On 3/4/19 17:43, Kalev Lember wrote:
It's GNOME 3.31.92 release this week. We have a f30-gnome side tag as
usual; if you are helping with builds please do F30 builds with 'fedpkg
build --target f30-gnome'. I'll collect all the builds from the side tag
and submit a megaupdate to Bodhi later this
On Thu, Mar 07, 2019 at 12:13:22PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Richard W. M. Jones:
>
> > $ sudo dnf install glibc-headers.i686
> …
> > Downgrading:
>
> That looks like a bug in itself.
>
> The last time I looked at something similar, I saw this: RPM would not
> adjust a pre-existing
On 3/2/19 5:02 PM, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 01, 2019 at 06:57:48PM -0800, Tom Stellard wrote:
>> On 03/01/2019 01:19 PM, Ben Cotton wrote:
>>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/GatingRawhideSinglePackageUpdates
>>>
>>> == Summary ==
>>> We want to gate packages on test
Great, thanks. I took a look and did a review. I have a couple minor
tweaks I'd like to see, then I'll go ahead and merge it (and
backport/sideport it to the 8.x and 11.x branches)
On Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 6:44 AM Elliott Sales de Andrade
wrote:
>
> On Thu, 28 Feb 2019 at 16:24, Stephen Gallagher
On Thu, Mar 07, 2019 at 10:24:00PM +0800, Zamir SUN wrote:
>
>
> On 3/2/19 5:02 PM, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 01, 2019 at 06:57:48PM -0800, Tom Stellard wrote:
> >> On 03/01/2019 01:19 PM, Ben Cotton wrote:
> >>>
On Thu, 28 Feb 2019 at 16:24, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 7:02 PM Elliott Sales de Andrade
> wrote:
> >
> > Let's try this again, but CC'ing the package owners.
> >
> > On 2019-02-17 9:12 p.m., Elliott Sales de Andrade wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Sorry for resurrecting
On 3/7/19 1:13 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
* Richard W. M. Jones:
$ sudo dnf install glibc-headers.i686
…
Downgrading:
That looks like a bug in itself.
The last time I looked at something similar, I saw this: RPM would not
adjust a pre-existing symbolic link to a new target very late in the
$ sudo dnf install glibc-headers.i686
Last metadata expiration check: 0:53:05 ago on Thu 07 Mar 2019 09:42:26 GMT.
Dependencies resolved.
Package Architecture Version Repository
On 07. 03. 19 9:33, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Thu, Mar 07, 2019 at 09:15:23AM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 07. 03. 19 9:11, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
Related to:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Mass_Python_2_Package_Removal
I have some packages which build python 2 subpackages,
On Thu, Mar 07, 2019 at 08:29:52AM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 07, 2019 at 08:02:00AM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > DEBUG util.py:554: BUILDSTDERR: Error:
> > DEBUG util.py:554: BUILDSTDERR: Problem: package
> > libvirt-daemon-kvm-5.1.0-1.fc30.x86_64 requires
> >
On Thu, Mar 07, 2019 at 09:47:51AM +, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 07, 2019 at 08:29:52AM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 07, 2019 at 08:02:00AM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > > DEBUG util.py:554: BUILDSTDERR: Error:
> > > DEBUG util.py:554: BUILDSTDERR:
Actually it's more subtle. It didn't remove the files, but it did
break something really fundamental, perhaps execv? Perhaps new
binaries cannot link with the slightly older glibc?
$ echo /usr/bin/ls
/usr/bin/ls
$ /usr/bin/ls
-bash: /usr/bin/ls: No such file or directory
Rich.
--
Richard
Related to:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Mass_Python_2_Package_Removal
I have some packages which build python 2 subpackages, but they are
not "python packages" as such. One example is nbdkit:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1225638
This package isn't listed
Hi,
On 07-03-19 11:45, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
Actually it's more subtle. It didn't remove the files, but it did
break something really fundamental, perhaps execv? Perhaps new
binaries cannot link with the slightly older glibc?
$ echo /usr/bin/ls
/usr/bin/ls
$ /usr/bin/ls
-bash:
On 07. 03. 19 9:11, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
Related to:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Mass_Python_2_Package_Removal
I have some packages which build python 2 subpackages, but they are
not "python packages" as such. One example is nbdkit:
On Thu, Mar 07, 2019 at 09:37:12AM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 07. 03. 19 9:33, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> >On Thu, Mar 07, 2019 at 09:15:23AM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> >>On 07. 03. 19 9:11, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> >>>
> >>>Related to:
>
On Thu, Mar 07, 2019 at 09:15:23AM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 07. 03. 19 9:11, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> >
> >Related to:
> >https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Mass_Python_2_Package_Removal
> >
> >I have some packages which build python 2 subpackages, but they are
> >not "python
DEBUG util.py:554: BUILDSTDERR: Error:
DEBUG util.py:554: BUILDSTDERR: Problem: package
libvirt-daemon-kvm-5.1.0-1.fc30.x86_64 requires libvirt-daemon-driver-storage =
5.1.0-1.fc30, but none of the providers can be installed
DEBUG util.py:554: BUILDSTDERR: - package
On Thu, Mar 07, 2019 at 08:02:00AM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> DEBUG util.py:554: BUILDSTDERR: Error:
> DEBUG util.py:554: BUILDSTDERR: Problem: package
> libvirt-daemon-kvm-5.1.0-1.fc30.x86_64 requires libvirt-daemon-driver-storage
> = 5.1.0-1.fc30, but none of the providers can be
Am Donnerstag, den 07.03.2019, 09:53 + schrieb Richard W.M. Jones:
> On Thu, Mar 07, 2019 at 09:47:51AM +, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 07, 2019 at 08:29:52AM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > > On Thu, Mar 07, 2019 at 08:02:00AM +, Richard W.M. Jones
> > > wrote:
> > >
On Thu, 2019-03-07 at 12:38 +0800, Jens-Ulrik Petersen wrote:
> Thanks to Sundeep, who has already started and worked on this.
