[Yahoo-eng-team] [Bug 1894077] [NEW] Upgrading from train(el7) to ussuri(el8): Packet sequence number wrong - got 2 expected 1

Public bug reported: We are trying to upgrade our OpenStack from Train (based on CentOS 7) to the Ussuri (based on CentOS 8) and during `neutron-db-manage upgrade --expand` I see it failing with a following traceback. I've tried googling this, but only thing I found was "wrong usage of PyMySQL"

Re: [ansible-project] Install raid1 and bios on a HP ilo server

visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/ansible-project/77ab9b14-994e-4750-a9d5-68e27a6dc714n%40googlegroups.com. -- -Igor Gnatenko -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ansible Project" group. To unsubscribe from this group and st

Re: [ansible-project] Is there a strategy that runs on X hosts as fast as possible

: > > On Sun, 9 Aug 2020 04:33:58 -0700 (PDT) > Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > > Basically I am looking for something like `parallel -jX` linux command. At > > any time it runs up to X threads with a command. > > That's what strategy "host_pinned" does. See > http

[ansible-project] Is there a strategy that runs on X hosts as fast as possible

Basically I am looking for something like `parallel -jX` linux command. At any time it runs up to X threads with a command. I noticed that serial: 2 with any strategy will wait for play to run on these 2 hosts and only after that it will move to the next ones. However, I'd like Ansible to run

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] WIP: RFC: Buildsystem overhaul (meson) (#1209)

> Oh, I see I said "patches might be considered" in #887, which is wrong and > I'll need to correct that in the ticket too. Wish I'd know this earlier :) -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] WIP: RFC: Buildsystem overhaul (meson) (#1209)

> Rpm is a low-level tool needed early in bootstrapping of a distro, and > Python as a pre-requisite for building rpm is not acceptable. Why so? Why do you need to start with RPM? In order to get something what you could call a system, you'd need to compile util-linux (to create filesystems,

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] WIP: RFC: Buildsystem overhaul (meson) (#1209)

@mlschroe well, don't worry - I will convert all the test :) -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] WIP: RFC: Buildsystem overhaul (meson) (#1209)

@ignatenkobrain pushed 1 commit. 45c863b2f064df76bc4a23185be76c0c239a2eef Add meson buildsystem -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. View it on GitHub:

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] WIP: RFC: Buildsystem overhaul (meson) (#1209)

@ignatenkobrain pushed 1 commit. 85df61d8e2fcc174b4b9dbeed2f513ce884a25fc Add meson buildsystem -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. View it on GitHub:

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] WIP: RFC: Buildsystem overhaul (meson) (#1209)

@ignatenkobrain pushed 1 commit. 56082ae5a49d0eac581cac4c2f49a08069a2fc63 Add meson buildsystem -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. View it on GitHub:

[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] WIP: RFC: Buildsystem overhaul (meson) (#1209)

So I was tempted for long time to implement meson buildsystem for RPM because autofoo is very slow. systemd and many other core projects has switched to meson long long time ago and this morning I finally saw that util-linux is switching to meson

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] RFE: derive package name from spec filename (#1208)

@voxik well, if you define `Name` in spec, nothing will change for you. But this is very similar to what I was asking few comments above to be able to redefine Name while preserving access to the auto-guessed one, so that for example buildsystem could just do `-D 'name

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] RFE: derive package name from spec filename (#1208)

I think this is great idea, though having `%{source_name}` or `%{spec_name}` (just bikeshedding) would be useful so that you could define `Name` tag in the way like `%{source_name}%{compat_version}` so that you can build different packages out of one spec file by just appending different

Re: Unannounced SONAME bump: libglade-2.so.6() (glade)

Thank you Kalev! If that soname bump is needed, please rebuild glade and all affected packages in a side tag next time. Thanks! On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 7:19 AM Kalev Lember wrote: > > On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 6:56 AM Igor Gnatenko > wrote: >> >> Hello, >> >>

Unannounced SONAME bump: libglade-2.so.6() (glade)

Hello, it seems that glade-3.36.0-1.fc33 changes SONAME from libglade-2.so.6 to libglade-2.so.12. That is breaking: * anaconda-widgets-devel (anaconda) - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1832687 * anjuta - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1832688 * gnome-builder -

