Re: koji buildsystem changes

On Sunday, December 13, 2020 11:02:53 PM CET Kevin Fenzi wrote: > * Finally releng is looking at establishing a sidetag cleanup policy. > A reminder that sidetags should be short lived and only created when > needed. koji must generate buildroot repos for every single sidetag. > ( You can list

Re: Summary/Minutes for today's FESCo meeting (2020-12-16)

Dne 16. 12. 20 v 16:47 Fabio Valentini napsal(a): > * #2519 F34 Change: GitRepos-master-to-main (decathorpe, 15:09:57) > * AGREED: APPROVED (+6, 0, -0) (decathorpe, 15:27:51) /me saving you time to read the log for **what** was actually approved: 15:19:05 Proposal: Approve proposal to

Re: What to do about ELN-related "spam"?

Dne 17. 12. 20 v 12:37 Petr Šabata napsal(a): On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 12:27 PM Fabio Valentini wrote: Hi everybody, I'm unsure how to deal with this, so I'm asking here if anybody has ideas. - I'm getting serious spam from fedora-notif on IRC about successful - and a lot more failed - ELN

Re: koji buildsystem changes

Dne 17. 12. 20 v 10:17 Pavel Raiskup napsal(a): >> I wonder how much slower it is? > IOW, bootstrap image is even now slightly faster than normal bootstrap, but we > could make it almost as fast as mock without bootstrap. 1) the difference is mostly in first run (till the cache is populated).

Re: What is the most time consuming task for you as packager?

On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 10:14 AM Vít Ondruch wrote: > > > Dne 16. 12. 20 v 21:56 Neal Gompa napsal(a): > > On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 3:34 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote: > >> On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 07:15:21PM +, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > >>> On 15/12/20 23:46 +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On

Re: End of CentOS Linux: What about Fedora?

Robin Opletal wrote: > I think this wouldn't be that much of a problem - what I think is bad is > that CentOS Stream security updates aren't going to come before RHEL's > will, and they will essentially be backported, at least as I understood > it. That would be a forward-port then, not a

Re: End of CentOS Linux: What about Fedora?

I think this wouldn't be that much of a problem - what I think is bad is that CentOS Stream security updates aren't going to come before RHEL's will, and they will essentially be backported, at least as I understood it. Correct me if I am wrong On Wed Dec 9, 2020 at 5:52 PM CET, Adam Williamson

Re: What to do about ELN-related "spam"?

Hi, Fabio, On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 1:22 PM Fabio Valentini wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 12:37 PM Petr Šabata wrote: > > > > On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 12:27 PM Fabio Valentini > > wrote: > > > > > > Hi everybody, > > > > > > I'm unsure how to deal with this, so I'm asking here if anybody

Re: Proposal: drop "Test installation media" from live media

On Thu, 17 Dec 2020 at 00:29, przemek klosowski via devel < devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote: > > On 12/16/20 5:38 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 04:28:49PM -0500, przemek klosowski via devel wrote: > > I was trying to make a point that we don't have a way to check the

Re: How to troubleshoot aarch64 and s390x?

I tried qemu using this link but it's wildly out of date... https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/AArch64/Install_with_QEMU I updated the url for Fedora 33 but it still fails... sudo virt-install --name f33-aarch64-urlinst --ram 4096 --arch aarch64 --boot uefi --disk size=8 --location

Re: koji buildsystem changes

On Wednesday, December 16, 2020 8:25:50 PM CET Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 10:54:07AM +0100, Miroslav Suchý wrote: > > > > https://github.com/rpm-software-management/mock/wiki/Feature-container-for-bootstrap > > which is still fresh feature - just one year old :) And so far not

What to do about ELN-related "spam"?

Hi everybody, I'm unsure how to deal with this, so I'm asking here if anybody has ideas. - I'm getting serious spam from fedora-notif on IRC about successful - and a lot more failed - ELN builds for my packages (triggered either by ELN developers or automatically by their CI) - bodhi is spamming

Re: What is the most time consuming task for you as packager?

