Why ignore the reviewer and use bundled vcglib? you were asked not to do that.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1658153
You did the vcglib review and never built it
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1677989
I have removed the useless unpacked source files, don't abuse
https://fedorapeople.org/groups/389ds/ci/nightly/2020/01/05/report-389-ds-base-1.4.3.0-20200105gitb133a74.fc31.x86_64.html
___
389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
sergiomb opened a new pull-request against the project:
`perl-Glib-Object-Introspection` that you are following:
``
Update to 0.048 (#1782378)
``
To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Glib-Object-Introspection/pull-request/1
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1787759
Sergio Monteiro Basto changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends On||1785501
Doc Type|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1785501
Sergio Monteiro Basto changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||1787759
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1787759
Bug ID: 1787759
Summary: please build perl-Glib-Object-Introspection for epel 8
Product: Fedora EPEL
Version: epel8
Status: NEW
Component: perl-Glib-Object-Introspection
Hi,
After 13 months, wdune/white_dune is avaliable for fedora 32 8-)
I want to say thanks for anyońe, who gave tips, especially Petr Menšík
(the reviewer) and
Robert-André Mauchin (the sponsor).
so long
MUFTI
___
devel mailing list --
Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> nohang has experimented with PSI, but it actually isn't using PSI
> metrics by default because they've proven to be less effective than
> hoped for. In theory, using an interactivity measure like PSI should
> provide for the best results, but in practice it just hasn't
John M. Harris Jr wrote:
> This is simply not the case. It may be for GNOME, but I haven't tested
> that. It definitely is not the case for Plasma.
… unless you want to run KMail/Akonadi on it. :-)
But yes, Plasma itself works fine with 2 GiB (I haven't actually tested with
less than 4 GiB, but
On Sat, Jan 4, 2020 at 6:22 PM John Reiser wrote:
>
> On 1/3/20 22:35 UTC, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 5:25 PM Jan Kratochvil
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Fri, 03 Jan 2020 22:45:52 +0100, Neal Gompa wrote:
> >>> Can someone please explain why gdb dlopen()'s librpm instead of just
>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1783984
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|fusioninventory-agent-2.5.2 |fusioninventory-agent-2.5.2
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1784170
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Fixed In
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1784658
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Fixed In
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1781826
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-Lchown-1.01-14.el8 |perl-Lchown-1.01-14.el8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1780704
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1781749
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1781752
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1780871
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
On Saturday, January 4, 2020 2:29:11 PM MST drago01 wrote:
> A modern desktop with apps on top will not run well enough on 2GB,
> lets stop pretending it does.
This is simply not the case. It may be for GNOME, but I haven't tested that.
It definitely is not the case for Plasma.
--
John M.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1781750
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1785501
Bug 1785501 depends on bug 1780871, which changed state.
Bug 1780871 Summary: please build perl-Cairo for epel 8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1780871
What|Removed |Added
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1780702
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1781742
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1781826
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1781746
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1778465
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
On Sat, Jan 4, 2020 at 2:51 AM Aleksandra Fedorova wrote:
> Since in the Change we are not introducing just the earlyoom tool but enable
> it with a specific profile I would add those details here. Smth like:
>
> "earlyoom service will choose the offending process based on the same
> oom_score
On 1/3/20 22:35 UTC, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 5:25 PM Jan Kratochvil wrote:
On Fri, 03 Jan 2020 22:45:52 +0100, Neal Gompa wrote:
Can someone please explain why gdb dlopen()'s librpm instead of just
doing proper compile-time linking?
[[snip]]
gdb.spec could auto-detect
On Sat, Jan 4, 2020 at 2:30 PM drago01 wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jan 4, 2020 at 7:32 PM Chris Murphy wrote:
> >
> > It might be. And it might need to be tweaked. Perhaps 6% for SIGTERM
> > and 3% for SIGKILL. Or even 5% and 2.5%. For sure using a percentage
> > of RAM and swap is too simplistic. But
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1785827
--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System ---
perl-Module-CoreList-5.20191220-1.fc31 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1785831
--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System ---
perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.20191220-1.fc31 has been pushed to the Fedora 31
testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this
bug report.
