Re: F29 System Wide Change: uEFI for ARMv7

2018-07-11 Thread Peter Robinson
On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 9:22 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 10:14:43PM -0700, Thomas Daede wrote: >> On 07/03/2018 05:15 AM, Jan Kurik wrote: >> > Move to uEFI as the default boot mechanism for ARMv7 devices. >> >> Will this work with virt-manager too? Currently,

Update to podofo-0.9.6 in rawhide

2018-07-11 Thread Sandro Mani
Hi I'm updating podofo to version 0.9.6 in rawhide. It carries a soname bump (libpodofo.so.0.9.5 -> libpodofo.so.0.9.6), but all affected packages build without changes against the new version [1]. I'll rebuild all affected packages: calibre gimagereader krename scribus vfrnav Sandro [1]

Re: Packages which use banned tags

2018-07-11 Thread Peter Robinson
On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 9:43 PM, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > The packaging guidelines indicate that the following tags must not be > used: > Copyright: > Packager: > Vendor: > PreReq: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Tags_and_Sections > > I wasn't aware that a

Re: F29 System Wide Change: ZRAM support for ARM images

2018-07-11 Thread Peter Robinson
On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 10:50 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On 07/03/2018 05:39 AM, Jan Kurik wrote: >> = Proposed System Wide Change: ZRAM support for ARM images = >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ZRAMforARMimages >> >> >> Owner(s): >> * Peter Robinson >> >> >> Enable ZRAM for swap on

Re: F29 System Wide Change: uEFI for ARMv7

2018-07-11 Thread Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 10:30:39AM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote: > >> >> > Move to uEFI as the default boot mechanism for ARMv7 devices. > >> >> > >> >> Will this work with virt-manager too? Currently, while aarch64 boots via > >> >> uEFI there, it seems that armv7 is only supported by manually

Re: F29 System Wide Change: ZRAM support for ARM images

2018-07-11 Thread Peter Robinson
>> = Proposed System Wide Change: ZRAM support for ARM images = >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ZRAMforARMimages >> >> >> Owner(s): >> * Peter Robinson >> >> >> Enable ZRAM for swap on ARMv7 and aarch64 pre generated images to >> improve performance and reliability on ARM Single Board

Re: F29 System Wide Change: ZRAM support for ARM images

2018-07-11 Thread Peter Robinson
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 8:50 AM, Peter Robinson wrote: > On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 10:50 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: >> On 07/03/2018 05:39 AM, Jan Kurik wrote: >>> = Proposed System Wide Change: ZRAM support for ARM images = >>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ZRAMforARMimages >>> >>> >>>

Re: F29 System Wide Change: ZRAM support for ARM images

2018-07-11 Thread Peter Robinson
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 10:44 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 08:33:36AM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote: >> >> = Proposed System Wide Change: ZRAM support for ARM images = >> >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ZRAMforARMimages >> >> >> >> >> >> Owner(s): >> >>

Re: F29 System Wide Change: uEFI for ARMv7

2018-07-11 Thread Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 09:03:27AM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote: > On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 9:22 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek > wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 10:14:43PM -0700, Thomas Daede wrote: > >> On 07/03/2018 05:15 AM, Jan Kurik wrote: > >> > Move to uEFI as the default boot mechanism

Re: F29 System Wide Change: uEFI for ARMv7

2018-07-11 Thread Peter Robinson
>> >> > Move to uEFI as the default boot mechanism for ARMv7 devices. >> >> >> >> Will this work with virt-manager too? Currently, while aarch64 boots via >> >> uEFI there, it seems that armv7 is only supported by manually specifying >> >> a kernel and initrd. >> > >> > Ping. >> >> Ping? Who or

Re: F29 System Wide Change: ZRAM support for ARM images

2018-07-11 Thread Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 08:33:36AM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote: > >> = Proposed System Wide Change: ZRAM support for ARM images = > >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ZRAMforARMimages > >> > >> > >> Owner(s): > >> * Peter Robinson > >> > >> > >> Enable ZRAM for swap on ARMv7 and aarch64

