Here are the recent changes to the packaging guidelines: The documentation section of the guidelines has been updated to include a prohibition on using both %doc and direct installation of files into %_pkgdocdir. * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Documentation *

Re: Texlive packaging

GH == Gerd Hoffmann kra...@redhat.com writes: GH Makes sense to me, not only for texlive, stuff like perl pkgs from GH cpan have pretty standard way to be built too. It's not just how the packages are built. There are also bundling and license issues which require manual inspection. The only

Re: Issues around packaging CoreOS' rocket for fedora

LM == Lokesh Mandvekar l...@fedoraproject.org writes: LM There seem to be a few issues with it currently though, the major LM one being using a non-distro-provided systemd (systemd v215): Just a note that in my opinion there is essentially no chance that the packaging committee would approve a

Re: Issues around packaging CoreOS' rocket for fedora

ML == Mark Lamourine markll...@redhat.com writes: ML Is there a recommended way to retrieve, extract and track the files ML so that they can be compiled into the gzipped tarball which can then ML be included in a package? I cannot think of anything in existing Fedora policy which would permit

Re: Issues around packaging CoreOS' rocket for fedora

ML == Mark Lamourine markll...@redhat.com writes: ML build at runtime? Generate the tarball or whatever image you need at runtime. When it's needed. Not as part of the package build, because I can't see a way that such a thing would be permitted under current Fedora policies. You have

Texlive packaging (Was: A proposal for Fedora updates)

KL == Kalev Lember kalevlem...@gmail.com writes: KL If texlive packaging is causing issues with update pushes, could KL maybe ask the texlive maintainers to rework the packaging? The texlive packaging is basically the way they were required to do it way back when. It used to be just a big ol'

Re: Texlive packaging

KL == Kalev Lember kalevlem...@gmail.com writes: KL What do you mean with were required to ? There were many discussions during and after the big texlive license audit as to how to properly package the software. I can no longer remember exact dates because it's been a while; maybe someone else

Re: A proposal for Fedora updates

KF == Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com writes: KF Right, as I noted at the end of that other long mail, there's KF discussion about a 'urgent updates' repo for security updates. Why not, when going to mash, mash only updates marked a security and get those out immediately, then mash everyhing else.

Re: Texlive packaging

MM == Matthew Miller mat...@fedoraproject.org writes: MM Basically, this is an end-run around the requirement of doing MM individual package reviews for a zillion completely separate MM packages, right? That was my opinion, but you could argue the same for Perl, I suppose. We're essentially

[Guidelines change] Changes to the packaging guidelines

Here are the recent changes to the packaging guidelines: The guidelines for packaging static libraries were amended to indicate that the -static package should require the -devel package: * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Packaging_Static_Libraries_2 *

Re: [Fedora-packaging] SeqAn downgrading

AT == Antonio Trande anto.tra...@gmail.com writes: AT Is it a problem if i downgrade the current release of SeqAn on pkgdb AT until the new 2.0.0 is fully ready ? I'm not sure what pkgdb has to do with that; it doesn't track versions. Basically, if you didn't have a successful non-scratch koji

Re: plowshare is not shipped with modules anymore

EM == Elder Marco elderma...@gmail.com writes: EM So, upstream recommends to deal with plowshare core only, which it EM is quite stable. And I agree. Well, look at how clamav does it. The package provides a snapshot of the virus data so that we can ship _something_. This will be updated when

Re: Fwd: Why Isn't NFS Working?

KM == Kelly Miller lightsolphoe...@gmail.com writes: KM I just tried to mount my home folders using NFS as I usually do, but KM no matter what I get the error mount.nfs: requested NFS version or KM transport protocol is not supported. Did something change in the KM Alpha of Fedora 22 to

Orphaning Zoneminder

I'm orphaning the zoneminder package on all branches. Feel free to pick it up if you wish to maintain it. Zoneminder is a security camera monitoring system. Back in the dark days of history I ended up becoming the de-facto maintainer when the original maintainer went away, though he still owned

Re: How to build one TeXLive subpackage for EPEL-7?

