[Bug 1469313] perl-Dist-Zilla-6.010 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1469313 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA

[Bug 1468854] ctstream-27 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1468854 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System --- ctstream-27-1.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See

Re: super-drafty F28 and F29 schedules

On ti, 11 heinä 2017, Michael Catanzaro wrote: On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 6:56 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: IMHO, if you absolutely want to stick to May/October dates, it may make sense to skip a release date as was done with F21 and go for a 9-month cycle. The schedule as it

[Bug 1468854] ctstream-27 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1468854 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA

Re: F27 System Wide Change: Graphical Applications as Flatpaks

Hey Kevin, Thanks for your detailed response. I usually try not to read or write long mails, but I made an exception this time. :) On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 7:45 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: Bastien Nocera wrote: Why do we care about FHS compliance inside a Flatpak?

Schedule for Wednesday's FPC Meeting (2017-07-12 17:00 UTC)

Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FPC meeting Wednesday at 2017-07-12 17:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting-3 on irc.freenode.net. Local time information (via. uitime): = Day: Wednesday = 2017-07-12 10:00 PDT US/Pacific 2017-07-12

[389-devel] Please review: 49316 - DS multithread clock safety

https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49316 https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/raw/4e695b492aeab6dd59f673c986468bf62f6d33d8a5071541e05455c277289de2-0001-Ticket-49316-Fix-clock-unsafety-in-DS.patch -- Sincerely, William Brown Software Engineer Red Hat, Australia/Brisbane signature.asc

[EPEL-devel] Fedora EPEL 6 updates-testing report

The following Fedora EPEL 6 Security updates need testing: Age URL 734 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-7031 python-virtualenv-12.0.7-1.el6 728 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-7168 rubygem-crack-0.3.2-2.el6 618

[Bug 1462475] abi-compliance-checker-2.1 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1462475 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|abi-compliance-checker-2.1-

[Bug 1464431] perl-Parse-ErrorString-Perl-0.24 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1464431 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-Parse-ErrorString-Perl

[Bug 1467066] perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-3.26 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1467066 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-3.2

[Bug 1464620] perl-Scalar-List-Utils-1.48 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1464620 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-Scalar-List-Utils-1.48

[Bug 1464674] perl-Parse-ErrorString-Perl-0.26 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1464674 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-Parse-ErrorString-Perl

Re: super-drafty F28 and F29 schedules

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 6:56 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: IMHO, if you absolutely want to stick to May/October dates, it may make sense to skip a release date as was done with F21 and go for a 9-month cycle. The schedule as it stands now either WILL slip, or almost all the

Re: super-drafty F28 and F29 schedules

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 8:36 PM, Carlos O'Donell wrote: I encourage Jeff Law and Jakub Jelinek to review these schedules for compiler related issues. I don't think we should adjust the schedule much (or even at all) for the compiler. We scheduled F26 a month later than

[Bug 1467066] perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-3.26 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1467066 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-3.2

[Bug 1464431] perl-Parse-ErrorString-Perl-0.24 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1464431 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-Parse-ErrorString-Perl

[Bug 1464674] perl-Parse-ErrorString-Perl-0.26 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1464674 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-Parse-ErrorString-Perl

Re: Fedora 27 mass rebuild at risk

On 07/11/2017 12:37 AM, Carlos O'Donell wrote: > If we're lucky we can get everything ready for the 12th, but we might > need another day or two given how long it takes to build gcc on all > the arches. We are getting more luck. We'll see how tomorrow goes. Status update: * Get the gcc trunk

Re: super-drafty F28 and F29 schedules

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 09:36:28PM -0400, Carlos O'Donell wrote: > This is just a perfunctory review from the glibc perspective with > regard to base ABI and API issues in this core runtime. [...] > Otherwise the schedules look sensible from a glibc perspective. > We can drive new security,

