Some results from a Rawhide podman container:
# koji download-build --arch x86_64 coreutils-9.0-1.fc36
# dnf install coreutils-common-9.0-1.fc36.x86_64.rpm
coreutils-9.0-1.fc36.x86_64.rpm
# git clone https://github.com/systemd/systemd
# cd systemd
# /usr/bin/chmod -Rf a+rX,u+w,g-w,o-w .
# echo
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20211003.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20211004.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:1
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 0
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 60
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 0 B
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Size
We had a spirited and detailed discussion so far. But nevertheless, I think we
are none the wiser at the moment. We have many informative contributions to the
discussion and analyses of the situation.
However, we lack concepts on how to proceed after removing java-maint-sig. What
On 04. 10. 21 14:06, Kamil Dudka wrote:
On Monday, October 4, 2021 11:57:14 AM CEST Miro Hrončok wrote:
Hello,
I see this failure in dnf in Copr and Koji:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/churchyard/patch251/build/2872812/
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=76673401
On 04. 10. 21 14:16, Kamil Dudka wrote:
On Monday, October 4, 2021 1:58:36 PM CEST František Šumšal wrote:
Some results from a Rawhide podman container:
# koji download-build --arch x86_64 coreutils-9.0-1.fc36
# dnf install coreutils-common-9.0-1.fc36.x86_64.rpm
coreutils-9.0-1.fc36.x86_64.rpm
On Monday, October 4, 2021 2:24:22 PM CEST Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 04. 10. 21 14:16, Kamil Dudka wrote:
> > On Monday, October 4, 2021 1:58:36 PM CEST František Šumšal wrote:
> >> Some results from a Rawhide podman container:
> >>
> >> # koji download-build --arch x86_64 coreutils-9.0-1.fc36
>
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 Mon, 4 Oct 2021 at 13:07, Peter Boy wrote:
>
> We had a spirited and detailed discussion so far. But nevertheless, I think
> we are none the wiser at the moment. We have many informative contributions
> to the discussion and analyses of the situation.
>
> However, we lack concepts on how to
On 04. 10. 21 13:33, František Šumšal wrote:
I just noticed that as well in our systemd Packit runs, but so far
only on i386, because the repos for x86_64, ppc64le, and aarch64
are still on coreutils-8.32-32.fc36 (whereas i386 has
coreutils-9.0-1.fc36)
That's because by defalt, Copr uses the
On Monday, October 4, 2021 11:57:14 AM CEST Miro Hrončok wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I see this failure in dnf in Copr and Koji:
>
> https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/churchyard/patch251/build/2872812/
> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=76673401
>
> Executing(%prep): /bin/sh -e
On Monday, October 4, 2021 1:58:36 PM CEST František Šumšal wrote:
> Some results from a Rawhide podman container:
>
> # koji download-build --arch x86_64 coreutils-9.0-1.fc36
> # dnf install coreutils-common-9.0-1.fc36.x86_64.rpm
> coreutils-9.0-1.fc36.x86_64.rpm
# git clone
>
Announcing the creation of a new nightly release validation test event
for Fedora 35 Branched 20211004.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
Hi!
I like this idea. As a new contributor, I am really scared to touch anything
related to committing the package, for fear of screwing up, so something that
is not screwable as onboarding sounds great.
On 10/4/21 5:57 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Hi,
Recently, there have been a lot of
Missing expected images:
Iot dvd aarch64
Iot dvd x86_64
Failed openQA tests: 3/16 (x86_64), 3/15 (aarch64)
New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-IoT-36-20211003.0):
ID: 1013062 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_zezere_server
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1013062
ID:
Hi,
Recently, there have been a lot of discussions on this list as well as
we have internally about onboarding. During our internal brainstorming,
we were initially discussing that it could be useful to have some
package one can experiment with without being too much worried about the
V Sat, Oct 02, 2021 at 12:29:01PM -0600, Orion Poplawski napsal(a):
> On 9/10/21 6:26 AM, Petr Pisar wrote:
> > Good news, module maintainers.