MC == Matěj Cepl mc...@cepl.eu writes: MC Now, the question is how to build just one subpackage (or any MC required other subpackages) from the monstrosity which the current MC texlive? Anybody any suggestions? Just package it separately. They should all have proper upstream tarballs, and

Re: dnf replacing yum and dnf-yum

MJ == Marcin Juszkiewicz mjuszkiew...@redhat.com writes: MJ When I was Debian/Ubuntu developer it was easy. Pbuilder had hooks MJ and one of them in my setup was once built, install all resulting MJ packages. MJ This way as a developer I could check are results usable. Not found MJ something

Re: How to build one TeXLive subpackage for EPEL-7?

MC == Matěj Cepl mc...@cepl.eu writes: MC Cutting up texlive monster piece by piece seems like rather lousy MC idea to me. I honestly don't see why. Surely fixing some of it is better than fixing none of it. And fixing some of it shows us how to fix the rest of it. - J -- devel mailing

Schedule for Thursday's FPC Meeting (2015-04-02 16:00 UTC)

Following is the list of topics that may be discussed in the FPC meeting Thursday at 2015-04-02 16:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on irc.freenode.net. Local time information (via. rktime): 2015-03-12 09:00 Thu US/Pacific PDT 2015-03-12 12:00 Thu US/Eastern EDT

Re: F23 System Wide Change: Default Local DNS Resolver

RSB == Ryan S Brown rya...@redhat.com writes: RSB I disagree; for server cloud deployments it doesn't make sense to RSB duplicate a DNS server on *every* host, and if you care about RSB DNSSEC you likely already run a trusted resolver. I disagree generally in the case of server deployments.

[Guidelines change] Changes to the packaging guidelines

Here are the recent changes to the packaging guidelines: The policy for systemd presets has been modified to merge the individual treatments of service, socket and timer units into one policy. The policy page was also moved into the packaging guidelines proper. *

[Guidelines change] Changes to the packaging guidelines

Here are the recent changes to the packaging guidelines. - The big change is that the Python guidelines have been extensively reorganized and partially rewritten, and new macros are available which simplify packaging by removing some of the boilerplate which was previously required. The

Re: [Guidelines change] Changes to the packaging guidelines

VS == Ville Skyttä ville.sky...@iki.fi writes: VS I have a bug report about the macros. Where should I file it, FPC VS ticket or Bugzilla against the python* packages that ship the VS affected macro files? Oops, I didn't see your mailing list post until well after I saw the ticket.

Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets

H == Haïkel hgue...@fedoraproject.org writes: H Using Bugzilla rather than FAS is not a bad idea, as some people H abuse their sponsor status by blindly adding people into the packager H group without any supervision. Using FAS as the information source H would just hide this hideous behaviour.

Re: BuildRequires: pythonN-devel unnecessary

I also sent a notice to Fedora's python list, pinged the relevant IRC channel and have generally tried to let people know about this. The actual macros are in the pagure repo but there's still more work to be done. https://pagure.io/python-macros - J< -- devel mailing list

Re: BuildRequires: pythonN-devel unnecessary

Luckily I saw this. The best way to make sure the packaging committee sees this kind of thing is to open a ticket at https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ However, I don't believe your assertion to be true. python*-devel is the package with the dependency on the RPM macros; if you depend only on python

Re: BuildRequires: pythonN-devel unnecessary

> "MB" == Mike Bonnet writes: MB> That sounds like a good plan. Is this work being tracked anywhere? As you might expect, in an FPC ticket: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/567 - J< -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: [Guidelines change] Changes to the packaging guidelines

> "NG" == Neal Gompa writes: NG> In regards to boolean/rich dependencies, DNF should NG> support them fine, because libsolv (the depsolver library) NG> does. This ban came a the direct request of one of the DNF project managers during Flock. The final syntax hadn't even

Quick proposal for making packager sponsorship slightly easier

I recently filed https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1499 with the goal of making the process just a bit simpler for new packagers. The text of my proposal follows. Please make sure that substantial comments are made on the ticket to ensure that FESCo sees them. - tl;dr: Relax the

[Guidelines change] Changes to the packaging guidelines

Here are the recent changes to the packaging guidelines. - The guidelines were updated to reflect the current policy that Fedora packages are no longer permitted to carry SysV-style initscripts. The relevant guidelines page has been moved to the EPEL hierarchy. *

