Re: Call for participation: Fedora Flatpaks

Dne 7.9.2018 v 10:23 Martin Stransky napsal(a): > On 9/7/18 9:36 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> >> >> Dne 7.9.2018 v 03:45 Owen Taylor napsal(a): >>> I'd like to invite Fedora contributors to start creating Flatpaks of >>> graphical applications in Fedora. We're

Re: Fedora 30 Self-Contained Change proposal: Make ambiguous python shebangs error

Dne 31.8.2018 v 13:41 Miro Hrončok napsal(a): > On 31.8.2018 13:30, Miro Hrončok wrote: >> On 31.8.2018 09:05, Igor Gnatenko wrote: >>> On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 10:02 PM Ben Cotton >> > wrote: >>> >>>     >>>

fedora-package purpose and future

Hi, I am wondering what is the purpose of fedora-packager package and what is its future? It seems to be abandoned upstream as well as in Fedora [1, 2, 3, 4]. This is a bit unfortunate considering this is package every Fedora packager has to have installed. Is there a chance to give that package

Re: [HEADS UP] gcc/gcc-c++ removal from buildroot and more

Thank you for pushing this forward! One question though. I see that this works in Koji, but trying to test this locally it does not work. 1) $ mock -r fedora-rawhide-x86_64 rubygem-abrt-0.3.0-3.fc29.src.rpm --enablerepo=local This still installs gcc. 2) $ mock -r fedora-rawhide-x86_64

Re: [HEADS UP] Removal of GCC from the buildroot

Dne 10.7.2018 v 14:03 Tomasz Kłoczko napsal(a): > On Tue, 10 Jul 2018 at 12:26, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > [..] >> # dnf -C repoquery --qf "%{name}.%{arch} %{source_name} %{reponame}" | >> grep -w rawhide | grep x86_64 | awk '{print $2}' | sort | uniq | wc -l >> Last metadata expiration check:

Re: [HEADS UP] Removal of GCC from the buildroot

Dne 10.7.2018 v 09:42 Tomasz Kłoczko napsal(a): > On Tue, 10 Jul 2018 at 06:37, David Tardon wrote: > [..] >>> My proposition is *not* to add gcc/g++ explicit to BuildReequires and >>> use instead glibc-devel and libstdc++-devel modifications and ban use >>> gcc/gcc-c++ in BuildRequires (in

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

Dne 23.1.2018 v 19:03 Daniel P. Berrange napsal(a): > On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 05:56:47PM +, Jonathan Wakely wrote: >> On 23/01/18 15:38 +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: >>> We could deactivate -z defs for F28 and reactivate it after the branch >>> for F29, giving packagers more time to fix

Re: Frequently broken Rawhide/Branched composes

Dne 6.3.2018 v 19:26 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a): > On 03/06/2018 07:47 AM, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 06, 2018 at 02:58:45PM +, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > ...snip... >>> But that has its own issues. >> Sorry, just to be clear, what would have its own issues: >> - asking rawhide

Re: [ACTION NEEDED #2] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

Dne 8.3.2018 v 09:19 Igor Gnatenko napsal(a): > On Wed, 2018-03-07 at 16:39 +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote: > > > Dne 7.3.2018 v 15:08 Jerry James napsal(a): > >> On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 12:43 AM, Igor Gnatenko > >> <ignatenkobr...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > >

Re: Frequently broken Rawhide/Branched composes

Dne 6.3.2018 v 21:36 Kevin Kofler napsal(a): > Nicolas Mailhot wrote: >> The “never go backwards” policy means that as soon something hits devel >> other packages can rely on your package and start adapting >> their packages on the basis of your changes. You can not pull the carpet >> from under

Re: [ACTION NEEDED #2] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

Dne 8.3.2018 v 09:15 Igor Gnatenko napsal(a): > On Wed, 2018-03-07 at 09:21 +0100, Lukas Czerner wrote: > > Hi, > > > how do I test my changes are working properly ? So far my builds > > succeeded without problems. > > Probably easiest way would be to copy existing /etc/mock/fedora- >

Re: Should we have a release manager for each release? (or, "who owns rawhide"?)