Re: super-drafty F28 and F29 schedules

On 07/06/2017 09:15 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/28/Schedule I encourage Jeff Law and Jakub Jelinek to review these schedules for compiler related issues. This is just a perfunctory review from the glibc perspective with regard to base ABI and API issues in

Re: F27 System Wide Change: Graphical Applications as Flatpaks

Bastien Nocera wrote: > Why do we care about FHS compliance inside a Flatpak? Because the proprietary directory layout means the applications (and the libraries!) have to be specially built for it, and in the worst case, require code and/or build system changes to deal with it. > And why would

[389-devel] Please review: Issue 49315 - Log a warning whenever unauthenticated binds are enabled

https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49315 https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/raw/c6f0c622a9bf124eab65e1b64d900bc5dac8fa36259e6cbcb0209e4a7a1ae3a8-0001-Issue-49315-Log-a-warning-whenever-unauthenticated-b.patch ___ 389-devel mailing list --

Re: Using ndb in RPM

* Stephen John Smoogen: > On 11 July 2017 at 16:48, Florian Weimer wrote: >> * Stephen John Smoogen: >> >>> On 11 July 2017 at 07:52, Michael Schroeder wrote: On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 06:41:05AM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: > And we do use SQLite today in

[Bug 1466082] perl-SNMP-Info-3.37 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1466082 --- Comment #5 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- hotness's scratch build of perl-SNMP-Info-3.37-1.el7.src.rpm for rawhide failed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=20466840

[Bug 1466082] perl-SNMP-Info-3.37 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1466082 Upstream Release Monitoring changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug 1466082] perl-SNMP-Info-3.37 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1466082 --- Comment #4 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- Created attachment 1296621 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1296621=edit [patch] Update to 3.37 (#1466082) -- You are

Re: No i686 kernel: Can we require SSE2 for i686?

On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 12:00:05AM +0200, Zdenek Kabelac wrote: > The question is - why - certainly not because CPU got less powerfull that No, it's because modern desktop environments are much more heavily GPU-dependent to the point where the (very lousy) onboard GPUs on 2005-era laptops are

[Bug 1469841] perl-Dancer2-0.205001 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1469841 --- Comment #2 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- hotness's scratch build of perl-Dancer2-0.205001-1.el7.src.rpm for rawhide failed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=20466621

[Bug 1469841] New: perl-Dancer2-0.205001 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1469841 Bug ID: 1469841 Summary: perl-Dancer2-0.205001 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: perl-Dancer2 Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged Assignee:

Re: No i686 kernel: Can we require SSE2 for i686?

Florian Weimer wrote: > I ran into this unannounced change: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Stop_Building_i686_Kernels Since this effectively amounts to desupporting Fedora on i686 hardware, this is very much a system-wide change. Kevin Kofler

[Bug 1469841] perl-Dancer2-0.205001 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1469841 --- Comment #1 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- Created attachment 1296609 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1296609=edit [patch] Update to 0.205001 (#1469841) -- You are

Re: No i686 kernel: Can we require SSE2 for i686?

Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: > Considering that SSE2 was introduced by Intel in 2001 and AMD caught up > with it in 2003, I'd be +1 (with my FESCo hat on) to requiring SSE2, > regardless of whether the above change is accepted. If you require SSE2, you limit the usefulness of the i686

Re: super-drafty F28 and F29 schedules

Matthew Miller wrote: > I took a look at the planned F27 schedule > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/27/Schedule and sketched out > what the same time periods would look like with a May target for F28, > and then repeated again for F29, making very drafty preliminary > schedules: > >

Re: No i686 kernel: Can we require SSE2 for i686?

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 4:00 PM, Zdenek Kabelac wrote: > Dne 11.7.2017 v 23:17 Solomon Peachy napsal(a): >> >> On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 10:55:25PM +0200, Michal Schorm wrote: >>> >>> He won't install it on his home desktop PC or work laptop. He rather find >>> an old dusty

Re: No i686 kernel: Can we require SSE2 for i686?

