Dne 06. 11. 19 v 5:21 Randy Barlow napsal(a):
> On Tue, 2019-11-05 at 21:17 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
>> This feature of "slotting" multiple EVRs of the same name actually
>> already exists in RPM. DNF currently restricts this to packages that
>> contain one of the following provides:
>> *
On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 11:22 PM Randy Barlow
wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2019-11-05 at 21:17 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > This feature of "slotting" multiple EVRs of the same name actually
> > already exists in RPM. DNF currently restricts this to packages that
> > contain one of the following provides:
>
Dne 06. 11. 19 v 12:17 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
> Dne 06. 11. 19 v 5:21 Randy Barlow napsal(a):
>> On Tue, 2019-11-05 at 21:17 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
>>> This feature of "slotting" multiple EVRs of the same name actually
>>> already exists in RPM. DNF currently restricts this to packages that
>>>
I'm trying vagrant image of rawhide from [1], however vagrant is unable
to bring the machine up. It gets always stuck on "==> client: Waiting
for domain to get an IP address..." step. Other vagrant boxes (Fedora 29
till Fedora 31) from these cloud composes works well.
I tried to upgrade to
Dne 05. 11. 19 v 16:03 Ben Cotton napsal(a):
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/PythonStaticSpeedup
>
> == Summary ==
> Python 3 traditionally in Fedora was built with a shared library
> libpython3.?.so and the final binary was dynamically linked against
> that shared library. This change
On Wed, 06 Nov 2019 11:49:18 +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> > we can achieve a
> > performance gain of 5% to 27% depending on the workload.
>
> Where are these number coming from? And what is the reason for the
> performance hit for dynamically linked Python?
Yes, it looks suspicious. -fPIC was a
- Original Message -
> From: "Ralf Corsepius"
> To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Sent: Wednesday, November 6, 2019 3:32:03 AM
> Subject: Re: Modularity: The Official Complaint Thread
>
> On 11/5/19 9:41 PM, Alex Scheel wrote:
>
> > IMO, without a resolution in Fedora we'll never get
On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 4:35 PM Fabio Valentini wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 8:15 PM Matthew Miller
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 05, 2019 at 01:08:23PM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > > I think I mentioned that it would be possible, as OpenPKG actually
> > > worked this way.
> > >
> > > The
On Wed, Nov 06, 2019 at 12:12:54PM +0100, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
> On Wed, 06 Nov 2019 11:49:18 +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> > > we can achieve a
> > > performance gain of 5% to 27% depending on the workload.
> >
> > Where are these number coming from? And what is the reason for the
> > performance
Randy Barlow wrote:
> *Kofler - sorry for misspelling your name Kevin.
Oh, I'm used to that. :-) Even in Vienna, where I live and where the name is
relatively common, it keeps getting misspelled. (For the record, the name is
originally from the Tyrol area. My father was from Alto Adige / South
Il giorno mer, 06/11/2019 alle 08.52 +0100, Franta Hanzlík ha scritto:
> If I can speak for myself and for the Linux people I know, nobody
> needs a FreeIPA, and many need a Samba AD DC. And of course they want
> a stable solution if possible.
>
> The current situation leads to either choosing a
Hi,
I had every intention of pushing this forward, but I never found the
time. Sorry for that. It would still be great to have these.
Iñaki
On Wed, 6 Nov 2019 at 10:11, Elliott Sales de Andrade
wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> On Thu, 1 Nov 2018 at 20:45, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> >
> > Since I
Hello,
As you may or may not know, due to this F31 Change [1], all R packages
now have Suggests for all packages in their metadata automatically. In
the discussion with FPC and Legal [2], it has been determined that the
Suggests cannot apply to non-existent packages.
I have already fixed my
Hello,
On Thu, 1 Nov 2018 at 20:45, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
>
> Since I actually had an existing pagure repo for random RPM macro
> experiments, I just dropped the R macro stuff there.
>
> https://pagure.io/misc-rpm-macros
> https://pagure.io/misc-rpm-macros/blob/master/f/macros.R-extra
>
>
On 11/5/19 11:21 PM, Dridi Boukelmoune wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> It looks like some leftover from the past. I don't really see why it
>> should be there.