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] RFE: introduce symbol versioning to librpm* (finally) (#1127)

Related bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1830346 -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Parallelize file processing (#1185)

@dmnks this sounds very nice, is there some PR to follow? -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Built-in %{S:...} and %{P:...} macro stupidity in 4.16 (#1206)

I love those shortcuts for %SOURCE ;) Though I always use `%{S:…}` syntax. I think > I suppose a middle ground could be requiring brackets for all the built-ins > that are expected to expand to some text (ie having builtins->func set), and > just fall through otherwise. would be good enough.

Re: OCaml packages in Rawhide are broken for long time

I have opened bugs for affected packages. Unfortunately did not exclude ocaml-bin-prot, but feel free to just change status to ASSIGNED and fix it as soon as you can. On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 4:54 PM Jerry James wrote: > > On Sun, May 3, 2020 at 1:47 AM Igor Gnatenko > wrote: >

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] 4.15.1: multiple "-a" parameters in %autosetup are not handled correctly (#1204)

This is known bug. %setup is not really a macro, but rather something which is parsed by RPM internally. However, %autosetup is a real macro, so it parses only last `-a` argument. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on

OCaml packages in Rawhide are broken for long time

Hello, Is anybody planning to fix bunch of FTI (Fails To Install) ocaml packages in rawhide? ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct:

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Discussion: splitting language specifics out of rpm core (#1199)

Well, nothing prevents you having extensive testsuite for python, rust and whatnot in one repo. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Discussion: splitting language specifics out of rpm core (#1199)

I think having them in one repository makes more sense to me because of sharing some code, knowledge and so on If there would be bunch of separate repos, you'd need to implement CI for each of them and so on. I think the best would be to get interested people aboard and move things like

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Unclosed %if (when defined inside %define) (#1198)

5f4fdce3041b80ef26e3a87db07ecdbd2041a9b2 is the first bad commit commit 5f4fdce3041b80ef26e3a87db07ecdbd2041a9b2 Author: Pavlina Moravcova Varekova Date: Mon Jul 1 13:06:35 2019 +0200 Parse multiline conditional and %include parameters correctly (#775) Trailing '\' after multiline

