https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1849262
Bug ID: 1849262
Summary: perl-Net-IPv6Addr-1.01 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-Net-IPv6Addr
Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
Hey All,
The Kernel team and Fedora QA team is holding Kernel 5.7 Test Week[0]
starting Monday.
It's fairly simple, head over to the wiki [0] and read in details about the
test week and simply run the test case mentioned in[1] and enter your
results.
Should you have any questions, come and talk
https://fedorapeople.org/groups/389ds/ci/nightly/2020/06/20/report-389-ds-base-1.4.4.3-20200619gitb59faa4.fc32.x86_64.html
___
389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
I just noticed that my openmpi module build is building for Fedora 30.
This seems like a mistake. Where do I report that?
--
Orion Poplawski
Manager of NWRA Technical Systems 720-772-5637
NWRA, Boulder/CoRA Office FAX: 303-415-9702
3380 Mitchell Lane
On Thu, 18 Jun 2020, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
Stewardship SIG guy speaking :)
If you have a limited set of packages that you want to keep working,
e.g. to keep a minimal environment available to build other NodeJS rpm
packages in fedora, then that's exactly what the Stewardship SIG was
The following Fedora EPEL 6 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
5 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2020-5f91ab971e
wordpress-5.1.6-1.el6
3 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2020-be517af396
tcpreplay-4.3.3-1.el6
3
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1843173
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1842889
Bug 1842889 depends on bug 1843173, which changed state.
Bug 1843173 Summary: perl-Test-TempDir is wanted in EPEL7
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1843173
What|Removed |Added
Hi folks! I'm proposing we cancel the QA meeting for Monday. I don't
have anything urgent new this week.
If you're aware of anything important we have to discuss this week,
please do reply to this mail and we can go ahead and run the meeting.
Thanks!
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community
On 19. 06. 20 23:11, Ben Cotton wrote:
All make invocations in spec files that don't use the install target will be
modified to use the %make_build macro
Many Python packages build Sphinx documentation with variant of "make html".
Such invocation will always be just 1 job. Hence there is no
On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 at 22:20, Ben Cotton wrote:
[..]
> The %make_build macro enables parallel make builds using the -j option.
> In case a package does not build correctly with parallel make, then
> parallel make will be disabled for that package by redefining the
> %_smp_mflags macro like this:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/LLVM-11
== Summary ==
Update all llvm sub-projects in Fedora to version 11.
== Owner ==
* Name: [[User:tstellar| Tom Stellard]]
* Email:
== Detailed Description ==
All llvm sub-projects in Fedora will be updated to version 11, and there
will be a soname
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/UseMakeBuildInstallMacro
== Summary ==
This change will update all spec files in Fedora that use make and replace
the make invocations with either the %make_build or %make_install macros.
== Owner ==
* Name: [[User:tstellar| Tom Stellard]]
* Email:
==
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Zanata_removal
== Summary ==
While most Fedora project migrated to Weblate, the old translation platform
still exists and needs to be removed (the community shouldn't have to go to
multiple place to contribute, and nobody assume Zanata maintenance).
==
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Zanata_removal
== Summary ==
While most Fedora project migrated to Weblate, the old translation platform
still exists and needs to be removed (the community shouldn't have to go to
multiple place to contribute, and nobody assume Zanata maintenance).
==
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/UseMakeBuildInstallMacro
== Summary ==
This change will update all spec files in Fedora that use make and replace
the make invocations with either the %make_build or %make_install macros.
== Owner ==
* Name: [[User:tstellar| Tom Stellard]]
* Email:
==
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/LLVM-11
== Summary ==
Update all llvm sub-projects in Fedora to version 11.
== Owner ==
* Name: [[User:tstellar| Tom Stellard]]
* Email:
== Detailed Description ==
All llvm sub-projects in Fedora will be updated to version 11, and there
will be a soname
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1781739
Jakub Jedelsky changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||needinfo?(p...@city-fan.org
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1842895
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1842891
Bug 1842891 depends on bug 1842895, which changed state.
Bug 1842895 Summary: Add perl-DateTimeX-Easy to EPEL7
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1842895
What|Removed |Added
On 19. 06. 20 21:48, Troy Dawson wrote:
On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 11:20 AM Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 19. 06. 20 16:03, Troy Dawson wrote:
Hi Miro,
I was hoping someone more python oriented would look at this, but I
guess that isn't happening.
I'll take a look at it later today.
The Python
On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 11:20 AM Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> On 19. 06. 20 16:03, Troy Dawson wrote:
> > Hi Miro,
> > I was hoping someone more python oriented would look at this, but I
> > guess that isn't happening.