Re: F29 System Wide Change: uEFI for ARMv7

2018-07-11 Thread Peter Robinson
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 12:13 AM, Kyle Marek wrote: > On 07/10/2018 04:51 PM, Cole Robinson wrote: >> On 07/10/2018 04:22 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: >>> On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 10:14:43PM -0700, Thomas Daede wrote: On 07/03/2018 05:15 AM, Jan Kurik wrote: > Move to uEFI as

Re: F29 System Wide Change: uEFI for ARMv7

2018-07-11 Thread Peter Robinson
On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 9:51 PM, Cole Robinson wrote: > On 07/10/2018 04:22 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 10:14:43PM -0700, Thomas Daede wrote: >>> On 07/03/2018 05:15 AM, Jan Kurik wrote: Move to uEFI as the default boot mechanism for ARMv7 devices. >>>

Re: libicu 62 update with soname bump in rawhide/F29

2018-07-11 Thread Pete Walter
09.07.2018, 20:34, "Pete Walter" : > Hi, > > I'm updating icu to 62.1 in rawhide and rebuilding anything that links with > libicu. We'll also have a compat package with libicu 61 soname, so I don't > expect much rawhide breakage: anything that is currently built with libicu 61 > but fails to

Re: Orphaning eclipse-xtext and dependencies

2018-07-11 Thread Mat Booth
On 10 July 2018 at 12:30, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote: > eclipse-xtext and its dependencies eclipse-xpand and eclipse-emf-mwe have > just been orphaned. Eclipse SIG has no use of these packages anymore > (despite them being really active upstream), the build system is quite > complicated and they

Re: Packages which use the BuildRoot: directive

2018-07-11 Thread Jason L Tibbitts III
> "JB" == Josh Boyer writes: JB> That's impossible to enforce and unrealistic. I will go as far as "it's somewhat difficult to enforce and idealistic", but no further. JB> We can say that as much as we'd like, but there is nothing we can do JB> to prevent people from syncing from

Re: Packages which use banned tags

2018-07-11 Thread Jason L Tibbitts III
My apologies; after closer inspection I see that dpkg is a false positive. It does match "^Vendor:" but that string occurs inside of a here-document within a section. Will improve the scripting to only look for tags when the rpm parser will be outside of section context. I did fix the other

Re: Packages which use the BuildRoot: directive

2018-07-11 Thread Josh Boyer
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 10:40 AM Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > > > "JB" == Josh Boyer writes: > > JB> That's impossible to enforce and unrealistic. > > I will go as far as "it's somewhat difficult to enforce and idealistic", > but no further. > > JB> We can say that as much as we'd like, but

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

2018-07-11 Thread David Tardon
On Tue, 2018-07-10 at 08:42 +0100, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > 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 > > >

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

2018-07-11 Thread Kevin Kofler
Igor Gnatenko wrote: > A lot of packages in 2018 are not written in C/C++ … and this is the problem that needs fixing. It is just a PITA to have packages dragging in more and more interpreters and/or language runtimes. The slowness and lack of compile-time type safety of interpreted languages

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

2018-07-11 Thread Jan Kratochvil
On Wed, 11 Jul 2018 18:26:23 +0200, Josh Stone wrote: > So I hear you like compile-time safety... > > No, I don't seriously want to get into a language comparison here, > except to say that it's reasonable for the world to expand beyond C/C++, There is no C/C++ language. There are two

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

2018-07-11 Thread Josh Stone
On 07/11/2018 10:01 AM, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > On Wed, 11 Jul 2018 18:26:23 +0200, Josh Stone wrote: >> So I hear you like compile-time safety... >> >> No, I don't seriously want to get into a language comparison here, >> except to say that it's reasonable for the world to expand beyond C/C++, >