Dne 11.7.2017 v 23:17 Solomon Peachy napsal(a): On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 10:55:25PM +0200, Michal Schorm wrote: He won't install it on his home desktop PC or work laptop. He rather find an old dusty laptop from 2005 in his shed and starts to learn there. If we're being honest, a typical

Re: No i686 kernel: Can we require SSE2 for i686?

On 11 July 2017 at 17:03, Justin Forbes wrote: > On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 3:43 PM, Matthew Miller > wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 10:26:03PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: >>> I ran into this unannounced change: >>>

Re: No i686 kernel: Can we require SSE2 for i686?

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 04:43:27PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > Currently i686 users are at about 1/6th of x86_64 users, by mirror > checkins. I don't have an easy way of knowing how many of those i686 > checkins are old releases It's worth pointing out that won't tell us how many of those i686

Re: Using ndb in RPM

On 11 July 2017 at 16:48, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Stephen John Smoogen: > >> On 11 July 2017 at 07:52, Michael Schroeder wrote: >>> On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 06:41:05AM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: And we do use SQLite today in DNF with the yumdb, as well as

Re: No i686 kernel: Can we require SSE2 for i686?

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 10:55:25PM +0200, Michal Schorm wrote: > He won't install it on his home desktop PC or work laptop. He rather find > an old dusty laptop from 2005 in his shed and starts to learn there. If we're being honest, a typical 2005-era laptop is going to yield a rather lousy

Re: No i686 kernel: Can we require SSE2 for i686?

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 4:54 PM, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 4:43 PM, Matthew Miller > wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 10:26:03PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: >>> I ran into this unannounced change: >>>

Re: No i686 kernel: Can we require SSE2 for i686?

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 4:55 PM, Michal Schorm wrote: > Idk, but you know - example - somebody starts with Linux. > > He won't install it on his home desktop PC or work laptop. He rather find an > old dusty laptop from 2005 in his shed and starts to learn there. > > I think, a

Re: No i686 kernel: Can we require SSE2 for i686?

On Tue, 2017-07-11 at 22:55 +0200, Michal Schorm wrote: > Idk, but you know - example - somebody starts with Linux. > > He won't install it on his home desktop PC or work laptop. He rather find > an old dusty laptop from 2005 in his shed and starts to learn there. > > I think, a lot of people

Re: No i686 kernel: Can we require SSE2 for i686?

On 11 July 2017 at 16:57, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 4:41 PM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski > wrote: >> On Tuesday, 11 July 2017 at 22:26, Florian Weimer wrote: >>> I ran into this unannounced change: >>> >>>

Re: No i686 kernel: Can we require SSE2 for i686?

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 3:43 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 10:26:03PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: >> I ran into this unannounced change: >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Stop_Building_i686_Kernels >> If this is accepted, all x86 hardware

Re: F27 System Wide Change: 32 bit UEFI Support

Does edk2-ovmf provide qemu-kvm with switchable 32-bit and 64-bit support so this can be more widely tested by QA folks without hardware? Chris Murphy ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to

Re: No i686 kernel: Can we require SSE2 for i686?

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 4:41 PM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: > On Tuesday, 11 July 2017 at 22:26, Florian Weimer wrote: >> I ran into this unannounced change: >> >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Stop_Building_i686_Kernels > > I noticed this is

Re: No i686 kernel: Can we require SSE2 for i686?

On 07/11/2017 10:33 PM, Chris Adams wrote: > Once upon a time, Florian Weimer said: >> I ran into this unannounced change: >> >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Stop_Building_i686_Kernels > > I'm assuming it's a work-in-progress proposal? For one thing, it says > it

Re: No i686 kernel: Can we require SSE2 for i686?

Idk, but you know - example - somebody starts with Linux. He won't install it on his home desktop PC or work laptop. He rather find an old dusty laptop from 2005 in his shed and starts to learn there. I think, a lot of people who are potential new users or IT guys, has only access to old HW,

Re: No i686 kernel: Can we require SSE2 for i686?