Dne 17. 12. 20 v 12:30 Fabio Valentini napsal(a): On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 10:14 AM Vít Ondruch wrote: Dne 16. 12. 20 v 21:56 Neal Gompa napsal(a): On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 3:34 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote: On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 07:15:21PM +, Jonathan Wakely wrote: On 15/12/20 23:46 +0100,

Re: What is the most time consuming task for you as packager?

On Thu, 17 Dec 2020 at 04:14, Vít Ondruch wrote: > > Dne 16. 12. 20 v 21:56 Neal Gompa napsal(a): > > >>> Yes, that's a real pain. Can we just add everything to Koschei instead > >>> of having it opt-in? > >> Thats worth considering in the new year. I would like that. :) > >> > > I would

Re: What is the most time consuming task for you as packager?

On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 1:02 AM Chuck Anderson wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 11:29:27PM +0100, Miroslav Suchý wrote: > > I am looking for challenges for upcoming year - what I and my team should > > enhance. I have some ideas, but I want to hear > > yours. > > > > What you - as Fedora

Re: What to do about ELN-related "spam"?

On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 12:27 PM Fabio Valentini wrote: > > Hi everybody, > > I'm unsure how to deal with this, so I'm asking here if anybody has ideas. > > - I'm getting serious spam from fedora-notif on IRC about successful - > and a lot more failed - ELN builds for my packages (triggered

Re: What is the most time consuming task for you as packager?

On 16.12.2020 20:15, Jonathan Wakely wrote: What I'd really like would be a "test mass rebuild" process, where a prospective package is uploaded and everything that depends on it is automatically rebuilt (ideally after creating the dependency graph so each individual package doesn't get rebuilt

Announcing the Pantheon SIG

Good day everybody, With ever-increasing interest in running the Pantheon DE on fedora, we decided to create a SIG for Pantheon! There's the obligatory Wiki page: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Pantheon We have created a dedicated IRC channel: #fedora-pantheon There's also tracking

Re: What is the most time consuming task for you as packager?

Dne 17. 12. 20 v 8:02 Luya Tshimbalanga napsal(a): > Frontend for spec file ??? Can you elaborate it? -- Miroslav Suchy, RHCA Red Hat, Associate Manager ABRT/Copr, #brno, #fedora-buildsys ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To

Re: What to do about ELN-related "spam"?

On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 12:37 PM Petr Šabata wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 12:27 PM Fabio Valentini wrote: > > > > Hi everybody, > > > > I'm unsure how to deal with this, so I'm asking here if anybody has ideas. > > > > - I'm getting serious spam from fedora-notif on IRC about successful -

Re: End of CentOS Linux: What about Fedora?

On Thu, 17 Dec 2020 at 04:45, Robin Opletal wrote: > I think this wouldn't be that much of a problem - what I think is bad is > that CentOS Stream security updates aren't going to come before RHEL's > will, and they will essentially be backported, at least as I understood > it. > > a) CentOS

Re: What is the most time consuming task for you as packager?

Dne 16. 12. 20 v 21:56 Neal Gompa napsal(a): On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 3:34 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote: On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 07:15:21PM +, Jonathan Wakely wrote: On 15/12/20 23:46 +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote: On 12/15/20 11:29 PM, Miroslav Suchý wrote: I am looking for challenges for upcoming

Fedora-Cloud-32-20201217.0 compose check report

No missing expected images. Soft failed openQA tests: 1/7 (x86_64), 1/7 (aarch64) (Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug) Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-32-20201215.0): ID: 742382 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud URL:

Re: What to do about ELN-related "spam"?

On 17/12/2020 11:23, Fabio Valentini wrote: - I'm getting serious spam from fedora-notif on IRC about successful - and a lot more failed - ELN builds for my packages (triggered either by ELN developers or automatically by their CI) I use email notification rather than IRC so I just have an

Re: What to do about ELN-related "spam"?