Dne 28.2.2018 v 18:56 Bruno Wolff III napsal(a): > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 10:35:11 +0100, >  Vít Ondruch <vondr...@redhat.com> wrote: >> >> And was the compose successful today or not. Looking at >> >> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/compose/rawhide/Fed

Re: Frequently broken Rawhide/Branched composes

Dne 1.3.2018 v 03:19 Kevin Kofler napsal(a): > Fabio Valentini wrote: >> AFAICT, those "broken deps in rawhide" mails are only sent if there is a >> compose, and during the past weeks, there have been few of those ... so >> breakage is sometimes allowed to sit unnoticed (and grow increasingly >>

Re: Frequently broken Rawhide/Branched composes

Dne 1.3.2018 v 14:47 Mamoru TASAKA napsal(a): > Vít Ondruch wrote on 03/01/2018 06:44 PM: >> >> >> Dne 1.3.2018 v 03:19 Kevin Kofler napsal(a): >>> Fabio Valentini wrote: >>>> AFAICT, those "broken deps in rawhide" mails are only sent if the

Re: Gating packages in Rawhide

Dne 9.3.2018 v 11:24 Pierre-Yves Chibon napsal(a): > On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 10:52:27AM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> I had a different idea in mind, basically try to keep the experience as >> close as >> what it is now. >> for single package: >>- packa

Re: Gating packages in Rawhide

Thanks for starting this discussion and I really want to thank you for offering Bodhi to handle the Rawhide. It would be really sad I some other system was used for Rawhide then for stable versions. Dne 9.3.2018 v 10:20 Pierre-Yves Chibon napsal(a): > On Thu, Mar 08, 2018 at 01:00:32PM -0500,

Re: [ACTION NEEDED #2] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

Dne 8.3.2018 v 10:13 Vít Ondruch napsal(a): > > > Dne 8.3.2018 v 09:19 Igor Gnatenko napsal(a): >> On Wed, 2018-03-07 at 16:39 +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> >> > Dne 7.3.2018 v 15:08 Jerry James napsal(a): >> >> On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at

Re: Gating packages in Rawhide

Dne 9.3.2018 v 15:23 Colin Walters napsal(a): > A more modern architecture would be something closer to pull requests on > dist-git; > tests report into the PR the same way github works today. May be if we had all .spec files in single repository . V. > > This would work *particularly*

Re: [ACTION NEEDED #2] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

$ curl https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal-pkgs.txt | wc -l   % Total    % Received % Xferd  Average Speed   Time    Time Time  Current Dload  Upload   Total   Spent    Left  Speed 100  281k  100  281k    0 0   156k  0  0:00:01  0:00:01

Re: [ACTION NEEDED #2] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

Dne 7.3.2018 v 15:08 Jerry James napsal(a): > On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 12:43 AM, Igor Gnatenko > wrote: >> This is the second iteration of my mass-scratch-rebuild without >> gcc/gcc-c++ in the buildroot[0]. Everything what was written in >> original mail still

Re: Fedora rawhide compose report: 20180411.n.3 changes

Dne 12.4.2018 v 10:26 Fedora Rawhide Report napsal(a): > Added packages: 421 ... snip ... > = ADDED PACKAGES = > Package: ReviewBoard-3.0.6-1.module_1655+c1bb0ce4 > Summary: Web-based code review tool > RPMs:ReviewBoard > Size:12.19 MiB > > Package:

Re: Fw: fedmsg notification

I don't mind to receive such notification, but I would welcome if the subject was meaningful. V. Dne 8.4.2018 v 13:47 Michael Schwendt napsal(a): > Please make such a message flood opt-in by default instead of opt-out. > The communication about such new services and their purpose is extremely >

Re: orphaning my Ruby and Perl packages

Hi, Dne 22.4.2018 v 02:18 Ken Dreyer napsal(a): > rubygem-inflecto I am taking this ^^ needed by rubygem-fog-brightbox > rubygem-loofah Taking this ^^ required by Rails > rubygem-rspec-its Taking this ^^ needed by Vagrant https://pagure.io/releng/issue/7453 Vít

Re: orphaning my Ruby and Perl packages

Dne 22.4.2018 v 02:18 Ken Dreyer napsal(a): > Hi folks, > > I had several Ruby and Perl packages in Fedora that I no longer > maintain any more. > > I've assigned all these to the "orphan" ID in src.fedoraproject.org . > > rubygem-creole > rubygem-expression_parser > rubygem-org-ruby >

