Mock v5.5 released (and mock-core-configs v40.1)

Hello maintainers! Let me announce a new release of Mock v5.5, the chroot build environment manager for building RPMs. First and foremost, this update ships with updated mock-core-configs v40.1, bringing Fedora 40 configs as "branched" separately from Fedora Rawhide (Fedora 41 now equals to

Re: Why branched config pointed to rolling config?

Dne 15. 02. 24 v 6:38 Mikhail Gavrilov napsal(a): I think that getting the f41 package with fedora-40 config looks at least odd. And one of the solutions is making rolling config pointed to branch config rather than the other way around. Than you will get f40 packages with rawhide config.

Re: Why branched config pointed to rolling config?

I think that getting the f41 package with fedora-40 config looks at least odd. And one of the solutions is making rolling config pointed to branch config rather than the other way around. -- Best Regards, Mike Gavrilov. -- ___ devel mailing list --

List of long term FTBFS packages to be retired in 2 weeks

NOTE: This was not sent to individual maintainers, as @fedoraproject.org aliases are currently broken https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/11768 --- Dear maintainers. Based on the current fail to build from source policy, the following packages should be retired from Fedora 40

Is Yatin Karel still around?

See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2048204 no activity for over two years. -- Orion Poplawski he/him/his - surely the least important thing about me IT Systems Manager 720-772-5637 NWRA, Boulder/CoRA Office FAX: 303-415-9702 3380 Mitchell Lane

[Bug 2262901] perl-LWP-Protocol-https-6.13 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2262901 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version||perl-LWP-Protocol-https-6.1

Re: [heads up] update to jpegxl-0.9.2 with soname bump in rawhide

On Wed, Feb 14 2024 at 09:38:39 PM +00:00:00, Sérgio Basto wrote: I found "cc1plus: out of memory allocating 603 bytes after a total of 86921216 bytes" Thanks. This was a big help. -- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To

Re: [heads up] update to jpegxl-0.9.2 with soname bump in rawhide

On Wed, 2024-02-14 at 12:57 -0600, Michael Catanzaro wrote: > > I checked the build log for > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=113473592 but > unfortunately I don't actually see any error message. I searched for > "error:" (indicating a compiler error) and I also searched

[Bug 2264268] New: F40FailsToInstall: perl-Alien-pkgconf

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2264268 Bug ID: 2264268 Summary: F40FailsToInstall: perl-Alien-pkgconf Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-Alien-pkgconf Assignee: ppi...@redhat.com

[Bug 2264260] New: F41FailsToInstall: perl-Alien-pkgconf

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2264260 Bug ID: 2264260 Summary: F41FailsToInstall: perl-Alien-pkgconf Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-Alien-pkgconf Assignee: ppi...@redhat.com

Re: [heads up] update to jpegxl-0.9.2 with soname bump in rawhide

On Wed, 2024-02-14 at 12:57 -0600, Michael Catanzaro wrote: > I checked the build log for > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=113473592 but > unfortunately I don't actually see any error message. I searched for > "error:" (indicating a compiler error) and I also searched for

Re: [heads up] update to jpegxl-0.9.2 with soname bump in rawhide

I checked the build log for https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=113473592 but unfortunately I don't actually see any error message. I searched for "error:" (indicating a compiler error) and I also searched for "Killed" (indicating OOM). No doubt something is wrong somewhere

Re: Why branched config pointed to rolling config?

Dne 14. 02. 24 v 14:56 Michael J Gruber napsal(a): Why branched config pointed to rolling config? # ls -ln | grep fedora-40 lrwxrwxrwx. 1 0 135 26 Jan 11 20:46 fedora-40-aarch64.cfg -> fedora-rawhide-aarch64.cfg lrwxrwxrwx. 1 0 135 23 Jan 11 20:46 fedora-40-i386.cfg ->

Re: Does splint work for anyone?

