On Sunday, September 8, 2019 3:57:22 AM MST vvs vvs wrote:
> I'm sorry, but where did you saw that I said something about i686 *kernel*?
> I think that I explicitly mentioned *x86_64* kernel with i686 userland and
> described why it could be beneficial for some users with limited memory.
> As
On Sun, 2019-09-08 at 20:35 -0700, John M. Harris Jr. wrote:
>
> Wait, what happened to x86 becoming a secondary architecture? You know, there
> are vendors that still create and sell x86 systems today.
That already happened several releases ago. But secondary arches
failing blocks package
On Saturday, September 7, 2019 11:44:59 AM MST Victor V. Shkamerda wrote:
> I totally agree with that view. Making such decisions without public
> discussion is not respecting user's freedom of choice. And this list
> doesn't count as a public discussion. Nobody will know about it outside a
> very
On Sunday, September 8, 2019 1:50:17 AM MST vvs vvs wrote:
> That's nice to know Fedora's developers point of view on that subject. But
> I'm not subscribing to that view. I'm with Richard Stallman. And now I
> clearly see why he is opposed to OSS paradigm. Looks like I was in a wrong
> place for
On Sun, Sep 8, 2019 at 11:44 PM John M. Harris Jr. wrote:
>
> On Sunday, September 8, 2019 7:05:39 PM MST Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> > On Sun, Sep 8, 2019 at 7:00 AM vvs vvs wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > I'm sorry, but where did you saw that I said something about i686
> > > *kernel*? I think
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 '2019-09-09 15:00 UTC'
Links to all issues to be
On Sun, Sep 8, 2019 at 7:00 AM vvs vvs wrote:
>
> I'm sorry, but where did you saw that I said something about i686 *kernel*? I
> think that I explicitly mentioned *x86_64* kernel with i686 userland and
> described why it could be beneficial for some users with limited memory.
And a child with
On Sunday, September 8, 2019 7:05:39 PM MST Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 8, 2019 at 7:00 AM vvs vvs wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > I'm sorry, but where did you saw that I said something about i686
> > *kernel*? I think that I explicitly mentioned *x86_64* kernel with i686
> > userland and
Hi,
I need to create a multi-package bodhi update for F30 and F31 to fix a
bug. Could a provenpackager help me out please? I only have commit
rights to wxpython.
For F31, please create an update with builds and tag bug #1739469:
python-fsleyes-0.30.1-1.fc31
On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 5:06 PM Ernestas Kulik wrote:
> On Fri, 2019-09-06 at 14:26 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I upgraded to F31 recently, and I now I noticed that the gnome top
> > bar is always black. I miss the old translucent blue bar that would
> > only go
On 30.06.19 06:51, Leigh Scott wrote:
speedtest-cli and python3-speedtest-cli appear to be the same package.
Yes, I stumbled over this too, some time ago. It is indeed the same
source [1], python-pdfarranger is just getting it through pypi [2].
I think speedtest-cli has the more appropriate
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 6/152 (x86_64), 1/2 (arm)
New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-31-20190907.n.0):
ID: 445608 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso desktop_browser
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/445608
ID: 445676 Test: x86_64 universal
I'm sorry, but where did you saw that I said something about i686 *kernel*? I
think that I explicitly mentioned *x86_64* kernel with i686 userland and
described why it could be beneficial for some users with limited memory.
As for security, I don't think that running your own computer in a
No missing expected images.
Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check!
21 of 45 required tests failed, 19 results missing
openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING**
below
Unsatisfied gating requirements that could not be mapped to openQA tests:
MISSING:
OLD: Fedora-31-20190907.n.0
NEW: Fedora-31-20190908.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 2
Added packages: 0
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 0
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 0 B
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Size of upgraded
That's nice to know Fedora's developers point of view on that subject. But I'm
not subscribing to that view. I'm with Richard Stallman. And now I clearly see
why he is opposed to OSS paradigm. Looks like I was in a wrong place for all
these years. Time to move elsewhere.
On 9/7/19 8:44 PM, Victor V. Shkamerda wrote:
> There are reasons why using x86_64 kernel with i686 userland might be a
> better option.
Because i686 has tons of unresolved bugs: it has no upstream support, no
maintainers and even testers with real hardware.
Do **YOU** want to be a i686-arch
> >> Several of us are getting errors in our c++ packages related to missing
> >> PIC flags in aarch64.
> >>
> >> Something is amiss there. A small snippet from openmpi:
>
> >You're much better off including a couple of koji tasks/packages
> >showing the issue, it's much easier to get some real
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20190907.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20190908.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 1
Added packages: 2
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 36
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 8.04 MiB
Size of dropped packages:0 B
On 06. 09. 19 20:15, Ricardo Martinelli Oliveira wrote:
Honza,
Can we discuss the possibility to hand over the package to me? I am
the guy who annoyed you on scl mailing list and I'm red hatter too.
I'm interested to have this working on OpenShift since our partners
did not get it run wel on
Hello packagers,
The Stewardship SIG is currently providing only bare-minimum
maintenance for some Java packages, and none of our packages depend on
them anymore.
So, we're looking for someone to take better care of them, preferably
someone who actively uses these packages or maintains a package
Hi,
concurrentunit will be orphaned.