Re: [Fedora-packaging] Welcome new FPC members

Congratulations! With the fresh blood, I'm looking forward to see my Ruby guidelines updates [1] reviewed and approved soon ;) V. [1] https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/710 Dne 16.4.2018 v 06:17 James Antill napsal(a): > As a followup we now have ten new members of the FPC: > >

Re: Gating packages in Rawhide

Dne 28.3.2018 v 19:06 Pierre-Yves Chibon napsal(a): > On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 06:46:50PM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: >>Why are you stressing MultiplePkgs vs single pkgs. Single pgk process is >>just subcase of multiplepkgs process. > And because it is just a subcase, it

Re: Gating packages in Rawhide

Dne 28.3.2018 v 19:55 Pierre-Yves Chibon napsal(a): > On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 07:34:51PM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: > >> And please rename this thread to "Gating packages in Fedora", because >> Rawhide should be just Fedora. > You do realize that there is alr

Re: Announcing DNF 3 development

Dne 26.3.2018 v 10:16 Tom Hughes napsal(a): > On 26/03/18 09:06, Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote: >> W dniu 22.03.2018 o 13:40, Daniel Mach pisze: >>> We are pleased to announce that development of DNF 3 has started. This >>> version is focused on performance improvements, new API and >>> consolidating

Re: Gating packages in Rawhide

Why are you stressing MultiplePkgs vs single pkgs. Single pgk process is just subcase of multiplepkgs process. And if you can do chain build in Rawhide, I can't see any reason why it should not be possible for stable branch. IOW the process for Rawhide should be as close to stable version as

Re: Request for testing: dbus-broker as system and user bus

I would like to test it, but as long as it keeps the original dbus on my system, I won't install it. I don't want two dbus implementations on my system. Vít Dne 13.3.2018 v 15:04 Tom Gundersen napsal(a): > Hi, > > dbus-broker is a new DBus message bus implementation. We are proposing > it as

Re: Fedora Rawhide-20180315.n.1 compose check report

Dne 16.3.2018 v 08:07 Adam Williamson napsal(a): > On Thu, 2018-03-15 at 22:26 +, Fedora compose checker wrote: >> No missing expected images. >> >> Failed openQA tests: 84/137 (x86_64), 24/24 (i386), 1/2 (arm) > Virtually all tests currently fail on Rawhide because a complete > redesign of

Re: josm orphaned

Dne 22.3.2018 v 19:08 Ricardo Martinelli Oliveira napsal(a): > I never packaged something for Fedora before, but can you give me a > chance to see how is the effort to maintain the package before I adopt > it? This should be good place to start your journey:

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2018-03-02)

Zbyszek, Next time, could you please include the meeting minutes in the email body. It would provide more information and save me some clicks. Thx Vít Dne 2.3.2018 v 18:06 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek napsal(a): > Minutes: >

Re: Appstream metadata compose failures

Dne 2.3.2018 v 16:13 Kalev Lember napsal(a): > On 03/02/2018 03:59 PM, Dennis Gilmore wrote: >> El vie, 02-03-2018 a las 11:28 +0100, Kalev Lember escribió: >>> Hi, >>> >>> hughsie just did a new appstream-data compose for F29 and I noticed >>> there's quite a large number of packages failing in

Re: fedora28 and strong crypto settings

I was bitten by this. To workaround the issues in FF and TB, it might help to change all the "dfe" options in about:config to False, which might break other sites, but it helped me to access my email again. Vít Dne 26.2.2018 v 16:37 Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos napsal(a): > Hi, > regarding the

Re: Unannounced soname bump (Rawhide): qpdf (libqpdf.so.18 -> libqpdf.so.21)

Dne 28.2.2018 v 13:46 Kevin Kofler napsal(a): > Richard Shaw wrote: >> Unannounced soname bumps are a pain :) > The requirement to announce soname bumps to begin with is unreasonable > bureaucracy in the first place. If your package shows up in the broken > dependency report, you rebuild it

Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

Dne 18.2.2018 v 18:09 Igor Gnatenko napsal(a): > > List of packages and respective maintainers: > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/gcc-removal-pkgs.txt > xchat-ruby was retired. ruby and rubygem-bcrypt are fixed (at least in git). Vít signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital

Re: Should we have a release manager for each release? (or, "who owns rawhide"?)

