On 3/11/19 11:48 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Ben Cotton:
>
>> '''-Wformat -Wformat-security -fstack-protector-strong
>> --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -O'
>
> --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 will not affect anything because
> -fstack-protector-strong uses a completely different
Hello,
I have an issue with the update of papirus-icon-theme: in the new version,
symlinks
have replaced what was previously folders and dnf errors out on this:
For example, on the current version:
$ ll /usr/share/icons/Papirus-Light/16x16
total 24K
drwxr-xr-x. 1 root root 73K nov. 6
Dear all,
You are kindly invited to the meeting:
Modularity Team (weekly) on 2019-03-12 from 15:00:00 to 16:00:00 UTC
At fedora-meetin...@irc.freenode.net
The meeting will be about:
Meeting of the Modularity Team.
More information available at: [Modularity Team
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the
FESCo meeting Monday at 15:00UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on
irc.freenode.net.
To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto
or run:
date -d '2019-03-11 15:00 UTC'
Links to all issues to be
On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 7:05 AM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
>
> Hi,
> I just added those chroots to Copr:
> rhelbeta-8-x86_64
> mageia-7-i586
> mageia-7-x86_64
>
> Please be aware that there is no available EPEL for rhelbeta-8-x86_64 yet.
> This chroot is intended for some initial
> bootstraping
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 Hrončok writes:
MH> On 08. 03. 19 21:16, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Mon, 11 Mar 2019 at 05:29, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>
>
> 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
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
On 3/9/19 7:33 PM, Chris wrote:
Thank you both for your fast reply!
> Why do you need to BuildRequire a linting tool? What are you trying
to achieve?
I just use python-flake8 as an OCD way of having my build fail if i fail
pep8 :) It's just used in conjunction of my unit tests.
Running
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-fd699ee2ea
"This update has reached 3 days in testing and can be pushed to stable
now if the maintainer wishes"
Yes I'd like to, but there's no push to batched button!
I guess this is something to do with "Failed to talk to Greenwave."?
Rich.
Missing expected images:
Atomichost qcow2 x86_64
Atomichost raw-xz x86_64
Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check!
10 of 47 required tests failed, 7 results missing
openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING**
below
Unsatisfied gating requirements that could
On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 09:56:35AM +0100, Petr Šabata wrote:
> Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the
> FESCo meeting Monday at 15:00UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on
> irc.freenode.net.
>
> To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at
>
On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 9:23 AM Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-fd699ee2ea
>
> "This update has reached 3 days in testing and can be pushed to stable
> now if the maintainer wishes"
>
> Yes I'd like to, but there's no push to batched button!
> I
Hi,
I just added those chroots to Copr:
rhelbeta-8-x86_64
mageia-7-i586
mageia-7-x86_64
Please be aware that there is no available EPEL for rhelbeta-8-x86_64 yet. This
chroot is intended for some initial
bootstraping and testing prior RHEL 8 release and it will be removed from Copr
once
* Panu Matilainen:
> It's glibc's own %post own scripts that are somehow breaking it. I've
> a minimal reproducer here with glibc 2.29 in /srv/root chroot. The
> bash version is just to show whether bash is alive or not:
Yes, you are right, I had actually looked at this failure a few weeks
ago
On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 6:48 AM Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>
> On Mon, 11 Mar 2019 at 05:29, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> >
> >
> > 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):
> > >>>
On Fri, Mar 08, 2019 at 03:07:09PM -0500, Kaleb Keithley wrote:
> The epoch was inadvertently bumped (not by me) when ceph was rebased to
> 14.x in f30/rawhide.
>
> I reset it to 1 in subsequent builds. Now adamwill is running builds with
> it bumped to 2 again.
>
> I would prefer that it not be
On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 7:35 AM Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 08, 2019 at 03:07:09PM -0500, Kaleb Keithley wrote:
> > The epoch was inadvertently bumped (not by me) when ceph was rebased to
> > 14.x in f30/rawhide.
> >
> > I reset it to 1 in subsequent builds. Now adamwill is running
On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 7:35 AM Daniel P. Berrangé
wrote:
> The ability to have multiple different builds of the same software which
> users can choose between, sounds alot like the use case for modularity.
> Abusing Epoch to try to address this kind of situation feels like a pretty
>
On Sat, Mar 09, 2019 at 06:23:17PM +0100, Sasa Savic wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> TLDR first,
>
> I am:
> * Potential contributor, searching for guidance
> * Good with Python, C# (probably nobody cares) and JS, basics of C/C++
> * Experienced with everything above sys engineering (cli/gui, f/s webdev,
On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 09:29:52AM -0400, Kaleb Keithley wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 7:35 AM Daniel P. Berrangé
> wrote:
>
> > The ability to have multiple different builds of the same software which
> > users can choose between, sounds alot like the use case for modularity.
