Hi Christopher,
A small doubt .
Do I need to call fedpkg update --type enhancement after fedpkg build for
epel8 ?
Regards,
Muneendra.
-Original Message-
From: Muneendra Kumar M [mailto:muneendra.ku...@broadcom.com]
Sent: Friday, August 28, 2020 1:00 PM
To: 'Development discussions
All,
The below question came up in the context of a LibreOffice unit test,
where LibreOffice writes out a PNG image (involving zlib for
compression) and the test checked the exact sequence of bytes, which
failed on aarch64 when using Fedora's zlib. (Though the resulting
images look rather
> one difference is that F-33 enabled LTO (new compiler flags added at
> the distro level, [1], but as you are building with -Werror, then you
> should review the code for real issues.
What do you mean by real issues?
On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 2:38 PM Dan Horák wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Aug 2020
On 28.08.20 10:04, Muneendra Kumar M wrote:
> Do I need to call fedpkg update --type enhancement after fedpkg build for
> epel8 ?
Yes. Any branch that is Bodhi-enabled (normally any branch except
rawhide & epel8-playground) will require a 'fedpkg update' to actually
submit the build to the
Of course this would "solve" issue with GPG signature. It opens door for
man-in-the-middle attack without any protection. But I am aware there
are no many better fixes. There is one with arch symlink, allowing
continued GPG verification.
On 8/25/20 5:56 PM, Mattia Verga via devel wrote:
> Il
Hi Christopher,
Thanks for the detailed information.
Regards,
Muneendra.
-Original Message-
From: Christopher Engelhard [mailto:c...@lcts.de]
Sent: Friday, August 28, 2020 2:26 PM
To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Subject: Re: Query on upgrading the Fedora package
Hi Muneendra,
On
Yep, thanks for help
Lukas
On Fri, Aug 28, 2020 at 10:11 AM Dan Horák wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Aug 2020 10:01:37 +0200
> Lukas Javorsky wrote:
>
> > > one difference is that F-33 enabled LTO (new compiler flags added at
> > > the distro level, [1], but as you are building with -Werror, then you
>
Hi Chrstopher,
Thanks for the info.
I have run the below command for update
Fedpkg update --type enhancement.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2020-77b06c3bc1
After stable time i.e 14 day's the updates will be automatically moved to
stable .Is this correct.
Regards,
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 1/16 (x86_64)
New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-IoT-33-20200826.0):
ID: 649883 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_clevis
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/649883
Soft failed openQA tests: 2/16 (x86_64)
(Tests
Hi Muneendra,
On 28.08.20 10:47, Muneendra Kumar M via devel wrote:
> After stable time i.e 14 day's the updates will be automatically moved to
> stable .Is this correct.
That is the default yes, but you can configure it differently in the
Bodhi web interface if you choose.
Check out the EPEL
Hello Fedorans, Bastien,
I have noticed that the shared-mime-info package was orphaned couple days ago.
Bastien, AFAIK you were the primary point of contact in Fedora and I also see
you are the RHEL 8 default bugzilla assignee.
Considering the following commit:
Hi Christopher,
I did the below steps to upgrade my package to EPEL8 and fedpkg build was
success.
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1602105
Do I need to do anything more for the same.
As the below link still shows the older version.
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/fctxpd
No missing expected images.
Passed openQA tests: 7/7 (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
No missing expected images.
Soft failed openQA tests: 1/7 (x86_64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)
Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-32-20200827.0):
ID: 649871 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2020 10:01:37 +0200
Lukas Javorsky wrote:
> > one difference is that F-33 enabled LTO (new compiler flags added at
> > the distro level, [1], but as you are building with -Werror, then you
> > should review the code for real issues.
as others already mentioned - there is a
OLD: Fedora-33-20200827.n.0
NEW: Fedora-33-20200828.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:1
Dropped images: 1
Added packages: 0
Dropped packages:3
Upgraded packages: 1
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 0 B
Size of dropped packages:889.49 KiB
Size
- Original Message -
> On 28. 08. 20 13:33, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> > I'm sorry, I read through the mail, but I don't understand what you'd want
> > me to say, or what questions you'd want me to answer.
>
> You pretty much answered all the questions. Thanks.