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

2018-07-11 Thread Kevin Kofler
Jan Kratochvil wrote: > There is no C/C++ language. There are two orthogonal languages, C and > C++. (And some people say C++11 and C++03 are also orthogonal.) Yes, C and C++ are divergent languages (I wouldn't call them "orthogonal", but they are definitely different things), but gcc-c++

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

2018-07-11 Thread Andrew Lutomirski
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 10:08 AM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote: > > On 07/11/2018 06:37 PM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: > > From my perspective as an occasional Fedora packager, I'm regularly > > surprised by just how long it takes for Koji builders to install > > dependencies. I've never tried to dig in

Re: Packages which use the BuildRoot: directive

2018-07-11 Thread Ben Rosser
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 12:16 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: > Because nobody is communicating with upstream and fixing it there. In > some cases it'll be met with a shrug (like changelogs). In many, it > might actually result in upstream making a similar fix. What is "upstream", though? Some

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

2018-07-11 Thread Colin Walters
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018, at 12:37 PM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: > > (Hmm. Some future version of rpm/dnf could get really fancy and > *reflink* > package contents into the build chroot rather than untarring them every > time.) Try `rpm-ostree ex container` today and see just how fast it is to

Re: F29 System Wide Change: ZRAM support for ARM images

2018-07-11 Thread Chris Murphy
The proposal suggests using zram device for swap, but doesn't say if there will be a secondary swap on disk. Zram uses memory rather than a drive partition as backing, so it's useful for /tmp instead of tmpfs; and also when there isn't a swap partition on the local drive. But if there is a

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

2018-07-11 Thread Mikolaj Izdebski
On 07/11/2018 06:37 PM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: > From my perspective as an occasional Fedora packager, I'm regularly > surprised by just how long it takes for Koji builders to install > dependencies. I've never tried to dig in too far, but it looks like the > builders download package metadata,

Re: Packages which use the BuildRoot: directive

2018-07-11 Thread Tomasz Torcz
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 12:16:45PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: > > > maintain their specs wherever they want, but they should be prepared that > > Fedora will change their specs and they should not overwrite such changes. > > I said that as well. What you're missing is the part where people > tell

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

2018-07-11 Thread Mikolaj Izdebski
On 07/11/2018 07:31 PM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: > On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 10:08 AM, Mikolaj Izdebski > wrote: >> >> On 07/11/2018 06:37 PM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: >>> From my perspective as an occasional Fedora packager, I'm regularly >>> surprised by just how long it takes for Koji builders

Re: Packages which use the BuildRoot: directive

2018-07-11 Thread Matthew Miller
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 01:39:51PM -0400, Ben Rosser wrote: > We have been telling people for a while now that they don't "own" > their packages. Making it easier for people to maintain their packages > outside of dist-git and (effectively) ignore changes from > proven-packagers seems to take us

Re: Fedora 29 Mass Rebuild

2018-07-11 Thread Mohan Boddu
Hi all, We are delaying the mass rebuild as people are still working on binutils 2.31 change (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/BINUTILS231). At this point, we want to re-evaluate the situation on Friday, 13 July 2018 and based on where we are, we will either proceed with the mass rebuild

[Test-Announce] Fedora 27 Candidate Update-20180711.1812 Available Now!

2018-07-11 Thread rawhide
According to the schedule [1], Fedora 27 Candidate Update-20180711.1812 is now available for testing. Please help us complete all the validation testing! For more information on release validation testing, see: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Release_validation_test_plan Test coverage

Re: F29 System Wide Change: ZRAM support for ARM images

2018-07-11 Thread Chris Murphy
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 11:01 AM, Chris Murphy wrote: > The proposal suggests using zram device for swap, but doesn't say if > there will be a secondary swap on disk. > > Zram uses memory rather than a drive partition as backing, so it's > useful for /tmp instead of tmpfs; and also when there

