Hey guys, I am trying to build a SRPM since mockbuild does not work due to (1).
# fedpkg srpm
# fedpkg build --srpm
/home/lzap/work/fedpkg/workrave/workrave-1.10.37-1.fc33.src.rpm
But getting %SUBJ%: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=42794359
What is wrong? I believe my
On 27. 03. 20 10:59, Vít Ondruch wrote:
As you can see, there is much more to this just to "put some conditional
somewhere". There are very complex considerations and a lot of work.
I would also like to point out the obvious:
The RHEL only patch needs to be rebased every time the package is
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 9:36 AM Vít Ondruch wrote:
>
>
> Dne 26. 03. 20 v 12:39 Aleksandra Fedorova napsal(a):
> > On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 10:34 AM Vít Ondruch wrote:
> >>
> >> Dne 25. 03. 20 v 20:22 James Cassell napsal(a):
> >>> On Wed, Mar 25, 2020, at 1:18 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Dne
Lukas Zapletal píše v Pá 27. 03. 2020 v 10:30 +:
> Hey guys, I am trying to build a SRPM since mockbuild does not work
> due to (1).
>
> # fedpkg srpm
> # fedpkg build --srpm /home/lzap/work/fedpkg/workrave/workrave-
> 1.10.37-1.fc33.src.rpm
Real builds from SRPM are not allowed for Fedora
Dne 26. 03. 20 v 12:39 Aleksandra Fedorova napsal(a):
> On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 10:34 AM Vít Ondruch wrote:
>>
>> Dne 25. 03. 20 v 20:22 James Cassell napsal(a):
>>> On Wed, Mar 25, 2020, at 1:18 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 25. 03. 20 v 18:06 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
> Dne 25. 03. 20 v
No missing expected images.
Passed openQA tests: 1/1 (x86_64)
--
Mail generated by check-compose:
https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 3:55 PM Petr Viktorin wrote:
>
> On 2020-03-25 17:33, Aleksandra Fedorova wrote:
> > [Branching] removes community maintainer from the conversation about what
> > downstream is doing. While we want to give community member a voice in
> > that conversation.
>
> I fear that
Hello! Lutris broken completely on F32 and many users asking what happens with
package. Lutris always up to day in Fedora and i personally doesn't have any
issues with it or all this time until this, but seems like this time '
bunnyapocalypse' just busy [1] to fix it and merge my PR [2]. Can we
Dne 27. 03. 20 v 10:16 Aleksandra Fedorova napsal(a):
> On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 9:36 AM Vít Ondruch wrote:
>>
>> Dne 26. 03. 20 v 12:39 Aleksandra Fedorova napsal(a):
>>> On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 10:34 AM Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 25. 03. 20 v 20:22 James Cassell napsal(a):
> On Wed, Mar
On 3/27/20 9:55 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 09:04:53AM +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote:
On 3/26/20 2:35 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 02:00:49PM +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote:
previous-release-blocker(s) and
On 26. 03. 20 16:13, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 25. 03. 20 17:10, Miro Hrončok wrote:
Finally, of the set of packages that we're going to be including, we
anticipate around 200-300 of them will have distro conditionals that
need investigation (with fewer needing actual modification). The ELN
SIG
On 3/26/20 6:12 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 11:41:56AM -0400, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2020 at 10:54, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 02:08:57PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 03:29:50PM
On 3/27/20 9:04 AM, Panu Matilainen wrote:
On 3/26/20 2:35 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 02:00:49PM +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote:
previous-release-blocker(s) and
previous-previous-release-blockers(s),
since the changes would need to be deployed in F32
On 3/26/20 2:35 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 02:00:49PM +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote:
previous-release-blocker(s) and previous-previous-release-blockers(s),
since the changes would need to be deployed in F32 and F31. Also
note that the last time when
No missing expected images.