See
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1786805
--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System ---
perl-IRI-0.010-1.fc31 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 testing repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1786801
--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System ---
perl-Encode-3.02-440.fc31 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 testing repository.
If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1783984
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|fusioninventory-agent-2.5.2 |fusioninventory-agent-2.5.2
On Sat, Jan 4, 2020 at 7:32 PM Chris Murphy wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jan 4, 2020 at 4:48 AM drago01 wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Saturday, January 4, 2020, Neal Gompa wrote:
> >>
> >> On Sat, Jan 4, 2020 at 2:33 AM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > On 03.01.2020 22:27, Neal Gompa
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1786805
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #4 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1785827
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #4 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1786801
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #4 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1785831
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #3 from
On Sat, Jan 4, 2020 at 2:37 AM Mattia Verga via devel
wrote:
> There are also a bunch of broken updates in Bodhi which were created without
> any build. Here it is a list of aliases:
[snip]
> FEDORA-2019-98ef2a04fc created by jjames
> FEDORA-2019-f57b34f7a0 created by jjames
Both of these
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1782935
Bug 1782935 depends on bug 1782932, which changed state.
Bug 1782932 Summary: RFE - build perl-No-Worries for EPEL 8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1782932
What|Removed |Added
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1782941
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1783984
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1782941
Bug 1782941 depends on bug 1782932, which changed state.
Bug 1782932 Summary: RFE - build perl-No-Worries for EPEL 8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1782932
What|Removed |Added
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1782935
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1782932
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
On Sat, Jan 4, 2020 at 11:20 AM John M. Harris Jr wrote:
>
> On Saturday, January 4, 2020 11:16:24 AM MST Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 5:52 pm, John M. Harris Jr
> > wrote:
> >
> > > In that case, I'd suggest waiting the 15 minutes, and then not
> > > bogging down
> > >
On Saturday, January 4, 2020 11:31:49 AM MST Chris Murphy wrote:
> A modern operating system needs to
> know better than to allow unprivileged processes to take down the
> whole system.
Well, you can configure quotas if you really want, but the idea is that it's
YOUR COMPUTER, and you should be
On Sat, Jan 4, 2020 at 4:48 AM drago01 wrote:
>
>
>
> On Saturday, January 4, 2020, Neal Gompa wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 4, 2020 at 2:33 AM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > On 03.01.2020 22:27, Neal Gompa wrote:
>> > > and servers...
>> >
>> > Admins will be very happy when such
On Saturday, January 4, 2020 4:48:04 AM MST drago01 wrote:
> And btw we should really update the minimum memory requirements in our
> documentation, the current ones have nothing to do with reality (if you
> want a pleasant user experience).
That is not necessary, at all. I'm running Fedora on a
On Saturday, January 4, 2020 11:16:24 AM MST Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 5:52 pm, John M. Harris Jr
> wrote:
>
> > In that case, I'd suggest waiting the 15 minutes, and then not
> > bogging down
> > your system that badly the next time. This is, really, the best
> >
On Sat, Jan 4, 2020 at 12:45 AM wrote:
>
> В Суб, 04/01/2020 в 08:27 +0100, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel пишет:
>
> > I'm strongly against adding of any user-space OOM killers to Fedora
> > default images. Users should explicitly enable them only when needed.
>
> Just my 2 cents: i tested early
On Friday, January 3, 2020 11:34:13 PM MST Andreas Tunek wrote:
> Den lör 4 jan. 2020 kl 01:53 skrev John M. Harris Jr :
> > On Friday, January 3, 2020 4:25:20 PM MST Chris Murphy wrote:
> > > in the cases were I could issue syrq+b, responsiveness was so bad
> > > it'd take upwards of 15 minutes
On Sat, Jan 4, 2020 at 11:38 am, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
What about using the memory controller for user units to allocate
memory resources between the processes in the user session? Thanks to
recent developments, the gnome session uses separate systemd units
(and thus separate
On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 5:52 pm, John M. Harris Jr
wrote:
In that case, I'd suggest waiting the 15 minutes, and then not
bogging down
your system that badly the next time. This is, really, the best
option.
