Re: libxml2 2.12.0 (and 2.12.1) in rawhide, with some API breaks

Hi Iñaki On 2023-11-24 14:00, Iñaki Ucar wrote: Hi David, We have a couple of broken R packages due to this update: - https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/R-xml2 - https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/R-XML But I'm overloaded right now and I've been unable to take a look. Any help would be

libxml2 2.12.0 (and 2.12.1) in rawhide, with some API breaks

The latest released versions of libxml2 have a couple of important changes in header files that have unintentionally caused some packages to fail to build without modification, including: * several functions now accept or return a const xmlError struct * cyclic dependencies in header files

GSSDP and GUPnP 1.6 coming to Rawhide

The 1.6 series of both GSSDP and GUPnP was released a while ago, and the 1.6.2 releases contain an important fix for Rygel (which itself depends on the 1.6 series in the latest version): https://discourse.gnome.org/t/important-gssdp-gupnp-1-6-2/12394 As these versions bring new sonames, I

seahorse license change from GPLv2+ and LGPLv2+ to GPLv2+ and LGPLv2+ and CC-BY-SA

While updating seahorse to the latest version, I noticed that the user documentation was incorrectly listed as being under the GFDL. After confirming with upstream, I updated to to the current CC-BY-SA license: https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/seahorse/-/merge_requests/199 --

simple-scan license change from GPLv3+ to GPLv3+ and CC-BY-SA

While looking at license changes in the latest version, I found that the simple-scan sources are under the stated GPLv3+, but the icon and user documentation are under CC-BY-SA. -- https://amigadave.com/ signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___

ghex license change from GPLv2+ to GPLv2+ and GFDL and CC-BY-SA

While updating ghex to the latest version, I checked through the included licenses, and found that the user documentation is under GFDL and the icon is under CC-BY-SA, with the sources being under GPLv2+. -- https://amigadave.com/ signature.asc Description: PGP signature

gnome-backgrounds license change to CC-BY-SA from GPLv2

Hi While updating gnome-backgrounds, I realised that all the backgrounds were licensed under CC-BY-SA, rather than the specified GPLv2, and after checking with upstream, I updated the License field accordingly. Cheers -- https://amigadave.com/ signature.asc Description: PGP signature

GNOME 42 builds for F36: use f36-gnome side tag

Hi all I am looking after GNOME builds this release cycle, as Kalev is away, and I have requested a side tag for building GNOME packages intended for F36. Please build updates of GNOME packages in the 42 series into the f36-gnome side tag, using "fedpkg build –target=f36-gnome", or let me

libportal license change and soname bump

As part of updating libportal to 0.5 in rawhide, there was a license change from LGPLv2+ to LGPLv3. The soname changed from libportal.so.0 to libportal.so.1, and I rebuilt the following packages: * epiphany * gcolor3 (coordinated with fnux) * gnome-builder * gnome-todo If there are any

Re: qemu / VNC / vino

Hi On 2014-03-25 12:06, Nathanael D. Noblet nathan...@gnat.ca wrote: I'm not sure where the bug is and it isn't really a big bug as much as I need to be able to tell either vino or qemu-system-x what ports to use. You can change the default port which Vino listens on by changing the value

Re: Orphaning simple scan

Hi Simone On 2014-03-10 12:22, Simone Caronni negativ...@gmail.com wrote: permissions granted. Actually we've been updating the package at the same time :) Ha, I pushed some updates as soon as I had the necessary privileges. Thanks! Mind if I also make some cosmetic changes to the spec

Re: Orphaning simple scan

Hi Simone On 2014-03-08 18:28, Simone Caronni negativ...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for maintaining this so far, I've taken it as I use it every once in a while. Co-maintainers welcome. I would like to be a co-maintainer, as I use Simple Scan on a regular basis, and as a GNOME contributor I am

Re: Non-responsive easytag package maintainer

On 2014-01-08 13:16, Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com wrote: On Wed, 1 Jan 2014 18:09:32 +0400 Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com wrote: Matthias seems to stop his participation in Fedora ~1 year ago: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/tasks?owner=thiasstate=all Dave, I think you should be granted

Request to takeover easytag package

Hi I posted a week ago about the non-responsive easytag package maintainer (thias, Matthias Saou): https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1044029 https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2014-January/193301.html Based on Peter Lemenkov’s reply, it seems that the maintainer has

Non-responsive easytag package maintainer

Hi The EasyTAG package in Fedora has not been updated since 2.1.8 was released last February. There are several open bugs which which would be fixed by the update. I have updated the packaging for 2.1.8 in a bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=951265 I am the upstream