16.2.2018 v 21:14 Adam Williamson napsal(a): > On Fri, 2018-02-16 at 14:34 +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> I wish the compose process was more transparent. May be it is just me, >> but I don't know where to start looking when I don't get the daily >> compose report. > https://kojipkgs.f

Re: Should we have a release manager for each release? (or, "who owns rawhide"?)

Dne 28.2.2018 v 10:52 Lubomír Sedlář napsal(a): > Vít Ondruch píše v St 28. 02. 2018 v 10:35 +0100: >> Can the logs actually contain timestamps with timezone? > There's a timezone offset at the beginning of the log: > > 2018-02-28 00:33:30 [INFO] Current timezone offset:

Re: Unannounced soname bump (Rawhide): qpdf (libqpdf.so.18 -> libqpdf.so.21)

Dne 28.2.2018 v 12:14 Ralf Corsepius napsal(a): > On 02/27/2018 07:27 PM, Richard Shaw wrote: >> On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 12:16 PM, Adam Williamson >> > wrote: >> >> >>     Once again, folks, *please* announce your soname bumps, and

Re: Attempting to contact unresponsive maintainers - xing, noriko, aortega, jcholast, mzatko

Dne 5.3.2018 v 21:03 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a): > On 02/07/2018 10:27 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: >> Greetings, we've been told that the email addresses for these package >> maintainers are no longer valid. I'm starting the unresponsive >> maintainer policy to find out if they are still interested in >>

Re: Fedora for Web Development fail

If you these two steps from documentation: https://developer.fedoraproject.org/tools/vagrant/vagrant-atlas.html the vagrant box appears in virt-manager as another machine. The name of the machine will be derived from the directory name where the Vagrant file is located. Of course it is not

Re: Semi-serious proposal: drop all optional entries from comps

Dne 26.9.2018 v 18:35 Adam Williamson napsal(a): > On Tue, 2018-09-25 at 08:17 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> Dne 24.9.2018 v 19:32 Adam Williamson napsal(a): >>> On Mon, 2018-09-24 at 12:21 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: >>>> Just FTR, some while ago, I proposed to drop c

Re: Fwd: Re: Vagrant: can we make it show up in Software?

d also bundle a desktop file > which runs gnome-terminal... > > On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 02:51:38PM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> Hi, >> >> It is not problem to make Vagrant show in Software. However, as far as i >> know, CLI tools were never supposed to be there. I

Re: Missing Notifications

Dne 29. 10. 18 v 23:31 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a): > On 10/28/18 8:01 AM, Scott Talbert wrote: >> Hi, >> >> What happened to the broken dependency notification emails? > They got broken a while back by rich deps, then the script was > re-written entirely and re-enabled, but we haven't re-enabled the

Re: Fwd: Re: Vagrant: can we make it show up in Software?

:24 Richard Hughes napsal(a): > On Fri, 19 Oct 2018 at 09:36, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> I was always under impression, that we don't want to show CLI apps in >> Software. Not sure what was the reasoning behind, but I can imagine that: >> * we don't want Python to show up in Software

Re: fedora-packager purpose and future

Dne 08. 11. 18 v 1:57 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a): > On 11/7/18 9:22 AM, Miro Hrončok wrote: >> On 05. 09. 18 9:38, Vít Ondruch wrote: >>> >>> Dne 4.9.2018 v 21:46 Rex Dieter napsal(a): >>>> Ben Rosser wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Tue, Sep 4,

Re: NSS package consolidation

Dne 08. 11. 18 v 13:04 Tom Hughes napsal(a): > On 08/11/2018 11:44, Daiki Ueno wrote: > >> The question is, is there any documented procedure to do this kind of >> package merge safely?  I guess at least the unnecessary packages >> (nss-util and nss-softokn) would need to be retired. > > Just

Re: fedora-packager purpose and future

Dne 08. 11. 18 v 10:03 Vít Ondruch napsal(a): > > > Dne 08. 11. 18 v 1:57 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a): >> On 11/7/18 9:22 AM, Miro Hrončok wrote: >>> On 05. 09. 18 9:38, Vít Ondruch wrote: >>>> Dne 4.9.2018 v 21:46 Rex Dieter napsal(a): >>>>> Ben Ros

Vagrant dependencies updated in Rawhide

Hi Vagrant users, If you are using Vagrant together with libvirt backend (default on Fedora), please be warned that today, I have updated fog-libvirt (dependency of vagrant-libvrit) and its dependencies in Rawhide. Because fog upstream is currently a bit of a mess, where some major sub-components

