Re: rawhide buildroot creation changes

On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 4:03 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 03:54:41PM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 3:52 PM, Richard W.M. Jones > > wrote: > > > Are we using a branch of koji? > > > > ​Is this part of the

Re: rawhide buildroot creation changes

On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 15:54:41 -0400 Neal Gompa wrote: > On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 3:52 PM, Richard W.M. Jones > wrote: ...snip... > > So I was having a look at how to change this in the configuration, > > but I don't understand how the dnf.conf is generated

Self Introduction: Nuno Dias

Hi, Following the procedure from "Join the package collection maintainers", let me introduce myself, I usually create rpms to my use, and after some years doing that, I realised that maybe I should contribute, I use Linux every day, I started with RedHat some year ago, and now Fedora is my

Re: rawhide buildroot creation changes

On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 09:58:39PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 10:47:22AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote: > > as of this morning US time we have changed the way rawhide buildroots are > > created in koji. rawhide is now using dnf to install the packages into the > >

Re: Proposal: retire lesstif in f24 and beyond

On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 07:20:22AM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On 10/09/2015 09:17 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > >On 8 October 2015 at 17:04, Kevin Kofler wrote: > >>Christopher Meng wrote: > >>>IMO motif should 'Obsoletes' lesstif in Fedora since motif is free now.

Re: rawhide buildroot creation changes

On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 03:54:41PM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 3:52 PM, Richard W.M. Jones > wrote: > > Are we using a branch of koji? > > ​Is this part of the mysterious Koji 2.0 codebase that I can't seem to find > anywhere?​ I don't know - was that

Re: rawhide buildroot creation changes

On 10/10/2015 04:24 AM, Rex Dieter wrote: Tom Hughes wrote: On 10/10/15 10:59, Rex Dieter wrote: Dennis Gilmore wrote: as of this morning US time we have changed the way rawhide buildroots are created in koji. rawhide is now using dnf to install the packages into the buildroot. this means

[Bug 1270076] perl-Log-Report-1.08 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270076 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Log-Report-1.08-1.fc21 has been pushed to the Fedora 21 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test

Re: rawhide buildroot creation changes

On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 3:52 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 09:58:39PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 10:47:22AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote: > > > as of this morning US time we have changed the way rawhide buildroots >

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)

On 10/09/2015 11:30 PM, Neal Gompa wrote: Though, I don't quite understand what the purpose for sonames are in the first place, if they aren't really designed for supporting parallel installable stuff... They signal a break in ABI. Applications must be recompiled to link to the new version

Re: Self Introduction: Nuno Dias

2015-10-10 21:38 GMT+02:00 Nuno Dias : > Hi, > > Following the procedure from "Join the package collection > maintainers", let me introduce myself, > > I usually create rpms to my use, and after some years doing that, I > realised that maybe I should contribute, I use Linux

Query: %cmake not doing out-of-tree builds?

Hello all, Over the last few weeks, I've been working on a number of packages that use CMake for the build system for various distros, and I've noticed something rather peculiar. Of all the distros I've built packages for (Fedora/CentOS, openSUSE, Mageia, Debian, and Ubuntu), only Fedora/CentOS

Re: rawhide buildroot creation changes

On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 09:58:39PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 10:47:22AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote: > > as of this morning US time we have changed the way rawhide buildroots are > > created in koji. rawhide is now using dnf to install the packages into the > >

Re: Query: %cmake not doing out-of-tree builds?

2015-10-10 22:25 GMT+02:00 Neal Gompa : > Hello all, > > Over the last few weeks, I've been working on a number of packages that use > CMake for the build system for various distros, and I've noticed something > rather peculiar. Of all the distros I've built packages for

Re: ipset unmaintained

Done, fails to build in rawhide due to an unrelated ARM builder failure. > DEBUG util.py:393: Config error: releasever not given and can not be > detected from the installroot. https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/3255/11403255/root.log F23 update submitted. -- devel mailing list

Re: rawhide buildroot creation changes

On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 02:28:21PM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 21:03:32 +0100 > "Richard W.M. Jones" wrote: > > > (BTW is anyone else disturbed by the relatively massive user icons > > that are now shown on git.fedorahosted.org? Seems to be a recent > >

Re: Query: %cmake not doing out-of-tree builds?