Re: Fedora c++ default build flags

2018-07-11 Thread Dan Horák
On Wed, 11 Jul 2018 14:00:40 +0200 mskal...@redhat.com wrote: > Hi, > during a discussion with upstream (MongoDB) they asked me about > default Fedora C/C++ build flags. And I don't remember all Fedora > System Wide changes where it was introduced,... so is there some > place where it's

F29 Self Contained Change: Update comps to use Python 3

2018-07-11 Thread Ben Cotton
= Proposed self contained change = https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Update_comps_to_use_python3 * Owner: churchyard Change the comps groups python-classroom, engineering-and-scientific, development-libs, cloud-management, font-design, mysql, robotics-suite, authoring-and-publishing and

Re: Packages which use the BuildRoot: directive

2018-07-11 Thread Josh Boyer
On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 8:27 PM Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > > Unfortunately it seems that many of these packages have had the > BuildRoot tags _added back in_ after previously having them removed. A > number of the commits even delete existing changelog entries, a sure > sign that someone is

Re: Update to podofo-0.9.6 in rawhide

2018-07-11 Thread Sandro Mani
On 11.07.2018 11:35, Sandro Mani wrote: Hi I'm updating podofo to version 0.9.6 in rawhide. It carries a soname bump (libpodofo.so.0.9.5 -> libpodofo.so.0.9.6), but all affected packages build without changes against the new version [1]. I'll rebuild all affected packages: calibre

Rawhide Rebase Warning to Package Maintainers

2018-07-11 Thread Ben Cotton
Greetings, This e-mail is intended to inform you about the upcoming Bugzilla changes happening on 2018-08-14 (Rawhide bug rebase) and what you need to do, if anything. We will be automatically changing the version for most rawhide bugs to Fedora 29. This will result in regular bugs reported

Fedora c++ default build flags

2018-07-11 Thread mskalick
Hi, during a discussion with upstream (MongoDB) they asked me about default Fedora C/C++ build flags. And I don't remember all Fedora System Wide changes where it was introduced,... so is there some place where it's described? Main upstream question was: """ I don't know what is in those various

Flock Update - ~1 month away

2018-07-11 Thread Brian (bex) Exelbierd
An Update on Flock * New Sponsor Some of you may have noticed that the ARM Foundation is now a Gold Sponsor for Flock. * Tickets and T-shirts My tardiness at getting t-shirts ordered is to your BENEFIT. The tickets that have t-shirts associated with them have been extended until tomorrow, 12

Re: Packages which use the BuildRoot: directive

2018-07-11 Thread Josh Boyer
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 11:58 AM Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 5:02 PM Josh Boyer wrote: >> >> On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 10:40 AM Jason L Tibbitts III >> wrote: >> > >> > > "JB" == Josh Boyer writes: >> > >> > JB> That's impossible to enforce and unrealistic. >> > >> > I

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

2018-07-11 Thread Andrew Lutomirski
On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 1:13 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek < zbys...@in.waw.pl> wrote: > On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 06:03:33PM +0200, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 5:52 PM Kevin Kofler > wrote: > > > > > Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > > > As per Changes/Remove GCC from BuildRoot > >

Re: Packages which use the BuildRoot: directive

2018-07-11 Thread Igor Gnatenko
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 5:02 PM Josh Boyer wrote: > On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 10:40 AM Jason L Tibbitts III > wrote: > > > > > "JB" == Josh Boyer writes: > > > > JB> That's impossible to enforce and unrealistic. > > > > I will go as far as "it's somewhat difficult to enforce and idealistic",

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

2018-07-11 Thread Adam Williamson
On Wed, 2018-07-11 at 16:37 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > A lot of packages in 2018 are not written in C/C++ > > … and this is the problem that needs fixing. > > It is just a PITA to have packages dragging in more and more interpreters > and/or language runtimes. The

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

2018-07-11 Thread Josh Stone
On 07/11/2018 07:37 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Igor Gnatenko wrote: >> A lot of packages in 2018 are not written in C/C++ > > … and this is the problem that needs fixing. > > It is just a PITA to have packages dragging in more and more interpreters > and/or language runtimes. The slowness and