> >
> > I'm relieved to announce an availability of the new module packaging format,
> > modulemd-packager, version 3.
> >
>
> Question: is this
Dne 02. 10. 21 v 18:02 Robert-André Mauchin napsal(a):
On 7/19/21 18:17, Ben Cotton wrote:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/WirePlumber
== Summary == PipeWire currently uses a simple example session
manager. This proposal is to move to the more powerful WirePlumber
session manager.
==
No missing expected images.
Soft failed openQA tests: 1/8 (x86_64), 1/8 (aarch64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)
Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-33-20211003.0):
ID: 1011785 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL:
On Mon, Oct 04, 2021 at 05:11:48AM +, John Wolfe wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> As a member of the VMware Tools team since 2016, I have actively participated
> in the publication of granular change updates to the branches of https://
> github.com/vmware/open-vm-tools/. For the past year I have been
On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 04:48:43PM +0200, Dmitry Belyavskiy wrote:
> Dear colleagues,
>
> I recently added OpenSSH 8.7p1 to rawhide.
> This version includes implementation of the SFTP protocol as the main transfer
> protocol for the scp utility. In upstream, the SCP protocol is used by default
>
On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 02:40:18PM -0400, Demi Marie Obenour wrote:
> That said, I am also unsure if anyone is using those bindings. Why were they
> added originally?
I think probably for oVirt, but oVirt now only uses the virt-* tools
(ie. command line).
Rich.
--
Richard Jones,
Dear Richard,
On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 10:23 AM Richard W.M. Jones
wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 04:48:43PM +0200, Dmitry Belyavskiy wrote:
> > Dear colleagues,
> >
> > I recently added OpenSSH 8.7p1 to rawhide.
> > This version includes implementation of the SFTP protocol as the main
>
Hi all! I just got back from Open Source Summit, several of the talks I
found interesting were on RISC-V -- a high-level one about the
organizational structure, and Drew Fustini's more technical talk.
In that, he noted that there's a Fedora build *, but it isn't an official
Fedora arch. As I
On Mon, Oct 04, 2021 at 10:57:42AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Thoughts?
I like the idea!
We can block such a package from ever appearing in a compose in pungi.
So, perhaps we seperate it into:
open a bug, submit a pr, do a scratch build, look at ci
get added as commit to onboarding
Missing expected images:
Xfce raw-xz armhfp
Compose PASSES proposed Rawhide gating check!
All required tests passed
Failed openQA tests: 6/206 (x86_64), 11/141 (aarch64)
New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20211003.n.0):
ID: 1012056 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2
Hello,
I'm not a Fedora Maintainer, or packager, or developer. I was involved
more in marketing and more "people person"[1] stuff. I hope this can
close this thread.
This email has a specific goal, but it doesn't have a great title: For
starters, SIG can't die, because they aren't alive. Also
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 4/204 (x86_64), 7/141 (aarch64)
New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-35-20211003.n.0):
ID: 1012578 Test: x86_64 Everything-boot-iso memory_check@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1012578
ID: 1012666 Test: aarch64
On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 1:10 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 04, 2021 at 10:57:42AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> > Thoughts?
>
> I like the idea!
It's indeed a good idea.
> We can block such a package from ever appearing in a compose in pungi.
You'd need to block it from ever appearing in
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 1/15 (aarch64)
Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-IoT-35-20211003.0):
ID: 1013356 Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_clevis@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1013356
Soft failed openQA tests: 1/16 (x86_64)
(Tests
I've been wanting to work with RISC-V for a while, but it's been really
difficult to get my hands on a dev board. I spoke with Mark Himmelstein
from RISC-V International last week and he mentioned that they are pushing
hard to get more dev boards out... but they're getting hit with the chip
On Mon, Oct 04, 2021 at 10:57:42AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> However, discussing this back and forth, we figured that it might
> also be good idea to actually have something such as "onboarding"
> package, where new coming package maintainer could gradually gain
> experience with the packaging
On Mon, 4 Oct 2021 at 13:25, Josh Boyer wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 1:10 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 04, 2021 at 10:57:42AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> > > Thoughts?
> >
> > I like the idea!
>
> It's indeed a good idea.
>
> > We can block such a package from ever appearing in
On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 2:08 PM Peter Boy wrote:
> However, we lack concepts on how to proceed after removing java-maint-sig.
> What consequences do we draw from the analyses?
The java-maint-sig formal group ceased to exist. Java SIG continues to
exist as an informal group, in the shape it
Hi everyone,
Reminder to kindly think about porting your packages to
avoid build failures with OpenSSL 3.0.0.
We will try a rebuild of previously shared failed packages on 15th, and
report FTBFS bugs.
Thank you,
Regards,
Sahana Prasad
On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 4:31 PM Sahana Prasad wrote:
>
>
>
On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 3:08 PM Mat Booth wrote:
>
> On Mon, 4 Oct 2021 at 13:07, Peter Boy wrote:
> >
> > We had a spirited and detailed discussion so far. But nevertheless, I
> > think we are none the wiser at the moment. We have many informative
> > contributions to the discussion and
Dne 04. 10. 21 v 11:34 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek napsal(a):
On Mon, Oct 04, 2021 at 10:57:42AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Hi,
Recently, there have been a lot of discussions on this list as well
as we have internally about onboarding. During our internal
brainstorming, we were initially
OLD: Fedora-35-20211003.n.0
NEW: Fedora-35-20211004.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:1
Dropped images: 2
Added packages: 2
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 46
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 12.70 MiB
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Size
On Mon, Oct 04, 2021 at 10:57:42AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Recently, there have been a lot of discussions on this list as well
> as we have internally about onboarding. During our internal
> brainstorming, we were initially discussing that it could be useful
> to have some package one
This is a great idea.
I've been reading through the new packager documentation this weekend and
attempting to get my first package submitted. It would be really nice if there
was a way to go all the way through the process with a "real" package, but
without effecting anything, to help those who
On 04/10/2021 10:57, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Recently, there have been a lot of discussions on this list as well as
we have internally about onboarding. During our internal brainstorming,
we were initially discussing that it could be useful to have some
package one can experiment with without being
On Sun, Oct 3, 2021 at 6:48 PM TItouan Bénard wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I want to help you
>
Sweet. Onuralp replied via direct mail and I have added them to the repo
as well. Can you work with them (or agree on any other organization)
around the upgrades indicated in
Hello,
I see this failure in dnf in Copr and Koji:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/churchyard/patch251/build/2872812/
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=76673401
Executing(%prep): /bin/sh -e /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.x8REO2
+ umask 022
+ cd /builddir/build/BUILD
+ cd
No missing expected images.
Soft failed openQA tests: 1/8 (x86_64), 1/8 (aarch64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)
Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-34-20211003.0):
ID: 1011918 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL:
Hey All,
As we come closer to Fedora 35 release dates, it's time to test upgrades.
Fedora 35 has a lot of changesets [0] and it becomes essential that we
test the graphical upgrade methods as well as the command line.
As a part of this test day[1], we will test upgrading from a full
updated, F33
On Mon, Oct 04, 2021 at 10:57:42AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Recently, there have been a lot of discussions on this list as well
> as we have internally about onboarding. During our internal
> brainstorming, we were initially discussing that it could be useful
> to have some package one
Hello.
Rpmlint on Fedora 35 includes strange E: shlib-policy-name-error and E:
invalid-ldconfig-symlink checks. It complains about most of the built
RPM packages.
Upstream bug report:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpmlint/issues/718
Example RPM:
I just noticed that as well in our systemd Packit runs, but so far
only on i386, because the repos for x86_64, ppc64le, and aarch64
are still on coreutils-8.32-32.fc36 (whereas i386 has
coreutils-9.0-1.fc36):
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/packit/systemd-systemd-20923/build/2873236/
On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 7:04 PM Matthew Miller wrote:
>
> Hi all! I just got back from Open Source Summit, several of the talks I
> found interesting were on RISC-V -- a high-level one about the
> organizational structure, and Drew Fustini's more technical talk.
>
> In that, he noted that there's
On Mon, Oct 04, 2021 at 10:10:35AM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 04, 2021 at 10:57:42AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> > Thoughts?
>
> I like the idea!
>
> We can block such a package from ever appearing in a compose in pungi.
Is this really necessary? The package will not be open to
On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 1:35 PM Fabio Valentini wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 7:04 PM Matthew Miller
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all! I just got back from Open Source Summit, several of the talks I
> > found interesting were on RISC-V -- a high-level one about the
> > organizational structure, and
On Mon, Oct 04, 2021 at 05:52:33PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > I like the idea!
> > We can block such a package from ever appearing in a compose in pungi.
> Is this really necessary? The package will not be open to anyone,
> but only for approved contributors. Malicious
On Mon, Oct 04, 2021 at 03:15:24PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 04, 2021 at 10:57:42AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Recently, there have been a lot of discussions on this list as well
> > as we have internally about onboarding. During our internal
> > brainstorming,
On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 03:09:08PM +0200, Mario Torre wrote:
> I'm not sure what's the best solution, but I guess the number one
> reason to have packages within the Fedora distribution is for a matter
> of trust, if this is the case I would argue that a curated list of
> maven packages served via
I have nothing to add to this conversation other than:
1) I'd love to see RISC-V become a serious contender to X86-64. I'm tired
of being controlled by the Intel/AMD oligopoly.
2) I love seeing Fedora people discuss supporting RISC-V.
3) Linux rocks. Fedora rocks.
On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 10:21 PM Peter Robinson wrote:
> I was going to ask people if they
> were interested in them but I decided to straight up orphan them so
> they#ll can go through the usual garbage collection process unless
> someone claims them.
> libcec
> platform
I'll volunteer to take
Polymake 4.5 is out and bumps soname. I will soon build the new
version and rebuild its dependencies, namely:
- python-jupymake
- sagemath
There are a couple of packages that I want to unbundle from sagemath
first, so these builds will not take place until I can get through the
package reviews.
On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 12:21 AM Sérgio Basto wrote:
> I wonder if kodi shouldn't use cec from kernel [1] instead libcec
Perhaps, perhaps not. The recent libcec
for Linux uses the kernel functionality, but
(mostly) maintains the existing API. So
for an application which is trying to be
cross
On Mon, Oct 04, 2021 at 12:07:30PM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 04, 2021 at 01:03:27PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > Hi all! I just got back from Open Source Summit, several of the talks I
> > found interesting were on RISC-V -- a high-level one about the
> > organizational
On Monday, 04 October 2021 at 22:39, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
[...]
> Personally speaking I think the real barrier is someone with a large
> colourful hat putting up the money to hire a full time developer to
> work on the project.
Also, I think one of the pre-requisites to enabling it in koji
On Mon, Oct 04, 2021 at 01:03:27PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> Hi all! I just got back from Open Source Summit, several of the talks I
> found interesting were on RISC-V -- a high-level one about the
> organizational structure, and Drew Fustini's more technical talk.
>
> In that, he noted that
Looking through the packages I own there's a bunch I no longer use.
I've tried to group these, from memory, where I own something because
it's a dependency of something else. I was going to ask people if they
were interested in them but I decided to straight up orphan them so
they#ll can go
On Mon, 2021-10-04 at 23:08 +, Gary Buhrmaster wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 10:21 PM Peter Robinson
> wrote:
>
> > I was going to ask people if they
> > were interested in them but I decided to straight up orphan them so
> > they#ll can go through the usual garbage collection process
https://www.opensourcevoices.org/20
On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 10:47 PM Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski <
domi...@greysector.net> wrote:
> On Monday, 04 October 2021 at 22:39, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> [...]