2015-10-11 2:14 GMT+02:00 Neal Gompa : > > I pretty much wound up doing that, but I wanted to know if there was a > reason for not having it built into the macro like Mageia and SUSE do. > > Fedora's %cmake macros came first many years ago before Suse's version. Again: 1. it

Re: rawhide buildroot creation changes

On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 16:27:30 -0400 Neal Gompa wrote: > ​What about createrepo_c? Are we using that now for Koji instead of > createrepo?​ No. kevin pgpMr0EAuYoCC.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: rawhide buildroot creation changes

On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 21:32:40 +0100 "Richard W.M. Jones" wrote: > Here you go: > > https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/4921 > > Wasn't sure what Component to use, so I guessed > 'SCM (Source Code Management)'. Thanks. We will get it sorted... kevin

ipset unmaintained

Hi, Can anyone update it ? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/1145913 -thanks- -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Re: Query: %cmake not doing out-of-tree builds?

On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 7:52 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote: > On 10/10/2015 02:25 PM, Neal Gompa wrote: > >> Hello all, >> >> Over the last few weeks, I've been working on a number of packages that >> use CMake for the build system for various distros, and I've noticed >>

Re: Query: %cmake not doing out-of-tree builds?

On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 9:31 PM, Haïkel wrote: > 2015-10-11 2:14 GMT+02:00 Neal Gompa : > > > > I pretty much wound up doing that, but I wanted to know if there was a > > reason for not having it built into the macro like Mageia and SUSE do. > > > >

Re: rawhide buildroot creation changes

On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 09:12:34PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 04:07:41PM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 4:03 PM, Richard W.M. Jones > > wrote: > > > > > On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 03:54:41PM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: > > > > On

Re: rawhide buildroot creation changes

On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 21:03:32 +0100 "Richard W.M. Jones" wrote: > (BTW is anyone else disturbed by the relatively massive user icons > that are now shown on git.fedorahosted.org? Seems to be a recent > change). Odd. I'm not sure how that happened, it was definitely not

Re: rawhide buildroot creation changes

On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 15:54:41 -0400 > Neal Gompa wrote: > > > On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 3:52 PM, Richard W.M. Jones > > wrote: > > ...snip... > > > > So I was having a look at how to

Re: Introduction

On Fri, 09 Oct 2015 14:30:02 -0400 Lyude wrote: > Hello! Although my legal name is Chandler, please just call me Lyude > ;). Hello. :) > I've been a Linux user for a couple years now, and as of the past few > years have became a developer and am working on making a career

Re: Query: %cmake not doing out-of-tree builds?

On 10/10/2015 02:25 PM, Neal Gompa wrote: Hello all, Over the last few weeks, I've been working on a number of packages that use CMake for the build system for various distros, and I've noticed something rather peculiar. Of all the distros I've built packages for (Fedora/CentOS, openSUSE,

Re: rawhide buildroot creation changes

On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 04:07:41PM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 4:03 PM, Richard W.M. Jones > wrote: > > > On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 03:54:41PM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: > > > On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 3:52 PM, Richard W.M. Jones > > >

Re: Query: %cmake not doing out-of-tree builds?

On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 4:49 PM, Haïkel wrote: > 2015-10-10 22:25 GMT+02:00 Neal Gompa : > > Hello all, > > > > Over the last few weeks, I've been working on a number of packages that > use > > CMake for the build system for various distros, and

Fedora Rawhide 20151010 compose check report

No missing expected images. Images in this compose but not Rawhide 20151009: Design_suite live x86_64 Cloud docker x86_64 Kde disk raw armhfp Kde live i386 Scientific_kde live x86_64 Scientific_kde live i386 Design_suite live i386 Kde live x86_64 No images in Rawhide 20151009 but not this.