> So hopefully we will have a working py3 zanata-python-client for F30+ soon.
> :-)
Nice & thanks in advance! :) Can definitely help testing the new version once
it
* Richard W. M. Jones:
> $ sudo dnf install glibc-headers.i686
…
> Downgrading:
That looks like a bug in itself.
The last time I looked at something similar, I saw this: RPM would not
adjust a pre-existing symbolic link to a new target very late in the
transaction. Like deleting old files
Hi Miro, sorry for a late reply: I wanted to think it through. Comments inline.
On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 4:43 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> On 20. 02. 19 23:24, Tomas Tomecek wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > at DevConf.cz, we have introduced a new project: packit [1] [2].
> > [1]
For your information:
the python-metar package has changed license from MIT to BSD,
starting with release 1.7.0.
see:
https://github.com/python-metar/python-metar/releases
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-metar
best regards,
Jos de Kloe.
___
* Panu Matilainen:
> On 3/7/19 1:13 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> * Richard W. M. Jones:
>>
>>> $ sudo dnf install glibc-headers.i686
>> …
>>> Downgrading:
>>
>> That looks like a bug in itself.
>>
>> The last time I looked at something similar, I saw this: RPM would not
>> adjust a pre-existing
On Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 10:07 AM Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 07, 2019 at 10:24:00PM +0800, Zamir SUN wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 3/2/19 5:02 PM, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> > > On Fri, Mar 01, 2019 at 06:57:48PM -0800, Tom Stellard wrote:
> > >> On 03/01/2019 01:19 PM, Ben Cotton wrote:
>
On Wed, Mar 6, 2019 at 6:39 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On 3/6/19 4:14 PM, Richard Shaw wrote:
> >
> > New since the last couple of weeks but I've been more active working on
> > FTBFS issues so can't say exactly when it started. It's never been super
> > speedy but also never been this painful.
>
>
Michael Zhang wrote:
> Recently, someone advised me that I have to build the binaries from the
> source code in the %install phase. That is to say that I have to make it
> transparent how the binaries (ex. jar) are built.
See
I’m a new maintainer and I’ve been trying to get my package, Open Liberty, into the Fedora repositories.
I currently build my rpms in a public Travis CI build. I do so by using wget to pull a zipped up pre-built openliberty package from
On Thu, 7 Mar 2019 at 15:31, Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> On 07. 03. 19 21:19, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > On 3/7/19 11:35 AM, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote:
> >> On Thu, 7 Mar 2019 at 12:17, Fedora Rawhide Report
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20190217.n.0
> >>> NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20190306.n.1
> >>>
Hello,
I'm trying to build the new python-twisted 18.9.0, but it fails on 32 bits
architecture:
BUILDSTDERR: In file included from /usr/include/asm/socket.h:1,
BUILDSTDERR: from /usr/include/bits/socket.h:393,
BUILDSTDERR: from /usr/include/sys/socket.h:33,
On 3/7/19 2:23 PM, Robert-André Mauchin wrote:
Hello,
I'm trying to build the new python-twisted 18.9.0, but it fails on 32 bits
architecture:
BUILDSTDERR: In file included from /usr/include/asm/socket.h:1,
BUILDSTDERR: from /usr/include/bits/socket.h:393,
BUILDSTDERR:
* Robert-André Mauchin:
> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=33279740
Since this has come up repeatedly in other contexts leading to
confusion:
This is not an x32 build. I don't think Fedora has any x32 builders.
x32 is a distinct, incompatible architecture from i386/i686 and
On Fri, 8 Mar 2019 at 00:37, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
[..]
> We don't push to mirrors. They sync from either our main servers or a
> tier 1 or tier 2 mirror which also pull/rsync from the master mirrors.