[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Unclosed %if (when defined inside %define) (#1198)

``` Name: hello Version: 1 Release: 1%{?dist} Summary: Hello License: Public Domain URL: https://google.com %if 0%{?foo} >= 8 %define test() \ %if 1\ BUG\ %endif\ %{nil} %endif %description %{summary}. %prep %autosetup -c -T %files ``` Make sure that `foo` is not defined in your

Non-responsive maintainer check for trondham

Hello, Anybody knows how to contact Trond? I have sent him an email last week, but no response (neither in bugzilla). BZ: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1827995 ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Don't check source package provides against installed conflicts (#1192)

@ignatenkobrain approved this pull request. LGTM -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Convert few simple generators for a parametric ones + fix for parametric generators (#1163)

I'll rebase and clean it up :) -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1163#issuecomment-617097701___ Rpm-maint mailing

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Convert few simple generators for a parametric ones + fix for parametric generators (#1163)

> I assume you have manually tested all these to produce same results as > before? The test-suite does not cover any of them. I have tested it on my system, yes. With quite a few examples. Just one things which I noticed when I was looking into this again... Any reason you did not use

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Python dist RPM generators errors are silently ignored (#1183)

> the rpmbuild continues (can we abort the build from a dependency generator?) Well, this is how it is done for all depgens, so this would be RFE on its own. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] scripts/pythondistdeps: Switch to argparse (#1181)

@ignatenkobrain commented on this pull request. > +parser.add_argument('-P', '--provides', action='store_true', help='Print > Provides') +parser.add_argument('-R', '--requires', action='store_true', help='Print Requires') +parser.add_argument('-r', '--recommends', action='store_true',

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] scripts/pythondistdeps: Switch to argparse (#1181)

@ignatenkobrain commented on this pull request. > +parser.add_argument('-P', '--provides', action='store_true', help='Print > Provides') +parser.add_argument('-R', '--requires', action='store_true', help='Print Requires') +parser.add_argument('-r', '--recommends', action='store_true',

Issue with booting on latest kernels (EFI_DISABLE_PCI_DMA related)

else saw this issue? Any ideas if this could be worked around in Fedora kernel? https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=206789 -- -Igor Gnatenko ___ kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le

Issue with booting on latest kernels (EFI_DISABLE_PCI_DMA related)

else saw this issue? Any ideas if this could be worked around in Fedora kernel? https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=206789 -- -Igor Gnatenko ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] scripts/pythondistdeps: Improved python version and operator handling. (#1015)

Merged #1015 into master. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1015#event-3220830516___ Rpm-maint mailing list

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] scripts/pythondistdeps: Improved python version and operator handling. (#1015)

Please squash commits and I'll merge it -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1015#issuecomment-611872077___ Rpm-maint

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] scripts/pythondistdeps: Improved python version and operator handling. (#1015)

@ignatenkobrain approved this pull request. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] scripts/pythondistdeps: Improved python version and operator handling. (#1015)

It would be nice to have the tests for these... But from the first glance this looks good to me. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:

Re: Rawhide python-rpm-generators news: small speedup + %python_provide not needed in most cases

Nice job, Miro! Thanks a lot for working on this. On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 8:45 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > Hello Python packagers. > > I have just updated python-rpm-generators to python-rpm-generators-11-1.fc33 > in > Rawhide. It uses some fresh stuff from RPM 4.16 and will not be backported to

Re: Rawhide update from side tag pending for 2 days

I agree, if this would not happen then everything would just blow up. On Wed, Apr 8, 2020 at 8:33 AM Clement Verna wrote: > > > > On Tue, 7 Apr 2020 at 23:38, Mohan Boddu wrote: >> >> I guess it should be a fixed in bodhi. But for now you can remove the >> builds that it's complaining about in

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Convert few simple generators for a parametric ones + fix for parametric generators (#1163)

Thanks for merging that part. Anyway, those generators are very simple and I think having them as parametric ones make sense. Related to this, I have not seen your opinion on moving these things to a rpm-extras and start actually releasing those things and inform distributions. WDYT? -- You

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Convert few simple generators for a parametric ones + fix for parametric generators (#1163)

@pmatilai if debuginfo qualifies, why metainfo one would not? They are essentially doing very same simple thing. Another point to WHY to do it is to speed up generators. The desktop one is very simple and can save bunch of fork()s, so why not to replace it? -- You are receiving this because

[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] RFE: Add possibility to generate Requires(meta) by a dependency generators (#1164)

Technically, by request I mean to be able to generate meta, pre, post and such, basically Requires with qualifier. There are 2 ways how to do it: * Just let scripts to emit `(meta|pre|post)` in the beginning/end of the string and parse it * Create a new __foo_requires_meta and such in *.attr