Petr Šabata writes: > On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 12:27 PM Fabio Valentini wrote: >> >> Hi everybody, >> >> I'm unsure how to deal with this, so I'm asking here if anybody has ideas. >> >> - I'm getting serious spam from fedora-notif on IRC about successful - >> and a lot more failed - ELN builds

Review request: mingw-openexr

Hi Similarly to the native package, I've reworked the mingw-ilmbase and mingw-OpenEXR packages to a single mingw-openexr package. Review request is here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1908713 Happy to review in exchange. Thanks Sandro

How to troubleshoot aarch64 and s390x?

I'm working on building the new openexr package but the unit tests are failing but just on aarch64 and s390x. The aarch64 test instances are down due to the infra move and there are none for s390x. What's the best way to work around this? An emulated aarch64 install of Fedora? Thanks, Richard

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20201217.n.0 changes

OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20201216.n.0 NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20201217.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:0 Dropped images: 1 Added packages: 5 Dropped packages:1 Upgraded packages: 142 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 975.66 KiB Size of dropped packages

Re: Proposal: drop "Test installation media" from live media

Am 17.12.20 um 14:35 schrieb Stephen John Smoogen: Right, but it's not automatic, and requires an existing known-good system, which is the actual 'root of trust' here. This cannot be assumed about a flash drive, which is why the automatic image check is hard. Speaking from Security pov,

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

Il 17/12/20 17:12, Tom Callaway ha scritto: > Okay, this one has me stumped. Any chromium package I build through > rawhide refuses to render most of the strings. Seems similar to what I reported for Falkon: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1904652 Does Chromium uses

Re: Summary/Minutes for today's FESCo meeting (2020-12-16)

On Thu, Dec 17, 2020, at 6:32 AM, Miroslav Suchý wrote: > Dne 16. 12. 20 v 16:47 Fabio Valentini napsal(a): > > * #2519 F34 Change: GitRepos-master-to-main (decathorpe, 15:09:57) > > * AGREED: APPROVED (+6, 0, -0) (decathorpe, 15:27:51) > > > /me saving you time to read the log for

Re: Summary/Minutes for today's FESCo meeting (2020-12-16)

On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 6:22 PM James Cassell wrote: > > > > On Thu, Dec 17, 2020, at 6:32 AM, Miroslav Suchý wrote: > > Dne 16. 12. 20 v 16:47 Fabio Valentini napsal(a): > > > * #2519 F34 Change: GitRepos-master-to-main (decathorpe, 15:09:57) > > > * AGREED: APPROVED (+6, 0, -0) (decathorpe,

Orphaning yad

Hi all, I've just orphaned yad[1], as I do not use it for a long time. It would be great if someone could give it more care. The package needs an update. Feel free to take it [1] - https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/yad ___ devel mailing list --

Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

Okay, this one has me stumped. Any chromium package I build through rawhide refuses to render most of the strings. At first, I thought this was gcc 11, but then I noticed that the first build with this problem was built before GCC 11 landed in rawhide (the compiler was the same n-v-r as the one

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 5:12 PM Tom Callaway wrote: > Okay, this one has me stumped. Any chromium package I build through > rawhide refuses to render most of the strings. > > At first, I thought this was gcc 11, but then I noticed that the first > build with this problem was built before GCC 11

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

Tom Callaway writes: > Okay, this one has me stumped. Any chromium package I build through rawhide > refuses to render most of the strings. > > At first, I thought this was gcc 11, but then I noticed that the first > build with this problem was built before GCC 11 landed in rawhide (the >

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

I cannot install the rawhide-built chromium into F33 without bringing glibc from rawhide with me: [spot@localhost ~]$ sudo rpm -Uvh chromium-common-87.0.4280.88-1.fc34.x86_64.rpm chromium-87.0.4280.88-1.fc34.x86_64.rpm error: Failed dependencies: libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.33)(64bit) is needed by

FedoraRespin-33-updates-20201215.0 compose check report

No missing expected images. Failed openQA tests: 6/37 (x86_64) ID: 742843 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso desktop_notifications_postinstall URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/742843 ID: 742846 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso desktop_update_graphical URL:

Re: What is the most time consuming task for you as packager?