I'm going to suggest you stop replying in this thread if you're not
interested in
On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 11:12 pm, Tom Seewald wrote:
I think this would be a really big improvement for workstation and
other desktop spins, the handling of out of memory situations have
been a consistent paint point on Linux. However, may I ask why
EarlyOOM was chosen over something like
Let's keep this desktop-focused, since the proposal does not affect
Server edition.
On Sat, Jan 4, 2020 at 12:48 pm, drago01 wrote:
As for the desktop case the running web browers in a cgroup to keep
them in check would solve most real world problems - other common
desktop apps don't use
ntl 11.4.2 has been released. Upstream has a policy of bumping the
soname on every release, so all dependent packages must be rebuilt. I
will take care of all the rebuilds. I do not anticipate any problems
as it looks like the only API change is the addition of 2 functions.
Packages to be
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20200103.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20200104.n.1
= SUMMARY =
Added images:11
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 3
Dropped packages:3
Upgraded packages: 86
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 110.19 MiB
Size of dropped packages
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 6/155 (x86_64), 1/2 (arm)
Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20200103.n.0):
ID: 506900 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso modularity_tests
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/506900
ID: 506902 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso
And now it's just "pending".
On Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 7:40 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 02, 2020 at 09:14:30AM -0500, Kaleb Keithley wrote:
> > related to bodhi having gone down?
> >
> > Can someone kick it please?
>
> I would if I could. This is due to the ongoing koji issues.
>
>
On Sat, 4 Jan 2020 08:36:07 +0100, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> > Which is something you can only fix with an RPM Fusion package,
> > if you "control" (= build) all depending packages.
>
> RPM Fusion will need to copy and rebuild all such packages and this is a
> huge headache for
On Saturday, January 4, 2020, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 4, 2020 at 2:33 AM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
> wrote:
> >
> > On 03.01.2020 22:27, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > > and servers...
> >
> > Admins will be very happy when such user-space killer will kill for
> > example PgSQL database server
On Fri, Jan 03, 2020 at 02:18:40PM -0500, Ben Cotton wrote:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/EnableEarlyoom
>
> == Summary ==
> Install earlyoom package, and enable it by default. This will cause
> the kernel oomkiller to trigger sooner, but will not affect which
> process it chooses to
On Sat, Jan 4, 2020 at 2:33 AM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
wrote:
>
> On 03.01.2020 22:27, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > and servers...
>
> Admins will be very happy when such user-space killer will kill for
> example PgSQL database server and cause DB corruption or loss of banking
> transactions.
>
This
On Fri, Jan 03, 2020 at 02:28:29PM -0500, Ben Cotton wrote:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/BINUTILS234
>
> == Summary ==
> Rebase the binutils package from version 2.33 to version 2.34.
>
> == Owner ==
> * Name: Nick Clifton [https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Nickc]
> * Email:
On Fri, 3 Jan 2020, 20:19 Ben Cotton, wrote:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/EnableEarlyoom
>
> == Summary ==
> Install earlyoom package, and enable it by default. This will cause
> the kernel oomkiller to trigger sooner, but will not affect which
> process it chooses to kill off. The
On Fri, 03 Jan 2020 19:35:36 -
"Frank R Dana Jr." wrote:
> Paul Howarth wrote,
> >
> > perl-Time-Piece was obsoleted by the base perl package way back in>
> >5.10.0.
> >
> > perl-Time-Piece-MySQL is an extension to perl-Time-Piece.
>
> Thanks for the info, Paul!
>
> ...Does that mean it
> On Fri, Jan 03, 2020 at 11:55:27PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>
> Yes, they are all because bodhi started composing them, moved their tags
> and then failed (because koji wasn't tagging things in a timely manner).
>
> So, they need to be retagged back and resubmitted, or bodhi tweaked to
>
69 matches
Mail list logo