>
> > In short, I've
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 9/181 (x86_64)
New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-33-20200827.n.0):
ID: 650037 Test: x86_64 universal install_asian_language
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/650037
Old failures (same test failed in
- Original Message -
> Hello Fedorans, Bastien,
>
> I have noticed that the shared-mime-info package was orphaned couple days
> ago.
I'm sorry, I read through the mail, but I don't understand what you'd want
me to say, or what questions you'd want me to answer.
In short, I've
the macro "%{vdr_apiversion}" is included in the package vdr-devel
rpm -qf /usr/lib/rpm/macros.d/macros.vdr
vdr-devel-2.4.4-1.fc32.x86_64
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
On Fri, Aug 28, 2020 at 02:30:20PM -, Martin Gansser wrote:
> the macro "%{vdr_apiversion}" is included in the package vdr-devel
>
> rpm -qf /usr/lib/rpm/macros.d/macros.vdr
> vdr-devel-2.4.4-1.fc32.x86_64
There is no such version in Fedora (is this a local build)?
Latest in F32 is
On 28. 08. 20 13:33, Bastien Nocera wrote:
I'm sorry, I read through the mail, but I don't understand what you'd want
me to say, or what questions you'd want me to answer.
You pretty much answered all the questions. Thanks.
In short, I've maintained the upstream shared-mime-info for 16
Hi,
when I want to do a review with: fedora-review -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 -b
1873407
i get this error message:
warning: line 16: Possible unexpanded macro in: Requires:
vdr(abi)(x86-64) = %{vdr_apiversion}
Building target platforms: x86_64
Building for target x86_64
setting
ok, I'll try again tomorrow or the day after tomorrow when it's available in
Rawhide.
Regards
Martin
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
Hi,
On 8/28/20 1:38 AM, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
All,
The below question came up in the context of a LibreOffice unit test,
where LibreOffice writes out a PNG image (involving zlib for
compression) and the test checked the exact sequence of bytes, which
failed on aarch64 when using Fedora's
On Fri, Aug 28, 2020 at 06:51:24PM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>
> Dne 25. 08. 20 v 16:25 Petr Menšík napsal(a):
> > No, unfortunately the key is there, but the package is incomplete.
> >
> > If you have enabled gpg signatures verification, it would fail. At least
> > it does to me.
> >
> > Check
Dne 25. 08. 20 v 16:25 Petr Menšík napsal(a):
> No, unfortunately the key is there, but the package is incomplete.
>
> If you have enabled gpg signatures verification, it would fail. At least
> it does to me.
>
> Check it with:
>
> rpm -ql fedora-gpg-keys | grep fedora-34-$(arch)
>
> It just does
On Fri, 2020-08-28 at 18:51 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Dne 25. 08. 20 v 16:25 Petr Menšík napsal(a):
> > No, unfortunately the key is there, but the package is incomplete.
> >
> > If you have enabled gpg signatures verification, it would fail. At least
> > it does to me.
> >
> > Check it with:
On Fri, 2020-08-28 at 16:41 +0200, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 28, 2020 at 02:30:20PM -, Martin Gansser wrote:
> > the macro "%{vdr_apiversion}" is included in the package vdr-devel
> >
> > rpm -qf /usr/lib/rpm/macros.d/macros.vdr
> > vdr-devel-2.4.4-1.fc32.x86_64
>
> There is no
Hello.
My name is Eugene Syromiatnikov, I am a Software Engineer at Red Hat,
an IBM company. I maintain strace and microcode_ctl packages
in RHEL, among other things. Also, I am a strace developer and used
to contribute to the MoinMoin wiki project.
My main areas of interests are computer
Hiya,
Is anyone working with python packages that use versioneer[1]? My
primary issue here is that upstream does not include tests in the pypi
tars, but because they use versioneer and it does all sorts of "magic":
- it is non trivial to figure out what untagged commit on Github matches
the
On Friday, 28 August 2020 20:30:18 CEST Eugene Syromiatnikov wrote:
> Hello.
>
> My name is Eugene Syromiatnikov, I am a Software Engineer at Red Hat,
> an IBM company. I maintain strace and microcode_ctl packages
> in RHEL, among other things. Also, I am a strace developer and used
> to
Dne 28. 08. 20 v 19:09 Adam Williamson napsal(a):
> On Fri, 2020-08-28 at 18:51 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>> Dne 25. 08. 20 v 16:25 Petr Menšík napsal(a):
>>> No, unfortunately the key is there, but the package is incomplete.