On Fri, 9 Feb 2024 at 17:17, Ian Laurie wrote: > On 2/10/24 05:06, Stephen Smoogen wrote: > > > > I was trying out the splint program on some code and found that it > > doesn't seem to work on any recent release due to changes in various > > header files > I tried using splint many years ago in

JACK rtprio=60, PipeWire rtprio=88: Why?

Hey, I intend to pull the rtirq package [1] back into this decade and realized there's a discrepancy between the priorities of JACK and PipeWire realtime threads. JACK's is at 60, per the decision made in Fedora 17 [2]: ``` $ ps -p 109009 -Lo tid,class,pri,rtprio,command TID CLS PRI

Re: [heads up] update to jpegxl-0.9.2 with soname bump in rawhide

On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 7:00 PM Sérgio Basto wrote: > > On Wed, 2024-02-14 at 16:41 +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 2:53 PM Sérgio Basto > > wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, 2024-02-09 at 13:28 +, Sérgio Basto wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > I will start a mass rebuild [1] in

Re: [heads up] update to jpegxl-0.9.2 with soname bump in rawhide

On Wed, 2024-02-14 at 16:41 +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote: > On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 2:53 PM Sérgio Basto > wrote: > > > > On Fri, 2024-02-09 at 13:28 +, Sérgio Basto wrote: > > > Hi, > > > I will start a mass rebuild [1] in a side-tag, very soon , the > > > goal > > > is > > > finish and

Re: do we need CONFIG_UPROBES=y in our kernels?

> On Feb 12, 2024, at 10:18 AM, Marius Schwarz wrote: > > Hi, > > I excuse myself if this has been already discussed, bastion ML server was > blacklisted (has been removed btw). > > Short summary(for details use the source link): > > In a german developer blog article was the topic raised, that

Fedora 40 Mass Branching complete

Hi All, Fedora Linux f40 has now been branched, please be sure to do a 'git fetch -v' to pick up the new branch. As an additional reminder, rawhide/f40 has been completely isolated from previous releases, which means that anything you do for 40 you also have to do in the rawhide branch and do a

Fedora 40 Mass Branching complete

Hi All, Fedora Linux f40 has now been branched, please be sure to do a 'git fetch -v' to pick up the new branch. As an additional reminder, rawhide/f40 has been completely isolated from previous releases, which means that anything you do for 40 you also have to do in the rawhide branch and do a

Orphaned packages looking for new maintainers

NOTE: This was not sent to individual maintainers, as @fedoraproject.org aliases are currently broken (https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/11768). I will send another announcement once that's fixed. --- Report started at 2024-02-13 01:07:53 UTC The following packages are orphaned and

Re: Unresponsive maintainer: petersen / Pandoc package not updated since June 2023: Security vulnerability, CVE-2023-35936 (medium)

As a pandoc user, I'm happy to help with any reviews. Is there a list where this tends to get posted, apart from devel? Thanks, Michel On Fri, Feb 09, 2024 at 11:26:33PM +0800, Jens-Ulrik Petersen wrote: > I should also have added there's an increasing amount of technical debt > with the pandoc

Re: Question about conditional BuildRequires lines

On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 5:55 PM Tom Hughes via devel wrote: > > On 14/02/2024 15:48, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 03:21:38PM +, Tom Hughes wrote: > >> On 14/02/2024 14:54, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > >> > >>> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rapidjson/pull-request/7

Re: Question about conditional BuildRequires lines

On 14/02/2024 15:48, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 03:21:38PM +, Tom Hughes wrote: On 14/02/2024 14:54, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rapidjson/pull-request/7 I don't think what Tom is saying there is correct, or is it? The answer is

Re: Question about conditional BuildRequires lines

On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 03:21:38PM +, Tom Hughes wrote: > On 14/02/2024 14:54, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > >https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rapidjson/pull-request/7 > > > >I don't think what Tom is saying there is correct, or is it? > > The answer is that I'm wrong about it breaking

Re: [heads up] update to jpegxl-0.9.2 with soname bump in rawhide

On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 2:53 PM Sérgio Basto wrote: > > On Fri, 2024-02-09 at 13:28 +, Sérgio Basto wrote: > > Hi, > > I will start a mass rebuild [1] in a side-tag, very soon , the goal > > is > > finish and merge it before branch of Fedora 40, please let me know we > > have any objection

Re: Why branched config pointed to rolling config?