Re: Ursa Major (modules in buildroot) enablement

Dne 09. 11. 18 v 16:28 Stephen Gallagher napsal(a): > On Fri, Nov 9, 2018 at 9:53 AM Kevin Kofler wrote: >> Raphael Groner wrote: >> >>> Kevin, * that no package may ever be module-only, but modules can only be used for non-default versions. >>> That statement doesn't make any

Re: Ursa Major (modules in buildroot) enablement

Dne 12. 11. 18 v 13:43 Stephen Gallagher napsal(a): > On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 4:50 AM Vít Ondruch wrote: >> >> Dne 09. 11. 18 v 16:28 Stephen Gallagher napsal(a): >>> On Fri, Nov 9, 2018 at 9:53 AM Kevin Kofler wrote: >>>> Raphael Groner wrote: >>&g

Re: Fedora Lifecycles: imagine longer-term possibilities

Dne 16. 11. 18 v 0:54 Jason Tibbitts napsal(a): >> "MM" == Matthew Miller writes: > MM> Let's talk about something new and exciting. > > I assume that you mean "very much not new and about as exciting as the > fifteenth viewing of an episode of the Joy of Painting". > > I know it's been a

Re: Fedora Lifecycles: imagine longer-term possibilities

Dne 16. 11. 18 v 10:38 Vít Ondruch napsal(a): > Dne 16. 11. 18 v 0:54 Jason Tibbitts napsal(a): >>>>>>> "MM" == Matthew Miller writes: >> MM> How would we balance this with getting people new stuff fast as >> MM> well? >> >> Wait,

Re: Safe to remove yum?

Dne 06. 11. 18 v 9:49 Miroslav Suchý napsal(a): > Dne 04. 11. 18 v 14:08 Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski napsal(a): >> Unless you're building packages for EPEL locally using mock, >> but then you can use mock --dnf. > Or `mock --bootstrap-chroot`, which build in two stages. First install small >

Re: Ursa Major (modules in buildroot) enablement

Dne 09. 11. 18 v 3:33 Kevin Kofler napsal(a): > Neal Gompa wrote: >> Moreover, as it stands, I don't think modularity provides any quality >> of life improvements for packagers within Fedora (it adds extra steps >> and makes it confusing to figure out what is maintained), > There is one I can see

Re: Fedora Packaging Guidelines on docs.fedoraproject.org

Dne 2.10.2018 v 13:11 Pierre-Yves Chibon napsal(a): > On Tue, Oct 02, 2018 at 11:53:45AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> >> Dne 1.10.2018 v 20:00 Jason L Tibbitts III napsal(a): >>>>>>>> "BP" == Björn Persson writes: >>> BP> This was o

Re: Fedora Packaging Guidelines on docs.fedoraproject.org

Dne 1.10.2018 v 20:00 Jason L Tibbitts III napsal(a): >> "BP" == Björn Persson writes: > BP> This was on Fedora 27. So one needs Fedora 28 to help fixing the > BP> formatting of the guidelines then? (Once that other breakage is > BP> fixed I suppose?) > > I believe one could build the

Re: Fedora Packaging Guidelines on docs.fedoraproject.org

Dne 2.10.2018 v 18:59 Neal Gompa napsal(a): > On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 11:59 AM Fabio Valentini wrote: >> On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 5:00 PM Neal Gompa wrote: >>> On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 9:02 AM Vít Ondruch wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> Dne 2.10.2018 v

Re: Semi-serious proposal: drop all optional entries from comps

Just FTR, some while ago, I proposed to drop comps entirely: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/ISCIB67JKW7WBC74KA4DSCAP6AZOUY5G/ Vít Dne 22.9.2018 v 03:14 Adam Williamson napsal(a): > Hi folks! > > I am currently working on finding and

Re: Fedora for Web Development fail

Dne 26.9.2018 v 13:28 Vít Ondruch napsal(a): > If you these two steps from documentation: > > https://developer.fedoraproject.org/tools/vagrant/vagrant-atlas.html > > the vagrant box appears in virt-manager as another machine. The name of > the machine will be derived from

Re: Semi-serious proposal: drop all optional entries from comps

Dne 26.9.2018 v 15:51 Matthew Miller napsal(a): > On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 08:17:18AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> rubygem-rails (which already exists and has its purpose no matter if >> there are comps or not) via Suggests for example. The only issue AFAIK >> is the