>>
>> This commit removes that:
>>
>> https://github.com/fedora-selinux/selinux-policy-macros/commit/5f366657da0c7c67f2448be03620581437c2dfbb
>>
>>
On ke, 06 marras 2019, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 06. 11. 19 0:26, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
On 11/5/19 4:59 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
… and Calamares …
... and Domoticz (Fedora), and Kodi (RPMFusion)...
Will this be as simple as a BR change in the spec or will
application patches be necessary?
On 11/5/19 9:41 PM, Alex Scheel wrote:
IMO, without a resolution in Fedora we'll never get one in RHEL.
And? Why should Fedora care about RHEL?
I for one consider RHEL not to be its partner, but it to be an
initiative to gradually push Fedora out of this planet.
Ralf
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1768957
--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2019-f29fcc60ce has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 8.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-f29fcc60ce
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are
On Wed, Nov 06, 2019 at 09:32:03AM +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 11/5/19 9:41 PM, Alex Scheel wrote:
>
> > IMO, without a resolution in Fedora we'll never get one in RHEL.
>
> And? Why should Fedora care about RHEL?
Because Fedora and Red Hat symbiotic.
I think this has been said at a few
On Wed, Nov 6, 2019 at 10:30 PM Gwyn Ciesla wrote:
>
> By all means, take them. I just don't want them to go away. :)
Thanks! We share the same concerns (no surprise) there :)
François
> --
> Gwyn Ciesla
> she/her/hers
>
> in your fear, seek
I'll take openal-soft, pdfbox, freealut, python-httplib2, and dosbox. FAS:limb
--
Gwyn Ciesla
she/her/hers
in your fear, seek only peace
in your fear, seek only love
-d. bowie
Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.
‐‐‐ Original Message
I somehow overlooked the fact that stringtemplate4 was going to be
retired due to having been orphaned. I need it for antlr3, which I
need because the cvc4 project still hasn't migrated to antlr4 (argh!).
I have filed a ticket with releng asking for it to be unretired:
Miro Hrončok writes:
> The following packages are orphaned and will be retired when they
> are orphaned for six weeks, unless someone adopts them. If you know for sure
> that the package should be retired, please do so now with a proper reason:
>
On Wed, Nov 06, 2019 at 11:56:13AM -0600, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 6, 2019 at 4:54 pm, David Sommerseth wrote:
> > Yes, TLSv1.3 with encrypted SNI will help to some degree, but still
> > there IP
> > addresses you connect to will still provide meta data which can be used
> > to
> >
Am 06.11.19 um 21:59 schrieb Kevin Fenzi:
>
> In any case, I will note here that firefox in Fedora is not going to
> enable DoH like upstream firefox. I don't know about chromium.
>
>
> kevin
That's good news, as it takes about half an hour to make ff privacy
conform again. Each step less helps.
On Wed, Nov 6, 2019 at 8:48 PM Gwyn Ciesla via devel
wrote:
>
> I'll take openal-soft, pdfbox, freealut, python-httplib2, and dosbox. FAS:limb
Heh, I wanted to take openal-soft and dosbox as I've been the de-facto
maintainer for some time.
FAS: fcami
https://pagure.io/releng/issue/8972
Gwyn,
On 06. 11. 19 20:41, Gwyn Ciesla via devel wrote:
I'll take openal-soft, pdfbox, freealut, python-httplib2, and dosbox. FAS:limb
Thanks for the quick response.
BTW For example python-httplib2 has plenty active co-maintainers to I suspect
they would take it as well.
It was recently orphaned
Ok. :) And I'll take wine if absolutely no one else will, but as a last
resort. :)
--
Gwyn Ciesla
she/her/hers
in your fear, seek only peace
in your fear, seek only love
-d. bowie
Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.
‐‐‐ Original Message
Hi Marius,
I maintain BIND and some similar stuff. More or less, there is already
implementation quite similar to what you have described. Already in
Fedora: stubby [1]. It has central list of several resolvers and uses
them in round-robin fashion. Does not make specific order.
