Re: Fedora 18 Beta Go/No-Go Meeting, Thursday, November 22 @ 20:00 UTC (3pm Eastern, 12pm Pacific)

2012-11-20 Thread Kaleb Keithley
From: Ric Wheeler rwhee...@redhat.com Friday is a normal work day for most people (although some people will take it off to get a longer weekend :)) You know it's a Red Hat paid holiday, right? -- Kaleb -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: [fedora-arm] Announcing Fedora 19 ARM remix for Allwinner SOCs release 2

2013-10-01 Thread Kaleb KEITHLEY
On 10/01/2013 01:10 PM, Niels de Vos wrote: On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 09:55:38PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: Hi All, I'm very happy to announce the second release (r2) of my Fedora 19 ARM remix images for Allwinner A10, A10s, A13 and A20 based devices. This release is based on the official

Re: SystemD service stop behavior

2013-10-23 Thread Kaleb KEITHLEY
On 10/23/2013 11:09 AM, Miroslav Suchý wrote: On 10/23/2013 04:25 PM, Simo Sorce wrote: If glusterfs feels people need to run the bricks and the main daemons separately then they should probably split service files and have a dependency to bring one up when the other comes up, yet still be

Re: SystemD service stop behavior

2013-10-23 Thread Kaleb KEITHLEY
On 10/23/2013 11:57 AM, Michael Cronenworth wrote: Perhaps I need to file the bug against the glusterfsd unit file? Yes, you should certainly do that. -- Kaleb -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of

package foo is blocked for tag dist-6E-epel-testing-candidate

2014-01-02 Thread Kaleb KEITHLEY
I unretired the el6 branch and took ownership for a package I maintain. Now I'm getting the $subject build error when I do a fedpkg build. Scratch builds are successful. Is there some built-in delay between unretiring before I can do builds or is there another step I've missed (and don't

sys/sysctl.h and bits/sysctl.h in rawhide/f18?

2012-05-31 Thread Kaleb Keithley
About a week ago I did a scratch build of one of my packages that includes sys/sysctl.h and it built successfully. Today I did another scratch build and it broke with: ... Making all in src CC fuse-helpers.lo CC fuse-resolve.lo CC fuse-bridge.lo CC misc.lo In file

Re: sys/sysctl.h and bits/sysctl.h in rawhide/f18?

2012-05-31 Thread Kaleb Keithley
A scratch build on koji if that wasn't apparent. - Original Message - From: Kaleb Keithley kkeit...@redhat.com To: Development discussions related to Fedora devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2012 1:38:32 PM Subject: sys/sysctl.h and bits/sysctl.h in rawhide/f18

Re: Deleting a package from f18/rawhide builds?

2012-06-07 Thread Kaleb Keithley
How do I do this? (The package is hekafs.) I have retired the package in f18. I have removed the f18 tag from all the fc18 builds. But the rawhide build is still pulling the fc17 version of the package. There are no dependencies on it. And FWIW, the latest glusterfs rpm Obsoletes

Re: well!

2013-03-13 Thread Kaleb KEITHLEY
On 03/13/2013 12:17 PM, Stef Walter wrote: On 03/12/2013 08:17 PM, Till Maas wrote: On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 12:47:07AM -0400, Digimer wrote: On 03/12/2013 12:41 AM, Charles Zeitler wrote: i don't like giving up control over my machine (partitioning), so i won't be upgrading to Fedora 18. i'll

Re: Broken dependencies: glusterfs

2013-05-14 Thread Kaleb KEITHLEY
On 05/14/2013 08:15 AM, build...@fedoraproject.org wrote: glusterfs has broken dependencies in the F-19 tree: On x86_64: glusterfs-ufo-3.4.0-0.4.beta1.fc19.noarch requires openstack-swift-proxy = 0:1.8.0 glusterfs-ufo-3.4.0-0.4.beta1.fc19.noarch requires openstack-swift-object

systemd network-online.target question

2013-07-16 Thread Kaleb KEITHLEY
I need glusterd to start before any _netdev mounts (NFS or glusterfs) take place. reading the system.special man page it talks about ...pulling in network-online.target and order themselves after it. Would adding a Before=network-online.target to the glusterd.service be the right thing to

Re: Why does so much virt stuff depend on glusterfs?