> > Abusing
On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 8:22 AM Neal Gompa wrote:
> Heck, the spec file
> that is in Fedora is basically an openSUSE spec with Fedora
> conditionals in it.
>
The ceph.spec file in Fedora is based on the upstream ceph.spec.in file;
not on anything in/from openSUSE.
The upstream ceph.spec.in
On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 09:56:35AM +0100, Petr Šabata wrote:
> Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the
> FESCo meeting Monday at 15:00UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on
> irc.freenode.net.
>
> To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at
>
Noted,
I'll take this portion out. :)
Chris
On Mon., Mar. 11, 2019, 6:00 a.m. Petr Viktorin,
wrote:
> On 3/9/19 7:33 PM, Chris wrote:
> > Thank you both for your fast reply!
> >
> > > Why do you need to BuildRequire a linting tool? What are you trying
> > to achieve?
> >
> > I just use
On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 9:12 AM Kaleb Keithley wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 8:22 AM Neal Gompa wrote:
>>
>> Heck, the spec file
>> that is in Fedora is basically an openSUSE spec with Fedora
>> conditionals in it.
>
>
> The ceph.spec file in Fedora is based on the upstream
On 11/03/19 12:31 +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Can somebody please enlighten me, how to update Rawhide after branching
> and not using --nogpgcheck?
Good question; have observed this over several (if not all since
to-be-f26 based Rawhide) jumps like that, and always have solved this
inconvenience
On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 12:23 PM Neal Gompa wrote:
> I don't remember how Plague handles this anymore (forgive me, but I
> haven't interacted with Plague since 2005!), but both Koji and OBS
> don't care if the Epoch goes up or down. Koji uses NVR as a key
> (without Epoch), and OBS freely allows
On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 11:00 AM Petr Viktorin wrote:
>
> On 3/9/19 7:33 PM, Chris wrote:
> > Thank you both for your fast reply!
> >
> > > Why do you need to BuildRequire a linting tool? What are you trying
> > to achieve?
> >
> > I just use python-flake8 as an OCD way of having my build fail
On 3/11/19 7:31 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> 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.
On Mon, 2019-03-11 at 08:22 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-fd699ee2ea
>
> "This update has reached 3 days in testing and can be pushed to
> stable
> now if the maintainer wishes"
>
> Yes I'd like to, but there's no push to batched button!
On Mon, 2019-03-11 at 10:35 -0400, Randy Barlow wrote:
> On Mon, 2019-03-11 at 08:22 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-fd699ee2ea
> >
> > "This update has reached 3 days in testing and can be pushed to
> > stable
> > now if the maintainer
On 08. 03. 19 19:29, Miro Hrončok wrote:
Due to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Sphinx2 we will be removing
python2-sphinx and other related packages on Monday (2019-03-11).
Done.
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
Is the expected workflow to be that I'd put these two lines to my spec file?
%generate_buildrequires
some-tool generate-rpm-buildreqs %{_builddir}
I'm interested if:
1. Generators will be separated from RPM codebase.
2. What the interface b/w a generator and rpm tool will be.
3. What are the
On 11/03/19 15:01 +0100, Jan Pokorný wrote:
> On 11/03/19 12:31 +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>> Can somebody please enlighten me, how to update Rawhide after branching
>> and not using --nogpgcheck?
>
> Good question; have observed this over several (if not all since
> to-be-f26 based Rawhide) jumps
On Fri, 2019-03-08 at 16:19 -0600, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> * Bodhi shouldn't be involved here as this would be restricted to
> rawhide.
Just a note that we do have plans to use Bodhi to manage Rawhide in the
future, and will hopefully have it doing this in 2019.
Bodhi is not currently
> All that's broken is a 3rd party's assumption that their Epoch setting
> is greater than Fedora's. Assuming Ceph want to keep using Epoch in
> this way, upstream can simply bump their Epoch again to be greater than
> Fedora's new Epoch.
Or bump their Epoch to something much less likely to
> On March 11, 2019 at 3:28 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> wrote:
> If you are interested in python, then there's a big effort underway to
> port things over to python3 and remove python2 altogether from Fedora
> in the future
>
This should be resolved now. Sorry for the issues!
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora
Look at chromium-vaapi build in rpmfusion.
пн, 11 мар. 2019 г., 20:17 Tom Callaway :
> Hi folks,
>
> I spent some time this weekend trying to get Chromium 72 building on
> Fedora, but I kept running into a C++ issue that I was not able to resolve.