Re: Semi-serious proposal: drop all optional entries from comps

Dne 24.9.2018 v 19:32 Adam Williamson napsal(a): > On Mon, 2018-09-24 at 12:21 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> Just FTR, some while ago, I proposed to drop comps entirely: >> >> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/ISCIB67JKW7

Re: Blocking criteria proposal for F30+: Printing

This one is interesting as well, since I was bitten by it: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1614978 V. Dne 20.9.2018 v 14:33 Stephen Gallagher napsal(a): > There was a bug[1] filed recently that indicated that printing was > broken on certain printers. As a result of that

Ruby soname bump

date from Ruby 2.5 in Fedora 29 to > Ruby 2.6 in Fedora 30, Fedora becomes the superior Ruby development > platform. > > == Owner == > * Name: [[User:vondruch| Vít Ondruch]], [[User:pvalena| Pavel Valena]] > * Email: vondr...@redhat.com, pval...@redhat.com > > == Detailed Descrip

Re: fedpkg build disconnects?

Dne 13. 12. 18 v 15:41 Florian Weimer napsal(a): > * Richard Shaw: > >> I've never had this problem before but for the last week or so I frequently >> get the following >> at some point before the build completes: >> >> Could not execute build: ('Connection aborted.', >>

Re: [HEADS UP] Rawhide buildroot now has glibc-minimal-langpack instead

That is huge. Thx a lot. Vít Dne 28. 11. 18 v 20:33 Igor Gnatenko napsal(a): > Hello, > > the removal of glibc-all-langpacks from the buildroot[0] is done. > Standard buildroot has decreased from 445 to 237 megabytes in > installed size ;) > > Before: > DEBUG util.py:439: Install 146

Re: Orphaned packages need new maintainers (will be retired in 3 weeks)

Dne 01. 12. 18 v 23:17 Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski napsal(a): > On Friday, 30 November 2018 at 14:15, Miro Hrončok wrote: >> 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

Re: Proposal: delay F31 release to work out infrastructure and lifecycle challenges

Dne 26. 11. 18 v 20:01 Randy Barlow napsal(a): > On Mon, 2018-11-26 at 17:23 +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: >>> * really actually for real gated Rawhide >> Is the "creating side tag for chain builds or by automated requests" >> is planned here? >> When I deal with rust packages, I often need to

Unretirement of js-jquery2

Nice, so the script is broken and does not report the dependencies correctly [1] and now js-jquery2 went unnoticed and get retired although it is required by rubygem-jquery-rails, similarly to js-jquery1. I'm going to ask for unretirement and I hope I did not miss the two week window. Vít [1]

Re: Unretirement of js-jquery2

Dne 07. 01. 19 v 18:13 Vít Ondruch napsal(a): > Nice, so the script is broken and does not report the dependencies > correctly [1] and now js-jquery2 went unnoticed and get retired although > it is required by rubygem-jquery-rails, similarly to js-jquery1. I'm > going to ask for

Re: Who is the fedora sponsor for aqsis ?

Dne 05. 01. 19 v 19:57 Stephen John Smoogen napsal(a): > On Sat, 5 Jan 2019 at 04:10, J. Scheurich wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Still searching for a wdune fedora sponsor. >> Who is the fedora sponsor for aqsis ? > The maintainers for aqsis can be found from: > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/aqsis

Re: How to avoid re-generating Pagure API keys all the time?

Dne 13. 12. 18 v 21:09 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a): > On 12/13/18 11:50 AM, Ken Dreyer wrote: > >> I would love to help bring back the birds-eye view dashboard that >> pkgdb provided for things like "how many packages does X person >> maintain", > https://src.fedoraproject.org/user/ktdreyer > > You

Re: How to avoid re-generating Pagure API keys all the time?