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Convert desktop/metainfo generators for a parametric ones + fix for parametric generators (#1163)

@ignatenkobrain pushed 1 commit. d6e2b928f2df67be3d051c3ffda0b16493d6d76d Convert debuginfo generator to a parametric generator -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. View it on GitHub:

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] %1 in parametric generator contains doubled %{buildroot} (#1162)

Fixed as one of commits in https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1163. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Convert desktop/metainfo generators for a parametric ones + fix for parametric generators (#1163)

@ignatenkobrain pushed 1 commit. 108ddacf6f43c0cb917bafc5c6219fe6bd3872c1 Convert desktop generator to a parametric generator -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. View it on GitHub:

[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Convert desktop/metainfo generators for a parametric ones + fix for parametric generators (#1163)

You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1163 -- Commit Summary -- * Convert metainfo generator to a parametric generator * rpmfc: Do not prepend buildroot to a path for parametric generator * Convert desktop

[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] %1 in parametric generator contains doubled %{buildroot} (#1162)

I was trying to port desktop generator to a parametric macro, but hit the problem that `rpm.expand("%1")` results into `/home/brain/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/hello-1-1.fc33.x86_64//home/brain/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/hello-1-1.fc33.x86_64/usr/share/applications/org.gnome.Terminal.desktop`. As you can see,

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] RFE: %_files_listed_twice_terminate_build (#1158)

If this ever becomes the thing... First we need to fix https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/336. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] error: parse error in expression: %{__isa_bits} == 64 (#1133)

No. `0%{__isa_bits} == 64` should be the proper syntax. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Bump libtool version info in preparation of 4.16.x branch (d210659)

I think it actually does. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:

Re: Bodhi 5.2.0 deployed in production.

Hello Clement, On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 10:30 AM Clement Verna wrote: > > Hi all, > > I have just deployed Bodhi 5.2.0 in production. This version should improve > the performance of updates creation since the expansive task of tagging > builds in koji has been moved to an async process using a

Re: Bodhi 5.2.0 deployed in production.

Hello Clement, On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 10:30 AM Clement Verna wrote: > > Hi all, > > I have just deployed Bodhi 5.2.0 in production. This version should improve > the performance of updates creation since the expansive task of tagging > builds in koji has been moved to an async process using a

HEADS UP: rust-psm license change (ISC/Apache-2.0 → MIT/Apache-2.0)

Effective since version 0.1.7. -- -Igor Gnatenko ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code

Re: Non-responsive maintainer: pwalter

This would be nice. It is blocking from upgrading tokei and bunch of other Rust-based packages in F31. I am out of time and not willing to do anything related to pushing new libgit2 in F31, so would be happy to assist anybody who will pick this work up. On Sat, Mar 21, 2020 at 10:45 AM Fabio

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Drop the experimental LMDB backend (#1123)

+1 on decision, did not check code though. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1123#issuecomment-601086001___

Re: Reducing broken dependencies in fedora (32) repositories

No. All dependencies and such are in Fedora Build System and kept there as any other package. On Wed, Mar 11, 2020, 14:10 Peter Robinson wrote: > On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 12:58 PM Randy Barlow > wrote: > > > > On 3/9/20 11:53 AM, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > > Source-only rust packages (those

Re: Reducing broken dependencies in fedora (32) repositories

We could if somebody will commit on maintaining those packages in stable releases, keep them always updated, insert proper Obsoletes and create compat packages all the time. The good news are that Koji maintainers implemented necessary configuration and when new version will be released and

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] ldconfig_scriptlets fg: no job control (#1112)

You need to define that macro somewhere. RPM is out of business here. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] ldconfig_scriptlets fg: no job control (#1112)

Closed #1112. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/1112#event-3109495836___ Rpm-maint mailing list

Re: GNOME 3.35.92 megaupdate

It is basically the same. The only difference is that name of the tag. On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 3:18 PM Kalev Lember wrote: > > > On 3/2/20 15:04, Richard Shaw wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 7:57 AM Kalev Lember > > wrote: > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > I am

HEADS UP: libgit2 0.99.x is coming to Rawhide

Hello, The libgit2 finally gets closer to 1.0 release, so this is one of "pre-releases". Of course, this involves soname bump :) The API should not be broken compared to 0.28.x, so I'm going to rebuild everything in side tag and then submit update for all the affected packages at once. Stay

[EPEL-devel] Ansible & Python 3 in EPEL7

Hey folks, We recently started to use Ansible more and we are using some ansible collection which is not compatible with Python 2. Are there any plans to switch Ansible to Python 3 in EPEL7 or are there any recommendations what to do in such cases as we have? -- -Igor Gnatenko

[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] rpm2archive segfaults if URL is given (#1091)