> > I'll take a look at it later today.
>
> The Python oriented people already
Hello. Upstream pytoml is deprecated in favor of toml:
https://pypi.org/project/pytoml/
Would you mind if I submit a self contained change to deprecate python-pytoml in
Fedora 33?
Similar to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/DeprecateNose
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC:
On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 2:54 PM David Cantrell wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 08:44:39AM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> >Hopefully that provides some context and helps FESCo and the wider
> >community understand where Red Hat is headed with modularity on the
> >Enterprise side.
>
> Around the
On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 08:06:29AM -0500, Martin Jackson wrote:
On 6/19/20 7:46 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 02:32:19PM +0200, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
On Friday, 19 June 2020 at 11:58, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
[...]
I can only see this being solvable
On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 08:44:39AM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
Hello Fedora Community!
I am a long-time Fedora Community member, and may be familiar to many
through previous FESCo or devel list discussions and passionate
debates. However I write to you today with a different community hat
on, as
On 19. 06. 20 16:03, Troy Dawson wrote:
Hi Miro,
I was hoping someone more python oriented would look at this, but I
guess that isn't happening.
I'll take a look at it later today.
The Python oriented people already reviewed this in Fedora, here are similar
F32/31 backports:
On Fri, Jun 19, 2020, at 12:44 PM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> IIUC from the docs, when using Modularity to build Flatpaks, the
> prefix is changed to /app instead of /usr, which makes it much
> closers to SCL:
>
>https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/flatpak/concepts/
The reason for that
On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 11:12 AM Robert-André Mauchin wrote:
> Done, no swap needed for now.
Thank you! Let me know if I can do anything for you in the future.
--
Jerry James
http://www.jamezone.org/
___
devel mailing list --
On Friday, 19 June 2020 18:28:43 CEST Jerry James wrote:
> Alt-ergo 2.2.0 has been released under a public license. It has a new
> dependency, however. Would someone like to swap reviews? I need this
> one:
>
> ocaml-psmt2-frontend: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1847772
>
>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1849138
Bug ID: 1849138
Summary: perltidy-20200619 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perltidy
Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1849138
--- Comment #1 from Upstream Release Monitoring
---
An unexpected error occurred while creating the scratch build and has been
automatically reported. Sorry!
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 11:16:33AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 9:08 AM Martin Jackson wrote:
>
>
> > I use flatpaks on Fedora (Discord and okular), and I've really enjoyed
> > the experience with them. I'm not sure how well that would translate to
> > the server
Alt-ergo 2.2.0 has been released under a public license. It has a new
dependency, however. Would someone like to swap reviews? I need this
one:
ocaml-psmt2-frontend: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1847772
Thanks!
--
Jerry James
http://www.jamezone.org/
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1841308
Bug 1841308 depends on bug 1841514, which changed state.
Bug 1841514 Summary: [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-Bytes-Random-Secure
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1841514
What|Removed |Added
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1841514
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Resolution|---
On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 9:16 AM Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> I love how people hold up "containers" as a solution to these problems
> without considering for a moment how exactly the container itself gets
> built. If you were to look into the flatpak build system in Fedora,
> you'd see that they
https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/51170
--
389 Directory Server Development Team
___
389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to 389-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1846148
--- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2020-0236944568 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 testing repository.
In short time you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1846491
--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2020-0236944568 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 testing repository.
In short time you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1846149
--- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2020-0236944568 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 testing repository.
In short time you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1846147
--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2020-0236944568 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 testing repository.
In short time you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1846490
--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2020-0236944568 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 testing repository.
In short time you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1846493
--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2020-0236944568 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 testing repository.
In short time you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade
On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 9:08 AM Martin Jackson wrote:
> I use flatpaks on Fedora (Discord and okular), and I've really enjoyed
> the experience with them. I'm not sure how well that would translate to
> the server environment though, but that general approach seems to do a
> good job of
On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 8:11 AM Sérgio Basto wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Guideline page needing clarification:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL:Packaging
>
> Explanation
>
> in this wiki page is not clear that on EPEL8 we don't need anymore the
> scriptlets of Icon Cache, mimeinfo and Desktop
Hi Miro,
I was hoping someone more python oriented would look at this, but I
guess that isn't happening.
I'll take a look at it later today.
On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 2:38 AM Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> Hello, I've opened this PR some time ago:
>
>
On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 8:19 AM Artur Iwicki wrote:
> A few days ago I adopted fritzing and fritzing-parts, which were orphaned
> by their original maintainer.