Re: ipset unmaintained

2015-10-10 22:37 GMT+02:00 Xose Vazquez Perez : > Hi, > > Can anyone update it ? > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/1145913 > > -thanks- > Please start the unresponsive maintainer process. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_nonresponsive_package_maintainers Meanwhile,

Fedora 23 Branched 20151010 compose check report

No missing expected images. Images in this compose but not 23 Branched 20151009: Workstation disk raw armhfp Images in 23 Branched 20151009 but not this: Cloud docker x86_64 Failed openQA tests: 10 of 52 ID: 5361Test: x86_64 generic_boot default_install@uefi ID: 5304Test:

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)

On 09/10/15 21:13, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > I completely, wholeheartedly agree with you here. However, the > unfortunate fact of life is that we can lead a horse to water but > cannot make them drink. Our previous policy was essentially holding > the horse's head under the water until it

Re: "Unbundling SIG" was [Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)]

2015-10-10 1:31 GMT+02:00 Kevin Kofler : > Matthew Miller wrote: >> When the packager has reasoned belief that debundling is actively bad >> in some way for this package, I think we should trust the packager. I >> know not everyone on this thread agrees, but in general,

Re: Proposal to reduce anti-bundling requirements

2015-10-10 1:12 GMT+02:00 Kevin Kofler : > Ian Malone wrote: >> I'm actually all for unbundling, but going it alone is not guaranteed >> to be simple. "Oh, hey, that deprecated function has been removed." > > Then you try to port the application to the new APIs, and if it's

Re: rawhide buildroot creation changes

Dennis Gilmore wrote: > as of this morning US time we have changed the way rawhide buildroots are > created in koji. rawhide is now using dnf to install the packages into > the buildroot. this means that in f24 and on dnf will be used to create > the buildroot. as well as manage the updates on

Re: rawhide buildroot creation changes

On 10/10/15 10:59, Rex Dieter wrote: Dennis Gilmore wrote: as of this morning US time we have changed the way rawhide buildroots are created in koji. rawhide is now using dnf to install the packages into the buildroot. this means that in f24 and on dnf will be used to create the buildroot. as

Re: Proposal to reduce anti-bundling requirements

Am 10.10.2015 um 11:27 schrieb Haïkel: Engineering is not science really? as previously stated, it's about compromises well, that can end in something like "the cleverer give in until he becomes the dumber itself" in german "Der Klügere gibt solange nach bis er selbst der Dümmere ist"

Re: rawhide buildroot creation changes

Tom Hughes wrote: > On 10/10/15 10:59, Rex Dieter wrote: >> Dennis Gilmore wrote: >> >>> as of this morning US time we have changed the way rawhide buildroots >>> are >>> created in koji. rawhide is now using dnf to install the packages into >>> the buildroot. this means that in f24 and on dnf

Re: Proposal to reduce anti-bundling requirements

Am 10.10.2015 um 12:46 schrieb Haïkel: 2015-10-10 12:17 GMT+02:00 Reindl Harald : Am 10.10.2015 um 11:27 schrieb Haïkel: Engineering is not science really? as previously stated, it's about compromises well, that can end in something like "the cleverer give in

[Bug 1270504] perl-File-Path-2.12 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270504 --- Comment #1 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- Created attachment 1081592 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1081592=edit [patch] Update to 2.12 (#1270504) -- You are

[Bug 1270504] New: perl-File-Path-2.12 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270504 Bug ID: 1270504 Summary: perl-File-Path-2.12 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: perl-File-Path Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged Assignee:

[Bug 1270507] New: perl-Net-SSH2-0.56 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270507 Bug ID: 1270507 Summary: perl-Net-SSH2-0.56 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: perl-Net-SSH2 Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged Assignee:

[Bug 1270502] perl-experimental-0.016 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270502 --- Comment #2 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- Scratch build completed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=11398337 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the