>>>
>>> If you have enabled gpg signatures verification, it would fail.
Greetings.
As many of you know, the s390x builders have been very slow or failing
builds with intermittent i/o issues for a while now.
I've done what I can to mitigate this on the builder level, but the
problem is at a deeper level.
I've been asked to try and collect issues that package
Hi, in accordance with [1] this is a non-responsive maintainer check for
Tom Moertel.
Non-responsive bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1873573
Unactioned bugs (earliest is February 2017):
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1221305
On Fri, 2020-08-28 at 15:03 +, Martin Gansser wrote:
> ok, I'll try again tomorrow or the day after tomorrow when it's
> available in Rawhide.
you may build it with koji package if you add enabled=1 in [local]
configuration at /etc/mock/templates/fedora-rawhide.tpl [1]
[1]
[local]
Hi folks! I'm proposing we cancel the QA meeting for Monday. I don't
have anything urgent this week. We can discuss the network criterion in
the blocker review meeting, I think.
If you're aware of anything important we have to discuss this week,
please do reply to this mail and we can go ahead
On 28. 08. 20 20:31, Ankur Sinha wrote:
Hiya,
Is anyone working with python packages that use versioneer[1]? My
primary issue here is that upstream does not include tests in the pypi
tars, but because they use versioneer and it does all sorts of "magic":
- it is non trivial to figure out what
On Fri, 2020-08-21 at 17:11 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> Hi folks!
>
> So at this week's blocker review meeting, the fact that we don't have
> explicit networking requirements in the release criteria really started
> to bite us. In the past we have squeezed networking-related issues in
> under
On Fri, Aug 28, 2020 at 10:44 PM Sérgio Basto wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2020-08-28 at 15:03 +, Martin Gansser wrote:
> > ok, I'll try again tomorrow or the day after tomorrow when it's
> > available in Rawhide.
>
> you may build it with koji package if you add enabled=1 in [local]
> configuration
On Thu, 2020-08-27 at 10:06 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 6:11 PM Adam Williamson
> wrote:
> >
> > Basic networking
> >
> > It must be possible to establish both IPv4 and IPv6 network connections
> > using DHCP and static addressing. The default network
On Wed, 2020-08-26 at 01:14 +, Gary Buhrmaster wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 10:51 PM Michel Alexandre Salim
> wrote:
>
> > Also, should we add WireGuard to this list for future-proofing?
>
> I had thought about explicitly suggesting
> wireguard, but then thought that we should
> focus
# F33 Blocker Review meeting
# Date: 2020-08-31
# Time: 16:00 UTC
# Location: #fedora-blocker-review on irc.freenode.net
Hi folks! We have 3 proposed Beta blockers, 1 proposed Final blocker
and 4 proposed Beta freeze exceptions to review, so let's have a Fedora
33 blocker review meeting on
Hi,
Björn added some useful Lua packaging macros in
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1447324
One of them, %lua_requires, adds a dependency on either `lua(abi) =
%{lua_version}` or, on EL6 and below, on lua >= current version and lua
< next version.
Somehow this seems to be
[Sorry for the double post, somewhere along the way desktop@ and kde@
were dropped, so I'm re-adding them and that means double post for
test@ and devel@.]