Dne 17. 12. 20 v 15:06 Stephen John Smoogen napsal(a): On Thu, 17 Dec 2020 at 04:14, Vít Ondruch > wrote: Dne 16. 12. 20 v 21:56 Neal Gompa napsal(a): >>> Yes, that's a real pain. Can we just add everything to Koschei instead >>> of having it

Fedora-Rawhide-20201217.n.0 compose check report

Missing expected images: Xfce raw-xz armhfp Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check! 5 of 43 required tests failed, 4 results missing openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING** below Failed openQA tests: 16/180 (x86_64), 16/122 (aarch64) New failures (same

Fedora-IoT-34-20201217.0 compose check report

Missing expected images: Iot dvd x86_64 Iot dvd aarch64 Failed openQA tests: 2/16 (x86_64), 5/15 (aarch64) New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-IoT-34-20201216.0): ID: 742805 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_rpmostree_rebase URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/742805

Re: How to troubleshoot aarch64 and s390x?

Richard Shaw 于2020年12月17日周四 下午9:34写道： > > I'm working on building the new openexr package but the unit tests are > failing but just on aarch64 and s390x. > > The aarch64 test instances are down due to the infra move and there are none > for s390x. > > What's the best way to work around this? An

Re: How to troubleshoot aarch64 and s390x?

Richard Shaw 于2020年12月17日周四 下午9:34写道： > > I'm working on building the new openexr package but the unit tests are > failing but just on aarch64 and s390x. And if having problems with s390x, https://linuxone.cloud.marist.edu/ provides a free s390x vps (at least last time I used its service) > >

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 12:02 PM Mattia Verga via devel wrote: > > Il 17/12/20 17:12, Tom Callaway ha scritto: > > Okay, this one has me stumped. Any chromium package I build through > > rawhide refuses to render most of the strings. > > Seems similar to what I reported for Falkon: > >

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

Tom Callaway writes: > I cannot install the rawhide-built chromium into F33 without bringing glibc > from rawhide with me: > > [spot@localhost ~]$ sudo rpm -Uvh > chromium-common-87.0.4280.88-1.fc34.x86_64.rpm > chromium-87.0.4280.88-1.fc34.x86_64.rpm > error: Failed dependencies: >

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

Certainly not ruling out glibc as the problem here, but if it was glibc, I would think the problem would arise when I install the Fedora 33 build in rawhide, and it does not... ~spot On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 12:10 PM Robbie Harwood wrote: > Tom Callaway writes: > > > I cannot install the

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

I downgraded cairo to 1.16.0-9.fc33 and it had no effect, the bug remained. Thanks, ~spot On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 11:19 AM Kalev Lember wrote: > On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 5:12 PM Tom Callaway wrote: > >> Okay, this one has me stumped. Any chromium package I build through >> rawhide refuses to

Re: Summary/Minutes for today's FESCo meeting (2020-12-16)

On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 12:33 PM Fabio Valentini wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 6:22 PM James Cassell > wrote: > > > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 17, 2020, at 6:32 AM, Miroslav Suchý wrote: > > > Dne 16. 12. 20 v 16:47 Fabio Valentini napsal(a): > > > > * #2519 F34 Change: GitRepos-master-to-main

Re: Orphaning yad

Elder Marco wrote: Hi all, I've just orphaned yad[1], as I do not use it for a long time. It would be great if someone could give it more care. The package needs an update. I've taken it. I am already involved with upstream a bit, anyway. ~buc