``` PID: 198189 (rpm2archive) UID: 1000 (brain) GID: 1000 (brain) Signal: 11 (SEGV) Timestamp: Sat 2020-02-29 13:35:39 CET (1min 2s ago) Command Line: rpm2archive https://jistone.fedorapeople.org/review//rust-cargo-platform-0.1.0-1.fc33.src.rpm

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Implement build system templating in spec files (#1087)

Sometimes build can involve multiple buildsystems, would be nice to have that covered. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Add a separate spec section for build configuration (#1086)

Fully agree, what about `%build_prep` or `%configure_build`? -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:

Re: Include non-RPM content in buildroot

Hi Martin, I was quite busy lately so did not have time to reply. (Most of the time I'll speak for Rust ecosystem below) On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 4:06 PM Martin Sehnoutka wrote: > > Hi, > > before I write the proposal itself I just want to stress the fact that > it isn’t my intention to change

Re: Ideas and proposal for removing changelog and release fields from spec file

On Mon, Feb 24, 2020, 18:38 Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 24. 02. 20 17:48, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > However, for the release field, we are struggling a little bit more, two > options > > are more appealing to us: > > Can we please have a "git is the only source of truth" version of this? > I.e.

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] PVS-Studio Analysis Results for RPM (#1052)

Yes, I set it up at some point. IIRC you push to specific tag and it runs build... Florian might still remember how to do it -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] RFE: Generators for license (#1073)

@ffesti I came up with another thing which might be nice to do. "Promotion of dependencies". As you know, Rust compiles statically and we package bunch of -devel packages with source code. `i3ipc` crate has features for specific versions of `i3` (the window manager). Like "which version of i3

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Disallow buildrequires: inside %package section (#1083)

Why should it disallow it? -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/1083#issuecomment-589749594___ Rpm-maint mailing

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Add znver1 arches with 32-bit + 64-bit variants and proper CPU detection (#1035)

For Rust packaging, we would appreciate being able to use rich dependencies together with architectures. Now we have to simply remove those specific bits or require everything everywhere. Same goes to OS handling. you can't use %ifarch in deps =( -- You are receiving this because you are

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] update OCaml requires/provides to cover also cmx (#1070)

@Conan-Kudo what I meant is not to release piece of junk, but start with just this OCAML generators. Once there is something else to be called "stable", release that as well. But not just random content which is there right now. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] update OCaml requires/provides to cover also cmx (#1070)

@pmatilai if you prefer this going away to rpm-extras, I'm willing to establish releases, installation scripts, and so on and so forth. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] RFE: Generators for license (#1073)

I would not expect such generators asking for more than 200-300 files. If that would help, we can force it to be passed at once, so that you don't have to initialize many things multiple times. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or

Re: Announcement: EPEL Steering Committee Changes

Then who is the best person? On Wed, Feb 19, 2020, 07:11 John M. Harris Jr wrote: > On Tuesday, February 18, 2020 10:35:26 AM MST Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > > Hi, > > > > It has been a pleasure for me to be a part of and help lead the > > EPEL steering committee for the last couple of years.

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] First iteration of a 4.14.3 update release (#1078)

@ffesti one another thing which needs to be backported is definitely 15b296c324794d288750136b3b4f3350c3d0b8c7 -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:

[Fedora-legal-list] How to write License field for packages bundling mutliple others

In Rust world we package all crates as source code in -devel packages. Then we use them to build the real applications. Some time ago, someone noticed that we don't put licenses of those -devel packages into a resulting RPM with app which is fair. However, I'm not entirely sure how to properly

How to write License field for packages bundling mutliple others

In Rust world we package all crates as source code in -devel packages. Then we use them to build the real applications. Some time ago, someone noticed that we don't put licenses of those -devel packages into a resulting RPM with app which is fair. However, I'm not entirely sure how to properly

[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] RFE: Generators for license (#1073)

According to Fedora Packaging Guidelines, with static linking, the license tag should actually contain license not only of software which is being compiled but also licenses of all software being linked. Do you think it would be possible to design some kind of generator for a license?

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] update OCaml requires/provides to cover also cmx (#1070)

> @ignatenkobrain No, there's no reason to move it there. Why not? It is better to split language-specific things into a rpm-extras. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] update OCaml requires/provides to cover also cmx (#1070)

While we are on it, shouldn't we move these to rpm-extras? -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Cleanup fingerprint cache creation (#1068)

@pmatilai was it intentional to close PR? -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1068#issuecomment-586161085___

Re: How to get proper nsswitch.conf?

25 PM Florian Weimer wrote: > > * Igor Gnatenko: > > > I've noticed that glibc ships one nsswitch.conf, but then it is > > entirely overridden by authselect... What is the proper way of getting > > proper nsswitch.conf on the system? > > authselect is not the on

How to get proper nsswitch.conf?