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 4:43 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 10:26:03PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: >> I ran into this unannounced change: >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Stop_Building_i686_Kernels >> If this is accepted, all x86 hardware

[Bug 1467066] perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-3.26 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1467066 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA

Re: Using ndb in RPM

* Stephen John Smoogen: > On 11 July 2017 at 07:52, Michael Schroeder wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 06:41:05AM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: >>> And we do use SQLite today in DNF with the yumdb, as well as the new >>> SWDB coming soon(TM). I'm not sure why the SQLite backend was

Re: No i686 kernel: Can we require SSE2 for i686?

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 10:26:03PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > I ran into this unannounced change: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Stop_Building_i686_Kernels > If this is accepted, all x86 hardware on which Fedora can run will > support SSE2, and we should reflect that in the i686

Re: No i686 kernel: Can we require SSE2 for i686?

On Tuesday, 11 July 2017 at 22:26, Florian Weimer wrote: > I ran into this unannounced change: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Stop_Building_i686_Kernels I noticed this is categorized as self-contained, which I think is wrong. I also have hardware that would no longer run Fedora

Re: No i686 kernel: Can we require SSE2 for i686?

Once upon a time, Florian Weimer said: > I ran into this unannounced change: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Stop_Building_i686_Kernels I'm assuming it's a work-in-progress proposal? For one thing, it says it is not a system wide change, but (if I'm

No i686 kernel: Can we require SSE2 for i686?

I ran into this unannounced change: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Stop_Building_i686_Kernels If this is accepted, all x86 hardware on which Fedora can run will support SSE2, and we should reflect that in the i686 build flags. How likely is it that this proposal is accepted? Ideally,

[389-devel] please review: Ticket 48210 - Add IP addr and connid to cn=monitor "connection" attribute

https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/48210 https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/raw/c3aa5d2923ad3f69730c353137befeeaa20d69bc9e0ff28179b7c91786539b46-0001-Ticket-48210-Add-IP-addr-and-connid-to-monitor-outpu.patch ___ 389-devel mailing list --

Re: super-drafty F28 and F29 schedules

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017, at 03:49 PM, Jean-Baptiste Holcroft wrote: > Le 11/07/2017 à 19:30, Colin Walters a écrit : > > specific ones. And we get into a lot of interesting questions around > > the intersection > > of the languages and Workstation, depending on what gets installed by > > default.

Re: F27 System Wide Change: 32 bit UEFI Support

On Thu, 2017-07-06 at 15:42 +0200, Jaroslav Reznik wrote: > = System Wide Change: 32 bit UEFI Support = > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/32BitUefiSupport > > Change owner(s): > Peter Jones > > Some x86 systems ship with a 64 bit CPU, but 32 bit UEFI firmware. It > is

Re: super-drafty F28 and F29 schedules

Le 11/07/2017 à 19:30, Colin Walters a écrit : specific ones. And we get into a lot of interesting questions around the intersection of the languages and Workstation, depending on what gets installed by default. can you please elaborate what you mean by languages in this particular context?

Re: F27 System Wide Change: Reduce Initial Setup Redundancy

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 08:39:51PM +0200, Andreas Tunek wrote: > 2017-07-11 20:33 GMT+02:00 Matthew Miller : > > On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 08:10:30PM +0200, Andreas Tunek wrote: > >> > I think that's fine. The GUI doesn't need to cover every possible use > >> > case, and

Re: pure-ftpd 1.0.46 released!