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

2018-07-11 Thread Kevin Fenzi
On 07/11/2018 10:53 AM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote: > On 07/11/2018 07:31 PM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 10:08 AM, Mikolaj Izdebski >> wrote: >>> >>> The slowest parts of setting up chroot is writing packages to disk, >>> synchronously. This part can be speeded up a lot by

Re: Packages which use the BuildRoot: directive

2018-07-11 Thread Kevin Fenzi
On 07/11/2018 10:39 AM, Ben Rosser wrote: > On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 12:16 PM, Josh Boyer > wrote: >> Because nobody is communicating with upstream and fixing it there. In >> some cases it'll be met with a shrug (like changelogs). In many, it >> might actually result in upstream making a

Re: Packages which use the BuildRoot: directive

2018-07-11 Thread Josh Boyer
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 1:40 PM Ben Rosser wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 12:16 PM, Josh Boyer > wrote: > > Because nobody is communicating with upstream and fixing it there. In > > some cases it'll be met with a shrug (like changelogs). In many, it > > might actually result in upstream

Re: Packages which use the BuildRoot: directive

2018-07-11 Thread Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 02:12:37PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 01:39:51PM -0400, Ben Rosser wrote: > > We have been telling people for a while now that they don't "own" > > their packages. Making it easier for people to maintain their packages > > outside of dist-git and

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

2018-07-11 Thread Mikolaj Izdebski
On 07/11/2018 09:26 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On 07/11/2018 10:53 AM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote: >> On 07/11/2018 07:31 PM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: >>> On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 10:08 AM, Mikolaj Izdebski >>> wrote: The slowest parts of setting up chroot is writing packages to disk,

Re: Packages which use the BuildRoot: directive

2018-07-11 Thread Josh Boyer
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 2:13 PM Matthew Miller wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 01:39:51PM -0400, Ben Rosser wrote: > > We have been telling people for a while now that they don't "own" > > their packages. Making it easier for people to maintain their packages > > outside of dist-git and

Re: linker errors (since binutils-2.30.90-1.fc29?) : _end: invalid version 21 (max 0), error adding symbols: bad value

2018-07-11 Thread Adam Williamson
On Mon, 2018-07-09 at 21:17 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote: > See bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/1599521 > > Haven't been able to successfully build anything in rawhide recently. FreeIPA folks also having trouble: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1600035 -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA

[Fedora-packaging] Schedule for Thursday's FPC Meeting (2018-07-12 16:00 UTC)

2018-07-11 Thread James Antill
  Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FPC meeting Thursday at 2018-07-12 16:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on irc.freenode.net.   Local time information (via. uitime): = Day: Thursday == 2018-07-12 09:00 PDT  US/Pacific

Re: Packages which use banned tags

2018-07-11 Thread Ken Dreyer
On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 2:43 PM, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > I guess that has to be another of those "nobody > can touch this" packages. Hey, c'mon, Ceph doesn't bite (that badly...) Seriously though, we do maintain ceph.spec upstream in http://github.com/ceph/ceph, in coordination with SUSE

Re: Packages which use the BuildRoot: directive

2018-07-11 Thread Emmanuel Seyman
* Kevin Fenzi [11/07/2018 12:47] : > > Barring that, I think we will just continue to have people make changes > and them get overwritten. Does this include changes that were made for security reasons (disabling a compile-time option, doing a dangerous chown/chmod call, ...)? If so, I'm not very

Haskell failures: relocation refers to local symbol "" [1], which is defined in a discarded section

2018-07-11 Thread Elliott Sales de Andrade
Hello all, All Haskell packages seem to be broken now, e.g., ghc-optional-args [1] or anything on koschei [2]. They all fail like this: + ghc --make -no-user-package-db -dynamic Setup [1 of 1] Compiling Main ( Setup.hs, Setup.o ) Linking Setup ...