> This means it will take time to get stuff down and out. So like I
> said.. do not expect
On Thu, 7 Mar 2019 at 12:17, Fedora Rawhide Report
wrote:
>
> OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20190217.n.0
> NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20190306.n.1
>
> = SUMMARY =
> Added images:13
> Dropped images: 7
> Added packages: 128
> Dropped packages:174
> Upgraded packages: 1745
>
On 3/7/19 11:35 AM, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Mar 2019 at 12:17, Fedora Rawhide Report
> wrote:
>>
>> OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20190217.n.0
>> NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20190306.n.1
>>
>> = SUMMARY =
>> Added images:13
>> Dropped images: 7
>> Added packages: 128
>> Dropped
On 07. 03. 19 21:19, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On 3/7/19 11:35 AM, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote:
On Thu, 7 Mar 2019 at 12:17, Fedora Rawhide Report
wrote:
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20190217.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20190306.n.1
= SUMMARY =
Added images:13
Dropped images: 7
Added packages:
Am 07.03.19 um 19:49 schrieb Michael Zhang:
> So after tinkering around, I can incorporate the building of the
> openliberty.zip into the Travis CI build but I cannot directly add it into the
> %install phase of the rpm spec file. Would that be fine?
To the best of my knowledge all building from
On Thu, Mar 07, 2019 at 06:49:12PM +, Michael Zhang wrote:
> Recently, someone advised me that I have to build the binaries from the
> source code in the %install phase. That is to say that I have to make it
> transparent how the binaries (ex. jar) are built.
As I understand it, in Debian,
On Thu, 2019-03-07 at 18:49 +, Michael Zhang wrote:
> Recently, someone advised me that I have to build the binaries from
> the source code in the %install phase.
The building should happein the %build phase. The %install phase is
where the resulting artifacts are copied into the buildroot.
A new Fedora Atomic Host update is available via an OSTree update:
Version: 29.20190306.2
Commit(x86_64): 57297da7779ed8b7b7b9a0f39f6f12a703000a40cf451770fe23749a5558f60d
Commit(aarch64):
df56dcbc9ae6c0653122753b835668b4d729ea3943cb2541114dabd9c1d271bb
Commit(ppc64le):
On Thu, 7 Mar 2019 at 19:00, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote:
>
> -- Tomasz Kłoczko | Tel: 0774 1209067 | LinkedIn: http://lnkd.in/FXPWxH
> On Thu, 7 Mar 2019 at 20:37, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> [..]
> > > What ground/public repos do you mean here? The master mirror is
> > > definitely updated. It's a large
-- Tomasz Kłoczko | Tel: 0774 1209067 | LinkedIn: http://lnkd.in/FXPWxH
On Thu, 7 Mar 2019 at 20:37, Miro Hrončok wrote:
[..]
> > What ground/public repos do you mean here? The master mirror is
> > definitely updated. It's a large pile of changes, so other mirrors may
> > take a bit longer than
Dne 06. 03. 19 v 14:00 Mikolaj Izdebski napsal(a):
> - create a proper modulemd document
> - build some (zero or more) RPM packages using rpmbuild
> - create YUM repodata from built packages using createrepo_c
> - attach modulemd to repodata using modifyrepo_c
Yes. But the first and last steps
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1686305
Bug ID: 1686305
Summary: perl-Data-ObjectDriver-0.16 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-Data-ObjectDriver
Keywords: FutureFeature,
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1680399
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jples...@redhat.com
Fixed In
On 05. 03. 19 0:03, Miro Hrončok wrote:
The following list of builds has "Ran 0 tests in 0.000s" in their build log.
It usually indicates a "Potemkin %check" [0] with python setup.py test without
actual tests.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potemkin_village
See also:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1680399
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |MODIFIED
--- Comment #1 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1686247
--- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System ---
perl-Imager-1.011-1.fc30 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 30.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-6a569be710
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1686247
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1686553
Bug ID: 1686553
Summary: perl-HTTP-BrowserDetect-3.22 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-HTTP-BrowserDetect
Keywords:
scfc opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-PAR-Packer` that you
are following:
``
Remove obsolete requirements for %post/%postun scriptlets
``
To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-PAR-Packer/pull-request/1
https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/50269
___
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
The following Fedora EPEL 7 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
205 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-3c9292b62d
condor-8.6.11-1.el7
76 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-b43fdd19c3
vcftools-0.1.16-1.el7
13
jplesnik merged a pull-request against the project: `perl-PAR-Packer` that you
are following.
Merged pull-request:
``
Remove obsolete requirements for %post/%postun scriptlets
``
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-PAR-Packer/pull-request/1
___
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1686247
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #2 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1686178
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #3 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1680399
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #2 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1686595
Bug ID: 1686595
Summary: rt-4.4.4 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: rt
Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
Assignee:
On mardi 5 mars 2019 00:03:28 CET Miro Hrončok wrote:
> eclipseo python-hpack python-hyperframe python-priority
python-hpack, python-hyperframe, python-h2, python-hyperlink, python-priority,
python-towncrier and python-twisted all now have proper tests.
Best regards,
Robert-André
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1686667
Bug ID: 1686667
Summary: perl-Geo-Distance-0.21 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-Geo-Distance
Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
61 matches
Mail list logo
