On Sat, Apr 15, 2023 at 5:01 AM Jeff Law wrote:
>
>
>
> On 4/12/23 10:08, przemek klosowski via devel wrote:
> >>
> >> That may rule out certain processors, but it ultimately provides a
> >> higher performing baseline architecture for systems that are
> >> (hopefully) going to be good performing
On Sat, Apr 15, 2023 at 4:49 AM Jeff Law wrote:
>
>
>
> On 4/12/23 10:57, David Abdurachmanov wrote:
>
> >
> > We have been focusing and building for RV64GC, which is kinda
> > represented by the RVA20 profile. RVA20 is considered a major profile,
> > but it significantly lacks modern ISA
On 4/14/23 20:14, Neal Gompa wrote:
We should not screw up with RISC-V in Fedora like RHEL did with ARM.
Yes, I'm saying RHEL's ARM strategy was a mistake, and still is, to
some degree. We see aspects of this being walked back now as the
ecosystem didn't go the way RHEL ARM folks hoped,
The following Fedora EPEL 7 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
4 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2023-4821639cb4
chromium-112.0.5615.49-1.el7
2 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2023-fca191b57e
libyang-2.0.164-2.el7
The following builds
The following Fedora EPEL 8 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
29 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2023-1e00c3d01e
cutter-re-2.2.0-1.el8 rizin-0.5.1-1.el8
2 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2023-8c1df52e87
chromium-112.0.5615.49-1.el8
2
The following Fedora EPEL 9 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
1 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2023-97d6b10e34
rnp-0.16.3-1.el9
1 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2023-4894f94aaa
dr_libs-0^20230324git4b3d078-0.1.el9
1
On Fri, Apr 14, 2023 at 10:01 PM Jeff Law wrote:
>
>
>
> On 4/12/23 10:08, przemek klosowski via devel wrote:
> >>
> >> That may rule out certain processors, but it ultimately provides a
> >> higher performing baseline architecture for systems that are
> >> (hopefully) going to be good performing
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2184624
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Fixed In
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2183880
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-Test-Compile-3.2.0-1.f |perl-Test-Compile-3.2.0-1.f
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2182227
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-Test-Compile-3.1.1-1.f |perl-Test-Compile-3.1.1-1.f
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2184492
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Fixed In
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2183924
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Fixed In
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2182563
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-DateTime-TimeZone-2.60 |perl-DateTime-TimeZone-2.60
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2181971
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-Glib-Object-Introspect |perl-Glib-Object-Introspect
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2181377
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-Business-ISBN-3.008-1. |perl-Business-ISBN-3.008-1.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2181237
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Fixed In
On 4/12/23 10:08, przemek klosowski via devel wrote:
That may rule out certain processors, but it ultimately provides a
higher performing baseline architecture for systems that are
(hopefully) going to be good performing parts rather than embedded
focused parts.
Yes, good point, but
On 4/12/23 10:57, David Abdurachmanov wrote:
We have been focusing and building for RV64GC, which is kinda
represented by the RVA20 profile. RVA20 is considered a major profile,
but it significantly lacks modern ISA extensions. There is also RVA22,
which is considered a "minor" profile. The
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2186946
Bug ID: 2186946
Summary: perl-DateTime-Locale-1.38 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-DateTime-Locale
Keywords: FutureFeature,
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2186944
Bug ID: 2186944
Summary: perl-Time-Progress-2.14 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-Time-Progress
Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2170647
Fedora Admin user for bugzilla script actions
changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|smo...@redhat.com
Dear all,
I am writing to you all to seek your opinion on the use of subplanets on
the Fedora Planet. There is an ongoing discussion on the infrastructure
mailing list regarding this matter, and we would appreciate your input. I
am sending this email to other mailing lists as well, as some of you
Hello everyone,
I am a software engineer working at Red Hat. Currently, I maintain TPM
packages in RHEL. One of those packages is the tss2 package, and I would
like to become a co-maintainer of the tss2 package in Fedora.
Regards,
Štěpán
___
devel
On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 at 12:37, Emmanuel Seyman wrote:
> * Stephen Smoogen [14/04/2023 12:20] :
> >
> > I would like someone else to take over this package and will either add
> > someone or orphan this in the coming 2 weeks.
>
> I will gladly take it (fas name: eseyman).
>
>
I have added you at
On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 at 12:37, Emmanuel Seyman wrote:
> * Stephen Smoogen [14/04/2023 12:20] :
> >
> > I would like someone else to take over this package and will either add
> > someone or orphan this in the coming 2 weeks.
>
> I will gladly take it (fas name: eseyman).