Re: add working mDNS to the criterion
The IPP Everywhere specification requires clients to support DNS-SD
(mDNS is part of that) or
On Fri, Aug 28, 2020 at 5:56 PM Adam Williamson
wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2020-08-27 at 10:06 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 6:11 PM Adam Williamson
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Basic networking
> > >
> > > It must be possible to establish both IPv4 and IPv6 network
On Friday, August 28, 2020 9:55:18 PM MST drago01 wrote:
> On Saturday, August 29, 2020, John M. Harris Jr
>
> wrote:
> > On Monday, August 10, 2020 9:52:42 AM MST Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> > > On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 9:08 am, Michael Catanzaro
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > > > Zbigniew, do you agree
On Fri, Aug 28, 2020 at 7:52 PM Chris Murphy wrote:
> The IPP Everywhere specification requires clients to support DNS-SD
> (mDNS is part of that) or WS-Discovery. Printers are required to
> support both DNS-SD and WS-Discovery. Avahi and systemd-resolved
> support DNS-SD, functionally equating
On Tuesday, August 4, 2020 9:32:35 AM MST Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 04, 2020 at 05:11:49PM +0200, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
>
> > I'm considering to split the default configuration file in the chrony
> > package to make it easier for vendors, products, and configuration
> >
On Saturday, August 29, 2020, John M. Harris Jr
wrote:
> On Monday, August 10, 2020 9:52:42 AM MST Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 9:08 am, Michael Catanzaro
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Zbigniew, do you agree that we should remove the script if and only
> > > if it is generated by
On Fri, 2020-08-28 at 18:36 -0700, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Björn added some useful Lua packaging macros in
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1447324
>
> One of them, %lua_requires, adds a dependency on either `lua(abi) =
> %{lua_version}` or, on EL6 and below, on lua
On Monday, August 10, 2020 9:52:42 AM MST Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 9:08 am, Michael Catanzaro
> wrote:
>
> > Zbigniew, do you agree that we should remove the script if and only
> > if it is generated by NetworkManager? Otherwise, the change is only
> >
On Fri, 2020-08-28 at 18:56 -0700, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
> On Fri, 2020-08-28 at 18:36 -0700, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Björn added some useful Lua packaging macros in
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1447324
> >
> > One of them, %lua_requires, adds a
On 27.08.20 04:01, William Brown wrote:
Hey there,
I'm seeing some odd behaviour in an import test. I'm seeing that a large number
of entries won't import unless the directory is restarted before the import
task is performed.
The error appears to be:
[25/Aug/2020:14:14:58.973490600 +1000]
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1843866
--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2020-4a08a623d2 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 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=1869106
--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-d51b4bbc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 Modular stable
repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
--
You are receiving this mail
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1869726
--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-d51b4bbc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 Modular stable
repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
--
You are receiving this mail
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1869726
--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-9f03413d40 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 Modular stable
repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
--
You are receiving this mail
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1869106
--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-MODULAR-2020-9f03413d40 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 Modular stable
repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
--
You are receiving this mail
Greetings.
As many of you know, the s390x builders have been very slow or failing
builds with intermittent i/o issues for a while now.
I've done what I can to mitigate this on the builder level, but the
problem is at a deeper level.
I've been asked to try and collect issues that package
The following Fedora EPEL 6 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
1 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2020-1af9888c22
golang-1.15-1.el6
The following builds have been pushed to Fedora EPEL 6 updates-testing
php-horde-Horde-Core-2.31.15-1.el6
Can the below be fixed ? I guess this package should not be in both repos...
# yum update
Last metadata expiration check: 0:10:02 ago on Fri 28 Aug 2020 23:47:51 BST.
Error:
Problem 1: package
plasma-workspace-geolocation-5.18.4.1-2.epel8.playground.x86_64
requires libgps.so.24()(64bit), but
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1873624
Bug ID: 1873624
Summary: perl-DateTime-Locale-1.27 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-DateTime-Locale
Keywords: FutureFeature,
On Fri, Aug 28, 2020, at 6:11 PM, Troy Dawson wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 2:10 PM Troy Dawson wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 11:12 AM kevin wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 02:50:39PM -0300, Pablo Sebastián Greco wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On 21/8/20 19:06, Troy Dawson wrote:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1873624
Upstream Release Monitoring
changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|perl-DateTime-Locale-1.27
On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 2:10 PM Troy Dawson wrote:
>
> On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 11:12 AM kevin wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 02:50:39PM -0300, Pablo Sebastián Greco wrote:
> > >
> > > On 21/8/20 19:06, Troy Dawson wrote:
> >
> > > > C) Drop playground. Say it was an interesting
Am 29.08.20 um 00:11 schrieb Troy Dawson:
On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 2:10 PM Troy Dawson wrote:
On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 11:12 AM kevin wrote:
On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 02:50:39PM -0300, Pablo Sebastián Greco wrote:
On 21/8/20 19:06, Troy Dawson wrote:
C) Drop playground. Say it was an
https://fedorapeople.org/groups/389ds/ci/nightly/2020/08/29/report-389-ds-base-1.4.4.4-20200828git3d61aaf.fc32.x86_64.html
___
389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
68 matches
Mail list logo