Dominik, are you try communicate with it's maintainers? вт, 11 июл. 2017 г., 16:09 Dominik Kucher : > Hi! > > No longer maintains pure-ftpd? 1.0.46 is released on Apr. 24 2017 > > -- > Dominik Kucher > A-2130 Mistelbach, Ebendorferstraße 7/2/3 > p: +43 (0) 720 511 941 >

Re: Self Introduction

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 11:22:55PM +0800, Felix Yan wrote: > Hi, > > My name is Felix Yan, and I am building my first Fedora package [1]. I > hope it can be accepted into the Fedora project. Hi, welcome to Fedora! #1468861 has already been approved (pending sponsorship), so that's pretty good

Re: F27 System Wide Change: Reduce Initial Setup Redundancy

2017-07-11 20:33 GMT+02:00 Matthew Miller : > On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 08:10:30PM +0200, Andreas Tunek wrote: >> > I think that's fine. The GUI doesn't need to cover every possible use >> > case, and this particular use case does not seem to be in high-priority >> > scope

Re: F27 System Wide Change: Reduce Initial Setup Redundancy

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 08:10:30PM +0200, Andreas Tunek wrote: > > I think that's fine. The GUI doesn't need to cover every possible use > > case, and this particular use case does not seem to be in high-priority > > scope for the Workstation target. > Since I like that use case I would really

Re: [Test-Announce] Fedora 26 Candidate RC-1.4 Available Now!

On Tue, 2017-07-11 at 11:12 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > > The best resolution to a situation like this is simply to fix the > problem that's causing images to fail to build in the first place. I should note for the record that both the images missing from RC-1.4 were present in RC-1.5, which

Re: [Fedora-packaging] Bundled Provides Libraries and Versioning

On Monday, 10 July 2017 at 13:56, Bastien Nocera wrote: > - Original Message - [...] > > There can be many reasons: copylibs, no upstream support for building as > > shared library, no stable API/ABI, etc. Many of them are listed on the > > wiki page:

Re: NoDefaultSyslog Breaks Logwatch on Clean Install

Thanks Matt... I did review this earlier and updated before I posted here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1462615 By clean install, what I meant was that I had to do a complete reinstall of my F25 installation (reformat of partition) because I couldn't get the recovery tools on the

Re: [Test-Announce] Fedora 26 Candidate RC-1.4 Available Now!

On Tue, 2017-07-11 at 11:24 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 01:10:52PM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > > But we can't "just ignore the compose tools", because we want the > > > metadata to actually be correct and consistent. If we dump an ISO into > > > a compose link this,

Re: F27 System Wide Change: Reduce Initial Setup Redundancy

2017-07-11 19:50 GMT+02:00 Matthew Miller : > On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 07:18:39PM +0200, Andreas Tunek wrote: >> What I wanted to do in the GUI is to revert to the Fedora setup with >> one root and several "regular" users. That does not seem to be >> possible with the

Fedora Rawhide-20170711.n.0 compose check report

Missing expected images: Atomic qcow2 x86_64 Workstation live i386 Server boot i386 Atomic raw-xz x86_64 Kde live i386 Failed openQA tests: 11/137 (x86_64), 1/18 (i386), 1/2 (arm) ID: 119611 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_role_deploy_domain_controller URL:

Re: super-drafty F28 and F29 schedules

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 01:30:32PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote: > > Hopefully, by the time we are at F28, Modularity will provide a way for > > us to offer faster streams for people who want them -- but let's also > > focus on stable releases. > > But with Modularity, how much does it even make

Re: F27 System Wide Change: Reduce Initial Setup Redundancy

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 07:18:39PM +0200, Andreas Tunek wrote: > What I wanted to do in the GUI is to revert to the Fedora setup with > one root and several "regular" users. That does not seem to be > possible with the current GUI tools. This setup would not be possible > to create (using the GUI

Re: NoDefaultSyslog Breaks Logwatch on Clean Install

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 10:06:45AM -0700, Gerald B. Cox wrote: > I found this: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/NoDefaultSyslog > I had to do a clean install of F25 because of problems with the system > rescue tools, now I find that Logwatch on a clean install is broken... and > it appears

Re: super-drafty F28 and F29 schedules

On Thu, Jul 6, 2017, at 09:15 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > Hopefully, by the time we are at F28, Modularity will provide a way for > us to offer faster streams for people who want them -- but let's also > focus on stable releases. But with Modularity, how much does it even make sense to talk