> I looked at the package and at the upstream project and noticed a few
> things:
> - Looking at the releases page for the app [1],
A few days ago I adopted fritzing and fritzing-parts, which were orphaned by
their original maintainer.
I looked at the package and at the upstream project and noticed a few things:
- Looking at the releases page for the app [1], upstream stopped doing releases
manually and relies on a
On 6/19/20 7:46 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 02:32:19PM +0200, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
On Friday, 19 June 2020 at 11:58, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
[...]
I can only see this being solvable if non-default modules streams are
required to be built into a
On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 02:32:19PM +0200, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> On Friday, 19 June 2020 at 11:58, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> [...]
> > I can only see this being solvable if non-default modules streams are
> > required to be built into a unique /opt prefix instead of /usr.
>
>
On Friday, 19 June 2020 at 11:58, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
[...]
> I can only see this being solvable if non-default modules streams are
> required to be built into a unique /opt prefix instead of /usr.
Are you trying to re-invent the SCLs?
Regards,
Dominik
--
Fedora https://getfedora.org |
- Original Message -
> From: "Daniel P. Berrangé"
> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
>
> Sent: Friday, June 19, 2020 5:58:28 AM
> Subject: Re: RHEL 9 and modularity
>
> On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 11:28:58AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> >
> > Dne 18. 06. 20 v 21:40 Stephen
Thanks for the heads up.
A couple of my Bodhi updates have "failed to talk to Greenwave" and Greewave is
on the list of affected services shown in that pagure issue. Not sure if I need
to resubmit the affected packages at a later date. I guess we will just wait
and see.
Hi everyone,
we are currently experiencing network issues in IAD2 datacenter. There
are plenty of services on fedoraproject.org unavailable right now.
Please stay calm and don't ping us on IRC.
If you want to follow the issue, we have a ticket for this [0].
On behalf of Fedora
On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 11:28:58AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>
> Dne 18. 06. 20 v 21:40 Stephen Gallagher napsal(a):
> > On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 3:34 PM John M. Harris Jr
> > wrote:
> >> The issues I've seen so far affect both Fedora and RHEL, but have gotten a
> >> bit
> >> better in Fedora.
I tried to build on my computer, seems to be no problem with the
package itself, maybe some new packages that is not currently
available in repository but used by koji brokes the build?
Koji is unavailable due to a 503 error here, maybe checking if koji is
using a different dependencies version
Dne 18. 06. 20 v 21:40 Stephen Gallagher napsal(a):
> On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 3:34 PM John M. Harris Jr
> wrote:
>> The issues I've seen so far affect both Fedora and RHEL, but have gotten a
>> bit
>> better in Fedora. For example, a major concern that has been much worse in
>> Fedora than
on my local machine, i tried also mock (in this case for rawhide) an it builds
without problems.
mock -r fedora-rawhide-x86_64 --resultdir=/tmp/mock --rebuild
../SRPMS/cxxtools-3.0-1.fc32.src.rpm
and also rpmbuild builds without problem.
Should I simply deactivate the test suite in general?
On your local computer, are you using mock to build or just rpmbuild?
If you are using rpmbuild on your local computer that can be missing
dependencies for testing.
If not so, maybe the test need some network or something like that,
since I can't open koji now, I am unsure about this.
Martin
Hi,
I am currently working on an rpm package for the new version 3.0 of cxxtools,
but the mock build [2] of the test suite fails on ervery
platform. On the other hand, the package for f32 and the test suite are built
on the local computer. What could be the reason ?
[1]
> I'm not sure who is maintaining the Fedora shim pkg, if none of you,
> could you suggest who is the right person to ping.
>
> The bug below is not fixed yet for long time, can we get an update?
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1651016
pjones is the maintainer, I know there's some
On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 6:50 PM Ben Rosser wrote:
> Hi Fabio,
>
> I'm not sure how much time I'll be able to put in, but I'd be very
> happy to (help) work on this, either as part of the Stewardship or
> Nodejs SIGs, or both. Hopefully others interested in the nodejs
> ecosystem (Sérgio and
Dne 17. 06. 20 v 15:01 Miro Hrončok napsal(a):
> However, my question in the original email remains unanswered.
>
> What kind of mock builds need Fedora modular repos inside the mock root?
> I thought mock uses repos defined in mock roots configuration.
Miro is right, and I raised it
On 11. 06. 20 18:04, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 11. 06. 20 13:09, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 08. 06. 20 16:49, Miro Hrončok wrote:
Hello,
as a maintainer of the python2.7 package I was surprised to see it being
built for ELN and I like to start a discussion on whether and how can I opt
out this
65 matches
Mail list logo