On Wed, 2024-02-14 at 13:38 +, Mikhail Gavrilov wrote: > Why branched config pointed to rolling config? > # ls -ln | grep fedora-40 > lrwxrwxrwx. 1 0 135   26 Jan 11 20:46 fedora-40-aarch64.cfg -> > fedora-rawhide-aarch64.cfg > lrwxrwxrwx. 1 0 135   23 Jan 11 20:46 fedora-40-i386.cfg ->

Re: Question about conditional BuildRequires lines

On 14/02/2024 14:54, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rapidjson/pull-request/7 I don't think what Tom is saying there is correct, or is it? The answer is that I'm wrong about it breaking things, because koji uses the unpacked spec file to install dependencies not

Question about conditional BuildRequires lines

https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rapidjson/pull-request/7 I don't think what Tom is saying there is correct, or is it? Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com virt-builder

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20240214.n.1 changes

OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20240212.n.0 NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20240214.n.1 = SUMMARY = Added images:3 Dropped images: 3 Added packages: 8 Dropped packages:6 Upgraded packages: 217 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 13.01 MiB Size of dropped packages

Re: Why branched config pointed to rolling config?

Am Mi., 14. Feb. 2024 um 14:48 Uhr schrieb Mikhail Gavrilov : > > Why branched config pointed to rolling config? > # ls -ln | grep fedora-40 > lrwxrwxrwx. 1 0 135 26 Jan 11 20:46 fedora-40-aarch64.cfg -> > fedora-rawhide-aarch64.cfg > lrwxrwxrwx. 1 0 135 23 Jan 11 20:46 fedora-40-i386.cfg ->

Re: [heads up] update to jpegxl-0.9.2 with soname bump in rawhide

On Fri, 2024-02-09 at 13:28 +, Sérgio Basto wrote: > Hi, > I will start a mass rebuild [1] in a side-tag, very soon , the goal > is > finish and merge it before branch of Fedora 40, please let me know we > have any objection that prevent to proceeding. > As we already have the new branch

Why branched config pointed to rolling config?

Why branched config pointed to rolling config? # ls -ln | grep fedora-40 lrwxrwxrwx. 1 0 135 26 Jan 11 20:46 fedora-40-aarch64.cfg -> fedora-rawhide-aarch64.cfg lrwxrwxrwx. 1 0 135 23 Jan 11 20:46 fedora-40-i386.cfg -> fedora-rawhide-i386.cfg lrwxrwxrwx. 1 0 135 26 Jan 11 20:46

Why branched config pointed to rolling config?

Why branched config pointed to rolling config? # ls -ln | grep fedora-40 lrwxrwxrwx. 1 0 135 26 Jan 11 20:46 fedora-40-aarch64.cfg -> fedora-rawhide-aarch64.cfg lrwxrwxrwx. 1 0 135 23 Jan 11 20:46 fedora-40-i386.cfg -> fedora-rawhide-i386.cfg lrwxrwxrwx. 1 0 135 26 Jan 11 20:46

Re: A note about riscv64 changes

On Wed, 14 Feb 2024 12:29:00 + Peter Robinson wrote: > On Wed, 14 Feb 2024 at 12:07, David Abdurachmanov > wrote: > > > > On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 12:49 PM Dan Horák wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, 14 Feb 2024 10:42:52 + > > > "Richard W.M. Jones" wrote: > > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 14, 2024

Re: A note about riscv64 changes

On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 7:30 AM Peter Robinson wrote: > > On Wed, 14 Feb 2024 at 12:07, David Abdurachmanov > wrote: > > > > On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 12:49 PM Dan Horák wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, 14 Feb 2024 10:42:52 + > > > "Richard W.M. Jones" wrote: > > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at

