On Thu, Jul 08, 2021 at 11:45:36AM +0200, Petr Pisar wrote:
>
> DNF should acquire dependencies among repositories. I saw so many EPEL bug
> reports explained by missing powertools repository. The history will repeat.
>
It... currently does, but only at the RPM level. So we can ensure the
The following Fedora EPEL 7 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
42 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-1f259a45ef
openjpeg2-2.3.1-11.el7
8 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-bd790583ee
seamonkey-2.53.8-1.el7
6
The following Fedora EPEL 8 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
8 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-f77315a931
seamonkey-2.53.8-1.el8
8 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-3eb74527f8
chromium-91.0.4472.114-1.el8
6
On Thu, Jul 08, 2021 at 06:24:57AM -0700, Troy Dawson wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 8, 2021 at 1:20 AM Petr Pisar wrote:
>
> > V Wed, Jul 07, 2021 at 06:33:51PM -0700, Michel Alexandre Salim napsal(a):
> > > I'm working on a tool to make it easier to create EPEL branch requests
> > > in the case where
On Thu, Jul 8, 2021 at 11:08 AM Michel Alexandre Salim
wrote:
> I might eventually extend python-bugzilla a bit to make it easier to
> do this. A lot of the operations seem to assume it's a small Bugzilla
> instance an would try to pre-load all the components for a given
> product.
Your comment
On Thu, 8 Jul 2021, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Wed, Jul 07, 2021 at 08:28:20PM -0400, Mohan Boddu wrote:
Hello all,
While we are already working on epel9-next enablement, there was a
discussion about how to handle epel9 when rhel9 goes GA. It is safe to
assume that a lot of the builds that are
On Thu, Jul 8, 2021 at 7:51 AM Mohan Boddu wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 8, 2021 at 9:58 AM Neal Gompa wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 8, 2021 at 9:39 AM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jul 07, 2021 at 08:32:27PM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > > >
> > > > This is very exciting!
> > > >
> > > > However,
On Thu, Jul 8, 2021 at 9:58 AM Neal Gompa wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 8, 2021 at 9:39 AM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 07, 2021 at 08:32:27PM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > >
> > > This is very exciting!
> > >
> > > However, question here: At least for the bootstrap for RHEL 9 GA,
> > >
On Thu, Jul 8, 2021 at 9:39 AM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 07, 2021 at 08:32:27PM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
> >
> > This is very exciting!
> >
> > However, question here: At least for the bootstrap for RHEL 9 GA,
> > couldn't we use the EPEL9 next buildroot to rebuild everything once
> >
On Wed, Jul 07, 2021 at 08:32:27PM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
>
> This is very exciting!
>
> However, question here: At least for the bootstrap for RHEL 9 GA,
> couldn't we use the EPEL9 next buildroot to rebuild everything once
> instead of rebuilding 5 times? We can then remove the EPEL9 next
>
On Wed, Jul 07, 2021 at 08:28:20PM -0400, Mohan Boddu wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> While we are already working on epel9-next enablement, there was a
> discussion about how to handle epel9 when rhel9 goes GA. It is safe to
> assume that a lot of the builds that are already in epel9-next at that
>
On Thu, Jul 8, 2021 at 1:20 AM Petr Pisar wrote:
> V Wed, Jul 07, 2021 at 06:33:51PM -0700, Michel Alexandre Salim napsal(a):
> > I'm working on a tool to make it easier to create EPEL branch requests
> > in the case where there are transitive dependencies that also need to
> > be branched.
> >
V Thu, Jul 08, 2021 at 05:24:05AM -0400, Neal Gompa napsal(a):
> On Thu, Jul 8, 2021 at 5:19 AM Petr Pisar wrote:
> >
> > V Thu, Jul 08, 2021 at 04:47:33AM -0400, Neal Gompa napsal(a):
> > > On Thu, Jul 8, 2021 at 4:41 AM Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On 08. 07. 21 2:28, Mohan Boddu wrote:
V Thu, Jul 08, 2021 at 04:47:33AM -0400, Neal Gompa napsal(a):
> On Thu, Jul 8, 2021 at 4:41 AM Miro Hrončok wrote:
> >
> > On 08. 07. 21 2:28, Mohan Boddu wrote:
> > > Also, people who wish to opt out of this mass rebuild can add
> > > 'noautobuild' file to the epel9-next branch beforehand, this
On Thu, Jul 8, 2021 at 4:41 AM Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> On 08. 07. 21 2:28, Mohan Boddu wrote:
> > Also, people who wish to opt out of this mass rebuild can add
> > 'noautobuild' file to the epel9-next branch beforehand, this however
> > does not stop from creating the epel9 branch, just the
On 08. 07. 21 2:28, Mohan Boddu wrote:
Also, people who wish to opt out of this mass rebuild can add
'noautobuild' file to the epel9-next branch beforehand, this however
does not stop from creating the epel9 branch, just the package won't
be included in the rebuild.
I think there are 3
V Wed, Jul 07, 2021 at 06:33:51PM -0700, Michel Alexandre Salim napsal(a):
> I'm working on a tool to make it easier to create EPEL branch requests
> in the case where there are transitive dependencies that also need to
> be branched.
>
> I'm basing it on
>
V Wed, Jul 07, 2021 at 08:32:27PM -0400, Neal Gompa napsal(a):
> On Wed, Jul 7, 2021 at 8:28 PM Mohan Boddu wrote:
> > While we are already working on epel9-next enablement, there was a
> > discussion about how to handle epel9 when rhel9 goes GA. It is safe to
> > assume that a lot of the builds
18 matches
Mail list logo