Passed openQA tests: 1/1 (x86_64)
--
Mail generated by check-compose:
https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 09:04:53AM +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> On 3/26/20 2:35 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> >On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 02:00:49PM +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> >>> previous-release-blocker(s) and previous-previous-release-blockers(s),
> >>> since the changes
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
There has been a lot of (really good!) discussion on the original
proposal thread, but as it has grown too large to follow anymore, I'm
restarting it. I have made numerous changes to the Change Proposal
page to improve the scope of the proposal as
On 27. 03. 20 12:31, Artem Tim wrote:
Hello! Lutris broken completely on F32 and many users asking what happens with
package. Lutris always up to day in Fedora and i personally doesn't have any
issues with it or all this time until this, but seems like this time '
bunnyapocalypse' just busy
On 3/27/20 1:32 PM, Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
The conditional approach will only allow this:
%if 0%{?rhel}
Version: 7.4.5
%else
Version: 8.0.0~rc1
%endif
(And I assume the rest of the spec file would need major %if/%else mess
as well, because Brainfuck 8 is built with meson, while
On Fri, 27 Mar 2020, Lukas Zapletal wrote:
Hey,
I am trying to bump version of package named workrave which was not originally
added by me, I have been able to fix all the issues so far except one:
https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/7540/42797540/build.log
error: File not found:
Dne 27. 03. 20 v 12:48 Aleksandra Fedorova napsal(a):
> On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 11:00 AM Vít Ondruch wrote:
>>
>> Dne 27. 03. 20 v 10:16 Aleksandra Fedorova napsal(a):
>>> On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 9:36 AM Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 26. 03. 20 v 12:39 Aleksandra Fedorova napsal(a):
> On Thu,
Dne 27. 03. 20 v 12:32 Miro Hrončok napsal(a):
>
> And trust me, you don't want to maintain that. It is not maintainable.
> And it has problems like this:
> https://pagure.io/copr/copr/issue/1315
>
Heh, nice one :) Thanks for sharing
Vít
___
devel
Hello,
Just a general request: could more community folks please spend a few
minutes a day to check AskFedora[1]. With the beta release, we're
already seeing some users asking questions, which often turn out to be
bugs. So, if the package maintainers in the community can please keep an
eye on
Thank you!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines:
Facepalm.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines:
Hey,
I am trying to bump version of package named workrave which was not originally
added by me, I have been able to fix all the issues so far except one:
https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/7540/42797540/build.log
error: File not found:
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 11:00 AM Vít Ondruch wrote:
>
>
> Dne 27. 03. 20 v 10:16 Aleksandra Fedorova napsal(a):
> > On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 9:36 AM Vít Ondruch wrote:
> >>
> >> Dne 26. 03. 20 v 12:39 Aleksandra Fedorova napsal(a):
> >>> On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 10:34 AM Vít Ondruch wrote:
>
Hi, Miro,
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 12:35 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> On 26. 03. 20 16:13, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > On 25. 03. 20 17:10, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> >>> Finally, of the set of packages that we're going to be including, we
> >>> anticipate around 200-300 of them will have distro
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 3/171 (x86_64), 1/2 (arm)
New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-32-20200326.n.0):
ID: 558825 Test: x86_64 Everything-boot-iso memory_check@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/558825
ID: 558944 Test: x86_64 universal
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 10:47 AM David Cantrell wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 10:32:26AM +0100, Aleksandra Fedorova wrote:
> >As Ben is on PTO, I'd like to present the System-Wide Change
> >
> >https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ELN_Buildroot_and_Compose
> [snip]
>
> It has taken me some
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 12:02:40PM -0400, Robbie Harwood wrote:
> Stephen Gallagher writes:
> > It is under discussion whether this snapshot will have its own
> > installation media. For now the preferred way to test ELN composes
> > would be to use standard Fedora Rawhide images and then include
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 02:20:29PM -0500, Justin Forbes wrote:
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 2:09 PM David Cantrell wrote:
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 01:48:15PM -0500, Justin Forbes wrote:
>On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 10:47 AM David Cantrell wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 10:32:26AM +0100,
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 2:41 PM Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> Yup, and the stack trace shows the failure happening when creating an
> ephemeron.
On the other hand, a scratch build with coq upstream's final patch for
ocaml 4.10.0 succeeded on the first try:
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 01:48:15PM -0500, Justin Forbes wrote:
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 10:47 AM David Cantrell wrote:
On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 10:32:26AM +0100, Aleksandra Fedorova wrote:
>As Ben is on PTO, I'd like to present the System-Wide Change
>
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 11:54:44AM -0600, Jerry James wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 10:28 AM Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > Jerry, I suggest this bug is real, but is also likely to be a bug in
> > Coq (most likely) or the OCaml runtime, possibly in the Weak module.
> > You might have more luck
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 4:41 PM Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> I'll run it in a loop overnight and see if I can make it crash.
Good idea. Thank you!
--
Jerry James
http://www.jamezone.org/
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 04:20:16PM -0600, Jerry James wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 2:41 PM Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > Yup, and the stack trace shows the failure happening when creating an
> > ephemeron.
>
> On the other hand, a scratch build with coq upstream's final patch for
> ocaml
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 11:36:38AM -0600, Jerry James wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 11:30 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> wrote:
> > We are. Did you trying putting '%global _smp_mflags -j1' somewhere
> > near the top of the spec file?
>
> We are? Where?
