https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887621
--- Comment #30 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2020-45065fae47 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887621
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887621
--- Comment #28 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2020-53f08a8053 has been pushed to the Fedora 33 testing repository.
In short time you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf install
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887621
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #27 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887621
--- Comment #26 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2020-53f08a8053 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 33.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-53f08a8053
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887621
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
--- Comment #25 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887621
Michel Alexandre Salim changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||1892101
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887621
Michel Alexandre Salim changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||1891640
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887621
Michel Alexandre Salim changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||1891639
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887621
--- Comment #24 from Gwyn Ciesla ---
(fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/folly
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887621
--- Comment #23 from Michel Alexandre Salim ---
❯ fedpkg request-repo folly 1887621
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/30071
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887621
--- Comment #22 from Michel Alexandre Salim ---
(In reply to Davide Cavalca from comment #20)
> (In reply to Antonio T. sagitter from comment #18)
> > folly.x86_64: W: no-documentation
> > folly-static.x86_64: W: no-documentation
>
> FYI we
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887621
Antonio T. sagitter changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|trp...@rocketmail.com |
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887621
--- Comment #20 from Davide Cavalca ---
(In reply to Antonio T. sagitter from comment #18)
> folly.x86_64: W: no-documentation
> folly-static.x86_64: W: no-documentation
FYI we do have documentation (under folly/docs, see
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887621
--- Comment #19 from Davide Cavalca ---
(In reply to Antonio T. sagitter from comment #18)
> - folly.x86_64: W: crypto-policy-non-compliance-openssl
> /usr/lib64/libfolly.so.2020.10.19.00 SSL_CTX_set_cipher_list
>
> $ rpmlint -I
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887621
--- Comment #18 from Antonio T. sagitter ---
- folly.x86_64: W: crypto-policy-non-compliance-openssl
/usr/lib64/libfolly.so.2020.10.19.00 SSL_CTX_set_cipher_list
$ rpmlint -I crypto-policy-non-compliance-openssl
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887621
--- Comment #17 from Michel Alexandre Salim ---
Spec URL: https://salimma.fedorapeople.org/specs/libdevel/folly.spec
SRPM URL:
https://salimma.fedorapeople.org/specs/libdevel/folly-2020.10.19.00-4.fc33.src.rpm
- Put static cmake support
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887621
--- Comment #16 from Michel Alexandre Salim ---
Let's make fedora-review happy
Spec URL: https://salimma.fedorapeople.org/specs/libdevel/folly.spec
SRPM URL:
https://salimma.fedorapeople.org/specs/libdevel/folly-2020.10.19.00-3.fc33.src.rpm
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887621
--- Comment #15 from Davide Cavalca ---
(In reply to Antonio T. sagitter from comment #14)
> The link to src-rpm is wrong.
The right one should be
https://salimma.fedorapeople.org/specs/libdevel/folly-2020.10.19.00-3.fc33.src.rpm
--
You
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887621
--- Comment #14 from Antonio T. sagitter ---
(In reply to Michel Alexandre Salim from comment #13)
> Spec URL: https://salimma.fedorapeople.org/specs/libdevel/folly.spec
> SRPM URL:
>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887621
--- Comment #13 from Michel Alexandre Salim ---
Spec URL: https://salimma.fedorapeople.org/specs/libdevel/folly.spec
SRPM URL:
https://salimma.fedorapeople.org/specs/libdevel/folly-2020.10.12.00-3.fc33.src.rpm
Koji scratch build (Rawhide):
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887621
--- Comment #12 from Davide Cavalca ---
(In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #11)
> Main value of using PROPERTIES VERSION over OUTPUT_NAME is that CMake
> handles structuring the filename correctly for the target OS for you (e.g.
> -.dll for
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887621
--- Comment #11 from Neal Gompa ---
(In reply to Davide Cavalca from comment #10)
> (In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #9)
> > You'd want to adjust the build script to set the soversion to match version.
> > Otherwise the generated
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887621
--- Comment #10 from Davide Cavalca ---
(In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #9)
> You'd want to adjust the build script to set the soversion to match version.
> Otherwise the generated dependency would be broken or otherwise wrong.
>
> You
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887621
--- Comment #9 from Neal Gompa ---
(In reply to Michel Alexandre Salim from comment #8)
> (In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #6)
> > (In reply to Davide Cavalca from comment #4)
> > >
> > > About the static libraries: folly doesn't have a
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887621
--- Comment #8 from Michel Alexandre Salim ---
(In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #6)
> (In reply to Davide Cavalca from comment #4)
> >
> > About the static libraries: folly doesn't have a stable ABI, by design, so
> > it doesn't seem
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887621
--- Comment #7 from Davide Cavalca ---
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/liburing/pull-request/1 should take care of
liburing-devel on armv7hl
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887621
Neal Gompa changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ngomp...@gmail.com
--- Comment #6 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887621
--- Comment #5 from Davide Cavalca ---
https://github.com/facebook/folly/commit/81e350e10b855e5ec48430677bc82d8f7e84015b
should fix the i686 build failure
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887621
--- Comment #4 from Davide Cavalca ---
Thanks! About the build failures:
- arm7hl: No matching package to install: 'liburing-devel'
- s390x: multiple build failures, including some endianness issues:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887621
--- Comment #3 from Antonio T. sagitter ---
Build failed on Rawhide:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=53501450
- Package does not compile and build into binary rpms on at least one supported
primary architecture
--
You
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887621
--- Comment #2 from Antonio T. sagitter ---
- Please, fix the Changelog.
- Why do you leave a 'folly.rpm' just for the License file?
- CXXFLAGS should be automatically set by %cmake
- Why don't build shared libs instead of static ones?
-
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887621
Antonio T. sagitter changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
33 matches
Mail list logo