Re: Naming ANTs

> "IG" == Igor Gnatenko writes: IG> How do I proceed with it? I think I can name it ANTs in upper case, IG> but probably it will confuse people. Suggestions? Ideas? "Package names should be in lower case and use dashes in preference to underscores." --

Re: [Fedora-legal-list] tktable license clarification

> "AT" == Antonio Trande writes: AT> Probably i taken too much seriously this "type of joke", so much AT> that this issue does not deserve any answer. Well, if the license text says "you must buy me a beer of you see me" or whatever then that would render the software

[Guidelines change] Changes to the packaging guidelines

Here are the recent changes to the packaging guidelines. Note that there is also a set of Python guideline changes pending which I will send in a separate announcement. - Guidelines for making use of weak dependencies (Recommends:, Suggests:, etc.) have been added.

Re: Some analysis on the size of the minimal and Server installs of Fedora 23

> "DW" == Dan Williams writes: DW> I suppose NM-tui could be pulled out of Server since not that many DW> other things require newt, and nmcli is always going to be there DW> anyway. For some reason I thought NM-tui _was_ nmcli. There's no reason to have anything other

Re: building conflicting packages from a single spec

> "PB" == Pádraig Brady writes: PB> What I've done in %post is to mv the conflicting files from a temp PB> to standard location, overwriting any existing files. You really, really shouldn't do that. Really. - J< -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Some analysis on the size of the minimal and Server installs of Fedora 23

> "DW" == Dan Williams writes: DW> Could you confirm what NetworkManager-* packages are installed on DW> F23 server? On my custom install (which just lists the packages I need in my kickstart file) I have: NetworkManager-glib-1.0.6-8.fc22.x86_64

Dealing with the "my packages" problem

tl; dr: I have submitted the following RFE for pkgdb: https://github.com/fedora-infra/pkgdb2/issues/274 Please add comments there if you have any. I know I'm not the only provenpackager to have applied a bugfix to someone's package only to be yelled at it for it. Some maintainers are more

Re: Quick proposal for making packager sponsorship slightly easier

> "H" == Haïkel writes: H> It's all the more important then to formalize requirements from new H> packagers like having done two quality reviews and link them back to H> their first package tickets. That's sort of an orthogonal issues, but honestly I don't

Re: Dealing with the "my packages" problem

> "DA" == David Airlie writes: DA> This seems like a crappy technical solution to a social problem. I don't know; it seems to be more discoverable than the current state, where either you just commit and hope. And yeah, I'm relatively thick skinned but I still don't

Re: building conflicting packages from a single spec

> "PB" == Pádraig Brady writes: PB> Is $subject possible? I don't think so, since at the end of %install you have exactly one set of files in one buildroot. Still, I don't see a reason for the subpackages to actually conflict. PB> Are any other techniques possible?

Re: [Fedora-packaging] Proposal to reduce anti-bundling requirements

> "SG" == Stephen Gallagher writes: SG> Right now, we have a policy that essentially forbids source code SG> from being bundled into a package. Technically we only care if that bundled code is actually compiled in. SG> In technical terms, this means essentially that

Re: [Fedora-packaging] Proposal to reduce anti-bundling requirements

> "MM" == Matthew Miller writes: MM> That said, I do recognize that "provides high-quality packages" has MM> also always been an underlying Fedora value even if unstated. But, I MM> think that _that_ value should be in support of the Big Four, and in MM> support of

Re: [Fedora-packaging] Proposal to reduce anti-bundling requirements

> "AW" == Adam Williamson writes: AW> That just says 'multiple, separate upstream projects' (nothing about AW> being 'compiled in'), and implies that absolutely any such case can AW> only be included with an explicit 'Bundling Exception'. OK, so "compiled in"

Re: [Fedora-packaging] Proposal to reduce anti-bundling requirements

> "AW" == Adam Williamson writes: AW> I think the fact that we can't even have a discussion of this where AW> we both understand what the current rules actually *are* clearly AW> indicates they have a clarity problem =) You may recall my earlier message in this thread

Re: [Fedora-packaging] Proposal to reduce anti-bundling requirements

> "AM" == Adam Miller writes: AM> I also like the proposal for the bundled() macro definition AM> for tracking purposes. Just a note that it isn't a proposal; that is the current requirement for anything which bundles things. - J< -- devel mailing list