That is what the packaging
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 2:09 PM David Cantrell wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 01:48:15PM -0500, Justin Forbes wrote:
> >On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 10:47 AM David Cantrell wrote:
> >>
> >> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 10:32:26AM +0100, Aleksandra Fedorova wrote:
> >> >As Ben is on PTO, I'd like to
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 11:07:41AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> == Summary ==
> ELN is a new buildroot and compose process for Fedora that will take
> Fedora Rawhide dist-git sources and emulate a Red Hat Enterprise Linux
> compose. Feedback from this build, compose and integration testing
>
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 3:42 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 12:02:40PM -0400, Robbie Harwood wrote:
> > Stephen Gallagher writes:
> > > It is under discussion whether this snapshot will have its own
> > > installation media. For now the preferred way to test
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 11:15:01AM -0600, Jerry James wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 11:03 AM Jerry James wrote:
> > Okay, I will give that a try.
>
> Except I can't. We're already not using %_smp_mflags. Ugh.
I realized that my build machine has MAKEFLAGS=-j24 which is why it's
building
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20200326.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20200327.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 20
Dropped packages:1
Upgraded packages: 88
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 1.34 GiB
Size of dropped packages
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 2:42 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 12:02:40PM -0400, Robbie Harwood wrote:
> > Stephen Gallagher writes:
> > > It is under discussion whether this snapshot will have its own
> > > installation media. For now the preferred way to test
No missing expected images.
Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check!
1 of 43 required tests failed, 4 results missing
openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING**
below
Failed openQA tests: 8/171 (x86_64), 1/2 (arm)
New failures (same test not failed in
On 27. 03. 20 20:20, Justin Forbes wrote:
Sorry, I wasn't clear. I mean that the rhelhide/evolving nature of
this seems it should carry no number, similar to the rawhide it is
inheriting from. Let them deal with numbers in CentOS and RHEL.
But rawhide also has a number (currently 33).
--
Miro
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 1:56 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
>
> Where would mock be executing from? The same filesystem it is modifying?
> Somehow it seems that this doesn't change much, but just brings
> in another layer. Or will a complete copy of the system be made in
> memory to
Hi,
I would like to unsubscribe.
Best Regards,
Wen Rei
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
On 2020-03-28 08:24, wen rei do wrote:
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
--
The key to getting good answers is to ask good questions.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an
Jerry James writes:
> I think Richard addressed most of the points you raised.
Yes, and no new questions, either. So I think I'm done here (well,
I'll spectate, but the internals of the OCaml compiler are well beyond
my skillset :-).
Good luck!
Steve
--
Associate Professor
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 8:01 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> So, my concern here is timeline vs the upcoming datacenter move. ;(
>
> Do you have any ideas when rpm 4.16 will be released? I don't see any
> dates on the change. Or perhaps I guess the question is when it will
> land in rawhide?
>
Panu
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 03:19:01PM -0500, Justin Forbes wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 2:42 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 12:02:40PM -0400, Robbie Harwood wrote:
> > > Stephen Gallagher writes:
> > > > It is under discussion whether this snapshot will
So, in general I think this is a pretty cool idea and I am in favor of
it. I do think we are going to have to learn and adjust as we go here
somewhat, we can't be 100% sure of how this will pan out. Of course we
should plan as best we can now too. :)
Some random things in no particular order:
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 4:42 PM Jerry James wrote:
> Good idea. Thank you!
I got a segfault on s390x on the second build attempt. I'd like to
investigate the ephemeron angle a bit, I think.
--
Jerry James
http://www.jamezone.org/
___
devel mailing
So, my concern here is timeline vs the upcoming datacenter move. ;(
Do you have any ideas when rpm 4.16 will be released? I don't see any
dates on the change. Or perhaps I guess the question is when it will
land in rawhide?
As soon as it lands in rawhide we need to upgrade the builders to the
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 11:15:01AM -0600, Jerry James wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 11:03 AM Jerry James wrote:
> > Okay, I will give that a try.
>
> Except I can't. We're already not using %_smp_mflags. Ugh.
We are. Did you trying putting '%global _smp_mflags -j1' somewhere
near the top
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 11:30 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
> We are. Did you trying putting '%global _smp_mflags -j1' somewhere
> near the top of the spec file?
We are? Where? The spec file does this to build:
make world VERBOSE=1
--
Jerry James
http://www.jamezone.org/
On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 10:28 AM Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> Jerry, I suggest this bug is real, but is also likely to be a bug in
> Coq (most likely) or the OCaml runtime, possibly in the Weak module.
> You might have more luck asking the upstream developers for help.
Coq issue:
On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 10:28 AM Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> I don't know, now I can't even get the ‘fedpkg local’ to reproduce it :-(
>
> Jerry, I suggest this bug is real, but is also likely to be a bug in
> Coq (most likely) or the OCaml runtime, possibly in the Weak module.