2013-07-23 Thread Kaleb KEITHLEY
On 07/23/2013 03:44 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: Not sure if glusterfs could be split into client and server parts and/or if that would help (only a client bit is needed). glusterfs already exists in client (glusterfs and/or glusterfs-api and associated -devel rpms) and server

Re: Why does so much virt stuff depend on glusterfs?

2013-07-23 Thread Kaleb KEITHLEY
On 07/23/2013 04:41 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 03:49:37PM +0530, Kaleb KEITHLEY wrote: On 07/23/2013 03:44 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: Not sure if glusterfs could be split into client and server parts and/or if that would help (only a client bit is needed

Re: Why does so much virt stuff depend on glusterfs?

2013-07-23 Thread Kaleb KEITHLEY
On 07/23/2013 05:20 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 12:45:59PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 03:49:37PM +0530, Kaleb KEITHLEY wrote: On 07/23/2013 03:44 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: Not sure if glusterfs could be split into client and server

Re: Why does so much virt stuff depend on glusterfs?

2013-07-23 Thread Kaleb KEITHLEY
On 07/23/2013 05:34 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 05:27:20PM +0530, Kaleb KEITHLEY wrote: $ rpm -ql glusterfs-api /usr/lib64/glusterfs/3.4.0beta4/xlator/mount/api.so /usr/lib64/libgfapi.so.0 /usr/lib64/libgfapi.so.0.0.0 Even if libgfapi (from glusterfs-api) is used instead

Re: Why does so much virt stuff depend on glusterfs?

2013-07-23 Thread Kaleb KEITHLEY
On 07/24/2013 12:29 AM, Peter Robinson wrote: Can't you split the translators into a glusterfs-common (or something) The glusterfs RPM already is the glusterfs-common RPM that you want. If you look, you'll see that the other things in the glusterfs RPM really aren't that big; moving the

Re: Schedule for Wednesday's FESCo Meeting (2013-08-14)

2013-08-15 Thread Kaleb KEITHLEY
On 08/15/2013 11:32 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 15.08.2013 17:17, schrieb Ralf Corsepius: On 08/15/2013 04:36 PM, Paul Wouters wrote: On Thu, 15 Aug 2013, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 15.08.2013 15:40, schrieb Paul Wouters: We can't tell people to re-install from scratch every 6 months. What

.spec file Source0 magic for github release source tarballs?

2014-01-21 Thread Kaleb KEITHLEY
Take, for example, https://github.com/nfs-ganesha/nfs-ganesha/releases, where there's a button for Source code (tar.gz) pointing at https://github.com/nfs-ganesha/nfs-ganesha/archive/V2.0.0.tar.gz Note V2.0.0.tar.gz versus nfs-ganesha-2.0.0.tar.gz. If I click on that link the downloaded

Re: .spec file Source0 magic for github release source tarballs?

2014-01-21 Thread Kaleb KEITHLEY
On 01/21/2014 12:39 PM, Richard Shaw wrote: On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 11:25 AM, Alec Leamas leamas.a...@gmail.com mailto:leamas.a...@gmail.com wrote: Actually, the GL are pretty clear here: the source should be referenced using the full commit, nothing else. There is some reasoning

Unresponsive reviewer, glusterfs-openstack-swift,

2014-02-13 Thread Kaleb KEITHLEY
Hi, The gluster community has been trying to get its glusterfs-openstack-swift package reviewed since August (2013). See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1003089 I realize that reviewers are often unpaid volunteers working on their own time. On the flip side, the package owner, who

Review, or review swap?

2015-03-24 Thread Kaleb KEITHLEY
libntirpc. It's currently bundled in nfs-ganesha with a bundling exception through Fedora 23, but it's ready now. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1204898 Thanks, -- Kaleb -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

can't submit updates for f22?

2015-08-24 Thread Kaleb KEITHLEY
I must have missed some announcement? Submitting from an up to date f22 box I get: % fedpkg update /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/fedpkg/cli.py:169: DeprecationWarning: Commands._hash_file is deprecated and will be removed eventually. Please use Commands.lookasidecache.hash_file

Re: can't submit updates for f22?