However, the
On 11/5/19 7:18 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
"name mangling": Why is this a problem? First of all, it is not mangling, it
is suffixing. The original name is retained unchanged and nothing is
prepended to it, only appended. And, e.g., Qt 3, 4, and 5 are all different
packages, so why should they have
Hello,
it repeatedly happened to me that I'm notified by Koschei that dozens of my
packages suddenly fail to resolve build dependencies on a released Fedora.
I usually find out that the broken update was sitting in testing for 7 days
without any feedback, only to be pushed and receive
On Wed, Nov 06, 2019 at 08:56:53PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 06. 11. 19 20:41, Gwyn Ciesla via devel wrote:
> > I'll take openal-soft, pdfbox, freealut, python-httplib2, and dosbox.
> > FAS:limb
>
> Thanks for the quick response.
>
> BTW For example python-httplib2 has plenty active
By all means, take them. I just don't want them to go away. :)
--
Gwyn Ciesla
she/her/hers
in your fear, seek only peace
in your fear, seek only love
-d. bowie
Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Wednesday,
On 05/11/2019 22:00, Nicolas Mailhot via devel wrote:
> Le mardi 05 novembre 2019 à 19:45 +0100, Tomasz Torcz a écrit :
[]
>
> The day DoH actually gets decentralized the nowheristan state and its
> ISPs will run DoH servers like everyone else and influence their
> results exactly like today,
On ke, 06 marras 2019, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 06. 11. 19 11:41, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
Python extension modules embedding Python and linking to libpython
- needs to be evaluated case by case
- changes to cmake/autotools are needed
- changes in code might be necessary as well
- if not
Announcing the creation of a new nightly release validation test event
for Fedora 32 Rawhide 20191106.n.0. Please help run some tests for this
nightly compose if you have time. For more information on nightly
release validation testing, see:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki
On 06. 11. 19 11:41, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
Python extension modules embedding Python and linking to libpython
- needs to be evaluated case by case
- changes to cmake/autotools are needed
- changes in code might be necessary as well
- if not changed, might misbehave
- Python Maint will
On Wed, 2019-11-06 at 00:20 -0700, John M. Harris Jr wrote:
> This only works to a limited degree in Gentoo, and even then, if you
> want a stable system, you can't really install different versions of
> packages as X version of Y package will break package Z, generally
> not in the ebuild either.
On Wed, 6 Nov 2019 at 10:24, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>
> On Wed, 6 Nov 2019 at 03:35, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> >
> > On 11/5/19 9:41 PM, Alex Scheel wrote:
> >
> > > IMO, without a resolution in Fedora we'll never get one in RHEL.
> >
> > And? Why should Fedora care about RHEL?
> >
> > I for
> Waiting for MIT kerberos to become stable and supported from samba
> team, a simple solution is insert into official samba.spec, a flag for
> easily rebuild it with heimdal kerberos, without substitute or modify
> the .spec file.
>
> Something like this:
>
> $ rpmbuild --rebuild --with heimdal
Isn't it this issue?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1759603
Vít
Dne 06. 11. 19 v 14:02 Pavel Březina napsal(a):
> I'm trying vagrant image of rawhide from [1], however vagrant is
> unable to bring the machine up. It gets always stuck on "==> client:
> Waiting for domain to get
On Wed, 6 Nov 2019 at 03:35, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>
> On 11/5/19 9:41 PM, Alex Scheel wrote:
>
> > IMO, without a resolution in Fedora we'll never get one in RHEL.
>
> And? Why should Fedora care about RHEL?
>
> I for one consider RHEL not to be its partner, but it to be an
> initiative to
Randy Barlow wrote:
> Nix might be the only solution that avoids this since it has the most
> advanced form of parallel installability. I've not used Nix before, but
> it sounds pretty cool.