Re: A note about riscv64 changes

On Wed, 14 Feb 2024 at 12:07, David Abdurachmanov wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 12:49 PM Dan Horák wrote: > > > > On Wed, 14 Feb 2024 10:42:52 + > > "Richard W.M. Jones" wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 10:27:53AM +, Peter Robinson wrote: > > > > Hi Richard, > > > > > > > >

Re: A note about riscv64 changes

On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 12:49 PM Dan Horák wrote: > > On Wed, 14 Feb 2024 10:42:52 + > "Richard W.M. Jones" wrote: > > > On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 10:27:53AM +, Peter Robinson wrote: > > > Hi Richard, > > > > > > > A quick note that you may be seeing pull requests for riscv64 changes > > >

Re: dnf-4.19.0 without filelists in Rawhide soon

Yep, this is a topic for potential improvement. Currently, there's a simple file path detection, like "arg[0] == '/' || (arg[0] == '*' && arg[1] == '/')", and filelists are always additionally downloaded in such cases. The situation aligns with dnf5 at the moment, and there's already a tracking

Re: dnf-4.19.0 without filelists in Rawhide soon

/usr/bin/BINARYNAME is part of the primary metadata AFAIK Vít Dne 14. 02. 24 v 10:49 Jan Kolarik napsal(a): Hi Marcin, > So no more "dnf install /usr/bin/BINARYNAME" in default setup? In the case where a file path argument is provided to dnf, it will automatically attempt to download the

Re: do we need CONFIG_UPROBES=y in our kernels?

Hi, > On 12. Feb 2024, at 19:15, Marius Schwarz wrote: > > In a german developer blog article was the topic raised, that with uprobes > enabled, userland apps can i.e. circumvent tls security(and other > protections), > by telling the kernel to probe the function calls with the uprobes api.

Re: A note about riscv64 changes

On Wed, 14 Feb 2024 10:42:52 + "Richard W.M. Jones" wrote: > On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 10:27:53AM +, Peter Robinson wrote: > > Hi Richard, > > > > > A quick note that you may be seeing pull requests for riscv64 changes > > > against your packages, like these examples: > > > > > >

Re: A note about riscv64 changes

On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 10:27:53AM +, Peter Robinson wrote: > Hi Richard, > > > A quick note that you may be seeing pull requests for riscv64 changes > > against your packages, like these examples: > > > > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ghc/pull-request/7 > >

Re: A note about riscv64 changes

Hi Richard, > A quick note that you may be seeing pull requests for riscv64 changes > against your packages, like these examples: > > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ghc/pull-request/7 > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/zlib-ng/pull-request/11 >

A note about riscv64 changes

A quick note that you may be seeing pull requests for riscv64 changes against your packages, like these examples: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ghc/pull-request/7 https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/zlib-ng/pull-request/11 https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/gdal/pull-request/21 For many

Re: Unresponsive maintainer: petersen / Pandoc package not updated since June 2023: Security vulnerability, CVE-2023-35936 (medium)

Re: pandoc, we managed to build it on RISC-V thanks to the changes you merged in ghc: $ uname -a Linux vf2.home.annexia.org 5.15.0-starfive #1 SMP Sun Jun 11 07:48:39 UTC 2023 riscv64 GNU/Linux $ rpm -q pandoc pandoc-3.1.3-27.fc41.riscv64 $ pandoc --version pandoc 3.1.3 Features:

Re: dnf-4.19.0 without filelists in Rawhide soon

Hi Marcin, > So no more "dnf install /usr/bin/BINARYNAME" in default setup? In the case where a file path argument is provided to dnf, it will automatically attempt to download the missing filelists metadata. Sorry, I forgot to explicitly mention this use case. Jan On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at

Re: dnf-4.19.0 without filelists in Rawhide soon

W dniu 9.02.2024 o 14:02, Jan Kolarik pisze: Just a heads up that a new DNF version (4.19.0) is on its way to Rawhide and is expected to land within the next several hours. This update brings a system-wide change related to not