2015-08-25 Thread Kaleb KEITHLEY
of them has worked. The new web interface worked, once I figured out what the correct inputs were. On 08/25/2015 06:38 AM, Kaleb KEITHLEY wrote: I must have missed some announcement? Submitting from an up to date f22 box I get: % fedpkg update /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/fedpkg/cli.py:169

Re: pushed package to stable four days ago, is it stuck?

2016-04-07 Thread Kaleb KEITHLEY
On 04/07/2016 06:45 AM, Peter Robinson wrote: I pushed glusterfs-3.7.9-1.fc23 to stable four days ago. It has +4 karma. It's still pending. Is it stuck? Can someone please give it a kick? >>> >>> All the updates are already in process of being kicked by me, should >>> hopefully be

Re: pushed package to stable four days ago, is it stuck?

2016-04-07 Thread Kaleb KEITHLEY
On 04/05/2016 08:55 AM, Peter Robinson wrote: > On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 1:51 PM, Kaleb KEITHLEY <kkeit...@redhat.com> wrote: >> >> I pushed glusterfs-3.7.9-1.fc23 to stable four days ago. It has +4 karma. >> >> It's still pending. Is it stuck? Can someon

pushed package to stable four days ago, is it stuck?

2016-04-05 Thread Kaleb KEITHLEY
I pushed glusterfs-3.7.9-1.fc23 to stable four days ago. It has +4 karma. It's still pending. Is it stuck? Can someone please give it a kick? Thanks -- Kaleb -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

nfs-ganesha -stable request stalled

2016-07-07 Thread Kaleb KEITHLEY
Hi, Would someone please give the nfs-ganesha-2.4.0-0.8dev21.fc24 a kick? I've had two other updates pushed to -stable since, and they've gone through. Been waiting ~4 days now. Status page says the update is locked and can't be modified, but I don't know why. Thanks, -- Kaleb -- devel

autoconf test for deprecated readdir_r

2016-06-30 Thread Kaleb KEITHLEY
Hi, Does anyone have a good/working autoconf test for checking for deprecated readdir_r (for Fedora 25) ? I'm not having much luck. (Have tried AC_COMPILE_IFELSE, among other things.) Alternatively it would be nice if there was a some kind of feature test define in dirent.h. Thanks, --

more problems with koji builders for f26

2017-01-24 Thread Kaleb Keithley
Hi, Trying to build latest nfs-ganesha–– Yesterday (for me, 02:00 UTC, 24 Jan) I was getting (on both a fedpkg build and koji scratch builds): DEBUG util.py:435: Error: package pkgconf-pkg-config-1.2.0-1.fc26.ppc64le conflicts with pkgconfig < 1:0.29.1-2 provided by

Re: more problems with koji builders for f26

2017-01-24 Thread Kaleb Keithley
2017 6:21:52 AM > Subject: Re: more problems with koji builders for f26 > > On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 11:07 AM, Kaleb Keithley <kkeit...@redhat.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Trying to build latest nfs-ganesha–– > > > > Yesterday (for me, 02:00 UTC, 24 Jan) I w

are the armv7hl builders healthy?

2017-09-01 Thread Kaleb Keithley
I'm trying to build ceph-12.2.0 for f28, So far the build has failed twice on armv7hl during %install trying to install a file that was seeminlyly successfully built. That's two different files. The first time it was cephfs-journal-tool, the second time it was the one immediately after:

Re: are the armv7hl builders healthy?

2017-09-02 Thread Kaleb Keithley
Einstein's advice about insanity not withstanding, I tried building again – the third time was successful. (Expecting the same on f27 now. :-/ ) - Original Message - > From: "Kaleb Keithley" <kkeit...@redhat.com> > To: "Development discussions r

two Ceph updates for f28, f29, stuck in pending testing for six days

2019-02-18 Thread Kaleb Keithley
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-1c53f1a6c8 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-6a2e72916a Would someone please give them a kick? Thanks -- Kaleb ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To

Are the s390x builders healthy?