As the maintainer, I lost interest in general java packaging and I don't have
the time any more to fully support all of my packages in Fedora. No idea why
the new version [¹] does not build with current maven package in rawhide.
Please feel free to pick
Sorry folks, I obviously forgot to edit the date in the last mail :)
The meeting is tomorrow, 2019-09-09.
# F31 Blocker Review meeting
# Date: ** 2019-09-09 **
# Time: 16:00 UTC
# Location: #fedora-blocker-review on irc.freenode.net
Hi folks! We have 5 proposed Beta blockers, 1 proposed Final
# F31 Blocker Review meeting
# Date: 2019-08-26
# Time: 16:00 UTC
# Location: #fedora-blocker-review on irc.freenode.net
Hi folks! We have 5 proposed Beta blockers, 1 proposed Final
blocker and 2 proposed Beta freeze exceptions to review, so let's have a
Fedora 31 blocker review meeting tomorrow!
# Fedora Quality Assurance Meeting
# Date: 2019-09-09
# Time: 15:00 UTC
(https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto)
# Location: #fedora-meeting on irc.freenode.net
Greetings testers!
We didn't meet for a few weeks, so let's check in on where we're at.
If anyone has any other items
On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 7:21 PM Petr Stodulka wrote:
>
> Hi guys,
> I apologize that I mystified you a little in my prefious email when I wrote
> that
> I resolved majority of problems. I looked at that closer today after 1.5w and
> found that I have been near the start of all troubles. My
>> OK, here's one at least. I have had to manually add -DPIC to the spec for
>> aarch64 in order to get
>> that arch to pass. There were no problems with it up until recently.
>>
>> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=37332928
>So I believe this is fixed with the rebuild on
Hi,
I think this particular compatibility issue has been fixed in hg-git default
branch, so you might wanna retry on it.
For the record, I just tested very quickly Mercurial 5.1 with hg-git in a
Python3 virtualenv and it seems to work.
___
devel
On 9/8/19 3:57 AM, vvs vvs wrote:
Other distributions might drop it or not, we'll see. At least Debian is not
dropping it yet. But this is a moot point now. After all those discussions I
see that nobody really cares about user interests here. At least in Debian's
case they stated that their
On Sun, Sep 8, 2019 at 7:00 AM vvs vvs wrote:
>
> I'm sorry, but where did you saw that I said something about i686 *kernel*? I
> think that I explicitly mentioned *x86_64* kernel with i686 userland and
> described why it could be beneficial for some users with limited memory.
>
> As for
Hello,
a dependency of a package of mine lately failed to be rebuilt for Python
3.8/f32:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-asynctest/c/f7a6e498607f4635ec76c4759e8b51b3ea9367ab
The result on the build page
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=37184775 reads:
> BuildError:
On 08. 09. 19 23:41, Georg Sauthoff wrote:
But this build.log file isn't linked from that page.
How come?
Bug or feature?
The build was garbage collected because it is too old. A feature.
Attempt to rebuild the package to see the logs.
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
On 09. 09. 19 0:08, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 08. 09. 19 23:41, Georg Sauthoff wrote:
But this build.log file isn't linked from that page.
How come?
Bug or feature?
The build was garbage collected because it is too old. A feature.
Attempt to rebuild the package to see the logs.
BTW if you
https://fedorapeople.org/groups/389ds/ci/nightly/2019/09/09/report-389-ds-base-1.4.2.0-20190908git0040332.fc30.x86_64.html
___
389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
The following builds have been pushed to Fedora EPEL 8 updates-testing
SuperLUMT-3.1.0-22.el8
cgnslib-3.4.0-3.el8
globus-gridmap-verify-myproxy-callout-3.2-1.el8
globus-gsi-sysconfig-9.2-3.el8
ipv6calc-2.1.1-36.el8
lynis-2.7.5-2.el8
The following Fedora EPEL 6 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
12 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-af80b147c4
python-mitogen-0.2.8-1.el6
10 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-54cf4d603d
seamonkey-2.49.5-1.el6
9
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1750082
Bug ID: 1750082
Summary: perl-Archive-Zip-1.65 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-Archive-Zip
Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1744707
Emmanuel Seyman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #1 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1748857
--- Comment #1 from Emmanuel Seyman ---
FTR, EPEL8 branch requested:
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/16441
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/16442
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1744709
Emmanuel Seyman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #1 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1749564
Emmanuel Seyman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1749496
Emmanuel Seyman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1748209
--- Comment #1 from Emmanuel Seyman ---
My efforts concerning EPEL are mostly focused on EPEL 8.
Would you be willing to maintain the package in EPEL 6/7? If so, I'll need your
FAS username to give you commit access.
--
You are receiving
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1744708
Emmanuel Seyman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #1 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1744684
Emmanuel Seyman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #1 from
On 9/3/19 7:15 PM, Richard G wrote:
> Lars
>
> I've added the module and dependencies to my perl yum repo here:
> https://harbottle.gitlab.io/epmel/7/x86_64
>
> Give it a try.
>
> Richard
Thanks. I might poach the spec file.
/Lars
___
epel-devel
46 matches
Mail list logo