Re: Fedora 34 Change: Enable spec file preprocessing (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 3:15 PM Fabio Valentini wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 8:06 PM Ben Cotton wrote: > > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Enable_Spec_File_Preprocessing > > > > > > == Summary == > > This change should enable an opt-in spec file preprocessor in Fedora > >

Fedora 34 Change: Ruby on Rails 6.1 (Self-Contained Change proposal)

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Ruby_on_Rails_6.1 == Summary == Ruby on Rails 6.1 is the latest version of well known web framework written in Ruby. == Owner == * Name: [[User:pvalena| Pavel Valena]], [[User:vondruch| Vít Ondruch]], [[User:jaruga| Jun Aruga]] * Email: pval...@redhat.com,

Re: Fedora 34 Change: Enable spec file preprocessing (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Thu, Dec 17, 2020, at 2:05 PM, Ben Cotton wrote: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Enable_Spec_File_Preprocessing > > > == Summary == > This change should enable an opt-in spec file preprocessor in Fedora > infrastructure for the benefit of packagers. The preprocessor allows > some

Re: Fedora 34 Change: Enable spec file preprocessing (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Thu, 17 Dec 2020 14:05:40 -0500 Ben Cotton wrote: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Enable_Spec_File_Preprocessing > > == Summary == > This change should enable an opt-in spec file preprocessor in Fedora > infrastructure for the benefit of packagers. The preprocessor allows > some

Re: What is the most time consuming task for you as packager?

On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 03:26:47PM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote: > > Sadly we do not have the amount of disk space needed for that. Koschei > > fills up our koji partition regularly. The partition has a 100TB HARD > > limit and between koschei, ELN and regular update rebuilds we bounce off > > it

Re: Fedora 34 Change: Enable spec file preprocessing (System-Wide Change proposal)

On 12/17/20 9:21 PM, Miro Hrončok wrote: On 12/17/20 8:05 PM, Ben Cotton wrote: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Enable_Spec_File_Preprocessing == Summary == This change should enable an opt-in spec file preprocessor in Fedora infrastructure for the benefit of packagers. The 

Re: koji buildsystem changes

On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 10:17:45AM +0100, Pavel Raiskup wrote: > On Wednesday, December 16, 2020 8:25:50 PM CET Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 10:54:07AM +0100, Miroslav Suchý wrote: > > > > > > https://github.com/rpm-software-management/mock/wiki/Feature-container-for-bootstrap

Re: What is the most time consuming task for you as packager?

On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 9:08 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 03:56:25PM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: > ...snip... > > So I've written tools for doing this, and Igor has written tools for > > doing this, but it seems like people think that this is "impossible" > > and so the effort

Fedora 34 Change: Enable spec file preprocessing (System-Wide Change proposal)

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Enable_Spec_File_Preprocessing == Summary == This change should enable an opt-in spec file preprocessor in Fedora infrastructure for the benefit of packagers. The preprocessor allows some very neat tricks that were impossible before, for example generate

Re: What is the most time consuming task for you as packager?

On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 03:56:25PM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: ...snip... > > > What I'd really like would be a "test mass rebuild" process, where a > > > prospective package is uploaded and everything that depends on it is > > > automatically rebuilt (ideally after creating the dependency graph so >

Re: How to troubleshoot aarch64 and s390x?

On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 07:32:59AM -0600, Richard Shaw wrote: > I'm working on building the new openexr package but the unit tests are > failing but just on aarch64 and s390x. > > The aarch64 test instances are down due to the infra move and there are > none for s390x. Yeah, sorry about that. ;(

Re: koji buildsystem changes

On Thursday, December 17, 2020 8:55:48 PM CET Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 10:40:24AM +0100, Pavel Raiskup wrote: > > On Sunday, December 13, 2020 11:02:53 PM CET Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > > * Finally releng is looking at establishing a sidetag cleanup policy. > > > A reminder that