Hello, I've noticed that glibc ships one nsswitch.conf, but then it is entirely overridden by authselect... What is the proper way of getting proper nsswitch.conf on the system? ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Discussion: How to handle Python extras (#1061)

You still need to be able to BR them because you'd want to run tests and whatnot. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Reset global macro state after each spec query/parse (#1067)

@pmatilai funny thing is that somebody recently (yesterday) mentioned this bug in the Russian Fedora telegram group and today you come up with the fix :) Can we also backport this to 4.14? -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view

Re: Packaging of Ansible collections

The goal is to be able to use ansible with collections installed via RPM without having to connect to the internet. On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 4:45 PM Bill Nottingham wrote: > > Igor Gnatenko (ignatenkobr...@fedoraproject.org) said: > > Hello, > > > > Did anybody had an

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Handle Python extras trough reverse requirements encoded in provides (#1061)

You can't properly do it right now. It would need to be expanded on buildtime, but buildtime requirements != runtime requirements. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Handle Python extras trough reverse requirements encoded in provides (#1061)

They would depend on main package tied to NVR, and have broken deps after upgrade. And that should be just auto-removed by DNF (no such feature exists, but it is not very hard to implement in dnf.conf `autoallowremove=*+*`). -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Handle Python extras trough reverse requirements encoded in provides (#1061)

@hroncok of course that would be nice. And something what we have discussed with @ffesti. He even asked me to send sumup how we would use that in Rust: http://lists.rpm.org/pipermail/rpm-ecosystem/2020-February/000730.html While there is no commitment or anything like that from anybody, I think

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Handle Python extras trough reverse requirements encoded in provides (#1061)

> Can you do that automatically? Yes, it is done in rust2rpm. It generates spec file with bunch of subpackages for each feature. And dependency generators support them, based on the name of subpackage, it extracts feature and adjust generation of Provides/Requires. -- You are receiving this

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Handle Python extras trough reverse requirements encoded in provides (#1061)

@hroncok generate bunch of subpackages for the optional features (extras) and support them. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Handle Python extras trough reverse requirements encoded in provides (#1061)

> This needs to be in python-rpm-generators, that's why I discuss this here. It > can be done "immediately". @ignatenkobrain when can we expect dynamic > subpackages? Hopefully as soon as @ffesti has time :) --- @hroncok, the whole reason to not reimplement the wheel is that we already do

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Handle Python extras trough reverse requirements encoded in provides (#1061)

Dynamic subpackages is something what's already planned for the future. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:

Packaging of Ansible collections

Hello, Did anybody had an experience of packaging Ansible collections into an RPM? I guess if would be enough to put the files somewhere under /usr/share/ansible, but not sure. Also I'm not sure what download URL could be used. ___ devel mailing list

[Rpm-ecosystem] Dynamic subpackages

Hello, As I promised on #rpm.org, I'd like to describe here how we would like to use potential "dynamic subpackages" feature in Rust packaging. First of all, rust crates are packages as sources, so there is simply -devel subpackage containing source code. That includes Cargo.toml which is the

Re: satyr soname bump

What does it mean "us? I see that ABRT has broken dependencies in rawhide. I would appreciate if you could use side tag to build new version + rebuild all packages which depend on it in there. On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 3:15 PM Ernestas Kulik wrote: > > satyr 0.30 was built with a bumped soname.

Re: Any issues booting Rawhide kernel-5.6.0-0.rc0.git1.2.fc32.x86_64?

I have the same issue since 5.5.0 release kernel. Latest one which works for me is 5.5.0-rc6.git3.2. I was not sure how to debug this, so I did not submit a bug report. I have this issue on the ThinkPad T480s with latest firmwares and so on. On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 2:10 PM Richard W.M. Jones

[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Fixup few issues found by PVS (#1054)

build/files.c: * Expression rc == 0 is always true. * The path variable is assigned but is not used by the end of the function. build/parsePreamble.c: * The argv variable is assigned but is not used by the end of the function. tools/rpmgraph.c: * The argv variable is assigned but is not used

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >