Re: Discussion: unixODBC - move unversioned *.so files back to unixODBC-devel package

2020-09-11 Thread Tom Hughes via devel
On 11/09/2020 07:13, Ondrej Dubaj wrote: There seemed to be no big reason for moving the libraries to the main package in the past, so I consider f34 as a good candidate for such a change. It would be great, if  you share your opinions and concerns for this topic. Tom Lane has explained the

Re: F34 Change proposal: Remove support for SELinux runtime disable (System-Wide Change)

2020-09-10 Thread Tom Hughes via devel
On 10/09/2020 09:44, Richard Hughes wrote: On Tue, 8 Sep 2020 at 16:29, Ben Cotton wrote: NOTE: Runtime disable is considered deprecated by upstream, and using it will become increasingly painful (e.g. sleeping/blocking) through future kernel releases until eventually it is removed completely.

Re: Fedora 33 blocker status

2020-09-01 Thread Tom Hughes via devel
On 01/09/2020 18:29, kevin wrote: Just to make sure folks know, the retrace server being down is not this teams fault, it's ours (infrastructure). We planned to just have it down for a week or less when moving it to RDU, but it turned out that datacenter move was not at all what we hoped for

Re: /usr/bin/node: No such file or directory

2020-08-06 Thread Tom Hughes via devel
On 06/08/2020 13:57, Martin Gansser wrote: when I try to compile nodejs-indexof under rawhide I get the following error message [2] /usr/bin/node: No such file or directory [1] https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/nodejs-indexof/blob/master/f/nodejs-indexof.spec [2]

Re: %{_vpath_builddir} needs to be in the Cmake packaging guidelines

2020-08-04 Thread Tom Hughes via devel
On 04/08/2020 14:11, Neal Gompa wrote: On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 9:10 AM Richard Shaw wrote: On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 6:17 AM Michal Schorm wrote: Since this change, all (subsequent) CMake commands (after "%cmake") MUST be used with the builddir argument ( "-B %{__cmake_builddir}" ). Ok,

Re: %{_vpath_builddir} needs to be in the Cmake packaging guidelines

2020-08-04 Thread Tom Hughes via devel
On 04/08/2020 04:14, Richard Shaw wrote: I had to rely on the power of Google/Gmail to find Neal's response to one of my earlier emails to find the answer again... %{_vpath_builddir} But that begs the question, now that we have updated %cmake, and new %cmake_build & %cmake_install, why is

Re: Fedora 33 Mass Rebuild

2020-08-03 Thread Tom Hughes via devel
On 03/08/2020 22:32, Alexander Ploumistos wrote: Thanks, going for %define felt like trying to postpone adjusting to the new guidelines. What about any "make target1 target2" between the %cmake* macros? Do they remain as they are? A "make target" can be replaced with "%cmake_build --target

Re: The Fedora wiki system sucks

2020-08-01 Thread Tom Hughes via devel
On 01/08/2020 18:00, Richard Shaw wrote: So I wanted to document a ham radio related howto, so I decided that I would make it an extension of the Amateur Radio SIG wiki, and I've got an incomplete version created: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/AmateurRadio/Howto/Pat How can a wiki not have

Re: No debugsource generated, weird DWARF errors

2020-07-30 Thread Tom Hughes via devel
On 30/07/2020 22:26, Tom Hughes via devel wrote: On 30/07/2020 22:18, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: That problem is fixed, but binutils "ar" utility in Rawhide again segfaults, eg: Yes, because the commit adding the DWARF 4 patch has also turned LTO back on... ...and for extra fun

Re: No debugsource generated, weird DWARF errors

2020-07-30 Thread Tom Hughes via devel
On 30/07/2020 22:18, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: That problem is fixed, but binutils "ar" utility in Rawhide again segfaults, eg: Yes, because the commit adding the DWARF 4 patch has also turned LTO back on... Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/

Re: pagure pull-request email workflow

2020-07-22 Thread Tom Hughes via devel
On 22/07/2020 15:59, Mark Wielaard wrote: That is not how I understand the current situation. CPE has a proposal to provide a forge for use by the fedora project possibly based on gitlab, but pagure wouldn't go away. I think you may be behind the times. The pretend consultation is over and

Re: pagure pull-request email workflow

2020-07-22 Thread Tom Hughes via devel
On 22/07/2020 13:19, Mark Wielaard wrote: As you say, the web api is even more resourceful and we can integrate some of those requests into the library: https://pagure.io/api/ The only thing that is not very nice are those pagure_tokens. I was hoping you could get a temporary one through