Re: koji buildsystem changes

On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 10:40:24AM +0100, Pavel Raiskup wrote: > On Sunday, December 13, 2020 11:02:53 PM CET Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > * Finally releng is looking at establishing a sidetag cleanup policy. > > A reminder that sidetags should be short lived and only created when > > needed. koji must

Re: Fedora 34 Change: Enable spec file preprocessing (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 8:06 PM Ben Cotton wrote: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Enable_Spec_File_Preprocessing > > > == Summary == > This change should enable an opt-in spec file preprocessor in Fedora > infrastructure for the benefit of packagers. The preprocessor allows > some very

Re: Fedora 34 Change: Enable spec file preprocessing (System-Wide Change proposal)

On 12/17/20 8:05 PM, Ben Cotton wrote: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Enable_Spec_File_Preprocessing == Summary == This change should enable an opt-in spec file preprocessor in Fedora infrastructure for the benefit of packagers. The preprocessor allows some very neat tricks that were

Re: How to troubleshoot aarch64 and s390x?

On Thu, 17 Dec 2020 12:23:27 -0800 Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 07:32:59AM -0600, Richard Shaw wrote: > > I'm working on building the new openexr package but the unit tests are > > failing but just on aarch64 and s390x. > > > > The aarch64 test instances are down due to the

Re: How to troubleshoot aarch64 and s390x?

- Original Message - > I tried qemu using this link but it's wildly out of date... > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/AArch64/Install_with_QEMU > Updated for Fedora 33. > I updated the url for Fedora 33 but it still fails... > > sudo virt-install --name

Re: Fedora 34 Change: Route all Audio to PipeWire (System-Wide Change)

Hi, I'm the packager of pulseaudio-module-bluetooth-freeworld in rpmfusion. That library provides AAC, LDAC and aptX for Bluetooth users. What seems to be the case is that pipewire can already be built with aptX and ldac support:

Re: Fedora 34 Change: Enable spec file preprocessing (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Thu, 17 Dec 2020 at 22:04, James Szinger wrote: > > On Thu, 17 Dec 2020 14:05:40 -0500 > Ben Cotton wrote: > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Enable_Spec_File_Preprocessing > > > > == Summary == > > This change should enable an opt-in spec file preprocessor in Fedora > >

Re: Fedora 34 Change: Enable spec file preprocessing (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Fri, 18 Dec 2020 at 00:58, Matthew Miller wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 18, 2020 at 12:24:10AM +0100, clime wrote: > > It would be possible to specify the spec template as an rpm Source so > > it would get included into the resulting srpm as well. > > Yeah I was thinking the spec file templating

Re: Fedora 34 Change: Enable spec file preprocessing (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Thu, 17 Dec 2020 at 21:15, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 8:06 PM Ben Cotton wrote: > > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Enable_Spec_File_Preprocessing > > > > > > == Summary == > > This change should enable an opt-in spec file preprocessor in Fedora > >

Re: How to troubleshoot aarch64 and s390x?

On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 4:35 pm, Richard Shaw wrote: I'll take a look at the IBM community stuff while I'm on holiday after this week which may also be a stop gap. It's probably limited to a short trial period or something. You'll probably find it lot easier to work with Dan Horak instead.

Re: Fedora 34 Change: Enable spec file preprocessing (System-Wide Change proposal)

On 12/17/2020 3:59 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: On Fri, Dec 18, 2020 at 12:51:49AM +0100, clime wrote: This change proposal does affect users. The User Experience section needs to answer the following: Well, the users here are still packagers here no? I thought the "User" in the title means "end

Re: Fedora 34 Change: Stop Shipping Individual Nodejs Library Packages (Self-Contained)

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 3:42 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 12/9/20 9:56 PM, Troy Dawson wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 11:21 AM Miro Hrončok wrote: > >> > >> On 12/9/20 7:44 PM, Ben Cotton wrote: > >>> == How To Test == > >>> > >>> * Install all nodejs libraries in Fedora 33. Try to update to

Re: How to troubleshoot aarch64 and s390x?