Unfortunately, Nix uses a completely non-standard (non-FHS) file system
layout, essentially the Windows
Alex Scheel wrote:
> In an ideal world, Modularity would've been proposed to Fedora,
> it would've been discussed by the community, improved, perfected,
> and _then_ brought into the RHEL fold only when stable! Fedora
> would've _driven_ the innovation, rather than having to keep up
> with
On Wed, 6 Nov 2019 at 05:50, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Dne 05. 11. 19 v 16:03 Ben Cotton napsal(a):
> > When we compile the python3 package on Fedora (prior to this change),
> > we create the libpython3.?.so shared library and the final python3
> > binary (/usr/bin/python3) is dynamically linked
Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> Symbiotic is, I think, the best way to describe the Red Hat/Fedora
> relationship.
Well, a symbiosis has to go both ways. In this case, I unfortunately get the
feeling that this feature was implemented to comply with RHEL's needs and
RHEL's needs only (enterprise
On Wed, Nov 6, 2019 at 1:00 PM Dario Lesca wrote:
>
> Il giorno mer, 06/11/2019 alle 09.03 -0500, Nico Kadel-Garcia ha
> scritto:
> > > Can the Fedora samba maintainers do that?
> > >
> > > Thank
> > >
> >
> > They are very welcome to my work.
> >
>
> Then why do not use your samba.spec for build
On Wed, 2019-11-06 at 21:32 +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> Is there any good way to get notified about this sort of problems in
> timely manner prior to the update being pushed? This is currently not
> optimal.
I'm not familiar with an existing solution to this problem, but I agree
that it is not
Randy Barlow wrote:
> On Wed, 2019-11-06 at 01:18 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> The big difference is that Gentoo is source-based, whereas Fedora is
>> binary-based. So where Gentoo needs to ship only one ebuild (the
>> equivalent of a specfile) for foo-1.2.3 that the user can then
>> compile
Przemek Klosowski via devel wrote:
> On 11/5/19 7:18 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> "name mangling": Why is this a problem? First of all, it is not mangling,
>> it is suffixing. The original name is retained unchanged and nothing is
>> prepended to it, only appended. And, e.g., Qt 3, 4, and 5 are all
Josh Boyer wrote:
> What you call unfair, I call open source winning in the industry.
> Does it create an imbalance between funded vs. unfunded work? Yes.
> That is the reality of the software landscape today though, and I
> think it's a net good thing even if it is somewhat departed from what
>
On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 03:14:34PM +0100, Dario Lesca wrote:
> Il giorno lun, 04/11/2019 alle 08.38 -0500, Neal Gompa ha scritto:
> > What defines it as experimental?
>
> https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Running_a_Samba_AD_DC_with_MIT_Kerberos_KDC
> > Using MIT Kerberos is still considered
On Wed, Nov 6, 2019 at 4:54 pm, David Sommerseth
wrote:
Yes, TLSv1.3 with encrypted SNI will help to some degree, but still
there IP
addresses you connect to will still provide meta data which can be
used to
profile you and give an indication of what kind of sites you visit.
Well that's the
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20191105.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20191106.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:15
Dropped images: 9
Added packages: 8
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 89
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 305.15 MiB
Size of dropped packages:0
Il giorno mer, 06/11/2019 alle 09.03 -0500, Nico Kadel-Garcia ha
scritto:
> > Can the Fedora samba maintainers do that?
> >
> > Thank
> >
>
> They are very welcome to my work.
>
Then why do not use your samba.spec for build official samba package at
least on Fedora?
It already contain the
On 06. 11. 19 17:44, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
If you'd be able to help us removing this linking dependency, that would
be great.
We would. However we'd only invest the time and energy into it if this change is
accepted, not before that. IF samba and or freeipa breaks, that would be Fedora
32
No missing expected images.
Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check!