Dne 03. 01. 19 v 15:28 Richard Shaw napsal(a): > On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 2:11 PM Kevin Fenzi > wrote: > > On 12/13/18 11:50 AM, Ken Dreyer wrote: > > > I would love to help bring back the birds-eye view dashboard that > > pkgdb provided for things like "how

Re: Organizing a "packager experience" objective and working group

Dne 10. 01. 19 v 20:47 Artur Iwicki napsal(a): > - Now that I've mentioned it, maybe we should add something like "fedpkg > fas-login"? Personally I've put "alias koji-init='kinit > my-fas-acco...@my-domain.org'" in my .bashrc, because looking up how to solve > the "koji says I'm

Re: Organizing a "packager experience" objective and working group

; https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_package_collection_maintainers > to reflect this. > > Thanks Vit. > > On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 9:09 AM Vít Ondruch <mailto:vondr...@redhat.com>> wrote: > > > Dne 10. 01. 19 v 20:47 Artur Iwicki napsal(a): > > - Now that I've m

Re: Unretirement of js-jquery2

Dne 08. 01. 19 v 0:11 Miro Hrončok napsal(a): > On 07. 01. 19 18:13, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> Nice, so the script is broken and does not report the dependencies >> correctly [1] and now js-jquery2 went unnoticed and get retired although >> it is required by rubygem-jquery-r

Re: Fw: Re: OUTAGE: Koji system 2019-01-11 -> 2019-01-14

Dne 14. 01. 19 v 13:59 Daniel P. Berrangé napsal(a): > On Sun, Jan 13, 2019 at 04:38:37PM -0800, Kevin Fenzi wrote: >> On 1/13/19 4:11 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: >>> On Fri, 7 Dec 2018 at 14:51, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: During this time the s390 builders will not be available and all

Re: F29 hidden GRUB, problem testing and how to unhide

F8 and Esc should work. The change page [1] mentions also holding shift. It also mentions "sudo grub2-editenv - unset menu_auto_hide". But it is interesting that: 1. it does not work 2. it does not unhide itself after failed boot. Both sounds as a bugs to me. V. [1]

Re: Possibly non-responsive maintainer: hguemar

Dne 17.9.2018 v 09:48 Haïkel napsal(a): > Le lun. 17 sept. 2018 à 08:12, Mattia Verga a écrit > : >>> Le dim. 16 sept. 2018 à 11:27, Fabio Valentini >> a écrit : >>> >>> >>> The policy mention that you have to try contacting the maintainer >>> *first*, you never sent me an email or pinged me

Re: Orphaned packages to be retired

Miro, Could you please also send a list of retired packages after you pull the trigger? Thx Vít Dne 01. 04. 19 v 23:17 Miro Hrončok napsal(a): > 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

Re: More than 10% of all Fedora spec files are not POSIX sh compliant

Dne 27. 03. 19 v 10:30 Dridi Boukelmoune napsal(a): > On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 8:33 AM Nicolas Mailhot > wrote: >> Le 2019-03-27 03:46, Nico Kadel-Garcia a écrit : >>> On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 3:44 AM Nicolas Mailhot >>> wrote: POSIX is dead as a shell compatibility target. You want to

Re: latest rubygem-puppet-lint for F29 is from F23???

Dne 29. 03. 19 v 19:47 John Florian napsal(a): > I know it's not unusual to carry builds over from prior releases.  My > understanding is that happens because there was no mass rebuild.  > However, when I look at the F29 repo I see > rubygem-puppet-lint-1.1.0-2.fc23.noarch.rpm.  Was there really

Re: Orphaned some Java packages

Dne 28. 03. 19 v 0:48 Miro Hrončok napsal(a): > On 05. 02. 19 11:07, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote: >> I've just orphaned 259 packages listed below. Almost all of them are >> Java packages which I will continue to maintain as part of modules. >> Intent to orphan them was already announced on java-devel

Re: Orphaned some Java packages

Dne 28. 03. 19 v 14:53 Mikolaj Izdebski napsal(a): > On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 8:44 AM Vít Ondruch wrote: >> Trying to take look from the other side, the java.yaml might need some >> love [1], because the GH links are broken [2, 3] > java module doesn't have any complete builds.

Re: [stewardship-sig] Stewardship SIG: Initial report and plans for the future

Dne 30. 03. 19 v 10:53 Miro Hrončok napsal(a): > On 29. 03. 19 22:25, Fabio Valentini wrote: > >> Dependency Checks >> - >> >> Also, I've tried to run some repoqueries to determine which of our >> packages are >> leaf packages that could be retired eventually. However, running >>

Re: F31 System-Wide Change proposal: BuildRequires Generators

Dne 18. 02. 19 v 21:19 Ben Cotton napsal(a): > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/BuildRequires_Generators > > = BuildRequires Generators = > > == Summary == > Add possibility to generate build-time dependencies within RPM spec > file and teach RPM and mock how to handle this. > > == Owner ==