2019-02-20 Thread Kaleb Keithley
I'm trying to build Ceph again for f31 after the branching. It built before the branching, eight days ago. The x86_64[1] part of number two below got further than either of the two examples below before I killed it. I'm guessing it would have finished successfully if I had let it. I have another

Re: On not bumping the epoch in ceph-14, f30 and f31/rawhide

2019-03-11 Thread Kaleb Keithley
On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 7:35 AM Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > The ability to have multiple different builds of the same software which > users can choose between, sounds alot like the use case for modularity. > Abusing Epoch to try to address this kind of situation feels like a pretty >

Re: On not bumping the epoch in ceph-14, f30 and f31/rawhide

2019-03-11 Thread Kaleb Keithley
On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 8:22 AM Neal Gompa wrote: > Heck, the spec file > that is in Fedora is basically an openSUSE spec with Fedora > conditionals in it. > The ceph.spec file in Fedora is based on the upstream ceph.spec.in file; not on anything in/from openSUSE. The upstream ceph.spec.in

On not bumping the epoch in ceph-14, f30 and f31/rawhide

2019-03-08 Thread Kaleb Keithley
The epoch was inadvertently bumped (not by me) when ceph was rebased to 14.x in f30/rawhide. I reset it to 1 in subsequent builds. Now adamwill is running builds with it bumped to 2 again. I would prefer that it not be bumped. Ceph has their own builds (for Fedora even I think) where they have

Re: two Ceph updates for f28, f29, stuck in pending testing for six days

2019-03-21 Thread Kaleb Keithley
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 3:18 AM Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On 2/18/19 12:56 PM, Kaleb Keithley wrote: > > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-1c53f1a6c8 > > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-6a2e72916a > > > > Would someone please give them

Another ceph build stuck in pending testing, four days

2019-06-02 Thread Kaleb Keithley
Hi, https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-60ba61b5ab Why does this happen every time? Would someone please kick it? Thanks -- Kaleb ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to

Re: Another ceph build stuck in pending testing, four days

2019-06-07 Thread Kaleb Keithley
Thanks for opening the ticket, but the update is still stuck, now going on nine days. Would someone with the necessary privs please kick it. Thanks On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 1:52 PM Randy Barlow wrote: > On Sun, 2019-06-02 at 18:03 -0400, Kaleb Keithley wrote: > &

ceph packages submitted to testing four days ago still haven't been pushed

2019-04-19 Thread Kaleb Keithley
ceph-12.2.12 for f28 and f29. Happens every time. Someone please give them a kick. Thanks. -- Kaleb ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct:

Re: two Ceph updates for f28, f29, stuck in pending testing for six days

2019-04-22 Thread Kaleb Keithley
Two more are stuck again. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-3b8418 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-399f5bd105 On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 3:08 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On 3/21/19 5:45 PM, Kaleb Keithley wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 3:18 AM Ke

Re: Fedora 32 System-Wide Change: glusterfs dropping 32-bit arches

2019-08-13 Thread Kaleb Keithley
On Mon, Aug 5, 2019 at 6:17 PM Kevin Kofler wrote: > > > > Please feel free though to add your thoughts to the issue. > > > > [1] https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/issues/702 > > The upstream issue actually says they want to keep building 32-bit in > their > CI, so it should compile just

Re: when will bodhi (updates) recognize fc31/f31 updates

2019-08-15 Thread Kaleb Keithley
On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 10:21 AM Alexander Bokovoy wrote: > On to, 15 elo 2019, Kaleb Keithley wrote: > >I've tried to submit a build on f31 to testing, using both the cli and via > >the web site, and both are failing > > > >On the web site I get a popup with: B

when will bodhi (updates) recognize fc31/f31 updates

2019-08-15 Thread Kaleb Keithley
I've tried to submit a build on f31 to testing, using both the cli and via the web site, and both are failing On the web site I get a popup with: Builds : Cannot find release associated with build: nfs-ganesha-2.8.2-5.fc31, tags: ['f31'] fedpkg update gets: Could not execute update: Could not

ambiguous python in f29+ builds,

2019-08-19 Thread Kaleb Keithley
All the python files in one of my packages (nfs-ganesha) have #!/usr/bin/python[23] shebangs. The nfs-ganesha.spec does _not_ have python-unversioned-command as a BuildRequires: I do not have python-unversioned-command installed on my f30 box. AIUI, setup.py alters the shebangs to match the

Re: ambiguous python in f29+ builds,

2019-08-19 Thread Kaleb Keithley
Never mind, false alarm. Waiting for coffee to kick in. On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 8:49 AM Kaleb Keithley wrote: > > All the python files in one of my packages (nfs-ganesha) have > #!/usr/bin/python[23] shebangs. > > The nfs-ganesha.spec does _not_ have python-unve

python38-3.8.0~b3-1.fc30 on my f30 machine? how?