Re: [Fedora-packaging] RFC mass bug reporting: checksec failures

> "AT" == Alexander Todorov writes: AT> offending packages. You can find links to the script and execution AT> log here: AT> http://atodorov.org/blog/2015/09/16/4000-bugs-in-fedora-checksec-failures/ BTW to see if any packages you own are on the list, you can do: wget

Re: [Fedora-packaging] Proposal to reduce anti-bundling requirements

> "SS" == Simo Sorce writes: SS> I have the impression (which may be totally wrong) that you are SS> taking the binary approach here: either we care maximally or we do SS> not care at all. I sure hope that's not the tack I'm taking. SS> It seem to me Stephen is making a

Re: [Fedora-packaging] Proposal to reduce anti-bundling requirements

> "MM" == Matthew Miller writes: MM> I think it's because overriding a different group seems hostile, MM> even if it isn't meant that way. And FESCo doesn't want to feel like MM> they're second-guessing other groups all the time. Well, FPC even has a "bounce to

Re: no systemd in containers: Requires -> Recommends

> "HH" == Harald Hoyer writes: HH> To improve the situation, we could make use of the new rpm weak HH> dependencies. So the I'm not sure I see the point. The dependencies are there so that the scriptlets work. If the scriptlets don't actually need to work then there's

Re: no systemd in containers: Requires -> Recommends

> "HH" == Harald Hoyer writes: HH> The preset enablement would be missing. Couldn't systemd simply apply presets when it is installed? (Not upgraded, but on a fresh install?) - J< -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: no systemd in containers: Requires -> Recommends

> "RWMJ" == Richard W M Jones writes: RWMJ> Couldn't it use inotify (or whatever we're using these days to RWMJ> detect filesystem changes)? So when you drop in the unit file, RWMJ> systemd notices and reloads. Well, the point is that systemd isn't running or even

Re: Specs using %define

> "PH" == Paul Howarth writes: PH> In perl-Module-Extract-VERSION I have this for provides filtering PH> that works in EPEL < 7: Maybe I can grep that out, but you really should be using the proper macros in releases where they are supported. PH> It's been there for a

Specs using %define

To satisfy my curiosity, I grepped the convenient tarball of specfiles (http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/repo/rpm-specs-latest.tar.xz) for lines matching "(?http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Specs using %define

> "JJ" == Jerry James writes: JJ> This uses a %define inside the %check script as a convenient macro, JJ> used only inside the %check script; i.e., it really is a local JJ> definition. But %define isn't a "local definition" in the sense that you're thinking of. It's

Re: Specs using %define

> "MS" == Michael Schwendt writes: >> libmowgli (ertzing, mschwendt) MS> This has not been touched except for several mass-rebuilds. No API MS> users are left in the package collection. It could be retired. That's one of the reasons I like to poke around in the

Re: Specs using %define

BE> http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org -- Jason L Tibbitts III - ti...@math.uh.edu - 713/743-3486 - 660PGH System Manager: University of Houston Department of Mathematics -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Specs using %define

> "PS" == Petr Stodulka writes: PS> zip, unzip, git, gzip - are false positives: found "%%" or just PS> "define*" in changelog I'm confused; none of those were in the list I posted. PS> sed - fixed For fun, what was there: %ifos linux %define _bindir /bin %endif

Re: Specs using %define

> "MS" == Michael Schwendt writes: MS> %_bindir is not /bin In Fedora there's not exactly much of a difference because of the symlink. But why conditionalize it on "%ifos linux" in any case? - J< -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Slight change to the review process for new contributors

After FESCo approval of https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1499 I have modified the review process document: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Review_Process to indicate that any packager is welcome to complete the initial package review(s) for a new contributor. Contributors still need

Re: Packaging:NamingGuidelines Re: DNF is completly unable to act with local packages

> "SB" == Sérgio Basto writes: SB> When we fix the .spec and don't change the source, we bump rightmost SB> version, when we change the source, we bump the left version, so we SB> can distinguish when we update the source and when we updated the SB> .spec, this contrast

Re: F24 System Wide Change: Systemd file triggers

> "JK" == Jan Kurik writes: JK> * Update the macros provided by systemd and add appropriate file JK> triggers. This is great, but FPC is working on file trigger stuff so please do try and coordinate. We weren't planning on pushing any of this through the feature