Re: Orphaned packages that will be retired (and everything will most likely burn)

Dne 20. 02. 19 v 10:02 Till Maas napsal(a): > On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 04:28:17PM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> Dne 15. 02. 19 v 14:22 Emmanuel Seyman napsal(a): >>> * Hans de Goede [15/02/2019 12:09] : >>>> And automatic scripts really just should hand it over to

Re: Fedora 31 System-Wide Change proposal: Gating Rawhide - Single package updates

Dne 02. 03. 19 v 8:09 Adam Williamson napsal(a): > On Fri, 2019-03-01 at 16:19 -0500, Ben Cotton wrote: >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/GatingRawhideSinglePackageUpdates >> >> == Summary == >> We want to gate packages on test results before they can land in >> rawhide. This will reduce

Re: modular repositories in mock configs: please don't

Dne 05. 03. 19 v 9:08 Adam Samalik napsal(a): > > > On Mon, Mar 4, 2019 at 10:26 PM Michael Cronenworth > wrote: > > On 3/4/19 3:04 AM, Petr Šabata wrote: > > You can view them as virtual repositories with dependencies.  I > > think that might be the simplest

Re: Allowing Epoch to be reset between releases

Dne 11. 03. 19 v 20:50 Jason L Tibbitts III napsal(a): >>>>>> "VO" == Vít Ondruch writes: > VO> In this case, if DNF said something like "you have installed > VO> foo-1:1.0, but there is available foo-0:2.0" it would give me > VO> hint

Re: Updating Rawhide vs GPG keys

(a): > On 3/12/19 4:14 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> Dne 11. 03. 19 v 19:29 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a): >>> On 3/11/19 4:31 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> Can somebody please enlighten me, how to update Rawhide after branching >>>&g

Re: Allowing Epoch to be reset between releases (Was: On not bumping the epoch in ceph-14, f30 and f31/rawhide)

Dne 09. 03. 19 v 15:37 Neal Gompa napsal(a): > On Sat, Mar 9, 2019 at 7:11 AM Vít Ondruch wrote: >> >> Dne 09. 03. 19 v 13:00 Vít Ondruch napsal(a): >>> Dne 08. 03. 19 v 23:19 Jason L Tibbitts III napsal(a): >>>>>>>>> "MH" == Miro Hr

Updating Rawhide vs GPG keys

Hi, Can somebody please enlighten me, how to update Rawhide after branching and not using --nogpgcheck? It seems that Rawhide keys were added in fedora-repos-30-0.4. So this is the package which is still "rawhide" package and has "f31" keys. But this package was not probably signed, because this

Re: Fedora Rawhide-20190306.n.1 compose check report

Compose check report was send also the day before, but there are sill not updated Rawhide repositories as far as I can tell :/ But hopefully things are getting better. Vít Dne 07. 03. 19 v 7:28 Miro Hrončok napsal(a): > Huge thanks to everybody who made this possible! >

Re: Orphaning Fog (most of rubygem-fog* packages)

Dne 08. 03. 19 v 16:57 Vít Ondruch napsal(a): > Hi, > > I have orphaned most of the Fog stack [1, 2]. Fog is the Ruby cloud > services library, top to bottom, collections provide a simplified > interface, making clouds easier to work with and switch between. > > Fog was

Orphaning Fog (most of rubygem-fog* packages)

Hi, I have orphaned most of the Fog stack [1, 2]. Fog is the Ruby cloud services library, top to bottom, collections provide a simplified interface, making clouds easier to work with and switch between. Fog was originally introduced into Fedora just as a dependency of Vagrant. Since that time,

Orphaning rubygem-multipart

Hi, I don't have any use for rubygem-multipart, therefore I orpahned the package. There was no upstream change past 10 years and nobody is probably using the package. Vít ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an

Re: Builders with different Mock version and different results

There is probably also different version of DNF used to install the buildroot or otherwise I don't understand the differences in the root.log. V. Dne 08. 03. 19 v 21:19 Vít Ondruch napsal(a): > I wonder why different builders has different version of mock and why > the build result d

Re: Builders with different Mock version and different results

Dne 08. 03. 19 v 21:27 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a): > On 3/8/19 12:19 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> I wonder why different builders has different version of mock and why >> the build result differs? >> >> The scratch build passes: >> >> https://koji.fedorapr

<    5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   >