>
>
I have added you at
On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 at 12:37, Emmanuel Seyman wrote:
> * Stephen Smoogen [14/04/2023 12:20] :
> >
> > I would like someone else to take over this package and will either add
> > someone or orphan this in the coming 2 weeks.
>
> I will gladly take it (fas name: eseyman).
>
>
I have added you at
* Stephen Smoogen [14/04/2023 12:20] :
>
> I would like someone else to take over this package and will either add
> someone or orphan this in the coming 2 weeks.
I will gladly take it (fas name: eseyman).
Emmanuel
___
devel mailing list --
* Stephen Smoogen [14/04/2023 12:20] :
>
> I would like someone else to take over this package and will either add
> someone or orphan this in the coming 2 weeks.
I will gladly take it (fas name: eseyman).
Emmanuel
___
perl-devel mailing list --
I am looking over various packages I own, and realized I was the sole
maintainer for the perl-Net-TELNET package. I do not use this package and
the fact that I forgot I had maintenance of this.. says I am a 'poor'
maintainer.
I would like someone else to take over this package and will either add
I am looking over various packages I own, and realized I was the sole
maintainer for the perl-Net-TELNET package. I do not use this package and
the fact that I forgot I had maintenance of this.. says I am a 'poor'
maintainer.
I would like someone else to take over this package and will either add
On 2023-04-14 01:28, Michael J Gruber wrote:
Interesting. Can you pin down from you analysis where the difference comes
from, especially in user-space? I'm asking for a friend
The boot time improvements came from removing iscsi from the critical
path. There's no longer a dependency on
The Fedora Linux 38 Final RC 1.6 compose is GO and will be shipped on
Tuesday, 18 April. For more information please check the
Go/No-Go meeting minutes[1][2] or log[3][4].
[1]
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2023-04-13/f38_final_gono-go_meeting.2023-04-13-17.05.html
[2]
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20230413.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20230414.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 5
Dropped packages:3
Upgraded packages: 122
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 2.52 MiB
Size of dropped packages
Dear all,
You are kindly invited to the meeting:
Sagitter Vacation on 2023-04-15 from 00:00:00 to 00:00:00 UTC
The meeting will be about:
Not fully available for responding to mails and/or requests.
Please, wait later April 17th
Source: https://calendar.fedoraproject.org//meeting/10480/
OLD: Fedora-38-20230413.n.0
NEW: Fedora-38-20230414.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 1
Added packages: 0
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 4
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 0 B
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Size of upgraded
* Miro Hrončok:
>> Thank you, that was my tentative conclusion as well. Given the weird
>> -p-less behavior, shouldn't we encourage to use -p1 (to match git) or
>> -p0 (to match Subversion/CVS/RCS)?
>
> I prefer to use explicit -p1 or even -S git_am anyway, so I don't have
> a preference about
On 14. 04. 23 12:10, Florian Weimer wrote:
* Miro Hrončok:
On 14. 04. 23 9:31, Florian Weimer wrote:
What's the -p default for %autosetup? Without any -p argument, the
patch command has peculiar behavior. I assumed that without -p, %patch
would not inherit that behavior, and so would
* Miro Hrončok:
> On 14. 04. 23 9:31, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> What's the -p default for %autosetup? Without any -p argument, the
>> patch command has peculiar behavior. I assumed that without -p, %patch
>> would not inherit that behavior, and so would %autosetup without -p.
>> Is this
On Fri, Apr 14, 2023 at 10:28 AM Michael J Gruber
wrote:
> > I didn't mention this in time to even discuss whether it'd make a good
> > addition to the release notes, but I think users will be happy to see
> > that Fedora 38 Workstation boots faster and uses less baseline memory
> > (measured
On 14. 04. 23 9:31, Florian Weimer wrote:
What's the -p default for %autosetup? Without any -p argument, the
patch command has peculiar behavior. I assumed that without -p, %patch
would not inherit that behavior, and so would %autosetup without -p.
Is this accurate? Or does %autosetup (or
> I didn't mention this in time to even discuss whether it'd make a good
> addition to the release notes, but I think users will be happy to see
> that Fedora 38 Workstation boots faster and uses less baseline memory
> (measured from a session logged in to GNOME with only a terminal
>
What's the -p default for %autosetup? Without any -p argument, the
patch command has peculiar behavior. I assumed that without -p, %patch
would not inherit that behavior, and so would %autosetup without -p.
Is this accurate? Or does %autosetup (or %patch) have an actual default
for -p?
Thanks,
I didn't mention this in time to even discuss whether it'd make a good
addition to the release notes, but I think users will be happy to see
that Fedora 38 Workstation boots faster and uses less baseline memory
(measured from a session logged in to GNOME with only a terminal
application
43 matches
Mail list logo