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

2018-07-11 Thread Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 08:27:22PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 12:26:01PM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > On 07/11/2018 10:53 AM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote: > > > On 07/11/2018 07:31 PM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: > > >> On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 10:08 AM, Mikolaj

Re: Packages which use the BuildRoot: directive

2018-07-11 Thread Kevin Kofler
Ben Rosser wrote: > Only if you consider packaging metadata to be part of "the code base". > I guess that's the crux of the issue, some people want to treat it > this way and others don't. Packaging metadata has no business being part of the upstream code. Even for code bases where I am both the

Re: Packages which use the BuildRoot: directive

2018-07-11 Thread Ben Rosser
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 3:42 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: > I disagree. "Ownership" within Fedora is one aspect we've tried to > address, but we're pretending that Fedora "owns" the code base which > is a falsity. There are many more people involved and in this > specific kind of situation, pretending

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

2018-07-11 Thread Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 12:26:01PM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On 07/11/2018 10:53 AM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote: > > On 07/11/2018 07:31 PM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: > >> On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 10:08 AM, Mikolaj Izdebski > >> wrote: > >>> > >>> The slowest parts of setting up chroot is writing

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

2018-07-11 Thread Kevin Fenzi
On 07/11/2018 12:57 PM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote: > On 07/11/2018 09:26 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: >> On 07/11/2018 10:53 AM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote: >>> On 07/11/2018 07:31 PM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 10:08 AM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote: > > The slowest parts

Re: F29 System Wide Change: OpenLDAP without Non-threaded Libraries

2018-07-11 Thread Florian Weimer
On 07/10/2018 10:41 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 10:28:40PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: On 07/10/2018 10:19 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 11:26:02AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: On 07/03/2018 10:13 AM, Jan Kurik wrote: =

[Test-Announce] Re: Fedora 27 Candidate Update-20180711.1812 Available Now!

2018-07-11 Thread Adam Williamson
On Wed, 2018-07-11 at 19:03 +, rawh...@fedoraproject.org wrote: > According to the schedule [1], Fedora 27 Candidate Update-20180711.1812 is now > available for testing. Uhhh...OK? This obviously shouldn't have happened. I'm not sure what this compose is or why it somehow passed all the

Re: Packages which use the BuildRoot: directive

2018-07-11 Thread Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 12:47:40PM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > The guidelines currently say: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Spec_Maintenance_and_Canonicity > > "Fedora's git repository is the canonical location for Fedora spec > files. Maintainers MUST expect that other

[Bug 1599926] perl-BSON-v1.6.7 is available

2018-07-11 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1599926 Petr Pisar changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED Fixed In Version|

[Bug 1599926] perl-BSON-v1.6.7 is available

2018-07-11 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1599926 --- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System --- perl-BSON-1.6.7-1.fc28 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 28. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-e40d1a81b2 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list

[Bug 1599930] perl-Net-Amazon-S3-0.83 is available

2018-07-11 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1599930 Petr Pisar changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Fixed In Version|

[Bug 1599931] perl-MongoDB-v2.0.1 is available

2018-07-11 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1599931 Petr Pisar changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Fixed In Version|

Rawhide Rebase Warning to Package Maintainers

2018-07-11 Thread Ben Cotton
Greetings, This e-mail is intended to inform you about the upcoming Bugzilla changes happening on 2018-08-14 (Rawhide bug rebase) and what you need to do, if anything. We will be automatically changing the version for most rawhide bugs to Fedora 29. This will result in regular bugs reported

Re: Fedora 29 Mass Rebuild

2018-07-11 Thread Mohan Boddu
Hi all, We are delaying the mass rebuild as people are still working on binutils 2.31 change (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/BINUTILS231). At this point, we want to re-evaluate the situation on Friday, 13 July 2018 and based on where we are, we will either proceed with the mass rebuild