2019-08-29 Thread Kaleb Keithley
Also python36, python35, and python34. I'm 100% confident that I never explicitly installed these. Having python38 broke my devel setup due to there being no Cython in /usr/lib64/python3.8/site-packages/... I don't know how long it was broken. Very annoying to discover this. How do I prevent

Re: [HEADS UP] Fedora 32 Python 3.8 rebuilds have started in a side tag

2019-08-23 Thread Kaleb Keithley
On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 1:23 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 15. 08. 19 0:18, Miro Hrončok wrote: > > Hello, in order to deliver Python 3.8, we are running a coordinated > rebuild in a > > side tag. > > > > The side tag was merged. Build in regular rawhide now. Thanks. > /me wonders why my `dnf

f32/rawhide, nothing provides module(platform:f31)

2019-08-23 Thread Kaleb Keithley
`dnf update` on my f32/rawhide machine is giving me: Problem 1: conflicting requests - nothing provides module(platform:f31) needed by module bat:latest:3120190714171319:22d7e2a5-0.x86_64 Problem 2: conflicting requests - nothing provides module(platform:f31) needed by module

is this update stuck? Ceph-14.2.3-1.fc32

2019-09-10 Thread Kaleb Keithley
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-6f5be50fd9 Two other ceph updatest submitted around the same time moved to testing okay. If it is stuck, can someone with appropriate privs please kick it. Thanks, -- Kaleb ___ devel mailing list

Re: mass rebuild, glusterfs build failed

2019-07-31 Thread Kaleb Keithley
On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 1:31 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On 7/25/19 11:05 AM, Kaleb Keithley wrote: > > hmmm. from the root.log > > > > DEBUG util.py:585: BUILDSTDERR: Error: > > DEBUG util.py:585: BUILDSTDERR: Problem: conflicting requests > > DEBUG util.

Re: Fedora 32 System-Wide Change: glusterfs dropping 32-bit arches

2019-08-05 Thread Kaleb Keithley
On Mon, Aug 5, 2019 at 11:29 AM Peter Robinson wrote: > On Mon, Aug 5, 2019 at 3:44 PM Kaleb Keithley wrote: > > > > > > There is a proposal[1] in upstream GlusterFS to drop 32-bit arches. > > > > The original proposal was to drop 32-bit with GlusterFS-7. Glu

Re: Fedora 32 System-Wide Change: glusterfs dropping 32-bit arches

2019-08-05 Thread Kaleb Keithley
On Mon, Aug 5, 2019 at 9:57 AM Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 05. 08. 19 15:36, Kaleb Keithley wrote: > > There is a proposal[1] in upstream GlusterFS to drop 32-bit arches. > > > > The original proposal was to drop 32-bit with GlusterFS-7. GlusterFS-7 > will land > > i

Fedora 32 System-Wide Change: glusterfs dropping 32-bit arches

2019-08-05 Thread Kaleb Keithley
There is a proposal[1] in upstream GlusterFS to drop 32-bit arches. The original proposal was to drop 32-bit with GlusterFS-7. GlusterFS-7 will land in Fedora 31/rawhide soon. More than likely though it will not be official until GlusterFS-8, which will probably land, accordingly, after Fedora 31

Fwd: Fedora 32 System-Wide Change: glusterfs dropping 32-bit arches

2019-08-05 Thread Kaleb Keithley
There is a proposal[1] in upstream GlusterFS to drop 32-bit arches. The original proposal was to drop 32-bit with GlusterFS-7. GlusterFS-7 will land in Fedora 31/rawhide soon. More than likely though it will not be official until GlusterFS-8, which will probably land, accordingly, after Fedora 31

Re: mass rebuild, glusterfs build failed

2019-08-01 Thread Kaleb Keithley
On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 3:43 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On 7/31/19 12:01 PM, Kaleb Keithley wrote: > > > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1733602 > > > > One of the suggestions there is to "drop the arch." I.e. i686. > > > > If th

are the ppc64le builders healthy?