Re: pagure pull-request email workflow

2020-07-21 Thread Tom Hughes via devel
On 21/07/2020 13:12, Mark Wielaard wrote: I normally just edit .git/config and add to the origin remote an extra fetch: fetch = +refs/pull/*/head:refs/remotes/origin/pull/* then after fetching you can merge origin/pull/NNN. But this is very helpful! Thanks. So with that I can easily do

Re: pagure pull-request email workflow

2020-07-21 Thread Tom Hughes via devel
On 21/07/2020 11:56, Mark Wielaard wrote: Do you have to handle them on that pagure website? Is it possible to handle these pull-request through email? Or is there a normal (git) command line interface for these? Pagure supports the same pull heads are things like github so yes you can just

Orphaning og my nodejs packages

2020-07-07 Thread Tom Hughes via devel
I have orphaned all my nodejs packages - feel free to grab though be aware that in many cases they have hopeless dependency issues. Full list of affected packages: carto jake kosmtik lodash node-gyp nodejs-agentkeepalive nodejs-ap nodejs-array-differ nodejs-array-union nodejs-arrify

Re: Better Thermal Management for the Workstation - Fedora 33 Self-Contained Change proposal

2020-07-01 Thread Tom Hughes via devel
On 01/07/2020 11:53, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 10:30:21AM -0400, Owen Taylor wrote: So, this was discussed quite a bit in https://pagure.io/fedora-workstation/issue/71 and the conclusion that the Workstatopn Working Group came to 3 months ago was that we didn't want to

Re: The future of legacy BIOS support in Fedora.

2020-06-30 Thread Tom Hughes via devel
On 30/06/2020 15:25, Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote: W dniu 30.06.2020 o 16:20, Tom Hughes via devel pisze: On 30/06/2020 15:00, Florian Weimer wrote: * Jóhann B. Guðmundsson: Given Hans proposal [1] introduced systemd/grub2/Gnome upstream changes it beg the question if now would not be the time

Re: The future of legacy BIOS support in Fedora.

2020-06-30 Thread Tom Hughes via devel
On 30/06/2020 15:00, Florian Weimer wrote: * Jóhann B. Guðmundsson: Given Hans proposal [1] introduced systemd/grub2/Gnome upstream changes it beg the question if now would not be the time to stop supporting booting in legacy bios mode and move to uefi only supported boot which has been

Re: The future of legacy BIOS support in Fedora.

2020-06-30 Thread Tom Hughes via devel
On 30/06/2020 14:56, Igor Raits wrote: I think there are many people still install OS in the legacy mode, but I don't really have numbers. One thing we should definitely do if we deprecate legacy BIOS is to properly warn users that still use this configuration, develop tooling for them if

Re: Need assistance to build ispc

2020-06-09 Thread Tom Hughes via devel
On 09/06/2020 08:54, Kalev Lember wrote: The build failed with: /builddir/build/BUILD/ispc-1.13.0/src/bitcode_lib.cpp: In member function 'void BitcodeLib::print() const': /builddir/build/BUILD/ispc-1.13.0/src/bitcode_lib.cpp:61:17: error: variable 'type' set but not used

Re: FSL license

2020-05-30 Thread Tom Hughes via devel
On 30/05/2020 12:00, Ankur Sinha wrote: However, the License that the Oxford University has released it under has certain clauses that make me unsure if it is OK for inclusion in Fedora. Could someone please have a look? https://fsl.fmrib.ox.ac.uk/fsl/fslwiki/Licence The "solely for

Re: Transitioning scripts relying on libcgroup-tools to the cgroup’s unified hierarchy (v2)

2020-05-12 Thread Tom Hughes via devel
On 12/05/2020 15:06, virgo wrote: Let’s say I want to compile `pandoc` with modifications of my own and many non- default compiler options. At the same time, on the same machine, I still want to do other stuff. `cgexec` et al. helped a lot to cap the memory and CPU usage of tasks like that,

Re: Transitioning scripts relying on libcgroup-tools to the cgroup’s unified hierarchy (v2)

2020-05-12 Thread Tom Hughes via devel
On 12/05/2020 14:13, Petr Pisar wrote: On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 12:47:51PM +, virgo wrote: I recommend you to ask the question about v2 support on Fedora Bugzilla for= the libcgroup package

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: Node.js 14.x by default

2020-05-11 Thread Tom Hughes via devel
On 11/05/2020 13:02, Stephen Gallagher wrote: On Fri, May 8, 2020 at 6:03 PM Tom Hughes wrote: On 08/05/2020 21:18, Stephen Gallagher wrote: On Sat, May 2, 2020 at 6:26 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: On 01. 05. 20 22:21, Ben Cotton wrote: * Proposal owners: The packages are already built for