[Bug 1596132] CVE-2018-10860 perl-Archive-Zip: Directory traversal in Archive::Zip [fedora-all]

2018-07-11 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1596132 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #4 from

F29 Self Contained Change: Update comps to use Python 3

2018-07-11 Thread Ben Cotton
= Proposed self contained change = https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Update_comps_to_use_python3 * Owner: churchyard Change the comps groups python-classroom, engineering-and-scientific, development-libs, cloud-management, font-design, mysql, robotics-suite, authoring-and-publishing and

[Bug 1600090] New: Bad license in doc/jp/Class-Data-Inheritable.pod

2018-07-11 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1600090 Bug ID: 1600090 Summary: Bad license in doc/jp/Class-Data-Inheritable.pod Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: perl-Class-Data-Inheritable Assignee: tcall...@redhat.com

[Bug 1600131] New: Bad license in t/dclone.t

2018-07-11 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1600131 Bug ID: 1600131 Summary: Bad license in t/dclone.t Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: perl-Clone Assignee: tcall...@redhat.com Reporter: ppi...@redhat.com

[Bug 1592742] perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-3.62 is available

2018-07-11 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1592742 --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System --- perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-3.68-1.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail

[Bug 1593043] perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-3.64 is available

2018-07-11 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1593043 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System --- perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-3.68-1.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail

[Bug 1594468] perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-3.66 is available

2018-07-11 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1594468 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System --- perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-3.68-1.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail

[Bug 1595713] perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-3.68 is available

2018-07-11 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1595713 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System --- perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-3.68-1.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail

[Bug 1406558] build perl-Coro for EPEL7

2018-07-11 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1406558 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #8 from

[389-devel] please review: PR 49847 - Add SASL mapping functionality to CLI/UI

2018-07-11 Thread Mark Reynolds
https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/49847 ___ 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to 389-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html

[Bug 1594468] perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-3.66 is available

2018-07-11 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1594468 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System --- perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-3.68-1.fc28 has been pushed to the Fedora 28 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail

[Bug 1595713] perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-3.68 is available

2018-07-11 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1595713 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System --- perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-3.68-1.fc28 has been pushed to the Fedora 28 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail

[Bug 1592742] perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-3.62 is available

2018-07-11 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1592742 --- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System --- perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-3.68-1.fc28 has been pushed to the Fedora 28 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail

[Bug 1594467] perl-Devel-Size-0.82 is available

2018-07-11 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1594467 --- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Devel-Size-0.82-1.fc28 has been pushed to the Fedora 28 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You

[Bug 1593043] perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-3.64 is available

2018-07-11 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1593043 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System --- perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-3.68-1.fc28 has been pushed to the Fedora 28 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail

[Bug 1600305] New: perl-File-Temp-0.2308 is available

2018-07-11 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1600305 Bug ID: 1600305 Summary: perl-File-Temp-0.2308 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: perl-File-Temp Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged Assignee:

[389-devel] 389 DS nightly 2018-07-12 - 90% PASS

2018-07-11 Thread vashirov
https://fedorapeople.org/groups/389ds/ci/nightly/2018/07/12/report-389-ds-base-1.4.0.11-20180711git2fa0408.fc28.x86_64.html ___ 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to

[Bug 1598259] perl-Config-Perl-V-0.30 is available

2018-07-11 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1598259 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #4 from

[Bug 1600315] New: perl-Test2-Suite-0.000115 is available

2018-07-11 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1600315 Bug ID: 1600315 Summary: perl-Test2-Suite-0.000115 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: perl-Test2-Suite Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged Assignee:

[Bug 1599926] perl-BSON-v1.6.7 is available

2018-07-11 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1599926 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #3 from

[Bug 1596132] CVE-2018-10860 perl-Archive-Zip: Directory traversal in Archive::Zip [fedora-all]

2018-07-11 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1596132 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Archive-Zip-1.60-3.fc28 has been pushed to the Fedora 28 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See