2019-07-23 Thread Kaleb Keithley
I built the latest ceph-14 (14.2.2) on rawhide successfully two days ago. Two different builds on f30 built or are building fine on x86_64, i686, and aarch64, but failed with different errors on ppc64le at different places in the build. One looks like it ran out of space in the file system. The

YACBSIPT

2019-07-25 Thread Kaleb Keithley
Yet Another Ceph Build Stuck in Pending Testing https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-623fb9419e Would someone please give it a kick. Thanks -- Kaleb ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email

Re: YACBSIPT

2019-07-25 Thread Kaleb Keithley
On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 1:11 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On 7/25/19 3:48 AM, Kaleb Keithley wrote: > > Yet Another Ceph Build Stuck in Pending Testing > > > > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-623fb9419e > > > > Would someone please gi

mass rebuild, glusterfs build failed

2019-07-25 Thread Kaleb Keithley
hmmm. from the root.log DEBUG util.py:585: BUILDSTDERR: Error: DEBUG util.py:585: BUILDSTDERR: Problem: conflicting requests DEBUG util.py:585: BUILDSTDERR: - nothing provides kernel >= 4.18.0 needed by firewalld-0.6.4-1.fc31.noarch how to deal with this? Wait for a new firewalld

Re: 15 nonresponsive maintainers

2019-07-26 Thread Kaleb Keithley
On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 2:12 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > ktdre...@ktdreyer.com ktdreyer > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1731540 > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1706223 Use kdre...@redhat.com instead. He is currently on paternity leave and may not be responding to

YACBSIPT, rawhide ceph build stuck in bodhi, again

2019-09-19 Thread Kaleb Keithley
Someone with privs please kick it. Thanks https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-995f3ae953 ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct:

Re: YACBSIPT, rawhide ceph build stuck in bodhi, again

2019-09-19 Thread Kaleb Keithley
On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 2:18 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On 9/19/19 5:26 AM, Kaleb Keithley wrote: > > Someone with privs please kick it. Thanks > > > > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-995f3ae953 > > Done. Do note that you can do this too, jus

Re: YACBSIPT, rawhide ceph build stuck in bodhi, again

2019-09-20 Thread Kaleb Keithley
On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 7:33 PM Kaleb Keithley wrote: > On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 2:18 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote: > >> On 9/19/19 5:26 AM, Kaleb Keithley wrote: >> > Someone with privs please kick it. Thanks >> > >> > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FED

Re: YACBSIPT, rawhide ceph build stuck in bodhi, again

2019-09-20 Thread Kaleb Keithley
On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 11:41 AM Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On 9/20/19 6:07 AM, Kaleb Keithley wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 7:33 PM Kaleb Keithley > wrote: > > > >> On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 2:18 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote: > >> > >>> On 9/19/19 5:26 AM,

Re: YACBSIPT, rawhide ceph build stuck in bodhi, again

2019-09-25 Thread Kaleb Keithley
And for https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-6f79c53e44 I don't have permission to untag and retag the f30-signing-pending tag. Many thanks for your help. On Sun, Sep 22, 2019 at 4:02 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 12:12:58PM -0400, Kaleb Keithley wr

SONAME bump for libntirpc coming soon in f32/rawhide

2019-10-14 Thread Kaleb Keithley
I don't believe anything except nfs-ganesha uses libntirpc, but on the off-chance that there is— libntirpc will bump from 1.8 to 3.0 -- Kaleb ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to

Fwd: Fedora 32 System-Wide Change: glusterfs dropping 32-bit arches

2019-08-05 Thread Kaleb Keithley
There is a proposal[1] in upstream GlusterFS to drop 32-bit arches. The original proposal was to drop 32-bit with GlusterFS-7. GlusterFS-7 will land in Fedora 31/rawhide soon. More than likely though it will not be official until GlusterFS-8, which will probably land, accordingly, after Fedora 31