1 of 45 required tests failed, 2 results missing
Unsatisfied gating requirements that could not be mapped to openQA tests:
FAILED: compose.cloud.all
MISSING: fedora.Workstation-boot-iso.x86_64.64bit - compose.install_default
The following packages are orphaned and will be retired when they
are orphaned for six weeks, unless someone adopts them. If you know for sure
that the package should be retired, please do so now with a proper reason:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_remove_a_package_at_end_of_life
Note: If
On 11/6/19 7:11 AM, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
On Tue, Nov 05, 2019 at 10:00:17PM +0100, Nicolas Mailhot via devel wrote:
Le mardi 05 novembre 2019 à 19:45 +0100, Tomasz Torcz a écrit :
I don't agree with centralisation. You should run your own DoH
endpoint,
using Google's, Cloudflare's or
On Wed, Nov 6, 2019 at 9:11 PM Gwyn Ciesla via devel <
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> Ok. :) And I'll take wine if absolutely no one else will, but as a last
> resort. :)
>
I can take wine if you want that only as a last resort :) But, I'd be happy
if you would co-maintain that, more
On ke, 06 marras 2019, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
On Wed, Nov 6, 2019 at 1:00 PM Dario Lesca wrote:
Il giorno mer, 06/11/2019 alle 09.03 -0500, Nico Kadel-Garcia ha
scritto:
> > Can the Fedora samba maintainers do that?
> >
> > Thank
> >
>
> They are very welcome to my work.
>
Then why do not
On Monday, 04 November 2019 at 23:38, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 4, 2019 at 5:26 PM Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> >
> > So I started to review
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1767883 which is a package
> > which is normally in the zlib package but has been commented out from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1769359
Bug ID: 1769359
Summary: [RFE] EPEL8 branch of perl-B-Compiling
Product: Fedora EPEL
Version: epel8
Status: NEW
Component: perl-B-Compiling
Assignee:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1768809
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppi...@redhat.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1768805
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppi...@redhat.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1768807
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1768810
--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2019-d4e611bae1 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 8.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-d4e611bae1
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1768807
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppi...@redhat.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1768957
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1768807
--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2019-5ffbdf8eab has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 8.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-5ffbdf8eab
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1769280
Bug ID: 1769280
Summary: [RFE] EPEL8 branch of perl-CLASS
Product: Fedora EPEL
Version: epel8
Status: NEW
Component: perl-CLASS
Assignee: robinlee.s...@gmail.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1768803
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppi...@redhat.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1768928
--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2019-6299d1f15d has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 8.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-6299d1f15d
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1768928
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1768806
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1768806
--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2019-9ad8fb60ce has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 8.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-9ad8fb60ce
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1768957
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppi...@redhat.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1768810
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1763473
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |MODIFIED
--- Comment #6 from
The following packages are orphaned and will be retired when they
are orphaned for six weeks, unless someone adopts them. If you know for sure
that the package should be retired, please do so now with a proper reason:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_remove_a_package_at_end_of_life
Note: If
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1768649
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #2 from
https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/50693
--
389 Directory Server Development Team
___
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:
The following Fedora EPEL 8 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
10 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-c7b7c6aae7
java-latest-openjdk-13.0.1.9-2.rolling.el8
4 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-9db33fcb54
chromium-78.0.3904.70-1.el8
4
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1768804
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #4 from
On Wed, 6 Nov 2019 at 06:02, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski
wrote:
>
> On Monday, 04 November 2019 at 23:38, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 4, 2019 at 5:26 PM Stephen John Smoogen
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > So I started to review
> > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1767883 which is
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1758758
--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System ---
mod_perl-2.0.11-1.fc29 has been pushed to the Fedora 29 testing repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See
The following Fedora EPEL 6 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
10 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-244e8468f8
t1utils-1.41-1.el6
6 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-b3dc1811a1
rssh-2.3.4-15.el6
1
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1768797
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #3 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1758480
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #7 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1768817
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #6 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1768801
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #4 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1768800
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #3 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1768794
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #3 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1768973
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #3 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1768813
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #3 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1769009
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #3 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1768811
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #3 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1758480
--- Comment #8 from Xavier Bachelot ---
(In reply to Steve Traylen from comment #6)
> Sorry missed this, looks like you have it hand.
I too missed that I have commit rights on this package. Sorry for the noise...
--
You are receiving this
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1765952
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-4.1 |perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-4.1
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1765952
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-4.1 |perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-4.1
1 - 100 of 110 matches
Mail list logo