> > Personally speaking I think the real barrier is someone with a large
> > colourful hat
On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 8:49 PM Matthew Miller wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 03:09:08PM +0200, Mario Torre wrote:
> > I'm not sure what's the best solution, but I guess the number one
> > reason to have packages within the Fedora distribution is for a matter
> > of trust, if this is the case
On Mon, Oct 04, 2021 at 01:03:27PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> Hi all! I just got back from Open Source Summit, several of the talks I
> found interesting were on RISC-V -- a high-level one about the
> organizational structure, and Drew Fustini's more technical talk.
>
> In that, he noted that
On Mon, Oct 04, 2021 at 02:42:58PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 04, 2021 at 05:52:33PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > > I like the idea!
> > > We can block such a package from ever appearing in a compose in pungi.
> > Is this really necessary? The package will not be
On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 3:07 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 04, 2021 at 01:03:27PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > Hi all! I just got back from Open Source Summit, several of the talks I
> > found interesting were on RISC-V -- a high-level one about the
> > organizational structure, and
On 04/10/2021 19:52, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
Is this really necessary?
Yes. Because anyone can add something like this:
%post
rm -rf /
And it will destroy the installed system or even the hardware.
--
Sincerely,
Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.org)
On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 8:58 AM Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Thoughts?
Anything that improves the onboarding
process can only be a good thing.
I would recommend that before going
too deep into weeds that you need a
small group of "non-packagers"(*) to
see if this is the right approach from
their
On Mon, Oct 04, 2021 at 09:17:30PM +0200, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> On 04/10/2021 19:52, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> >Is this really necessary?
>
> Yes. Because anyone can add something like this:
> %post
> rm -rf /
>
> And it will destroy the installed system or even the
===
#fedora-meeting: FESCO (2021-10-04)
===
Meeting started by Eighth_Doctor at 19:03:26 UTC. The full logs are
available at
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2021-10-04/fesco.2021-10-04-19.03.log.html
.
Meeting
# Special Fedora Quality Assurance Meeting
# Date: 2021-10-08
# Time: 16:00 UTC (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto)
# Location: #fedora-meeting on irc.libera.chat
Greetings testers! Well, this is exciting. I've been doing this job for
approximately eleventy billion years, but
UPDATE: first time in eleventy billion years, and I messed it up...this
meeting will be in #fedora-meeting-1, not #fedora-meeting, because ELN
is using #fedora-meeting at that time. Apologies.
# Special Fedora Quality Assurance Meeting
# Date: 2021-10-08
# Time: 16:00 UTC
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=2008958
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |MODIFIED
--- Comment #2 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2008958
--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2021-e4daf49855 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 33.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-e4daf49855
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2008958
--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2021-0f9b1e3ac3 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 35.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-0f9b1e3ac3
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2009792
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2009792
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version||perl-Math-BigRat-0.2620-1.f
On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 3:50 PM Stefan Bluhm
wrote:
>
> it provides "java-11-headless". Not "java-headless". At least not on my
> machine
Doing my own checks on CentOS Stream 8 and RHEL 8.4, this sounds like a Fedora
change that didn't make its way back to RHEL. Worth opening a Bugzilla
report
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2008958
--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2021-f2e6978f90 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2008958
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #5 from
Hello,
can you please give me a direction on how to handle a Java 11 package build on
RHEL8 for EPEL8?
My issue: I am trying to build jaxb-api. The build works fine:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/jaxb-api/blob/rawhide/f/jaxb-api.spec
In addition to the original file, I added:
On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 3:06 PM Stefan Bluhm
wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> can you please give me a direction on how to handle a Java 11 package build
> on RHEL8 for EPEL8?
>
> My issue: I am trying to build jaxb-api. The build works fine:
>
Thanks Neal,
it provides "java-11-headless". Not "java-headless". At least not on my machine:
$ dnf repoquery --provides java-11-openjdk-headless
config(java-11-openjdk-headless) = 1:11.0.11.0.9-2.el8_4
config(java-11-openjdk-headless) = 1:11.0.12.0.7-0.el8_4
java-11-headless =
85 matches
Mail list logo