> This happened with gcc-9.0.1-0.8.fc30.x86_64
I'm late on this task, so I'm taking a broader approach. Please review
the list of release deliverables[1] and let me know if any need to be
added, removed, or have blocker status modified. Skimming the latest
complete compose, this seems to match, but it's better for the folks
responsible to
=
#fedora-meeting-1: FESCO (2019-03-11)
=
Meeting started by contyk at 15:00:01 UTC. The full logs are available
at
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2019-03-11/fesco.2019-03-11-15.00.log.html
Meeting
On 3/11/19 4:31 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Can somebody please enlighten me, how to update Rawhide after branching
> and not using --nogpgcheck?
Can you expand on the case here?
What should happen is:
* branching
* f30 repos gets the f31 key
* you update your f30-repos
* you jump to
On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 7:30 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On 3/11/19 4:31 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Can somebody please enlighten me, how to update Rawhide after branching
> > and not using --nogpgcheck?
>
> Can you expand on the case here?
>
> What should happen is:
>
> * branching
> *
Hi folks,
I spent some time this weekend trying to get Chromium 72 building on
Fedora, but I kept running into a C++ issue that I was not able to resolve.
This happened with gcc-9.0.1-0.8.fc30.x86_64 and gcc-8.3.1-2.fc29.x86_64.
Here's a sample of the error (it happens in a few places), from
On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 01:16:07PM -0400, Tom Callaway wrote:
> I spent some time this weekend trying to get Chromium 72 building on
> Fedora, but I kept running into a C++ issue that I was not able to resolve.
> This happened with gcc-9.0.1-0.8.fc30.x86_64 and gcc-8.3.1-2.fc29.x86_64.
Can you
The change proposal is about integrating an entry point in rpmbuild to accept
BR lists, at a moment of the build process where sources are already unpacked
and processed.
It's an entry point. It does not restrict how you generate the BR data
(upstream command, macro, cat somefile, echo foo, a
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/HardenedCompiler
== Summary ==
By Default enable a few security hardening flags which are used with GCC.
== Owner ==
* Name: [[User:huzaifas|Huzaifa Sidhpurwala]]
* Email: huzai...@redhat.com
* Release notes owner: huzai...@redhat.com
== Detailed
FWIW, I did. There is no fix there.
~tom
On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 1:20 PM Vascom wrote:
> Look at chromium-vaapi build in rpmfusion.
>
> пн, 11 мар. 2019 г., 20:17 Tom Callaway :
>
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> I spent some time this weekend trying to get Chromium 72 building on
>> Fedora, but I kept
* Ben Cotton:
> '''-Wformat -Wformat-security -fstack-protector-strong
> --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -O'
--param=ssp-buffer-size=4 will not affect anything because
-fstack-protector-strong uses a completely different heuristic.
> == Benefit to Fedora ==
> We provide better
On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 10:46:47AM -0400, Randy Barlow wrote:
> On Mon, 2019-03-11 at 10:35 -0400, Randy Barlow wrote:
> > On Mon, 2019-03-11 at 08:22 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-fd699ee2ea
> > >
> > > "This update has reached 3 days
On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 12:30 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> hobbes1069 apiextractor python-requests-cache shiboken
>
I have updated apiextractor and python-requests-cache and verified they
will build.
shiboken was already FTBFS so I changed it over and performed builds.
Thanks,
Richard
> "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. From the start it would be annoying, but once we would reach
VO> the point 4, I would, at least, know that I should do
On 04. 03. 19 12:34, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
On Sun, Mar 03, 2019 at 11:45:31AM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 01. 03. 19 22:19, Ben Cotton wrote:
'''The CI system, the tests and the decision on which tests are used
to gate upon are out of scope for the present document.'''
This is both
Miro Hrončok wrote:
> Due to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Sphinx2 we will be removing
> python2-sphinx and other related packages on Monday (2019-03-11).
...
> extra-cmake-modules cicku dvratil heliocastro lkundrak rdieter
fixed extra-cmake-modules to use python3-sphinx, but ran into
On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 2:56 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> * Printing must work on at least one printer available to Fedora QA.
> "Work" is defined as the output from the device matching a preview
> shown on the GNOME print preview display. (Note that non-ridiculous
> differences in color
https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49668
https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49667
https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/50275
—
Sincerely,
William Brown
Software Engineer, 389 Directory Server
SUSE Labs
___
389-devel mailing list --
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1678623
--- Comment #8 from Sergio Monteiro Basto ---
Dridi, you need update strip-nondeterminism.spec according to above mentioned,
to continue the review , until Peter approve this package .