On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 4:07 PM Sérgio Basto wrote: > On Thu, 2020-12-17 at 07:32 -0600, Richard Shaw wrote: > > I'm working on building the new openexr package but the unit tests are > failing but just on aarch64 and s390x. > > > Since is testing building, wh not mock with forcearch [1] ? >

Re: Fedora 34 Change: Enable spec file preprocessing (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Thu, 17 Dec 2020 at 21:34, James Cassell wrote: > > > On Thu, Dec 17, 2020, at 2:05 PM, Ben Cotton wrote: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Enable_Spec_File_Preprocessing > > > > > > == Summary == > > This change should enable an opt-in spec file preprocessor in Fedora > >

Re: koji buildsystem changes

On Thursday, December 17, 2020 9:04:42 PM CET Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 10:17:45AM +0100, Pavel Raiskup wrote: > > On Wednesday, December 16, 2020 8:25:50 PM CET Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > > On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 10:54:07AM +0100, Miroslav Suchý wrote: > > > > > > > >

Re: How to troubleshoot aarch64 and s390x?

On Thu, 2020-12-17 at 07:32 -0600, Richard Shaw wrote: > I'm working on building the new openexr package but the unit tests > are failing but just on aarch64 and s390x. Since is testing building, wh not mock with forcearch [1] ? [1]

Re: Fedora 34 Change: Stop Shipping Individual Nodejs Library Packages (Self-Contained)

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 3:52 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 12/9/20 7:44 PM, Ben Cotton wrote: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/NodejsLibrariesBundleByDefault > > > > ... > > * Policies and guidelines: N/A (not a System Wide Change) > > Should there be an update of: > >

Re: Fedora 34 Change: Enable spec file preprocessing (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Fri, Dec 18, 2020 at 12:24:10AM +0100, clime wrote: > It would be possible to specify the spec template as an rpm Source so > it would get included into the resulting srpm as well. Yeah I was thinking the spec file templating system could automatically add the original spec as Source where

Re: Fedora 34 Change: Enable spec file preprocessing (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Fri, 18 Dec 2020 at 02:27, Japheth Cleaver wrote: > > On 12/17/2020 3:59 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 18, 2020 at 12:51:49AM +0100, clime wrote: > > This change proposal does affect users. The User Experience section > needs to answer the following: > > Well, the users here are

Re: How to troubleshoot aarch64 and s390x?

Just to (not quite) wrap up this thread... Someone reached out to me privately to provide some hardware that can run Fedora aarch64, so once I receive that my immediate need should be satisfied assuming the same problem is plaguing it and s390x which is an assumption at this point. I'll take a

Re: Fedora 34 Change: Enable spec file preprocessing (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Fri, Dec 18, 2020 at 12:51:49AM +0100, clime wrote: > > This change proposal does affect users. The User Experience section > > needs to answer the following: > Well, the users here are still packagers here no? I thought the "User" > in the title means "end user" who shouldn't be affected by

Re: Fedora 34 Change: Enable spec file preprocessing (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Thu, 17 Dec 2020 at 21:23, Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 12/17/20 8:05 PM, Ben Cotton wrote: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Enable_Spec_File_Preprocessing > > > > > > == Summary == > > This change should enable an opt-in spec file preprocessor in Fedora > > infrastructure for the

Re: Fedora 34 Change: Enable spec file preprocessing (System-Wide Change proposal)

...snip... > > I'm generally not excited about this, as it adds a huge layer of > indirection and a ton of extra magic that makes it harder to decipher > what is happening. > I don't think there is any magic in it. Everything is clearly documented and every expansion clearly defined and also

Re: Proposal: drop "Test installation media" from live media

On 12/17/20 10:04 AM, Marius Schwarz wrote: Am 17.12.20 um 14:35 schrieb Stephen John Smoogen: Right, but it's not automatic, and requires an existing known-good system, which is the actual 'root of trust' here. This cannot be assumed about a flash drive, which is why the automatic image