Re: Some analysis on the size of the minimal and Server installs of Fedora 23

> "JLT" == Jason L Tibbitts writes: JLT> On my custom install (which just lists the packages I need in my JLT> kickstart file) I have: JLT> NetworkManager-glib-1.0.6-8.fc22.x86_64 JLT> NetworkManager-1.0.6-8.fc22.x86_64 JLT> NetworkManager-libnm-1.0.6-8.fc22.x86_64 JLT>

Re: F24 System Wide Change: Systemd file triggers

> "ZJ" == Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek writes: ZJ> Sure I'm happy to coordinate. I wrote up the Change page because of ZJ> the potential for breakage (as with anything systemd related) and ZJ> the need for a mass rebuild for the change to take effect. I'm not entirely sure

Re: Dealing with the "my packages" problem

> "BCL" == Brian C Lane writes: BCL> I don't think we need a technical solution, we just need the people BCL> who feel the need to modify packages they aren't normally involved BCL> with to ask first. It doesn't matter how simple or complicated the BCL> change is, just be

Re: [Fedora-packaging] Schedule for Thursday's FPC Meeting (2015-11-19 16:00 UTC)

I will be at the regional FBI headquarters attending a conference. While I had thought that I would be able to pull out my laptop and participate, I've now found out that they're so paranoid that I can't even wear my watch inside of the building, much less have a laptop with connectivity. I have

Re: [Fedora-packaging] Re: Hacks for multilib unclean C headers

> "PR" == Pavel Raiskup writes: PR> Thanks to Vit for the link, I'd like to see the discussion in: PR> https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/312 Why would you bump a three year old ticket for this? Just open a new one. - J< -- devel mailing list

Re: [Fedora-packaging] Re: Hacks for multilib unclean C headers

Also, if there is any point in having a packaging guideline for this, please submit a draft to FPC. I think I'd want to see how often it actually helps to have a standardized/mandated way of doing this before we go that far, though. (It's not particularly difficult to make that argument but

Re: Orphaning apcupsd

>>>>> "ES" == Eric Sandeen <sand...@redhat.com> writes: ES> On 6/22/16 2:24 PM, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: ES> So I could help with EPEL if you want; generally though, packages ES> like this don't get rebased or updated much in EPEL so I dou

Re: Orphaning apcupsd

> "MH" == Michal Hlavinka writes: MH> Hi, my APC UPS died and as I won't be buying new APC UPS, I can no MH> longer test and investigate bugs. So apcupsd is free for taking if MH> anyone wants it. Well, I need it but I don't really _want_ it. So it would be nice if

Re: Rules regarding whitespace inside .spec files

> "AT" == Andrew Toskin writes: AT> Is there a way to convert tags like "BuildRequires:" into %macros so AT> that they *can* be indented? Sure there is, but please don't actually try to do that in Fedora packages. There are cases where such things might be easier to

Re: rpmlint FAILED for cppad-20160000.0-2.fc24

> "KP" == Kamil Paral writes: KP> Just log in with your fasusern...@fedoraproject.org email. If you KP> receive an error the first time, please try again, there's a bug KP> somewhere :) Yeah, know that much, but after getting through persona and the Fedora signin, I just

Re: rpmlint FAILED for cppad-20160000.0-2.fc24

> "KP" == Kamil Paral writes: KP> Hello, we have an RFE for adding a rpmlint whitelist feature here: KP> https://phab.qadevel.cloud.fedoraproject.org/T692 I can't actually log into phabricator to respond there, but really this needs to be with the spec file. I edit spec

Re: Needless use of %defattr (in 4464 packages)

> "RC" == Remi Collet writes: RC> Please, don't change any of my packages. Could you perhaps explain your definition of "my" in that sentence? I'm kind of curious as to why someone might think that any package is the distribution is "theirs" as opposed to

Re: Needless use of %defattr (in 4464 packages)

> "RC" == Ralf Corsepius writes: RC> Are you sure the owners list you used is current? I pulled them directly from pkgdb at the time I generated the list. There's no way that they could have been any more current when I sent the mail. - J< -- devel mailing list

Re: Declining package maintenance requests? (Was Re: Large number of packages to be orphaned on Feb 26)