> You might have
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 12:02:40PM -0400, Robbie Harwood wrote:
> Stephen Gallagher writes:
>
> > Please see the newly-updated
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ELN_Buildroot_and_Compose
> > for more details[1].
>
> This page states:
[..]
> > Post build result to Fedora Messaging, so
On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 10:21 PM Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> Hi Jerry! Long time no see.
Hi Stephen! It's good to hear from yet another person I've worked
with via network for years.
I think Richard addressed most of the points you raised.
> Where is the segfault? Is it in coqc or is it in
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 11:03 AM Jerry James wrote:
> Okay, I will give that a try.
Except I can't. We're already not using %_smp_mflags. Ugh.
--
Jerry James
http://www.jamezone.org/
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To
OLD: Fedora-32-20200326.n.0
NEW: Fedora-32-20200327.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 0
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
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 4:12 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> There has been a lot of (really good!) discussion on the original
> proposal thread, but as it has grown too large to follow anymore, I'm
> restarting it. I have made numerous
On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 10:32:26AM +0100, Aleksandra Fedorova wrote:
As Ben is on PTO, I'd like to present the System-Wide Change
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ELN_Buildroot_and_Compose
[snip]
It has taken me some time, but I have read through the entire thread in
addition to the
Stephen Gallagher writes:
> Please see the newly-updated
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ELN_Buildroot_and_Compose
> for more details[1].
This page states:
> The fix will be done via a pull request that states a time limit. We
> want the regular maintainers to see / comment / commit,
On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 10:54:25AM -0600, Ken Dreyer wrote:
> I see pykickstart supports https URLs for --proxy, so I think I can
> just do --proxy https://squid.example.com:3128 ?
>
> I don't understand how I would get the installer to trust my custom CA
> to communicate with the HTTPS proxy,
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1812295
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-Encode-3.04-443.fc33 |perl-Encode-3.04-443.fc33
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1808956
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-Encode-3.03-442.fc33 |perl-Encode-3.03-442.fc33
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1817797
--- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2020-2b35f0ffcf has been submitted as an update to Fedora 32.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-2b35f0ffcf
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1817797
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |MODIFIED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1817015
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1817061
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends On||1817875
Referenced Bugs:
The following Fedora EPEL 6 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
6 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2020-9190462510
ckeditor-4.14.0-1.el6
3 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2020-0c0d9690e1
drupal6-6.38-3.el6
The following builds have been
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1817021
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1814708
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1814374
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1808956
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Fixed In
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1812295
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Fixed In
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1817764
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1817764
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Doc Type|---
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
There has been a lot of (really good!) discussion on the original
proposal thread, but as it has grown too large to follow anymore, I'm
restarting it. I have made numerous changes to the Change Proposal
page to improve the scope of the proposal as
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1814708
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-PAR-Packer-1.049-5.fc3 |perl-PAR-Packer-1.049-5.fc3
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1812295
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-Encode-3.04-443.fc33 |perl-Encode-3.04-443.fc33
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1808956
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-Encode-3.03-442.fc33 |perl-Encode-3.03-442.fc33
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1814445
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-EC-1.32- |perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-EC-1.32-
The following Fedora EPEL 8 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
20 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2020-02f03affd4
ansible-2.9.6-1.el8
9 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2020-0316f810ac
python-twisted-19.10.0-2.el8
7
The following Fedora EPEL 7 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
591 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-3c9292b62d
condor-8.6.11-1.el7
333 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-c499781e80
python-gnupg-0.4.4-1.el7
331
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1814532
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #5 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1814532
--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2020-1a094b4f91 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 testing repository.
In short time you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1814445
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Fixed In
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1814445
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-EC-1.32- |perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-EC-1.32-
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1818111
Bug ID: 1818111
Summary: perl-Test-Simple-1.302173 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-Test-Simple
Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1818111
--- Comment #1 from Upstream Release Monitoring
---
An HTTP error occurred downloading the package's new Source URLs: Getting
https://cpan.metacpan.org/modules/by-module/Test/Test-Simple-1.302173.tar.gz to
./Test-Simple-1.302173.tar.gz
--
ppisar closed without merging a pull-request against the project: `perl` that
you
are following.
Closed pull-request:
``
Set macros subpackage noarch
``
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl/pull-request/2
___
perl-devel mailing list --
ppisar commented on the pull-request: `Set macros subpackage noarch` that you
are following:
``
This change was implemented in perl-5.30.2-453.fc33.
``
To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl/pull-request/2
___
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1814532
--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2020-f85e3cdf82 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 32.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-f85e3cdf82
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1814532
--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2020-1a094b4f91 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 30.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-1a094b4f91
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1814532
--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2020-258db49abe has been submitted as an update to Fedora 31.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-258db49abe
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
99 matches
Mail list logo