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: Node.js 14.x by default

2020-05-08 Thread Tom Hughes via devel
On 08/05/2020 21:18, Stephen Gallagher wrote: On Sat, May 2, 2020 at 6:26 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: On 01. 05. 20 22:21, Ben Cotton wrote: * Proposal owners: The packages are already built for Fedora 33 in a non-default module stream. On June 14th, 2020, the nodejs-14.x packages will become the

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: systemd-resolved

2020-04-16 Thread Tom Hughes via devel
On 16/04/2020 11:46, Florian Weimer wrote: * Lennart Poettering: Long story short: if you experienced issues with DNSSEC on with resolved today, then be assured that with DNSSEC off things are much much better, and that's how we'd ship it in Fedora if it becomes the default. Would you please

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: systemd-resolved

2020-04-15 Thread Tom Hughes via devel
On 15/04/2020 10:14, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote: On 14.04.2020 21:23, Ben Cotton wrote: Enable systemd-resolved by default. glibc will perform name resolution using nss-resolve rather than nss-dns. I've tested systemd-resolved on my laptop for a month. It worked very, very unstable.

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: systemd-resolved

2020-04-15 Thread Tom Hughes via devel
On 15/04/2020 09:48, Florian Weimer wrote: >>> Is this expected to work with the Red Hat VPN out of the box, or do we >>> have to disable all this and use a custom configuration? Has this been >>> discussed with Infosec? It looks like this will break their DNS >>> sinkholing for domains such as

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: systemd-resolved

2020-04-15 Thread Tom Hughes via devel
On 15/04/2020 09:53, Florian Weimer wrote: > Thanks. Does this mean that no search list processing happens, for > neither single-label names (per for the first paragraph), nor for > multi-label names (per the routing description)? Or is this process > described in some other context? That text

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: systemd-resolved

2020-04-15 Thread Tom Hughes via devel
On 15/04/2020 09:29, Tom Hughes via devel wrote: > I'm not sure what happens if there are multiple interfaces with > no specific routing but I think it may try them all? Found the documentation now - it does try them all. Full details from systemd-resolved(8) are: Lookup re

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: systemd-resolved

2020-04-15 Thread Tom Hughes via devel
On 15/04/2020 09:08, Florian Weimer wrote: I cannot find documentation of the systemd stub resolver behavior: how it handles search list processing, and how it decides which upstream name servers to query. As I understand the terminology the "stub resolver" in systemd-resolved refers to the

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change Proposal: ELN Buildroot and Compose V4

2020-04-07 Thread Tom Hughes via devel
On 06/04/2020 22:53, Stephen Gallagher wrote: Changes in this version of the proposal[2]: * Improve our explanation of why we are doing ELN in the first place I agree that the proposal is now a lot clearer and I certainly see how it furthers the first goral of seeing how Fedora trunk comes

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: ELN Buildroot and Compose

2020-03-24 Thread Tom Hughes via devel
On 24/03/2020 12:08, Vít Ondruch wrote: Dne 24. 03. 20 v 11:43 Tom Hughes via devel napsal(a): On 24/03/2020 09:32, Aleksandra Fedorova wrote: ELN is an evolution of the request for an alternate buildroot for newer x86_64 processors. The reasoning behind that new buildroot was that we

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: ELN Buildroot and Compose

2020-03-24 Thread Tom Hughes via devel
On 24/03/2020 09:32, Aleksandra Fedorova wrote: ELN is an evolution of the request for an alternate buildroot for newer x86_64 processors. The reasoning behind that new buildroot was that we expected that the next major release of RHEL would likely drop support for older hardware and therefore

Re: bodhi web interface (not associating bugzilla entries)

2020-03-19 Thread Tom Hughes via devel
On 19/03/2020 10:19, José Abílio Matos wrote: when entering a new update through the web interface of bodhi I do not get the list of open bugs in bugzilla, no mater the wait. There is a rotating symbol as it happens to select the build(s) but I continues without any output. Are you

Re: Help with gcc10-arm-only problem

2020-03-01 Thread Tom Hughes via devel
On 01/03/2020 16:44, Sergio Pascual wrote: The package build in all arches except in arm an the error is: /builddir/build/BUILD/libindi-1.8.1/libs/indibase/inditelescope.cpp: In member function 'bool INDI::Telescope::processTimeInfo(const char*, const char*)':