Re: F27 System Wide Change: Reduce Initial Setup Redundancy

2017-07-11 16:25 GMT+02:00 Michael Catanzaro : > On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 6:40 AM, Andreas Tunek > wrote: >> >> So you mean that bug 1270953 >> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270953) is >> fixed/implemented? > > > I'm not sure it

NoDefaultSyslog Breaks Logwatch on Clean Install

I found this: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/NoDefaultSyslog I had to do a clean install of F25 because of problems with the system rescue tools, now I find that Logwatch on a clean install is broken... and it appears to be because of the removal of syslog.

Re: Coming soon: Pagure service for dist-git

On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 05:02:25PM +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 04:49:32PM +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote: > > Dne 8.7.2017 v 20:43 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek napsal(a): > > > Nah, most likely stg.fp.o is just some rpi on somebody's desk or a vm > > > stuck in the

Re: [Test-Announce] Fedora 26 Candidate RC-1.4 Available Now!

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 01:10:52PM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > But we can't "just ignore the compose tools", because we want the > > metadata to actually be correct and consistent. If we dump an ISO into > > a compose link this, it won't be. > > Real users don't care about metadata that you

Self Introduction

Hi, My name is Felix Yan, and I am building my first Fedora package [1]. I hope it can be accepted into the Fedora project. I am currently a developer of the Deepin Desktop team, and also a developer of Arch Linux [2]. Since the Deepin distribution is based on Debian, I've been working on a port

RFC: Packing Deepin Desktop Environment packages into Fedora

Hi all, Deepin Desktop Environment(Short as Deepin DE in following part) is the Desktop shipped with Deepin. Recently we want to pack Deepin DE into Fedora. We are working with one of the Deepin developers on a Wiki Page[1] aiming at making this easier for people who want to help and who can help

Re: Fedora 26 is officially here!

No, No, Nooo ! It's aleady here, to :-) THANKS Fedora's for a new release !! ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Broken dependencies: perl-Catalyst-Controller-HTML-FormFu

perl-Catalyst-Controller-HTML-FormFu has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree: On x86_64: perl-Catalyst-Controller-HTML-FormFu-2.01-2.fc26.noarch requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.24.1) On armhfp: perl-Catalyst-Controller-HTML-FormFu-2.01-2.fc26.noarch requires

Broken dependencies: perl-PDL-Graphics-PLplot

perl-PDL-Graphics-PLplot has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree: On aarch64: perl-PDL-Graphics-PLplot-0.71-6.fc27.aarch64 requires libperl.so.5.24()(64bit) perl-PDL-Graphics-PLplot-0.71-6.fc27.aarch64 requires libplplot.so.13()(64bit)

Broken dependencies: perl-Gtk3-WebKit

perl-Gtk3-WebKit has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree: On x86_64: perl-Gtk3-WebKit-0.06-7.fc26.noarch requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.24.1) On armhfp: perl-Gtk3-WebKit-0.06-7.fc26.noarch requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.24.1) On ppc64le:

Broken dependencies: perl-HTML-FormFu-MultiForm

perl-HTML-FormFu-MultiForm has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree: On x86_64: perl-HTML-FormFu-MultiForm-1.00-9.fc26.noarch requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.24.1) On armhfp: perl-HTML-FormFu-MultiForm-1.00-9.fc26.noarch requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.24.1) On ppc64le:

Broken dependencies: perl-OpenOffice-UNO

perl-OpenOffice-UNO has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree: On x86_64: perl-OpenOffice-UNO-0.07-21.fc26.x86_64 requires libperl.so.5.24()(64bit) perl-OpenOffice-UNO-0.07-21.fc26.x86_64 requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.24.1) On armhfp:

Broken dependencies: perl-SDL

perl-SDL has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree: On x86_64: perl-SDL-2.546-7.fc26.x86_64 requires libperl.so.5.24()(64bit) perl-SDL-2.546-7.fc26.x86_64 requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.24.1) On armhfp: perl-SDL-2.546-7.fc26.armv7hl requires libperl.so.5.24

Broken dependencies: perl-Algorithm-CurveFit

perl-Algorithm-CurveFit has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree: On x86_64: perl-Algorithm-CurveFit-1.05-18.fc26.noarch requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.24.1) On armhfp: perl-Algorithm-CurveFit-1.05-18.fc26.noarch requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.24.1) On ppc64le:

Re: F27 System Wide Change: Reduce Initial Setup Redundancy

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 6:40 AM, Andreas Tunek wrote: So you mean that bug 1270953 (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270953) is fixed/implemented? I'm not sure it was ever broken. Did you make sure there was an another administrator first before trying

Cleaning packages with broken deps

Hi, We have a ticket on how to clean up packages with broken deps: https://pagure.io/releng/issue/6877 We had a discussion about this issue in our releng meeting on Jul 10th 2017. The problem is that there is no good way of solving this issue, but we came up two options: 1. Blocking the pkgs

pure-ftpd 1.0.46 released!

Hi! No longer maintains pure-ftpd? 1.0.46 is released on Apr. 24 2017 -- Dominik Kucher A-2130 Mistelbach, Ebendorferstraße 7/2/3 p: +43 (0) 720 511 941 f: +43 (0) 1 34242 289967 m: +43 (0) 676 57 68 677 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Fedora 26 is officially here!

Fedora 26 is here! Read the official announcement with hyperlinks and fancy formatting and details and (especially) thanks to the community at: https://fedoramagazine.org/fedora-26-is-here/ or just go ahead and grab it from https://getfedora.org/ -- Matthew Miller

Cleaning packages with broken deps

Hi, We have a ticket on how to clean up packages with broken deps: https://pagure.io/releng/issue/6877 We had a discussion about this issue in our releng meeting on Jul 10th 2017. The problem is that there is no good way of solving this issue, but we came up two options: 1. Blocking the pkgs

Fedora 26 is officially here!

Fedora 26 is here! Read the official announcement with hyperlinks and fancy formatting and details and (especially) thanks to the community at: https://fedoramagazine.org/fedora-26-is-here/ or just go ahead and grab it from https://getfedora.org/ -- Matthew Miller

Re: Using ndb in RPM

Hi, On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 12:13:58PM -0400, Przemek Klosowski wrote: > Could you possibly summarize what you remember about those tests? What > scenario did you look at? Was the difference more like seconds vs hours, > or microseconds vs milliseconds? I found some of my old mail back. In

Re: Using ndb in RPM

On Tue, 11 Jul 2017 13:52:32 +0200 Michael Schroeder wrote: > So, suggesting different databases is fine and all, but they have > to be integrated and well tested. We re-added support for multiple > database just for that, so that we can test things and decide what > to do. Does

Re: Fedora 27 mass rebuild at risk

On 07/07/2017 04:11 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: >> If no other reason for a mass rebuild has surfaced, then we should >> just skip the mass rebuild for the Fedora 27 release. > Hm, https://pagure.io/releng/issue/6853 is about Go piggy-backing on > the "normal" mass rebuild Thanks, but

[389-devel] please review: Ticket 49031 - Improve memberof with a cache of group parents

https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49031 https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/raw/6faa291b5d9ab3f6ba554a7e1f312d2cb1c8a79edb7d04228ad66189e9549278-0001-Add-performance-tests-for-memberof-plugin.patch Thanks, -Sankar R. ___ 389-devel mailing list --

Re: Using ndb in RPM

On 11 July 2017 at 07:52, Michael Schroeder wrote: > On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 06:41:05AM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: >> And we do use SQLite today in DNF with the yumdb, as well as the new >> SWDB coming soon(TM). I'm not sure why the SQLite backend was removed >> in rpm 4.9.0, but

  1   2   >