> "FAL" == Fabio Alessandro Locati writes: FAL> If a person is not able to make a click in 7 days (maybe vacation FAL> periods could be excluded from the count), why should he be able to FAL> do so in the following 21 days? I think that a better question is: If a

Re: three questions: f24 branch, python3 default, where to put /etc/rsyslog.d/gluster.conf.example

> "SG" == Stephen Gallagher writes: SG> To supplement this, it's the default in the sense that packagers are SG> expected to ship python3 packages if they are supported upstream and SG> if the package includes the same binary executable name for py2 and SG> py3, only the

Re: three questions: f24 branch, python3 default, where to put /etc/rsyslog.d/gluster.conf.example

> "DJ" == Dave Johansen writes: DJ> I think the confusion comes from the fact that for several releases DJ> we heard "get ready because Python 3 is going to be the default" and DJ> then all of the sudden that just stopped. In that case, the issue is simply the

[Guidelines change] Changes to the packaging guidelines

Here are the recent changes to the packaging guidelines. - Some PHP scriptlets are now unnecessary in F24 due to the use of file triggers. * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:PHP#PECL_Modules * https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/597 - A page describing the implementation of

Re: Rstudio

> "SG" == Steve Grubb writes: SG> Hello, I like to have everything on my system in a package. So, I SG> looked around and found no recipe or rpm for Rstudio. I actually just use the upstream RPMs, but I unpack and repack them to remove some bundled crap and some

Re: The %license property is now supported in EPEL6 - breaks SCL build

> "RC" == Remi Collet writes: RC> FYI, I just open an issue to have this reverted. RC> https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/5071 Well that was not particularly nice. Why can't we work together to fix any bugs? In any case, I can't reproduce the

Re: Needless use of %defattr (in 4464 packages)

> "ZJ" == Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek writes: ZJ> Better to just run a script to fix those overnight, and than deal ZJ> with any fallout. Sure, I could, but I figured it's at least worth informing people. Maybe there's some use case for this of which I'm not aware. Or

The %license property is now supported in EPEL6

Just a note that it EPEL6 no longer requires you to include the definition of %license property; you can use it freely in your %files list as you would in EPEL7 or Fedora. It simply maps to %doc as it would if you had included the magic line noise manually. This works for me in koji; if it

Re: Needless use of %defattr (in 4464 packages)

> "VS" == Ville Skyttä writes: VS> The original post's general case is the one immediately after VS> %files, that's what was grepped according to the poster. Yes, I limited the search to %defattr falling immediately after %files and setting a default value. I'm sure

Re: The %license property is now supported in EPEL6

> "AW" == Adam Williamson writes: AW> Thanks for working on this! Selfishly, I care more about EL6 because AW> I just don't do EL5 builds for any of my packages =) but you're the AW> one doing the work. Honestly I don't really care much about EPEL5, 6 or 7. But after

Re: The %license property is now supported in EPEL6

> "AW" == Adam Williamson writes: AW> Does anyone feel like tackling %autosetup? Give me a few days. Right now I'm working on magically supplying some of the mandatory EL5 bits of boilerplate which annoy me the most: BuildRoot, %clean, Group, buildroot cleaning

[Guidelines change] Changes to the packaging guidelines

Here are the recent changes to the packaging guidelines. - A section on the treatment of pregenerated code has been added to the main guideline page. *​https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Use_of_pregenerated_code *​https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/580 - Text was

Re: [Guidelines change] Changes to the packaging guidelines

> "RWMJ" == Richard W M Jones writes: RWMJ> Is that new? Not really. The change relating to what's in the buildroot was made about nine months ago: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/497 RWMJ> I'm fairly sure I've got a lot of packages that assume gcc is RWMJ> there as

Re: [Guidelines change] Changes to the packaging guidelines

> "HdG" == Hans de Goede writes: HdG> I was specifically interested in this one, but this seems to be HdG> missing from the wiki page ? That URL certainly works for me. Here's the text: Use of pregenerated code Often a package will contain code which was itself

Re: F24 Self Contained Change: System Python

> "VO" == Vít Ondruch writes: VO> Since this is about disk size, I proposed already quite long ago to VO> not ship the source *.py code, e.g. there could be something like: Yes, this is something I've looked at as part of trying to clean up python packaging with new

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   >