[Bug 1270504] perl-File-Path-2.12 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270504 --- Comment #2 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- Scratch build failed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=11398349 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC

Re: Proposal to reduce anti-bundling requirements

2015-10-10 12:17 GMT+02:00 Reindl Harald : > > > Am 10.10.2015 um 11:27 schrieb Haïkel: >> >> Engineering is not science > > > really? > >> as previously stated, it's about compromises > > > well, that can end in something like "the cleverer give in until he becomes > the

rawhide report: 20151010 changes

Compose started at Sat Oct 10 05:15:02 UTC 2015 Broken deps for i386 -- [CableSwig] CableSwig-3.20.0-13.fc23.i686 requires gccxml [IQmol] IQmol-2.3.0-9.fc24.i686 requires libboost_serialization.so.1.58.0

[Bug 1270501] New: perl-DateTime-Format-RFC3339-v1.2.0 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270501 Bug ID: 1270501 Summary: perl-DateTime-Format-RFC3339-v1.2.0 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: perl-DateTime-Format-RFC3339 Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged

[Bug 1270503] perl-ExtUtils-CBuilder-0.280224 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270503 --- Comment #1 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- Created attachment 1081588 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1081588=edit [patch] Update to 0.280224 (#1270503) -- You are

[Bug 1270500] New: perl-DateTime-Format-Atom-v1.2.0 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270500 Bug ID: 1270500 Summary: perl-DateTime-Format-Atom-v1.2.0 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: perl-DateTime-Format-Atom Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged

[Bug 1270502] New: perl-experimental-0.016 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270502 Bug ID: 1270502 Summary: perl-experimental-0.016 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: perl-experimental Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged Assignee:

[Bug 1270500] perl-DateTime-Format-Atom-v1.2.0 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270500 --- Comment #1 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- Failed to kick off scratch build. cmd: spectool -g /var/tmp/thn-wbns0m/perl-DateTime-Format-Atom.spec return code: 22 stdout: Getting

[Bug 1270501] perl-DateTime-Format-RFC3339-v1.2.0 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270501 --- Comment #1 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- Failed to kick off scratch build. cmd: spectool -g /var/tmp/thn-hVftTg/perl-DateTime-Format-RFC3339.spec return code: 22 stdout: Getting

[Bug 1270503] New: perl-ExtUtils-CBuilder-0.280224 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270503 Bug ID: 1270503 Summary: perl-ExtUtils-CBuilder-0.280224 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: perl-ExtUtils-CBuilder Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged

[Bug 1270502] perl-experimental-0.016 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270502 --- Comment #1 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- Created attachment 1081587 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1081587=edit [patch] Update to 0.016 (#1270502) -- You are

[Bug 1270508] perl-PPIx-Regexp-0.042 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270508 --- Comment #1 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- Created attachment 1081596 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1081596=edit [patch] Update to 0.042 (#1270508) -- You are

[Bug 1270508] New: perl-PPIx-Regexp-0.042 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270508 Bug ID: 1270508 Summary: perl-PPIx-Regexp-0.042 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: perl-PPIx-Regexp Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged Assignee:

F-23 Branched report: 20151010 changes

Compose started at Sat Oct 10 07:15:03 UTC 2015 Broken deps for armhfp -- [389-ds-base] 389-ds-base-1.3.4.4-1.fc23.armv7hl requires librpmio.so.3 389-ds-base-1.3.4.4-1.fc23.armv7hl requires librpm.so.3 [CableSwig]

[Bug 1270508] perl-PPIx-Regexp-0.042 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270508 --- Comment #2 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- Scratch build completed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=11398406 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the

[Bug 1270503] perl-ExtUtils-CBuilder-0.280224 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270503 --- Comment #2 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- Scratch build completed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=11398339 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the

Re: [EPEL-devel] crlibm and libscs for EPEL 7?

On 10/9/2015 1:54 AM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: You could ask to become the maintainer in EPEL: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group#Become_a_co-maintainer That looks like quite an involved process with an uncertain outcome ... The process