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1687254
Upstream Release Monitoring
changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|perl-DBIx-Class-DeploymentH
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1687197
--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System ---
perl-ExtUtils-Manifest-1.72-1.fc29 has been submitted as an update to Fedora
29. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-a0f9360b0e
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1687224
--- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System ---
perl-Sub-Quote-2.006003-1.fc30 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 30.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-a5bb214d07
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1687197
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1687224
--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System ---
perl-Sub-Quote-2.006003-1.fc29 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 29.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-daa3316272
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1687209
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1687197
--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System ---
perl-ExtUtils-Manifest-1.72-1.fc30 has been submitted as an update to Fedora
30. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-b77433ca26
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1687209
--- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System ---
perl-strictures-2.06-4.fc30 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 30.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-9f5f97349f
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1687224
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
Fixed In Version|
On Sat, Mar 9, 2019 at 8:19 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> On 3/9/19 7:16 PM, Troy Dawson wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 9, 2019 at 9:47 AM Benjamin Pereto
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I saw that you rebuilt borgbackup (
> >> https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/borgbackup) for python3.6.
> >>
> >>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1686667
Bug 1686667 depends on bug 1686788, which changed state.
Bug 1686788 Summary: Review Request: perl-GIS-Distance - Calculate geographic
distances
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1686788
What|Removed
On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 9:44 AM Peter Robinson wrote:
>
> > I disabled autopushing precisely so that there's no accidental pushing
> > to stable updates. The worst thing that can happen is that we have to
> > unpush the update from testing. Seriously, that's really not the end
> > of the world.
>
On 11. 03. 19 15:54, Troy Dawson wrote:
On Sat, Mar 9, 2019 at 8:16 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On 3/9/19 7:15 PM, Troy Dawson wrote:
Hello,
There are a few questions I have, and since I'm not positive who all
of the correct people ask are, I'm sending to the epel-devel list.
Before I start the
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1686667
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1687197
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #4 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1687224
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #3 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1687209
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #2 from
On Mon, 11 Mar 2019 at 10:54, Troy Dawson wrote:
>
> On Sat, Mar 9, 2019 at 8:16 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> >
> > On 3/9/19 7:15 PM, Troy Dawson wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > > There are a few questions I have, and since I'm not positive who all
> > > of the correct people ask are, I'm sending to the
On Sat, Mar 9, 2019 at 8:16 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> On 3/9/19 7:15 PM, Troy Dawson wrote:
> > Hello,
> > There are a few questions I have, and since I'm not positive who all
> > of the correct people ask are, I'm sending to the epel-devel list.
> >
> > Before I start the questions, thank you to
https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/50274
___
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
I'm late on this task, so I'm taking a broader approach. Please review
the list of release deliverables[1] and let me know if any need to be
added, removed, or have blocker status modified. Skimming the latest
complete compose, this seems to match, but it's better for the folks
responsible to
On Mon, 11 Mar 2019 at 14:33, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> On 3/11/19 7:54 AM, Troy Dawson wrote:
>
> >
> > Thanks for the feedback. You too Miro.
> > After reading both of your reasons for doing A), I agree with you both.
> > Unless anyone objects, we'll plan to do option A
> >
> > We only have one
On 3/11/19 7:54 AM, Troy Dawson wrote:
>
> Thanks for the feedback. You too Miro.
> After reading both of your reasons for doing A), I agree with you both.
> Unless anyone objects, we'll plan to do option A
>
> We only have one package left that fails it's rebuild, python-apsw.
> I'm hoping
On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 9:42 AM Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> On 11. 03. 19 15:54, Troy Dawson wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 9, 2019 at 8:16 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> >>
> >> On 3/9/19 7:15 PM, Troy Dawson wrote:
> >>> Hello,
> >>> There are a few questions I have, and since I'm not positive who all
> >>> of
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/HardenedCompiler
== Summary ==
By Default enable a few security hardening flags which are used with GCC.
== Owner ==
* Name: [[User:huzaifas|Huzaifa Sidhpurwala]]
* Email: huzai...@redhat.com
* Release notes owner: huzai...@redhat.com
== Detailed
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1687197
--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System ---
perl-ExtUtils-Manifest-1.72-1.fc29 has been pushed to the Fedora 29 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1687224
--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System ---
perl-Sub-Quote-2.006003-1.fc29 has been pushed to the Fedora 29 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1687604
Bug ID: 1687604
Summary: perl-Module-Starter-1.76 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-Module-Starter
Keywords: FutureFeature,
85 matches
Mail list logo