Re: Fedora 34 Change: Enable spec file preprocessing (System-Wide Change proposal)

On 12/17/20 11:05 AM, Ben Cotton wrote: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Enable_Spec_File_Preprocessing == Summary == This change should enable an opt-in spec file preprocessor in Fedora infrastructure for the benefit of packagers. The preprocessor allows some very neat tricks that were

Fedora-Cloud-33-20201218.0 compose check report

No missing expected images. Soft failed openQA tests: 1/7 (x86_64), 1/7 (aarch64) (Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug) Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-33-20201217.0): ID: 743465 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud URL:

Re: koji buildsystem changes

On 12/16/20 12:18 AM, Miroslav Suchý wrote: Dne 15. 12. 20 v 11:39 Panu Matilainen napsal(a): BTW, I'm not aware of the details how the images are built these days, but of course *something* will still need to build those images, That is normal podman image of Fedora. Strictly speaking you

[Bug 1908474] perl-libwww-perl-6.50 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1908474 --- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-69cc4b3901 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 32. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-69cc4b3901 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list

[Bug 1908474] perl-libwww-perl-6.50 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1908474 --- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-b66683a2df has been submitted as an update to Fedora 33. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-b66683a2df -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list

[Bug 1908474] perl-libwww-perl-6.50 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1908474 Petr Pisar changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED Fixed In Version|

[Bug 1908474] perl-libwww-perl-6.50 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1908474 Petr Pisar changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED

[EPEL-devel] [Fedocal] Reminder meeting : EPEL Steering Committee

Dear all, You are kindly invited to the meeting: EPEL Steering Committee on 2020-12-18 from 17:00:00 to 18:00:00 US/Eastern At fedora-meet...@irc.freenode.net The meeting will be about: This is the weekly EPEL Steering Committee Meeting. A general agenda is the following: #meetingname

Re: Mass spec file change: Adding BuildRequires: make

On 11/30/20 2:06 PM, Tom Stellard wrote: Hi, As part of the f34 change request[1] for removing make from the buildroot, I will be doing a mass update of packages[2] to add BuildRequires: make where it is needed. If you are a package maintainer and would prefer to update your packages on

[Bug 1908799] New: perl-LWP-Protocol-https-6.10 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1908799 Bug ID: 1908799 Summary: perl-LWP-Protocol-https-6.10 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-LWP-Protocol-https Keywords:

[Bug 1908816] New: perl-DBD-CSV-0.57 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1908816 Bug ID: 1908816 Summary: perl-DBD-CSV-0.57 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-DBD-CSV Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged

Fedora 34 Change: Enable spec file preprocessing (System-Wide Change proposal)

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Enable_Spec_File_Preprocessing == Summary == This change should enable an opt-in spec file preprocessor in Fedora infrastructure for the benefit of packagers. The preprocessor allows some very neat tricks that were impossible before, for example generate

Fedora 34 Change: Ruby on Rails 6.1 (Self-Contained Change proposal)

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Ruby_on_Rails_6.1 == Summary == Ruby on Rails 6.1 is the latest version of well known web framework written in Ruby. == Owner == * Name: [[User:pvalena| Pavel Valena]], [[User:vondruch| Vít Ondruch]], [[User:jaruga| Jun Aruga]] * Email: pval...@redhat.com,

[EPEL-devel] Re: Proposal for RHEL8 missing -devel packages

On Sun, Dec 13, 2020 at 10:37:49AM -0700, Orion Poplawski wrote: > On 12/11/20 5:04 PM, Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 12/12/20 12:12 AM, Troy Dawson wrote: > > > There is also a problem if a missing package has been specifically > > > blocked by a module.  I think libuv-devel is this way. > > > > If

[389-devel] please review: PR 4508 - Improve csngen testing task

https://github.com/389ds/389-ds-base/pull/4508 -- 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:

  1   2   >